Flight 800 "True Lies"

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/missiles/slam/news/mdc/96-179.html
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/missiles/slam/news/mdc/96-225.html
Then suddenly Point Mugu...
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/missiles/slam/news/mdc/96-244.html
Alas somehow we are all mistaken.....
At a time when the US Navy was testing missiles far off the NY shoreline A Slam-er missile they test fired acquired a new target, a 747. The missile coasted from high in the atmosphere into the plane, deviating from its intended course. The warhead wasn't armed. The missile collided in midair with the 747 and did enough damage to cause the plane to break apart, also in mid-air. Ironically the full fuel load can be seen burning off as the plane plummets. This proves that the tank did not explode.
***The fuel will burn off slowly and at "lower" temperatures when exposed to air the at over 200mph or so as oxygen is available***
Is a missile recovery painted into these clips?
Did a Boeing harpoon missile strike a Boeing 747?
Can a 747 fuel tank be ignited by a spark?
In spite of the fact that it is impossible?
Why is there a hole above the wing?
Why allow the navy to do the recovery?
When they stood accused?
Or did they rush in to cover a mistake they made?
1 Oh this was just a mid-air collision why punish the Navy right?
2 Ok how about there were several escaping spy's on the plane? (with compromising materials)
3 The en-mass escape of a team of spy's leaving no choice but to shoot the plane down without making to much of a bang?

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• flight
• 800
• slammer
• missile
• 2nd
• acquired
• target
• mid-air
• collision

[jswaffxxx]

keep up the good work bud.