Questions:

There are many questions raised by the realization that four large commercial airliners were not  attacked by terrorists detonating bombs but by a common mechanical problem of faulty wires  which cause cargo doors to rupture open when they shouldn't. Listed below are some of the  informal and unofficial opinions, questions and partial answers that the wiring/cargo  door/explosive decompression explanation creates regarding the flights of Air India Flight 182,  Pan Am Flight 103, United Airlines Flight 811, and Trans World Airlines Flight 800 and many  aircraft in general.

 

A. How and why does the forward cargo door open in flight?  The United Airlines Flight 811 door open cause was faulty switch or electrical short  to door motor to unlatch position which overrode safety locking sectors and door unlatched and  opened. Pan Am Flight 103 and United Airlines Flight 811 and Trans World Airlines Flight 800  had midspan latch ruptures and so possibly did Air India Flight 182. Door openings were probably  a result of aging aircraft, out of rig door, chafed aging faulty Poly-X wiring, weakened Section 41  area, design weakness of no locking sectors for midspan latches, and only one latch per eight feet  of vertical door.

 

B. How does open door in flight cause nose to come off for Air India Flight  182, Pan Am Flight 103, and Trans World Airlines Flight 800?  The cargo door opens and a huge twenty by thirty foot hole appears in nose on  starboard side. Structural members of door and frame are missing, floor beams are fractured, bent,  and broken, aircraft direction is askew, flight control surfaces affected, engines damaged, and 300  knots bends the damaged area to starboard and tears nose off within three to five seconds.  

 

C. Why did nose of United Airlines Flight 811 stay on?  Nose of United Airlines Flight 811 may have stayed on because the pilot said he  had just come off autopilot and did not fight plane as it gyrated, or plane was younger than others,  or the time from door opening to tearing off was 1.5 seconds and allowed the pressurization to be  relieved somewhat and six less feet of width of hole was torn off. Essentially, the hole caused by  the absent cargo door and skin was much smaller that the other three flights whose forward  sections did separate.

 

D. Air India Flight 182 and Pan Am Flight 103 not a bomb?  Yes, not a bomb for Air India Flight 182 and Pan Am Flight 103 as initial event.  The evidence refutes bomb explanation. Those accident investigators years ago did not have the  benefit of hindsight, the internet, or several subsequent similar accidents to compare and draw  different conclusions.

 

E. Trans World Airlines Flight 800 not center tank as initial event?

Center tank exploded yes, but after door ruptured/opened, hole appeared in nose,  nose torn off in wind, fuselage falling with disintegrating fuel tanks and ignited by fodded and on  fire engine number 3 at 7500 feet thereby explaining the Chairman's question at the public hearing,  "Why so few bodies burned?" The answer is they were not there to be burned. The nose came off  with the passengers inside cabin and descended to ocean alone but not on fire.  

 

F. Is explosive decompression enough to tear nose and forward part of aircraft  off?

Explosive decompression is enough to rupture a pressurized hull at weak spot, one  latch for eight feet of door, in a weak area, Section 41, but not enough to tear nose off. The  ultimate destructive force is the 300 knots of slipstream, more powerful than any wind on earth. If  cargo door popped in balloon, the large hole would appear but the nose would stay on. In a  tornado, nose comes off within three to five seconds.  

 

G. When forward cargo door opens does it always result in deaths?  No. With United Airlines preflight in 1991 the aft door opened inadvertently and  nothing happened because it was on the ground and no pressure differential, so no damage or  fatalities. Then Pan Am Flight 125 in 1987 had forward door open partially and plane could not  pressurize adequately and turned around and landed, so no damage with slight pressure differential  except expense of fuel and risk to life. Then United Airlines Flight 811 happened with smaller hole  and 1.5 second delay in opening and nine dead with larger pressure differential. Then in October,  2000, another Boeing 747 had a forward cargo door open inadvertently on the ground when the  circuit breaker was pushed in but no fatalities. Pan Am Flight 103, Air India Flight 182, and Trans  World Airlines Flight 800 had explosive decompression occur up high with maximum differential  and door ruptured and shattered and took skin to the left and right and above with it exposing huge  hole and forward part of aircraft came off and all aboard died. When the forward cargo door  ruptures or fully opens or partially opens,  different consequences occur from minor to severe  depending on speed at which door ruptures/opens and pressure differential which depends on  altitude.

 

H. Is there a conspiracy to keep cargo door explanation quiet?  There is no conspiracy, no plot, no coverup by agencies involved with the cargo  door explanation:

1. No conspiracy of Sikh terrorists named Singh to put a bomb on Air  India Flight 182; the door ruptured in flight.  

2. No conspiracy of Libyan terrorists or whoever to put a bomb on Pan  Am Flight 103; the door ruptured in flight.  

3. No conspiracy to detonate a bomb on United Airlines Flight 811 as  the passengers thought, as the crew thought and told the tower who told the Coast Guard and crash  crews on the ground as they prepared for a wounded 747 coming in after a bomb blast; the door  ruptured in flight.

4. No conspiracy to put a bomb on Trans World Airlines Flight 800;  the door ruptured in flight.

5. No conspiracy of terrorists to shoot a missile.  6. No coverup by US Navy to hide accidental shootdown.  7. No coverup by Boeing, NTSB, FAA, or TWA, TSB, RCMP,  Scotland Yard, or AAIB who are hiding the knowledge the doors ruptured in flight.  

 

I. Why the huge hole on starboard side in cargo door area while port side  smooth?

That's where the forward cargo door is located on all the aircraft, forward of the  wing on the starboard side. The rectangular shattered zone around the forward cargo door is apparent on all the wreckage reconstruction photographs and drawings. The unilateral damage on  TWA Flight 800 refutes the center tank explosion as the initial event.  

 

J. Are passengers at risk right now?

Yes, all passengers currently flying in early model Boeing 747s with Poly X wiring  are at risk of the faulty wiring shorting on the door unlatch motor causing the ruptured opening of  the midspan latches of the cargo door leading to explosive decompression and fatalities. The fault  has unofficially occurred in 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1996 and 2000.  

 

K. What is the sudden loud sound on the CVR on all four aircraft at the initial  event time of the inflight breakup?

The sound is the rush of air molecules to the outside to equalize the high pressure  air in the cabin with the low pressure air outside at altitude. Explosive decompression is a very  loud event.

 

L. Why the almost immediate power cut to the recorders?  The main equipment compartment (MEC) is immediately adjacent and in front of the  forward cargo compartment. The MEC has  the wiring power to the recorders and the explosion of  decompression nearby cuts off power immediately.  

 

M. Why the right side inflight airframe damage?  The starboard (right) side is where the forward cargo door opens in flight and  material from inside the compartment and cabin above are ejected into the slipstream. Engine  number three and the right horizontal stabilizer are close to and aft of the forward cargo  compartment. The objects are ingested into the nearby engine number three, strike the leading edge  of the right wing, and continue aft and strike the right horizontal stabilizer. The port side is  relatively unscathed from inflight debris.

 

 N. Why the shattered area around the forward cargo door?  When the explosion of decompression occurs, the door is flung open if all the  latches unlock and shattered if the bottom eight latches hold but rupture at the midspan latches. The  top part of the door opens outward and upward and away taking much fuselage skin above the  door with it.

 

O. Why the streak for Trans World Airlines Flight 800?  The streak is the reflection of the evening sun of shiny metal skin from the forward  cargo door area coming off in flight during the explosive decompression and seen by ground  observers in darkness to the east as the objects quickly decelerate from 300 knots in a horizontal  direction to straight down from 13700 feet.  

 

P. What is the ignition source for the center fuel tank explosion of Trans World  Airlines Flight 800?

The ignition source for the center fuel tank explosion is the on fire engine number  three which ingested foreign objects from the forward cargo compartment after the ruptured  opening of the forward cargo door. The falling and disintegrating fuselage and fuel tanks were  ignited by the fiery exhaust and caused the explosion well after the initial event.  

 

Q. Why to do the authorities think Pan Am 103 was a bomb explosion?  There was a relatively mild, directed discharge of a shotgun type weapon in the  forward cargo compartment after the explosive decompression. This discharge put a small shatter  zone of 20 inches into the skin on the port side of the compartment. The authorities call this event

the initial event of a bomb explosion. A Boeing 747 can tolerate a 20 inch hole in its fuselage and  in fact has been designed to withstand such a hole of that size and larger. United Airlines Flight  811 showed that a Boeing 747 can safely withstand a ten foot by twenty foot hole in the fuselage  and land safely. Bombs are not mild, are spherical, would make a bomb sound on the CVR, and  leave much other evidence than a small hole.  

 

R. Why do the authorities think Air India Flight 182 was a bomb explosion?  Air India Flight 182 had a catastrophic inflight breakup that looked like a bomb had  gone off inside it. An explosive decompression mimics a bomb explosion. There was evidence of  an explosion. At the time there was no other reasonable explanation for such an explosive  decompression for a Boeing 747 except for a bomb or to leave the cause unstated. The finding of a  bomb explosion for Air India Flight 182 was based on two erroneous assumptions by the Indians:  an explosive decompression could not abruptly turn off the electrical supply to the recorders and  the floor panels separated upward from a exploding force from below.  

 

S. How can the experts and the public be so wrong?  Experts and laypersons below:

1. police

2. aircraft accident investigators

3. media

4. government

5. manufacturer

6. attorneys, plaintiffs, defendants, and judges  7. airlines

8. flightcrews

9. passengers.

This is a political and human nature question; the best I can do to explain it is as  follows: Experts are often wrong; they are human. In the case of the wiring/cargo door/explosive  decompression for four Boeing 747 accidents:  The experts were all partially right and partially wrong, some more than others. The  good ones try to find their errors, correct them and continue on; however, it is understandable that  the not so good experts and laypersons are reluctant to investigate alternative probable causes for  fatal aircraft accidents if that path leads to unpleasant truths with a  result:  For the law enforcement authorities to have their budgets cut and staff reduced  instead of increased to fight  terrorist activities,  For accident investigators who have previously made conclusions about causes that  are now refuted and whose credibility would now be in jeopardy and threaten their reputations,  For the media to have a boring mechanical story that has happened before and was  supposed to have been fixed instead of an exciting spy conspiracy story,  For the government who has oversight of all to find out it overlooked and allowed  noncompliance of regulations to occur,

 

For the manufacturer to discover most of the thousands of airplanes it constructed  have severe design problems of outward opening non plug cargo doors, inadequate midspan  latches, and faulty wiring installed.

 

For attorneys, plaintiffs, defendants, and judges who have caused the transfer of  hundreds of millions of dollars in lawsuits to discover it was decided on factual errors,  For the airlines to find out they may have not kept their airframes maintained  properly,

For the flightcrews who do not want to believe their aircraft can come apart at any  second and there is nothing they can do about it,

For the passengers who want to be persuaded there is no danger in flying and insist  on being reassured that any problems have been fixed, their ticket prices are low, and they have  their baggage with them.

 

All parties are acting in their perceived best interest and believing in wishful  thinking. They are not objective. In this particular case, when Boeing 747s are breaking apart in  flight, there is an understandable perceived best interest by all parties to believe they are not  responsible for the accidents and the fatalities. By having the blame shifted to outside forces such  as terrorists, most parties are absolved of guilt. The parties, law enforcement and security,  responsible for allowing the 'bomb' to be put aboard are rewarded with higher staffs and budgets.  The only losers with the 'bomb' explanation are the ones accused of putting it there and they never  dispute the ‘bomb’ but deny they put it there.  

 

The electrical problem in airliners is difficult to detect because the symptoms are  treated instead of the cause. Faulty wiring and switches do more than cause cargo doors to open in  flight; they cause yaw dampers to swing back and forth, they cause autopilots to disconnect or act  strange, and they often cause fires. When cargo doors ruptured open in flight over a period of  eleven years in four airlines in four airports in three countries, investigation jurisdictions where  spread out over distance and time. Each agency looked at the sole tree and did not see the forest of  four trees.

 

There are built in protection beliefs when a Boeing 747 crashes. The manufacturer  contributes to the welfare and salaries to tens of thousands of employees and indeed, the whole  northwest of the United States derives much support from Boeing. If the company were to be put  in jeopardy because of manufacturing errors and be the subject of lawsuits, literally millions of  citizens would be concerned. All parties including the government, the media, the investigating  agencies, and the legal system do not want the company to be in danger and instinctively, although  not conspiratorially, act together to protect that company. If any sort of plausible explanation that  exonerates the company exists, that explanation will be eagerly sought and agreed with. That  sudden agreement explains why the 'bomb' explanation for all four aircraft was discussed within  hours of the discovery of the accident and immediately accepted as a working hypothesis. In every  report the 'bomb' explanation is the one most quickly sought to be confirmed by the authorities.  Incredible lengths were taken in time and money to confirm the 'bomb' explosion.  

 

An explosion by explosive decompression caused by an inadvertently opened  forward cargo door inflight mimics a 'bomb' explosion in many ways. Passengers get hit by flying  debris, metal is petaled outwards, recorders pick up a loud noise, wings and tails get struck by  pieces of skin, engines suck in pieces of metal, and the aircraft can disintegrate and catch on fire as  it falls. Tangible evidence of a bomb is hard to find as the bomb explodes and distributes the timer,  fuze, and container far and wide. It looks at first glance as if a bomb had gone off.  It is understandable how all concerned parties are eager to accept the plausible and  absolving 'bomb' explanation and very, very reluctant to investigate the implicating wiring/cargo  door/explosive decompression explanation for the four Boeing 747 accidents that suffered  breakups in flight.

 

It is also understandable that a person motivated by actually being in a sudden,  night, fiery, fatal, jet airplane crash and surviving, although the pilot was killed, takes great effort  to prevent it from happening to others. Because that person is also being completely independent of  all the other parties he can objectively evaluate the separate accidents to see the pattern and thus the  common probable cause for all. That fatal accident was in 1967 and that person is the author of this report.

 

It is only when the evidence becomes overwhelming, incontrovertible, and  irrefutable that an alternative explanation to a bomb is even considered seriously and when that new  explanation reveals a clear and present hazard to the flying public, then the parties will reluctantly  reexamine the evidence to conclude that it was not the lesser evil of 'bomb' but the greater evil of a  mechanical problem, a design problem, an oversight problem, that was supposed to have been  fixed, but wasn't, and it could happen again.  

 

T. Can you describe in layperson’s terms what happens?  A laypersons’ explanation for the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 relies on basic  science and common sense and might go like this:  

 

Why do airplanes fly?

 

They fly because of lift which exceeds the drag. Common sense tells us that cutting anything such  as butter with a knife causes friction. Friction also slows things down when an object moves  through the air and creates heat. Friction is drag.  Lift is created when the air flowing over the top of the wing takes a longer distance than the wind  flowing over the bottom of the wing. This causes a pressure differential between the top and  bottom of the wing. The wing is sucked upwards into the lower pressure air on top of the wing.  The wing must be moving through the air. This can be done in many ways but the usual way is for  an engine to make the wing move forward by expelling gases to the rear. This powerful thrusting  overcomes the friction of the drag and moves the wing through the air which creates the lift and the  airplane flies.

 

Why do balloons rupture?

 

Balloons rupture when the compressed higher pressure inside air breaks through the balloon  material and to suddenly equalize the pressure to the uncompressed lower pressure outside air. It  happens so fast it’s called an explosion. The rupture cause can occur from within or from the  outside of the balloon. If the balloon material is just stretched too far, the rupture cause is on the  surface. The outside air pressure is less as the balloon goes higher making the inside air pressure  greater and greater.

Regardless of the cause of the rupture, the material of the balloon is shredded, torn, and frayed  from the outward force. If the balloon is placed under deep water then the reverse is true and the  balloon will implode and the material will be shredded, torn, and frayed from an inward force. In  this regard, a submarine is opposite from an airplane. The higher an airplane goes, the higher the  pressure inside; the lower a submarine goes, the higher the pressure outside. An airplane can  explode while a submarine can implode. Airplane plug type doors get tighter as the plane goes  higher and submarine plug type door get tighter as the sub goes deeper.  

 

What makes the sudden loud pop sound?

 

The pop is the noise of the suddenly rushing outward air molecules rubbing against the other  slower moving air molecules. Heat and noise is created.  What evidence is there of the balloon pop in air?

A sudden loud sound.

Torn, shredded, and frayed material.

Any inside material of the balloon moving to the outside.  

 

What is lightning?

 

Lightning is the equalizing of a electrical potential from one charged area to a differently charged  area. It is similar to a balloon pop except the movement is with electrons instead of air molecules.  Lightning causes fires by the intense heat created by this equalizing of electron pressure  differential.

 

Wiring conducts this discharge of electrons in directions to make things like motors move or stop  moving. When the wiring is not insulated the electrons in the bare wire will seek out a different  way to flow to equalize the different energy potential created by the generators. and as a result,  fires may start or motors may turn on when they are not supposed to.  Compressed air in a balloon and a full battery are similar in that they both have energy stored up  that seeks to discharge if given a chance.  

 

Why does a hand move backward when it is stuck out the window and turned flat against the  wind?

 

Air has weight. It may be invisible but it is real. When your hand is thin to the wind, the resistance  of your hand moving through the air molecules is less but when you turn your hand flat against the  wind, the extra area of your wide hand gives a greater resistance to the wind and the weight of the  wind force is increased to push your hand back. If the wind force is very powerful it can push  your hand back so hard it can break it. The highest wind on earth exists in Force Five Tornadoes  with wind speed up to 250 miles per hour. These winds tear roofs off houses, pick up trucks and  spin them around, and toss cows for long distances.  

 

Why did Pan Am Flight 103 crash?

 

For Pan Am Flight 103, the huge airplane was able to fly because of its wings which gave lift as  the plane moved through the air powered by the jet engines which created thrust which overcame  the friction of the drag of the airframe on the air molecules.  As the plane flew higher, the air inside become compressed relative to the outside air. The inside  air was actually less compressed than the air on the ground, but relative to the outside very low  pressure air at altitude, the inside air was highly compressed thus creating a large pressure  differential. It was like a balloon being expanded.  The balloon of the fuselage of Pan Am Flight 103 got bigger and bigger. It actually expanded from  the inside out as the air molecules inside tried to get outside to the less dense air to equalize the  pressure differential. The air molecules inside pressed against every inch of the fuselage at the  rivets, the windows, the doors, the hinges, the latches, and the skin itself.  Usually Pan Am Flight 103 would later descend and the process would be reversed and the  pressure differential would be reduced until landing when the outside and inside pressure would be  equal and the balloon of the fuselage would shrink  back to normal. This continual blowing up and  letting out the air in the balloon of the fuselage put wear and tear on all the fitting, rivets, windows, hinges, latches, and doors in the fuselage frame.  Pan Am Flight 103 was flying normally very high up with the pressure differential at its maximum,  and the balloon was at its most expanded with the inside air molecules pressing the hardest on the  inside of the fuselage which included the cockpit, the passenger cabin, the lavatories, and the cargo  compartments.

 

Suddenly, lightning struck in a small way when the electrons of electricity which were normally  blocked on their way to a motor found another way to get there because the blocking insulation  cracked and exposed the bare wire which touched another discharge path. The lightning flowed to  a motor which turned on and did what it was designed to do when it received electricity, turn some  wheels called cams which encircled some pins in a device called a latch. In this case the cams  turned in the direction to allow the latch of a forward cargo door to unlock. As the latch became  just so slightly unlocked, the huge internal compressed air pressure burst the entire cargo door  open at the weakest point, the midspan latches that held a long eight foot stretch of sliced fuselage  together and had no safety locks to prevent what was accidentally happening.  The balloon of Pan Am Flight 103 popped. A sudden loud sound was produced and heard by  everyone on board as the compressed air rushed out of the balloon of the fuselage and forward  cargo compartment into the outside air in front of the engines on the right side of the airplane. The  rupture area of the cargo door became shattered, torn, and frayed from the outward force of the air  molecules. The pop of the balloon was so violent it disrupted all the electricity in a nearby  equipment compartment and turned off the power to the data recorders. Material from inside the  cabin and cargo compartment was ejected outward into engines and against the right wing and rear  stabilizers.

 

The explosion of the pop of the fuselage is called an explosive decompression. The force is so  great it curls, pits, craters, bends, tears metal into fragments and affects the actual atom makeup of  the metal. The hole the explosive decompression caused when the large door was ruptured and tore  outward, upward, and away was about twenty feet wide and thirty feet tall.  If Pan Am Flight 103 had not been moving the damage may have remained as it was, a big hole in  the right side of the nose with a lot of stuff from the cabin and cargo compartment ejected and  missing. However, there was 300 knots, about 330 miles per hour, of wind force on the nose of  the airplane. The nose shuddered because the sides, the bottom, and top of the fuselage which had  strong beams to hold it together were all bent, twisted, and broken.  The enormous wind force of the weight of the fast moving air molecules on the weakened forward  part of Pan Am Flight 103 tore it off to the right. The jagged blunt end of the torn off nose was too  much drag for the engines to overcome. The airplane slowed down. The airplane could not fly  because there was not enough lift from the wings.  The aircraft broke in two and fell to the sea, coming apart in many pieces as it disintegrated from  the unusual forces applied from all directions.  The passengers inside Pan Am Flight 103 who were now outside falling would die because the  human body can not withstand the force of striking very dense water molecules at a high speed.  To sum up: The surface of the inflated fuselage popped when the lightning of the electricity caused  a motor to turn on which allowed a hole to appear in the forward cargo door and allowed the  compressed air molecules to escape outside to the less compressed air molecules. The escape was so sudden as to shatter and tear the surface of the inflated fuselage at the forward cargo door. The  aircraft came apart when the extremely fast moving air molecules pressed so hard against the  weakened forward part as to break it in two. The passengers died because they struck the water too  fast for the water to make a hole for them.  The technical term is the probable cause of this accident was the sudden opening of the forward  lower lobe cargo door in flight and the subsequent explosive decompression at the midspan  latches. The door opening was attributed to faulty  wiring or switch in the door control system  which permitted electrical actuation of the door latches toward the unlatched position after initial  door closure.

 

U. Why have the defense of the accused not used the shorted wiring/forward  cargo door rupture/explosive decompression/inflight breakup explanation as a defense?   The defense teams have always stated it was a bomb that went off and destroyed the  aircraft and passengers but their clients did not plant the bomb. The defense has never argued there  was no bomb, no crime, and therefore no criminals. The defense attorneys are criminal attorneys  who know who banks are robbed but not how or why airplanes crash.  Below from Lockerbie Judgment: “It is not disputed, and was amply proved, that  the cause of the disaster was indeed the explosion of a device within the aircraft.” The defense  never disputed the cause of the airplane crash their clients were accused of causing and the judicial  court accepted the flimsy evidence of a bomb explosion without question from the experts.  V. Why has the author pursued this issue of wiring/cargo door/explosive  decompression events for over a decade?  The best answer I can give to that is that my life was literally within two seconds of  ending but was saved by the unselfish action of my pilot who in a time of stress with a disabled  aircraft took the time to tell me to 'eject' which I did unquestionably and lived by the two seconds I  had while he died because of the two seconds he did not have. Because I survived one, I believe I  am repaying a moral debt to prevent others from dying in a sudden night fiery fatal jet airplane  crash.