News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Citing new evidence, families sue feds, Raytheon, Lockheed over 1996 TWA crash. Parent comment

Re:Citing new evidence, families sue feds, Raytheon, Lockhee... by ipsin on Sunday September 25, 2022 @12:32PM (#32973003)
What about the Navy radar tracks for an intercepting missile, and how those, like witness accounts, were actively discounted and suppressed, in favor of a "no missile" narrative?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Citing new evidence, families sue feds, Raytheon, Lockhee... by ceejayoz on Sunday September 25, 2022 @12:38PM (#32973068)
> What about the Navy radar tracks for an intercepting missile

The radar tracks are detailed here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800#Missile_or_bomb...

They're not from the Navy (they're ATC tracks), they don't intersect, and one of them's going 30 knots.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Citing new evidence, families sue feds, Raytheon, Lockhee... by Gamecollector on Sunday September 25, 2022 @04:34PM (#32975877)
You've made about 20 comments on this thread and all of them demonstrate you haven't read a single word of the docket.

Plaintiffs now have the Navy radar tapes and they show and object hitting the plane then spiraling away from it.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Citing new evidence, families sue feds, Raytheon, Lockhee... by ceejayoz on Sunday September 25, 2022 @04:52PM (#32976081)
> You've made about 20 comments on this thread and all of them demonstrate you haven't read a single word of the docket. Plaintiffs now have the Navy radar tapes...

Pot, meet kettle. The docket actually says this:

"For example, Dr. Stalcup obtained several FBI records never released to the TWA 800 families or the public. One described an 'original [Navy radar] tape' showing an object “heading straight for TWA 800.'"

There's no claim they have the actual tapes. We'll see what the record they've got says; that they're not parading it to the media is, at the very least, interesting.

[ Parent | on HN ]