Grand Summary to Three Simple Proofs of NTSB Fraud

And and additioanl proof, the offical Quarter-Scale CWT Explosion Test Results

A final intersection of the above proofs and examples can be found in a single instance of many which exemplifies NTSB fraud -- the 1/4 scale fuel tank explosion tests. Video still frames obtained from NTSB files, but NOT included within their report (the tests are ONLY shown in MOTION as the eye is easily impressed and hardly capable of seeing the facts at high speed), contain several important clues of fraud and cover up. To start with, the 1/4 scale tests were rigged in favor of NTSB findings -- rigged in a way guaranteed to focus all blast pressures against the front spar. According to pages 3 & 4 of Exhibit 20E, the entire structure was:

1) constructed like a cannon... 'The 1/4 scale tank will essentially consist of a rectangular vessel (Fig. 2) with non yielding steel top, bottom, rear spar, and transparent sides.' This is NOT scientific, and designs a test which is guaranteed to duplicate desired results, does not test if such preconceptions would be duplicable under natural circumstance, nor duplicate the actual results found in a real CWT explosion;

2) ignited like a cannon from the rear most portion (rear-spar mounted igniter) to create an explosion aimed forward. This is NOT scientific, and does NOT duplicate the claimed sequence in Flight 800 (test does not use the same conditions claimed in their own theory -- so what hypothesis ARE they testing for), but again, only insures that a cannon effect is achieved with maximum forward force;

3) constructed with deliberate internal connection-point weaknesses to insure early failure of inner supports matched NTSB's contrived Flight 800 sequence explanations: 'Partition failure will be simulated in the 1/4 scale tests by using deliberately weakened connections between the partitions and the tank top, bottom and sides'. This, too, is NOT scientific, guaranteed to produce desired results, again failing to duplicate normal CWT conditions.

In the test video single-frame sequence below, image 1 has yellow, red, and blue dots, added for reference. The red dot shows the front spar -- the simulated aircraft facing right in the image. The yellow dots point out the massive, rigid, steel framework within which the test tank is trapped -- nothing like the more fragile structure of the real aircraft. The blue dots reveal thick lexlan or similar clear plastic panels through which filming can take place. These features channel all canon-like forces in the direction NTSB wishes it to go -- through the front spar. Image 2 shows (yellow arrow added) what appears to be timing strobes flashing to indicate sequence initiation.

Image 3 shows early explosive forces building up within the CWS. Note a definite bulge forward in the front spar metalwork, consistent with the mail-box effect. The (added) green dots show receding shadows which further demonstrate the effect (compare to prior image). Image 4 reveals an ever so slight and temporary mail-box deflection in the blast-resistant lexlan panel and supports. Note also (yellow arrows) that the explosion focuses past the outer edges of the front spar rather than rupturing/fracturing its surface, also inconsistent with the actual front spar damage found in Flight 800.

Image 4 shows the explosion unleashed, engulfing past the front spar well into the front cargo bay area. Note the yellow arrow which shows the start of one of several detectable (within the full video) rearward moving ripples in the metal work found in the supporting structure beneath the CWS. Despite the rigid construct, mail-box effect forces beyond the CWS were significant, even here. Image 5 also shows the front spar (NTSB white arrow redone in black in order to be visible on the Web) being thrust forward by the blast along with the spanwise beam which was immediately behind it, both similarly bowed (more apparent in study of the sequence in motion). Note both are definitely bulged (sympathetic yellow curved lines added to illustrate) per the mail-box effect, and still remaining largely in tact, contrary to the evidence found in Flight 800. Also telling in the video is the 'cannon' effect, the entire massive structure visibly reeling or rocking backward and upward in a pivot about the lower-left base area -- displacing perhaps a half foot in recoil from the 'shot' of the spar and inner beams out of the rectangular 'turret' created by the design. The effect is just discernible in the still frames by study of the top horizontal beam angle.

Despite attempts of NTSB to focus the blast into the front spar, there was no fracturing destruction as found in Flight 800, which they excuse as unimportant -- admitting they were not trying to duplicate the damage found in Flight 800. Further, the fireball which results would clearly leave sooting traces on the rear, and likely, the front of the front spar, and more so for the cargo bay itself, where no trace of sooting was reported in Flight 800. Bulging and sooting are the hallmarks of low-velocity explosive force, as seen here. Fracturing, shattering, and shearing with an absence of bulging, as found in Flight 800, are the hallmarks of high-velocity forces. Clearly, NTSB's own tests refute their own theory, which is why they were included in the NTSB report only as textual and statistical summaries. However, this video was reportedly used by FBI to convince the families of Flight 800 and media that CWS failure was likely. That was probably its true intended purpose -- propaganda.
 
 


NTSB 1/4 scale 'simulation' of CWT explosion




Return to INTRODUCTION