More emails to the NTSB

Important letter to Mr. Robert Francis, please forward. John Barry Smith

Dear Mr. Robert Francis, 12 August 1996
The cause of the crash you are investigating is the inadvertent opening of the forward cargo door in flight. The FAA and Boeing have acknowledged that the loss of the forward cargo door is not an acceptable event. The 88-12-04 AD which reads, "To Insure that Inadvertent Opening of the Lower Cargo Door Will Not Occur In Flight" was correct in its effort but failed in the implementation. The NTSB has known the danger of the opening of the door and has issued recommendations regarding it. The cargo door culprit is well known because of previous accidents such as Pan Am Flight 125 and UAL Flight 811. It has struck again in TWA 800. And, Pan Am 103. And, Air India 182. Strong claims, yes sir, but backed up with documentation interpreting hard physical evidence of radar blips, voice recorder, data recorder, reconstruction patterns, engine FOD, missing passengers, and type of aircraft and flight pattern. The pattern of cargo door openings causing sudden catastrophic destruction of Boeing 747s is only apparent after observing several crashes over a period of eleven years and charting the significant similarties. Similarities which can be explained fully by a consistent serious mechanical fault occurring under similar flight circumstances to similar aircraft.
A known previously defective mechanical system, the door, is at the scene of the destruction, the main cargo hold. Please rule out that suspect, if you can. Further, please review my web site at http://www.corazon.com/barryhome.html for sixty pages of documentation for the claim of door openings causing crashes.
Other governments have taken the easy way out by explaining an unpopular event by saying it's a bomb by our enemies. Not true; it is a common occurence in the real world, a door pops open when it shouldn't. Sincerely, John Barry Smith phoneUS Army Major, retired, Commerical pilot, instrument rated, previous Part 135 charter operator and aircraft accident survivor.

, and Mr. Francis,
Why has not the NTSB even mentioned a prime suspect who was at the scene of the crime and could do the damage described? The first place to investigate would be the door. It has two ADs against it, it caused a well documented accident which gave extremely similar consequences to the current mystery (811), it is at the admitted scene of damage, (in front of the wing on the right side,) it is not unusual for the suspect to malfunction, and there is no evidence of any other suspect.
Except for wishful thinking. Yes, I'm going to come down on the side of wishful thinking instead of wilful coverup. The NTSB, FBI, Boeing, US government, and TWA all wish that the cause of the death of 230 people, more before, and probably more after, is not their fault but some crazy act of god terrorist that what the hell, it's a tough life out there and we are doing all we can but you've just got to accept life is cruel and unfair (but give us more money and agents anyway.)
They will not wish and will go to great lengths to not even think about, (as in I don't want to speculate, now is not the time to speculate, that's just speculation,") the cause of the crash to be something so in their face obvious and simple but with such severe implications and consequences that the little bit of space they allot to their right creative side brains just rebels and starts to throw up so they get a cup of coffee and talk about the Forty Niners.
I have to believe they do not know the cause and are thinking of ways to conceal the cause. That would be criminal and a betrayal of the public trust.
Really, I have to believe that the NTSB is not yet like the other government agencies of India and UK who issued official reports of a physical event ignoring physical laws and concluding politically satisfying ideas.
I understand how hard it is to be a NTSB investigator and be looking through paper work and get a glimmer of the culprit, caught visually (streak) and on radar (blip anomaly) leaving the scene of the crime and leaving documented evidence on tape of the crime (loud thump), and think, "Oh my God, a design defect in the Boeing 747 that has existed for twenty six years, crashed at least five, maybe more airplanes, killed over a thousand people grieving many more thousands, caused billions of dollars to be incorrectly shifted around, embarrassing my profession of accident investigation, shaming governments, economically devastating a part of my country, and what for? Truth? Screw truth, we are talking real life here; money, jobs, and careers. It can't be the door! No way! These planes are strong, we are good people, we do not murder by negligence! We are the good guys and good guys don't kill accidentally. Bad guys kill on purpose and that's why we are going to look for a bomb and forget all this cargo door bullshit."
I hope a little voice says, "But, but, the threat is still there, the hazard still exists, the mystery is still unsolved, I could be next..."
Harsh, yes,, and Mr. Francis, but so is spinning to your death from thousands of feet up. Check the door!

I apologize for my recent rude, sarcastic remarks to you in recent emails. After I read the below email I realized I was too quick to judge and must give you the benefit of doubt and trust you are doing all you can to find the cause of the TWA crash. email follows...
Dear Barry,

I have reviewed your e-mail exchange. I see it in a better light
than you do. Because of the specificity of his reply (*not* a form-letter),
and the timing (and existence!) of his *second* reply, my interpretation is
you are being taken seriously. What I get from it is bureaucratic tight-ass
defensiveness maybe, but not really, a diss. Suppose he did take it to
heart. Not implausible he'd try to get his ducks in a row in internal NTSB
channels before spilling all to you first. The ambiguitiy of his second
message (but which door??) could serve his purpose of buying time for him and
honoring your tip with a (ambiguous) morsel.

I'd advise that you just chill with him for the nonce, to resume when the
bomb theory is totally threadbare. The poor guy could actually be
beleagured himself with all the FBI crap surrounding the investigation.

After all, you have science on your side. You have, as I pointed out on the
show, made useful "predictions" with your theory (in classical scientific
terms): Early front cargo door fall, indigestion specifically for engine #3,
and the probable locus of the disappeared passengers, cards you can play at
some future, more amenable moment.

Barry, I have no doubt that you are being listened to behind closed doors.
Your AF1 advisory, for instance was a bold -- and responsible -- action which
officials are required to pay attention to (as evidenced, perhaps, by the
timing of exchange #2). And if that were not enough, I can assure you my
station is listened to because some years ago a producer got politely
interrogated by Treasury officials (Secret Service) after some fool caller
made irresponsible comments antagonistic to the then-President.

But as for the TW800 investigation, try assuming that the incompetents don't
want to talk, while the beleagured competent allies have to speak carefully
to smart ones like you (or maybe me) because we are insightful, and
because we are public entities.

We just have to help them by anticipating their circumstances. <end>
sorry again, John Barry Smith

>``I don't think that anybody that I know is saying that there's evidence to lean one way or another,'' Francis said.
Mr. Francis, I say there is evidence to lean one way and that way is the prime suspect of cargo door opening. The NTSB has already identifed the door as a nine person killer in Flight 811 in similar circumstances.
How did the front cargo door in pieces become one piece? And two wreckage trails become three? And debris found in number 3 engine become no debris.
Well, at least 8 passengers will never be found because they were sucked into number three engine, just like 103, and 811. And they sat above the cargo door. Match the missing passengers to the seats they sat in, all will be above and slightly aft of the cargo door, just like 811.

Dear Mr.
Do you recall the early F-100 crashes in the fifties where a perfectly normal plane in perfectly normal weather would take off by a perfectly normal pilot and soon after takeoff turn and dive right into the ground? Each accident when seen alone could have a different cause but only after a pattern emerged could the culprit be seen. In this case it was the Coriolus Effect where the pilot would be given a frequency change from tower to center while still at low altitude after takeoff and he would turn his head and look down at the UHF comm unit frequency dial to enter the new frequency. This turning of the head and lowering at the same time induced a physiological phenomenon called the Coriolus Effect which came from a false sense of movement in the inner ear which the pilot responded to by correcting and moving the stick driving the plane into the ground. Consequently frequency changes are now given later to pilots after takeoff and the frequency counter was moved to eye level. On my RA-5C Vigilante the counter on my now VHF comm was right in front of me.
That mysterious effect was a F-100 Super Sabre accident cause only seen by a pattern compared to other similar accidents, similar to the crash you are now investigating. Seen alone, Air India 182, Pan Am 103, UAL 811, and TWA 800 are mysterious and look to have different causes. It is only by comparing all variables that the pattern emerges and it matches closely UAL 811.
The similar variables are for Air India 182, Pan Am 103, TWA 800 and UAL 811 (up to nose not coming off):
1. Aircraft type, model, and experience: Boeing 747-100 and 200 series with two ADs against front cargo door and high flight time and cycles.
2. Flight mode: Presssure changes during or just after climb, or descent.
3. Airspeed: 300 knots.
4. Radar blip anomaly just before event: door seen on radar.
5. FOD number three engine of baggage.
6. Start of destruction: front cargo hold area.
7. One half second of loud bang on voice recorder, then silence.
8. Abrupt halt to flight data recorder: severing of main power line behind nose wheel.
9. Nose comes off.
10. Rest of aircraft falls and disintegrates landing apart from nose.
11. Cargo door and baggage closest to event indicating left first.
12. At least eight bodies never recovered: ingested into number three engine and vaporized.
13. Missing bodies sat over and just aft of cargo door.
14. Front cargo door in pieces.
15. No evidence of explosives found on any passengers nor airframe except for one aircraft with mild directional shatter zone. (103)
Possible similar variables:
1. Engine three separates and departs to land apart from other three engines.
2. Cargo floor buckled.
3. Cargo door closed at night.
4. Door opened while crew transmitting to Center.
5. EPR blip on engine number three just before abupt halt of data recorder.
6. Locks sectors locked on door but cam sectors unlocked.
Unknown: Why do doors open inadvertently inflight and on the ground?
The pattern which fits 800, 103, and 182 is the one you documented, UAL Flight 811. The events were similar; the cause is the same: Inadvertent opening of lower front lobe cargo door in flight.
Please compare other variables you have access to and believe could confirm or refute theory. Thank you, John Barry Smith, watching F-86, F-86D and F-100s take off from the Fresno North American plant.

it turns out that four and maybe five of the cargo door airplanes were talking on the radios when the door opened. Coincidence? I don't think so. It may be power pulse from transmitter or power supply of comm radio affecting frayed electrical door harness. This is where professional accident investigation should be going...why do doors open? One plane talking no problem, but four or five, find the link. It may be transponder related about changing codes interacting with electrical door system, far fetched yes, but worthy of investigation.
I believe the way the investigation is being reported in the press that the NTSB is now acting like a prosecutor in proving the center fuel tank exploded, a politically satisfying answer completely contrary to observed events of nose separation, fuselage descending, disintegrating, then exploding.
I'm assuming the goal of accident investigation is to find cause of crash regardless of consequences, even if own mother did it. Please don't be like Air Force that changed accident report to read only one wife was in cockpit to cause crash and not two wives to avoid looking bad. The NTSB is the last hope for a politically neutral accident cause determination based on truth determined by evidence. Being assisted by Boeing engineers is the fox guarding the henhouse.

and Francis: Well, you've gone and done it now. You stalled around and stalled around not checking prime suspect door and a FBI chemist, some poor soul, gave in to the pressure and said, yeah, I got a positive. Now the investigation is taken from the NTSB and you can go home leaving the real culprit free to stike again, as it will. Maybe that's what you wanted, relief from responsibility.
Well, when the next early model Boeing 747 takes off at night, explodes into two pieces, leaving only a short loud sound on the cvr, a fodded number 3 engine, a radar blip, and nine never recovered bodies, then we can go through this whole charade thing again, like Air India 182, Pan Am 103, TWA 800 and the new Flight X, all struck down by random bombers using different bombs placed in different places in random airplanes. What amazing coincidences. NTSB had its window of opportunity to get the real, boring, ordinary cause, but stalled and stalled, now the FBI can do its paranoid thing. We live in a dangerous world not made safer by you. If you ever do get around to checking prime suspect door and find the cams unlatched no one will believe you when you say door opened. But you haven't checked obvious things yet, why start now?
Very very disappointed. NTSB can now join India and UK transportation departments in using a tragedy to its own political ends, damn truth. This is an evil thing NTSB has permitted. John Barry Smith

Well, back again. The issue is too large for emotion to blot out.
Maybe I'm an asshole, but so what? I am unimportant. Does the cause of an accident care about the discoverer? Does the messenger change the facts of the message? I would hope not.
So before we get to facts that we can agree on, let me again humble myself before you as a senior accident investigator and I am the amateur sleuth with a hot lead who goes around shouting, hey everybody, look at this, look at this; over exuberant, emotional, and making mistakes left and right. Really, I'm on my virtual hands and knees begging patience, understanding, and guidance. Forgive my abrasive personality. I swallow my pride in the goal of preventing airplane crashes.
I have done everything you have told me to do. I emailed to NTSB webmaster and he forwarded the email to you. He said you were the appropriate NTSB official. I have not phoned, nor written nor anything else, just the assigned email channel of SCHLEDR@ntsb.gov. I checked, upon your recommendation, the public information about NTSB and read the biographies of the Board members. And except for a few emotional moments of perceived bitter defeat after weak FBI explosive find, I have kept to facts.
We have basic differences between us; I was Navy, you were Air Force, I was navigator, you were pilot, I loved Catch-22, you probably hated it. So, rather than go into differences, let us agree on basic facts of the case. If you don't agree it's a fact because it's open to interpretation, then it gets thrown out. And if I don't agree it's a fact because it is open to interpretation then it gets thrown out. The interpretations get thrown into the interpretation pile.
Facts, facts, facts. Actually five facts that I ask that we agree on. From those basic fundamental, essential facts, conclusions may be drawn which may be correct, or at least more likely to be correct than conclusions drawn on guesses.
The facts I got from you, you are the one who made the key called UAL 811 which I have fit into other crashes and am saying, hey, look it fits so far, let's try it further, need some help here. I am asking you to use your key of 811 to unlock other similar early 747 crashes. If true, great, we have solved the mystery. We will both go down Fifth Avenue in a parade with confetti everywhere and pretty girls running out to the limo and kissing us. And hope we don't get stuck in the eye by a thrown rose like Major -deCoverly of Catch-22 who then wore an eye patch. He's the one who refused to sign a loyalty oath before chow by saying, "Eat. Now."
Facts:
1. On 811 a radar blip fell from the plane during some destruction.
Support: The blips were tracked down to ocean to splashdown point and door found on ocean floor. Your official 811 report states radar blips were debris from plane.
2. On 811 at least ten missing persons sitting in forward fuselage were not found.
Support: Your 811 report states 9 passengers lost in flight. An extensive air and sea search for the passengers was unsuccessful. The passengers sat in seats 8H, 9FGH, 10GH, 11GH 12H.
3. On 811 a short loud bang was heard on the cockpit voice recorder then silence.
Support: Your official report states a loud bang could be heard on the CVR. The electrical power to the CVR was lost for approximately 21.4 second following the loud bang.
Ok, now that's three facts. I'm going slow here because this is very very important. Let us disregard emotion and conjecture and speculation to look closely at each word and agree on that word and not any implications, just the word. So far, I've said the three facts are; on 811 there was a radar blip during some destruction, under ten passengers sitting in forward fuselage were never found, and a short loud bang was heard on the CVR then silence. That's all so far, no more, no less.
4. On 811 engine number three had foreign object damage.
Support: Your official report states No. 3 engine exhibited extensive foreign object damage.
5. 811 was an early model Boeing 747 with high flight time.
Support: Your official report states Flight 811 was a Boeing 747-122, serial number 19875, the 89th built, and had 58,815 flight hours.
there they are, five facts that we can agree on. Do you agree with them? Exactly as they are, no more, no less. To review: 811 had radar blips during some destruction, under ten bodies never found, a short loud bang, then silence, engine number 3 Fodded, early model high time Boeing 747.
We know the cause of 811's moderate destruction, the inadvertent opening of the forward cargo door in flight. Support: Your report says probable cause was the sudden opening of the forward lower lobe cargo door in flight.
Ok so far, I believe. Now it gets harder.
Let's move to Pan Am 103 and stick to the facts and try to disregard seven years of daily emotional input about the evil bombers.
Facts that we can agree on are:
1. On 103 a radar blip fell from the plane during some destruction.
Support: Official report has strange blip from plane before destruction and many blips during destruction. Report has chart with radar blips showing destruction pattern. Mystery blip shown as green diamond.
2. On 103 at least ten missing persons sitting in forward fuselage were not found.
Support: Official report states the bodies of 10 passengers were not recovered and of these, 8 had been allocated seats in rows 23 to 28 positioned over the wing at the front of the economy section.
3. On 103 a short loud bang was heard on the cockpit voice recorder then silence.
Support: Official report states the tape ended with a sudden loud sound followed almost immediately by the cessation of recording.
4. On 103 engine number three had foreign object damage.
Support: Official report states No 3 engine intake area contained a number of loose items originating from within the cabin or baggage hold.
5. 103 was an early model Boeing 747 with high flight time.
Support: Official report states that 103 was a Boeing 747-121 serial number 19646, and had 72,464 flight hours.
do you agree to the facts above? No conclusions yet, no conjecture, no musings, no speculation, no guessing. That's later in the interpretations section. This is the fact section. Facts unemotional, boring, slow, but let's be precise and correct. The fun part of what the hell does it all mean comes later.
Now to 800. I don't have your 811 NTSB official report nor the 103 United Kingdom Air Accidents Investigation Branch official report to support these facts so we can disregard them if you wish. I am using reputable news reports which are flimsy support at best but it's all I have and I use what I can. I need all the help I can get. If you can correct these facts, please do, sir. When the official 800 report comes out I can use it to support my facts and I can refer to it as your 800 NTSB official report because you are intimately involved again in the greatest aircraft accident mystery series ever to strike aviation. And you made the key to unlock the mystery, your 811 report.
1. On 800 a radar blip fell from the plane during some destruction.
Support: Newsday reports "law enforcement and aviation officials were particularly perplexed by an unidentified ''blip,'' signaling the presence of some object, that appeared on air traffic control radar near the plane just before the crash, a senior law enforcement source said. Authorities were repeatedly replaying recordings of the radar transmission ''but we are stymied,'' the source said.
2. On 800 at least ten missing persons sitting in forward fuselage were not found.
Support: News reports gives body count found on 800 and number of missing bodies is now at twenty and decreasing, but at least ten. News reports state: In all, a dozen of the 22 missing bodies were supposed to be seated between rows 18 and 28, where investigators are rebuilding a section of the aircraft located over the center fuel tank.
3. On 800 a short loud bang was heard on the cockpit voice recorder then silence.
Support: News reports state: 'So far, investigators have been frustrated in trying to decipher the only audible evidence of the blast, a sound heard for 130 milliseconds, or just over one-tenth of a second, before the recording abruptly ended.'
4. On 800 engine number three had foreign object damage.
Support: News reports state: The right inboard engine was relatively intact but suffered ``foreign object damage'' from debris sucked in while it was apparently still running. News reports state: Investigators completed a meticulous tear-down of the right inboard engine of TWA Flight 800 yesterday and sent debris that had been sucked into the apparently still-running engine to FBI and National Transportation Safety Board labs in Washington.
5. 800 was an early model Boeing 747 with high flight time.
Support: News reports state: 800 was Boeing 747-131. The TWA airliner was 25 years old and was among a group of aircraft required to undergo more frequent inspections for metal fatigue, cracks and other age-related stresses that might pose safety concerns.The airplane is one of the older 747s in service and was the 153rd of the model to roll off Boeing's assembly line in Seattle. News reports 800 had 16869 flight cycles. Actual hours unknown.
Regarding the five facts for 800, they are flimsy, subject to change and qualification, yes. So are all the facts but today, using the broad language as stated, I submit them to be true. Here they are again in total:
1. On 800, 103, and 811 a radar blip fell from the plane during some destruction.
2. On 800, 103, and 811 at least ten missing persons sitting in forward fuselage were not found.
3. On 800, 103, and 811 a short loud bang was heard on the cockpit voice recorder then silence.
4. On 800, 103, and 811 engine number three had foreign object damage.
5. 800, 103, and 811 were early model Boeing 747s with high flight time.
The mystery event we wish to identify is seen on radar, it is heard on recorder, it is felt by engine, it has known consequences of death, and it happens to the same kind of airplane.
What does it mean? Well, there we may go in different directions, but maybe not.
What does it mean? Well, pattern. Five strong, important, facts exist in three airplane crashes. And your report states the cause of one of them.
My conclusions are:
It is most likely that the cause of the other two crashes is the same cause as yours.
It is less likely, but possible, that the three airplanes have three different causes to explain the five facts.
It is even less likely, but possible, your report is wrong and the three airplanes have a same different cause for the five facts.
And of course, it is less likely, but possible, that your report is right for one cause and the other two crashes have a same different cause for the same five facts.
Why my conclusion? It is most likely that your cause of the one crash is the right one and the same cause exists for the other two because the cause is a mechanical event that can be reproduced accurately under similar conditions to similar airplanes to give similar results.
Other less likely causes would give variables such as different model aircraft, different engine fodded, different number of bodies missing, different sounds on voice recorder, different radar information. Different causes can give similar results but more likely similar cause gives similar results.
That is my point sir, we could all be right or wrong, but at this time, what is more likely? Where should the investigation proceed? Toward the most likely, or the less likely?
What are the basic aircraft investigator procedures? I don't know, I wish I did. Maybe I should go to school and learn and then people would not ignore me when I talk about airplane crashes and their causes.
I believe based upon the scant evidence of facts above, that the potential cause of the crash of 103 and 800 might be the same as 811, that is, the opening of the forward cargo door in flight. I recommend the cargo door be considered a prime suspect and be investigated to either rule the door in or to rule the door out.
May I jump ahead. The question now to me is, why do the doors open in flight? I have eleven reasonable answers, all requiring skill and objects beyond my capability. And yes, could be a bomb opening those doors. Yes, yes yes, could be a bomb opening the doors. Again possible, but less likely bomb to cause three events, and possible, more likely cargo door to cause three events. But could be bomb, it is one of the eleven reasonable explanations for why the doors open inadvertently.
Based upon the forward cargo hold being the danger zone of several fatal crashes, there is enough evidence to weld all the forward cargo doors shut until further notice. If it's bombs getting in to the sensitive area, then seal it shut. If it's a door opening, then seal it shut. The danger is diminished until further investigation.
If another door opens or another "bomb" goes off in forward cargo hold area, there will be questions like, Why didn't you recommend sealing off the forward cargo hold area when you knew trouble, either bombs or doors, always seems to start from there in Pan Am 103, UAL 811, TWA 800?
Let the airlines worry about revenue loss, you and I care about lives and safe planes.
this is not wartime, not secret stuff, not VIPs, not embarrassing revelations; this is peacetime with a civilian airplane with civilians involved in US territory. Let us be open as can be. This is not CIA, FBI, DIA, NSA, Joint Chiefs of Staff stuff; this is civilian peacetime stuff. If we get shut out of this vital above board process now, we will never know what's happening when secret, coverup, shameful, illegal stuff goes on.
The FBI is releasing info every day. They are in a PR war for control and funds and they may win. The NTSB must fight back. Give the non bomb guys a chance. Give the non missile, non terrorists, non weirdo guys a chance to present our case. There are a lot of people out there who believe in a simple common sense explanation for a crash such as cargo door or something else. They are distressed to hear bomb bomb bomb everyday and how the terrorists are out to kill us. We need a rational voice out there with technical details.
My eighty year old father, who will never believe 103 was not a bomb, says, "We hear about a catastrophic mechanical failure possibility for TWA 800, but they never tell us what kind that could be." Well, sir, state that the NTSB is examining the possibility of a catastrophic mechanical failure such as open cargo door, or exploding nose wheel, or cockpit glass imploding or something to get the bomb guys away from your evidence and out of your pockets.
Mr Francis gives the general info to the general media as he should, he is the political appointee. You are the career professional investigator with the technical facts that the intelligent, reasonable public wish to know.
We know more about the inside of the secret FBI crime lab in Wash DC than we do about the inside of the four PW engines or unlocked or locked cargo door latches.
You are technically knowledgeable with email, and I hope reading my web site and newsgroups. Use the internet to get out technical info to the informed public. Use newsgroups, start your own web site from NTSB home page, answer requests for interviews by AVweb, send me email with permission to put on web site with source name.
Let the FBI use all this anonymous secret crap, they live on fear.
Let the NTSB be open and forthright by living of facts.
What is the goal? The goal is to prevent death. We prevent death by not allowing airplanes to crash. We prevent airplanes from crashing by eliminating the causes. We eliminate the causes by finding out what they are. We find out what they are by using the benefit of hindsight, superior information collection and dissemination called the internet, remembering experiences of our own flying days, and acquiring education. Then we add common sense and gut feelings.
I have a gut feeling that 800 was not a bomb but a cargo door opening in flight that tore nose off.
I have a gut feeling that 103 was a mild cargo blast but a cargo door opening in flight that tore nose off.
I have a gut feeling that 811 was a cargo door opening in flight almost tearing nose off.
There is a reason why the first page of my 80 page site has a picture (that you may have taken, ) of the huge gaping hole of 811 where the cargo door peeled back skin and left this big, black hole in side of nose open to 300 knot slipstream. That is truth. That is what happens for real when door goes. People really die when door goes.
...And blip shows up on radar, and engine 3 fodded, and at least ten bodies never recovered, and a loud bang heard on voice recorder, and yes, that picture of 811 is of a early model Boeing 747 with high flight time.
Please, please, please, pursue cargo door angle. Whatever you do to rule causes in or out, please do it for the cargo door. Please keep public informed of your activities. Please correspond with me using email. Please find cause of 800 crash.
Sincerely, John Barry Smith

NTSB home page link to TWA 800, terrific! Sparse but it's a great beginning.
I've been thinking exactly what is it I'm asking of the NTSB in a respectful and documented way and it is this:
I'm asking an investigator who observed what happens when a cargo door opens inflight to the nose of an early model Boeing 747 to make the leap of intuition that the next time that door opens in flight the nose could come all the way off. Based on that possibility, the cause of the first nose hole must be ruled out as the cause of the possibility of the nose coming all the way off.
There is the justification to pursue cargo door as cause of 800: it almost made nose come off of 811 and maybe it did on 800.
I've attached as .jpg files two charts of crashes just for reference. I hope they transfer alright. The pattern is there only evident by hindsight.
John Barry Smith

New clue: the floor under passengers and above cargo door always buckles downward. Suggest to check floor on TWA 800 for buckled down or fractured floor beams which will be similar to UAL 811, Air India 182, and Pan Am 103. Door opens to outside low pressure allowing passenger deck high pressure to push down floor beams. The low altitude of TWA 800 may make bending very subtle.
Your 811 report states: "The floor beams adjacent to and inboard of the cargo door area had been fractured and buckled downward." Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Good analysis of damage location, forward of the wing on the right side. And, interestingly, that is the identical spot where the big hole appears in UAL Flight 811, and underneath that big hole where the explosion was pinpointed on TWA 800 is the right side forward cargo door, prime suspect, previous killer, and so far not investigated in this case.
your UAL 811 investigation holds the key which is unlocking TWA 800.
To repeat a thought mentioned earlier. The evidence is in that mysterious trouble occurs in forward cargo holds of early model Boeing 747s. So seal the door shut. Now no bombs can get in and no door can inadvertently open.
Bottom line is that you are in the middle of a mysterious early model Boeing 747 crash and as we speak many early model Boeing 747s are flying around, including the one that the President of the United States flies in, Air Force One, a Boeing 747-200. The problem occurs in an area you can do something about, the forward cargo hold. Seal the doors shut before another door pops off or bomb goes off and the trouble is traced to the forward cargo hold. Be prudent, this is not wartime, the fate of the nation does not hang in the balance and some risks have to be taken. Seal the doors shut until further investigation. John Barry Smith

The event trigger for Air India 182 and Pan Am 103 was the pilot keying the mike. The event is timed to mike key to within a second according to documents. Both planes were about to receive clearances and before every clearance is given, the plane acknowledges to Center that it is ready to copy. So 182 and 103 talked to Center just before that second.
It is possible, even likely that TWA 800, and UAL 811 were also talking to Center when event occurred. I say the event was the door opening. I conject that the mike key triggered door motor which cracked door which opened outward and got torn off with skin, which led to explosive decompression leading to nose torn off which cut power abruptly, gave one short loud sound, gave radar blips, fodded number three engine, and caused the disappearance of at least nine people. And every single just listed clue happened to Air India 182, Pan Am 103, UAL 811 and TWA 800.
Doors opening in flight caused the crashes of 182, 103, 811, and 800. What caused the doors to open? Some say bombs, fine, call it a bomb. I say it is avionics electrical interference in electronics bay causing door motor to turn on triggered by mike key of VHF radio.
Too much coincidence going on, that's why hindsight is so great, it ties it all together once the pattern is seen.
Please check out exactly what crew of 811 and 800 were doing at instant of destruction as shown by CVR or radar time hack. If crew talking to ground then you have mystery solved. John Barry Smith

Please rule out cargo door as the cause of TWA Flight 800. It is a matter of life and death. It is a prime suspect with two ADs against it and it was at the scene of destruction, on the right side foward of the wing. It has already killed nine passengers in UAL Flight 811.
To come upon a crime scene with 230 dead people stabbed to death and a bloody knife is in plain sight and to not pursue that bloody knife as the killer weapon is not good. To continue to look for a bomb that stabbed all the victims to death is not good.
Investigation on a mechanical object that may have failed and led to the killing of the people is good. Especially if the object has documented failures three times before, two Airworthiness Directives to try to stop failure, and the mechanical object is located extremely near the scene of the start of the destruction of the aircraft, forward right side, and the death of all aboard. The mechanical object is the forward cargo door. It is the prime suspect and it is guilty.
It is an extremely important discovery.
If true. Is it true? Did the outward opening cargo doors inadvertently open on early model Boeing 747s which were torn off in the 333 mile per hour slipstream pulling fuselage skin with it a exposing large nine foot by fifteen foot gash in right side of nose just forward of the wing allowing wind forces to tear whole plane's nose off, thereby leaving short, loud sound on the cockpit voice recorder, cutting off power abruptly, throwing debris into the number three engine, forcing decapitated nose to crash to the surface, allowing the rest of the aircraft to disintegrate to the surface, resulting in the aircraft destroyed and all crew and passengers dead?
Did it that happen that way for Air India Flight 182 in 1985, Pan Am 103 in 1988, and TWA 800 in 1996? And almost happen for UAL 811 in 1989, nine dead, where the only difference from the others is the nose did not come all the way off and only nine passengers were swept out of their seats to their deaths?
I say yes, yes, yes, yes and can document every step of the way. No exaggerations, no slanting; only facts and conservative logic. It is on my website. http://www.corazon.om You must review/scan/browse the pages for the explanation. It is all there.
I say this with a smile on my face to hide my fear, but this is a matter of life or death. Hundreds of these 747s are flying right now with the potential of the door to tear off and cause another large gaping hole in the side of the nose which may or may not lead to the destruction of the aircraft and the death of all aboard. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

when a door/hatch/access panel/window is at the scene of a breakup, that door/hatch/access panel/window must be investigated. That is a basic tenet of crash investigation starting with the British Comet which had metal fatigue around the square passenger windows. The Comet is a good example of a mystery crash that could have been called a bomb but wasn't because of outstanding accident investigation. The Comet was another explosive decompression accident, just like Air India 182, Pan Am 103, and TWA 800 that looked like a bomb and wasn't.
The basic tenet of checking the holes in the hull near breakup is being ignored in TWA 800. The computer located scene of destruction in TWA 800 is the exact spot on the aircraft where the cargo door hole exists when the door comes off, as in UAL 811 picture,(http:// www.corazon.com/). On the right side, forward of the wing is your location of destruction and the cargo door is right there. To not thoroughly investigate the forward cargo door is to betray the profession of aircraft accident investigation.
You are being handed the solution to three of the biggest aircraft crash mysteries ever, Air India 182, Pan Am 103, and now TWA 800. They were all brought down when the nose tore off when a huge gaping hole in the right side of their nose was exposed when the outward opening forward cargo door cracked open and tore off in the slipstream taking fuselage skin with it. UAL 811 is the key and your report of UAL 811 has the answers to TWA 800.
The question as to why the doors open is also mostly answered in the UAL 811 report which states on three occassions the doors opened uncommanded when an electrical short affected frayed wire bundles to the door.
Why this investigation is so important is that there are 747s still flying as we write that are at risk to coming apart. The NTSB is dawdling with bombs and missiles and other exciting stuff while ignoring the basics, mechanical failure. One such failure is door opening in flight.
My question is: why is such an obvious avenue of investigation not being pursued? It is so obvious that a mechanical cargo door system with two ADs against it found at the scene of the destruction must be ruled in or out immediately, and the fact that nothing has been mentioned about the defective item for seven weeks is very suspicious. Can it truly be ignorance? Are the wild goose chases of bombs and missiles really misleading you? Of course there was a fuel tank explosion; it happened later and five thousand feet lower; it is not the cause of the crash but an effect of what happens when a forward cargo door opens in flight, tears of nose, rest of plane disintegrates on the way down, just like Pan Am 103.
Does the claim of door for 103 scare you off? The bomb cause can easily be debunked by a careful review of the AAIB report on the crash. It is all there, it was a small blast after the door caused explosive decompression but the blast did not bring the plane down. It was a red herring which was followed by the avid bomb fishermen.
I was interviewed by Newsday recently for a story to run on Sunday and I go on the New York radio station WBAI again Wednesday night to talk about the cargo door theory. It's only drops in the bucket to persuade the NTSB to go down the avenue of mechanical malfunction of the cargo door as cause.
You are the most important person there, can you request that the door be ruled out as a cause just because it would be following good accident investigation procedure? The formal accident reports all have weather, crew experience, airplane flight hours, and any corrosion found, etc. It would be obvious to ask were there there any proven defective mechanical systems at the scene of destruction? Well, yes, there was, the forward cargo door. Was it ruled out?
The claim of the cause of TWA 800 being cargo door is being made by me, a commercial pilot, instrument rated, Part 135 certificate holder, military aircrewman and navigator, combat experienced, jet crash survivor, and internet user. My web site at http://www.corazon.com has hundreds of pages of documentation. This is a substantial effort on my part reflecting years of aircraft intelligence officer training and flying experience.
Why ignore an informed, concerned member of the public who is answering your agency's appeal for public help? This is not wartime with a secret airplane. This is peacetime with a civilian airplane. All the secrecy is not good. All the non interaction with the public is not good. Staged briefings are not good. Ignoring basic investigation procedures is not good.
The investigation of TWA 800 so far is not good and is shown by not having determined the cause seven weeks after the event.
The cause is there; it is the inadvertent opening of the forward cargo door in flight, as has happened before, happened now, and will happen again.
John Barry Smith

The news today said mechanical cause is on front burner, may I suggest inadvertent opening of forward cargo door.
Web site at corazon has all the info. Isn't it plausible that a nine foot by 15 foot hole in the side of an older 747 would allow air to come in and blow out other side of fuselage, allowing nose to tear off? TWA 800 did have 93000 plus hours on airframe. Well, good luck. John Barry Smith
Newsday article attached about this wacky guy smith with web site about cargo doors...don't get backed into a corner of denial...
<html><head><title>newsday.com / Long Island / Crash of TWA Flight

Al Baker and Matthew Cox contributed to this story. 

<H2>A Web of Intrigue</h2>

<h4>Flight 800 crash theories running wild on Internet</H4>

By Jessica Kowal 

Staff Writer 

On the Internet, the mystery of TWA Flight 800 has long since been solved. J. Orlin Grabbe knows a missile downed the jet. On his World Wide Web site, Grabbe writes that Syrian-trained terrorists warned the FBI and then shot down the TWA jet with a surface-to-air missile from a boat in the water off Long Island. John Barry Smith is just as sure the plane was done in by a defective cargo door. According to Smith's Web site, a forward cargo door fell off both the TWA plane and off Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988, causing both planes to break apart and explode. Boeing and the U.S. government, Smith writes, aren't telling the truth because they don't want to damage the American economy. Richard Ruiz of Farmingdale fervently subscribes to the "friendly fire" theory, posting his views on a computer bulletin board along with hundreds of others who believe they can pinpoint when and how the American military shot down the airplane. Within minutes after the jet went down July 17 and killed all 230 people aboard, the Internet became the 24-hour worldwide talk show for theories about what caused the fireball. While the reality of this public detective story has been disappointing to armchair investigators - for almost two months, the professionals have repeated that a bomb, missile or mechanical failure could have downed the plane - virtual reality has stepped in to fill the narrative gap. "However damaging it may be, we're entitled to the truth," said Ruiz, a 62-year-old chemist who has been heartened by winning converts to his view. "Let's say I'm suspicious, and until I'm proven different than my thoughts are, I have to be suspicious." Using the key words "TWA Flight 800" and "missile," "bomb," or "conspiracy" yields thousands of messages posted on bulletin boards from visitors digging through hypotheses. The crash has already earned a spot alongside the Kennedy assassination and Vince Foster's death on a Web site entitled "50 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time." Such speculation may be fueled by the far-fetched nature of even some officially sanctioned theories, including that a missile pierced the plane, passing through without a trace. Longtime investigators also say the lack of new developments feeds the frenzy. Then there is investigators' refusal to rule out anything. Even while generally discounting theories about "friendly fire," chief FBI investigator James Kallstrom would not dismiss them outright last week. He would only call them "highly, highly, highly unlikely." So without waiting for the agents of the FBI; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; and National Transportation Safety Board to figure it out, computer users sift through available details, drawing their own conclusions. "When there's an absence of concrete information, the conspiracy theorists really thrive," said Vincent Cannistraro, the CIA's former counterterrorism chief of operations. "They know one fact and a fourth fact, but they don't know what's in between, so they start filling in their information." Perhaps the FBI opened the floodgates by giving out the agency's e-mail address and asking for help in solving the mystery. Now faced with a deluge of messages in reply, the FBI wades through explanations of aliens, meteorites, bombs or missiles to find tidbits of useful information coming from pilots, engineers or other experts. "There's thousands of them. There's millions of them," Kallstrom said of the messages the bureau has received. "A lot of them are very well reasoned and thought out and we appreciate getting them . . . We read them, and any of them we think are worth a second look, we take a second look." But there is a difference between the expert and the crackpot, said Oliver (Buck) Revell, who was in charge of the FBI's investigative and intelligence operations for 12 years. "Some of these people are fairly serious and knowledgeable about investigative processes and are using intellectual analysis," said Revell, who headed the Pan Am Flight 103 investigation. "And others are living through vicarious thrills of `X-Files' nonsense that doesn't hold any water." On the Internet, those differences can be hard to spot. And because of speedy transmission over telephone lines, Internet theorizing moves faster than other media, said John Whalen, author of the "50 Greatest Conspiracies" Web site. Whalen warns that believing in a government cover-up is "as responsible as saying that ET shot the plane down." "Anyone can get up on the Internet and propose a theory, float it out there, and then it begins to spread like an informational virus, for better or worse," Whalen said. The workings of the Internet certainly allow people to directly send detailed suggestions about how the investigation should proceed. Last Friday, one man sent a five-page e-mail message to the FBI to advise the bureau not to overlook the possibility that the TWA plane was hit by a meteor. Asking the bureau to find out "how long would the transit of a meteoroid traveling at 8 [kilometers per second] take to pass through a 747?" the author concluded that the lack of explosive evidence and reports of a "streak of light in the sky" before the plane exploded point to Flight 800's having been struck by "a falling object, a meteorite, comet or spacecraft debris." Also in the mix are the UFO theorists, including one Web site reporting that four days before the crash, a woman living in northern New Jersey "reported" seeing a UFO flying just south of Long Island. Other Web sites offer very specific information their authors say leads to one conclusion: their conclusion. On his Web site, Grabbe offers essays criticizing President Bill Clinton and the FBI and explaining his own views on international financial markets. In an interview, Grabbe, a Harvard-educated economist who lives in Reno, Nevada, said "high level intelligence people" who read his Web site contacted him to say the U.S. government knew within a week after Flight 800's demise that a modified surface-to-air Stinger missile hit the plane. He rejects the notion he's a "conspiracy theorist." "I think it was a terrorist group that took down that plane using a surface-to-air missile," Grabbe said. "I just call that the facts, but other people who don't like the facts would call that a conspiracy." Spectral data from satellite photos, Grabbe said, showed authorities that the missile's usual heat-seeking head was replaced with a white-glowing "phosphorous" tip, which could be aimed at the belly of the plane. Grabbe believes the FBI has offered falsified radar data showing the airplane flying at 13,700 feet when it exploded, while "the best information I can get" was that the plane was flying at 7,600 feet when hit by a missile. Moreover, Grabbe links both the TWA explosion and the July 2 energy blackout of 15 Western states to Syrian-trained terrorists. Grabbe said he believes the FBI is "deliberately falsifying evidence," with the complicity of the White House, because the United States does not want trouble with Syria but might try to use the TWA Flight 800 explosion to "justify a war in the Middle East" against Libya or Iraq. "People behind the scenes are laughing, and there are bets going on about how long the FBI can maintain the charade," Grabbe said. Grabbe's and others' views that the government is covering up what it knows are "crazy," Cannistraro said. "Anyone who claims to have knowledge is generally lying, paranoid or [doing it] for publicity or self aggrandizement," Cannistraro said. John Barry Smith of Carmel Valley, Calif., said he's putting his theory on the Internet to save lives. After viewing pictures of a United Airlines 747 severely damaged when a forward cargo door opened during a 1989 flight, killing nine people, Smith decided cargo doors, not bombs, were the cause of explosions aboard Pan Am Flight 103, the 1985 Air India Flight, and now TWA Flight 800. On his Web site, Smith uses photographs and documents to compare the United Airlines plane to the Pan Am and Air India planes and to conclude that malfunctioning cargo doors opened and ripped away the skin of the fuselages and then tore the noses off the planes. In an interview, Smith said he believes a door also fell off TWA Flight 800, and that the "streak of light" some say is a missile is actually the plane's falling cargo door reflecting light. "This door is a prime suspect. This door has killed before," Smith said. "I didn't invent the cause of these crashes. The door popped open. It's not weird. It's a no-brainer. So that's when you get to the coverup." The coverup, he said, is that Boeing and the federal government don't want to admit there's a major defect in the 747, potentially costing the company millions of dollars to fix and severely damaging the American economy. Smith, who said he has been "sensitive" to doors since his finger was slammed in a car door when he was 5-years old, has contacted the White House, FBI, FAA, Air Force, NTSB, and airline insurance companies to alert them to his view of the problem. "It's a case of human nature seeing what they want to see. They see a bomb, and they ignore what's in front of them," Smith said. Several aviation officials dispute Smith's theory. Boeing spokesman Doug Webb said the company knew of problems with 747 cargo doors a year before the United Airlines accident, and that the airlines have subsequently retrofitted them with steel-reinforced locks. NTSB spokeswoman Shelly Hazle said the agency examined TWA Flight 800's wreckage for a broken cargo door and discounted it as a cause of the crash. If the cargo door had opened in flight, a cockpit light would have gone on and the crew would have focused all their attention on the problem, Hazle said. Yet there is no discussion of the problem on the cockpit voice-recorder tapes, so the NTSB has ruled it out, she said. And, investigators said, Pan Am 103 and the Air India planes were both downed by bombs, not cargo doors. Even as some online theorists, such as Smith, use their own research, others draw conclusions using whatever information comes their way. Richard Ruiz said a conversation with a French Army officer while both men were waiting to catch flights at a South American airport convinced him friendly fire was responsible for the TWA explosion. Ruiz admitted he has no facts that haven't appeared in the mainstream news media, but he still said the Frenchman's comments about other friendly-fire shoot-downs, including the U.S. Navy's downing of an Iranian Airbus in 1988, made an impact. "I began to think about it and the fact that nothing conclusive was reached about [the TWA plane]," he said. "And I began to put two and two together."

t's when you get to the coverup."

The coverup, he said, is that Boeing and the federal
government don't want to admit there's a major defect in
the 747, potentially costing the company millions of
dollars to fix and severely damaging the American
economy.

Smith, who said he has been "sensitive" to doors since
his finger was slammed in a car door when he was 5-years
old, has contacted the White House, FBI, FAA, Air Force,
NTSB, and airline insurance companies to alert them to
his view of the problem.

"It's a case of human nature seeing what they want to
see. They see a bomb, and they ignore what's in front of
them," Smith said.

Several aviation officials dispute Smith's theory.

Boeing spokesman Doug Webb said the company knew of
problems with 747 cargo doors a year before the United
Airlines accident, and that the airlines have
subsequently retrofitted them with steel-reinforced
locks.

NTSB spokeswoman Shelly Hazle said the agency examined
TWA Flight 800's wreckage for a broken cargo door and
discounted it as a cause of the crash.

If the cargo door had opened in flight, a cockpit light
would have gone on and the crew would have focused all
their attention on the problem, Hazle said. Yet there is
no discussion of the problem on the cockpit
voice-recorder tapes, so the NTSB has ruled it out, she
said.

And, investigators said, Pan Am 103 and the Air India
planes were both downed by bombs, not cargo doors.

Even as some online theorists, such as Smith, use their
own research, others draw conclusions using whatever
information comes their way.

Richard Ruiz said a conversation with a French Army
officer while both men were waiting to catch flights at
a South American airport convinced him friendly fire was
responsible for the TWA explosion.

Ruiz admitted he has no facts that haven't appeared in
the mainstream news media, but he still said the
Frenchman's comments about other friendly-fire
shoot-downs, including the U.S. Navy's downing of an
Iranian Airbus in 1988, made an impact. "I began to
think about it and the fact that nothing conclusive was
reached about [the TWA plane]," he said. "And I began to
put two and two together."

Mr. Smith, thank you for your message concerning the TWA 800 crash
investigation. We have recovered many of the door/hatch/access
panel/windows from the sea floor and none of them indicate that they came
off the aircraft prior to the event which lead to the crash. In
addition, both the CVR and the FDR do not have any information that
indicates any of the above things departed the aircraft prior to the
event. A depressurization event most certainly would have been noted by
the crew and recorded on the CVR. We will continue to look for any
indications leading to the source of the event and definitely pay
attention to items memtioned in your letter.
Thank you for your interest in aviation safety.

thank you for replying, my faith in a responsive government official to an informed concerned citizen is about to be restored.
I'm reading and re-reading your email very carefully. Permit me to be picky.
>We have recovered many of the door/hatch/access
>panel/windows from the sea floor and none of them indicate that they came
>off the aircraft prior to the event which lead to the crash.
To be specific:
1. Did you get the forward cargo door? Was the forward cargo door found closest to the event site indicating it came off with the first batch of debris? Initial news reports indicated this was so. Does the forward cargo door have the latch cams in the unlocked position while the lock sectors are in the locked position? That was the way of UAL 811. The FBI may have altered the position of the latches while examining for residue.
2. Do the main floor beams bend downward as in explosive decompression or upward as in bomb blast?
3. Does engine number 3 show EPR blip just before destruction, as did Pan Am 103?
4. Is radar blip anomaly of 800 on right side of track similar to Pan Am 103 just before destruction?
5. Is engine number three the only fodded engine? What kind of fod? Pan Am 103 had engine cowling fod also.
6. Does short loud sound of TWA 800 match short loud sounds of Air India 182, Pan Am 103, and UAL 811. Short loud sound on Air India is described in Canadian report as matching short loud sound of explosive decompression of DC-10.
Do the unrecovered bodies match the seating of the unrecovered bodies UAL 811, and Pan 103, all of whom sat in about the same rows at TWA 800.
> In
>addition, both the CVR and the FDR do not have any information that
>indicates any of the above things departed the aircraft prior to the
>event.
The event is catastrophic and almost instantaneous. The short loud sound indicates something happened. I offer door opened, tore off large patch of skin allowing 300 knot force air to blow out other side of fuselage tearing off nose severing power supply allowing only short loud sound of CVR and abrupt power cut on FDR.
>A depressurization event most certainly would have been noted by
>the crew and recorded on the CVR.
Yes, sir, and only when the nose does not tear off and allows the copilot to report a bomb went off to the tower, as happened to UAL 811. The explosive decompression of door opening and the subsequent explosion of fuel air mix later mimic bomb. It is the classic red herring, in this case two red herrings.
When the depressurization event such as Pan Am 125 and UAL 811 do not tear nose off quickly the crew does notice comes around and lands safely. When an older airframe by 35000 hours (TWA 800 had 93000 hours) has door open, the nose comes off and there is no time for crew to talk about it or for cvr or fdr to record consequences.
>We will continue to look for any
>indications leading to the source of the event and definitely pay
>attention to items memtioned in your letter.
Thank you. Your questions indicate an open mind. Thank goodness this bomb/missile exciting nonsense is waning and the basic difficult work of real problems can be checked out. I realize the immense implications of the cargo door and not bombs on Air India 182, Pan Am 103, and TWA 800. I can show cargo door on Pan Am 103 and debunk the bomb too, a mean feat. My web has the cold hard data and I invite you, sir, to peruse at leisure and respond with best criticism to my theory of frayed wire door control bundle, worn latches, damaged door cams, and fuselage flex and door motor gets power which unlatches door which pops open, tears out and up taking skin with it exposing nine foot by 15 foot hole which allows 300 knots wind force to blow in and blow out other side of fuselage tearing off entire nose to land in separate debris trail, allowing fuselage and wings to fall and disintegrate later and form own debris trail. The door opening caused explosive decompression which spewed baggage and passengers outside and then they were sucked into number 3 engine fodding it. The door and debris are picked up on radar.
That is the mold of UAL 811 into which the other crashes fit. The mystery now for me is why do doors open in flight? The web site has several possible explanations from cargo shift to VHF transmitters triggering power to door actuator. But that is conjecture.
To be sure, door openings have caused the noses to be torn off Air India 182, Pan Am 103, and TWA 800, and almost UAL 811. All the clues match. Why and when and how the doors opened is a current mystery. The cause is still out there and another early model 747 with outward opening forward cargo door may again disintegrate in flight. I suggest emergency AD to weld forward cargo door shut until investigation of TWA 800 complete and door is cleared or not cleared.
indulge me a primitive analogy: imagine a soda can with the tab pressing on round partially cut aluminum. Pressing thumb against round area inside scribe mark can not open can but once tab using lever action cracks scribe area, poof, soda/debris is ejected, and round area can now be pushed down/open with little finger. Add a 300 knot slipstream on lip of area and you don't need little finger to push open, the air does. The integrity of the pressurized hull, soda can/747 is impeached by tab/door open and nature's laws take over, pressure equalizing, wind force, tearing action, weight; aerodynamic changes engineers never figured would happen and are not supposed to happen. Crack the pressurized hull of 747 exposing large nine foot by 15 foot hole, as in UAL 811, and by golly, nose coming off in ensuing 300 knot wind is plausible and warrants further investigation. Especially since that door has killed before for sure.
My morale is lifted significantly, sir, I now believe the investigation will focus on plausible reality and start ruling out mechanical causes. Let's put than damn door at the top of the list.
Please visit my extensive web site at <http://www.corazon.com> I welcome comments and criticism. The cause must be found and quickly before it happens again.
Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Well, the first blush of excitement has passed after receiving a communication from you, a member of the investigation team. My quick reply was to establish contact and to confirm I am vitally interested in everything you have to say. Now that I am relaxed other thoughts have occurred to me.
Other ideas have been rebutted but one of mine has not. Can it be rebutted? I offer the explanation of the streak being the cargo door ejected and spinning away from 800 just before destruction. I contend that at that altitude, 13700 feet, at 830PM on July 17th, past Long Island in lat/long that indeed a metal object spinning, descending, reflecting dusk sunlight, would be perceived as a streak by human eyes. If that can be rejected by sun angle, black non reflective door, too small, too high, too low, or whatever, please do it. If not, then please put the streak as door as a possible answer. Put it in the 'could be' category.
The radar anomaly of 800 before destruction...can that be put in the 'could be' category also? Pan Am 103 also had the radar anomaly at same time. Would a metal object the size of a cargo door give primary radar return? I say yes.
I contend the door was seen visually, seen on radar, heard on cvr, and felt in engine number three. Please rebut if possible.
There is another angle that may put your hairs on end. Air India 182 and Pan Am 103 were transmitting on VHF when event occurred. Can you confirm for me what exactly the pilot/copilot of TWA 800 were doing at event time, to the second? If either of the flight crew were transmitting then something very very interesting is going on. Then confirm through raw notes, if you can, what exactly, to the second, the flight crew of UAL 800 were doing at the time the door tore loose. If transmitting then the clues point for certain to some interaction in the avionics bay between VHF power supply/transmitting antenna and door actuator motor. One plane transmitting at event is ordinary, Air India 182, two planes AI 182 and PA 103 is coincidence, three planes would be amazing and four would be a certain connection. I am very interested in the actions of the crews at instant of event.Were they transmitting?
This raises the other point I wanted to mention: The internet and hindsight have permitted me to look at the forest of early 747s crashes and see the pattern. Just looking at the tree of each crash is not revealing. Each government, India, Canada, UK, and USA look at the fallen tree and can't explain why it fell so the political answer is given which is to offend the least and to benefit the most. In the case of Air India 182, Pan Am 103, and maybe TWA 800 that reason is outside evil forces such as foreign bombers. They did not have the advantage of hindsight and did the best they could.
The pattern is this, similar models of early Boeing 747s with outward opening doors have these documented events occur:
UAL preflight has uncommanded door opening traced to faulty wiring.
Pan Am 125 has uncommanded door opening in flight traced to faulty wiring.
UAL 811 has uncommanded door opening in flight traced to faulty wiring which leaves nine never recovered dead in certain seats, fod in number three engine, radar blips at destruction, short loud sound on cvr, abrupt power loss, explosive decompression in forward cargo hold, and crew thinking a bomb had gone off.
Pan Am 103 has event occur in flight near cargo door, leaving ten never recovered bodies in certain seats, fod in number three engine, radar blips at destruction, short loud sound on cvr, abrupt power loss, explosion in cargo hold, nose torn off, and people on ground thinking a bomb had gone off.
Air India 182 has event occur in flight near cargo door, fod in engines, short loud sound on cvr described as explosive decompression, abrupt power loss, explosion in cargo hold, nose torn off, and people on ground thinking a bomb had gone off.
TWA 800 has event occur in flight near cargo door, leaving so far seventeen never recovered bodies in certain seats, fod in number three engine, radar blips at destruction, short loud sound on cvr, abrupt power loss, explosion in cargo hold, nose torn off, and people on ground thinking a bomb had gone off.
The pattern is there, the links are there. It goes directly from uncommanded door opening on ground with no damage to uncommanded door openings in flight with total damage.
There are more potentially relevant clues which fit the pattern of UAL 811, night takeoffs, talking on the radios, sequence of destruction, bent floor beams, similar damage to tail and wings, deployment of oxygen masks, and blow out of pressure equalizing doors in fuselage and door.
The forest of six linked fallen trees make up the forest. One fallen tree is explained. By looking at the other trees alone the cause is unknown but looking at the forest of them all the cause is plain to see because the pattern matches the explained fallen tree.
That's why, sir, I have been able to connect the crashes to determine the common cause as inadvertent opening of the forward cargo door in flight.
Debunking the bomb in 103 is relatively easy now that TWA 800 evidence has shown that traces of explosive on fragments can be benign. There was a blast in the cargo hold of 103 but not a bomb big enough to bring down the plane. It was another red herring. My web site provides pictures of the reconstruction of 103 to see the pattern of destruction starting at the cargo door. The text of the UK report also describes the mild blast in the cargo hold.
Regardless, the issue at the moment is the cause of the crash of TWA 800 and I propose a full effort to rule out or rule in the forward cargo door, that villain with three ADs against it who has killed nine already and was near the scene of the recent crime.
The messenger, me, should not be confused with the message, cargo door, but the messenger must be considered so here I am: Regarding airplanes: models at 12, control line models at 13. Navy enlisted aircrewman at age 17-21 operating, maintaining avionics and radar on P2V antisubmarine plane, two burnin' and two churnin', Navy officer navigator bombardier on twin jet carrier RA5C age 22-26, private pilot, then commercial pilot, instrument rated, with Part 135 certificate holder. Air intelligence officer in Navy Reserve.
Involved in fatal jet crash, on web site as crash of Buno 149314.
US Army major as audiologist retiring in 1984.
I have to get the information out and web site is mode of the day, six years ago it was newsletter when I was president of EAA chapter 204 when I first published column stating 103 was not bomb but cargo door. Then writing letters in 1992 to Flying magazine where editor commented on my theory. Writing to insurance agency in 1995. Finally, the internet! With search engines and email and ftp and web sites.
So either stone tablets, hand press, or skywriting, the story will go out, inadvertent opening of forward cargo doors in early model 747s is causing catastrophic crashes. Fix the doors; weld them shut. Now. Please.
I predicted a crash like TWA 800 in writing in 1990. It happened, I don't want it to happen again.
I again invite you to my extensive web site with official accident reports of Air India 182, UAL 811, Pan Am 103, Navy 149314, and news reports of TWA 800. There are also a few fiction stories regarding this matter written to relieve my frustration in getting through to important official government agents, such as yourself. Your opinion counts much more than mine or the press. I really want to know what you think about this cargo door theory.
Another idea to throw out is to put video cameras in the cargo holds of early model 747s and watch how the door moves in and out during pressure changes. It may move a lot or not at all. If it fluctuates at all then something is wrong such as loose latches or worn cams, just waiting for door open motor to turn on for a few seconds, enough to crack the door to allow the slipstream to tear it away...
as a retired military officer, a middle class family man, aviation enthusiast, I offer the feet on the ground documented cause of door popping open when it shouldn't as cause of crash of TWA 800 and others. Please reply.
Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Dear Mr. President, Bill Clinton
Dear Mr. Chief of Staff, Leon Panetta
Dear Mr. Secretary of Transportation, Federico Peña
Dear Mr. Director, Federal Aviation Authority, David Hinson
Dear Mr. Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board, James Hall
Dear Mr. Vice Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board, Robert Francis
Dear Mr. Investigator, National Transportation Safety Board,
Dear Ms. Attorney General, Department of Justice, Janet Reno
Dear Mr. Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Louis Freeh
Dear Mr. Agent, New York Field Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, James Kallstrom

Mr. Bill Clinton, President of the United States of America
Dear Mr. President,
Hello, Sir. I have important news to give. Your life is in immediate danger, although slight, hopefully slight, when you fly on Air Force One, a Boeing 747-200B. This type aircraft has a history of inadvertent forward cargo door openings in flight. Hindsight and the internet have enabled me to link several crashes of early model Boeing 747s to a common cause, the inadvertent opening of the forward cargo door in flight. Documentation, pictures, comments, and emails from all over the world regarding this discovery are on the internet web site at http://www.corazon.com
Your life, the lives of those who fly with you, and all the passengers on early model Boeing 747s are at risk to this door opening outward and upward, tearing off in the slipstream exposing a large gash in the nose which tears off.
The door openings at altitude mimic a bomb. It is not a bomb. The world will be a bit less dangerous once the causes are determined to be mechanical and not evil.
Have you ever had a car door, or hood, or trunk open unexpectedly? I have; it's not unusual. If you have, then please give thought to possible airplane door opening and the severe consequences.
Please be responsive to this informed citizen.
Mr. Clinton, leader from follower, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Mr. Leon Panetta, Chief of Staff, Clinton Administration
I feel like saying, Leon, Leon, Leon, as that was the way I thought of you when I voted for you as Congressman several times in Monterey.
Mr. Panetta, we met in 1980 in your second floor office on Alvarado where I personally thanked you for inquiring on my behalf on a personnel matter while I was stationed in Korea.
I have come to alert you, sir, of danger to you, the President, and all passengers who fly in early model Boeing 747s. Yes, this is unorthodox, an email letter from a member of the public but then, I trust, as a former congressman, that you believe that occasionally a citizen may have something important to say. I do; here it is: The forward cargo doors of early model Boeing 747s are inadvertently opening in flight, tearing off door and skin, allowing the slipstream to enter the large gash which tears off the nose leading to total destruction and the deaths of all aboard. This has happened several times before and appeared to be explosions. The attached picture is of a Boeing 747 that almost had the nose come off.
Mr. Panetta, former representative of the people from former constituent, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800 or visit my web site at http://www.corazon.com. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Mr. Federico Peña , Secretary of Transportation,
Dear Mr. Secretary, I invite you to a visit to my web site at http://www.corazon.com.
Mr. Peña, traveller to traveller, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Mr. David Hinson, Director, Federal Aviation Authority,
Dear Director, I am looking at my FAA pilot's license, commercial pilot, airplane single engine land, instrument airplane, of which I am very, very proud. I also received a Part 135 certificate from your agency. I was also a US Navy Lieutenant Naval Flight Officer in RVAH -1, RA-5C Vigilantes. My ejection story and US Navy accident report are on my web site at http://www.corazon.com along with the official accident reports on UAL Flight 811 and Pan Am 103.
All of the four Boeing 747 crashes described were caused, in my opinion, by the inadvertent opening of the forward cargo door in flight. The web site provides documentation, reasoning, and opinion supporting that hypothesis.
At minimum, there now exists a mysterious early model Boeing 747 crash. Air Force One is an early model Boeing 747. There are several hundred early model Boeing 747s now flying. The location of the start of destruction for TWA Flight 800 and others is near the forward cargo hold. I ask that you seal the door shut to prevent explosives from being placed there or to prevent the door from accidentally opening.
The forward cargo door has two Airworthiness Directives against it and has killed nine persons already in UAL Flight 811. A glance at the attached picture of a Boeing 747-121 with the large gash in the right side of its nose may persuade you a nose could easily tear off in a 300 knot slipstream.
Mr. Hinson, naval officer to naval officer, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Mr. James Hall , Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board,
Dear Mr. Chairman, in 1992, the NTSB conducted a very complete and well explained accident report on the crash of UAL Flight 811 in which a cargo door came open in flight and nine passengers where sucked out of their seats to their deaths. Use the key of 811 to unlock 800.
The thrust of the crash investigation should then focus on what causes the forward cargo door to open inadvertently. The NTSB stated electrical short to the door control system in UAL 811. For others, an explosive device could do it, or random electrical signals in the avionics bay might do it. There are eleven rational causes for accidental door openings listed on the web site at http://www.corazon.com. The cause of the door openings is unknown and must be discovered.
Mr. Hall, passenger to passenger, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Mr. Robert Francis, Vice Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board
Dear Mr. Vice Chairman, I've seen you on TV and believe you are a compassionate man above all. I appeal to you to prevent the future deaths of innocent passengers in early model Boeing 747s whose forward cargo door may inadvertently open outward and upward, tearing off with skin into the slipstream, exposing a large gash in the side of nose which then tears all the way off. Please compare evidence collected in the explained cargo door crash of UAL 811 to those of Air India Flight 182, Pan Am 103, and currently, TWA Flight 800.
The specific similarities will be: 1: Short loud sound on CVR. 2. Abrupt power cut. 3. Fodded number three engine. 4. Radar blips during destruction. 5. Never recovered bodies sitting in similar seats above and just aft of the cargo door. 6. Same type of aircraft, Boeing 747 series 100 or 200 with high flight time. 7. Destruction sequence starts forward of the wing. Sun angle lighting may confirm spinning loose cargo door near New York in July at 8:30 PM at 13,500 feet would be reflected as streak. Other similarities in four crashes include: nose tears off, explosive decompression mimics bomb, crew talking on radios when event happens, night takeoff, and pressurization changes to hull at catastrophic event.
The forward cargo door has opened inadvertently many times, usually on the ground. It has opened several times in the air with only minor or moderate damage. Airworthiness Directives were issued after those events. It has opened in flight leading to total destruction three times, in my opinion, which is supported by documentation on my web site at http://www.corazon.com. A glance at the attached picture of a Boeing 747-121 with the large gash in the right side of its nose may persuade you a nose could easily tear off in a 300 knot slipstream.
Mr. Francis, survivor consoler from jet crash survivor, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Investigator, National Transportation Safety Board.
Dear Mr. Investigator, I saw you on CNN discussing the TWA Flight 800 case. Please consider the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash.
Facts, facts, facts. There are 105 pages of facts on my web site. If you were to go on the internet to the World Wide Web and go to Universal Resource Locator, URL address http://www.corazon.com you will fine 105 pages of documentation, support, argument, and correspondence from all over the world regarding this matter, the inadvertent opening of the forward cargo door of early model 747s, one of which is Air Force One.
Regarding the four Boeing 747 crashes, Air India Flight 182, Boeing 747-237B; Pan Am Flight 103, Boeing 747-121A; UAL Flight 811, Boeing 747-122; and TWA Flight 800, Boeing 747-131.:
Fact: All four crashes were early model Boeing 747s.
Fact: All four crashes had deaths.
Fact: All four crashes had a short loud sound before destruction.
Fact: All four crashes had abrupt power cut.
Fact: All four crashes had start of destruction start near forward cargo hold.
Fact: All four crashes had apparent explosions in forward cargo hold area.
Fact: All four crashes had explosive decompression.
Fact: Three crashes had nose snap off.
Fact: Three crashes had radar blips during destruction, possibly all four.
Fact: Three crashes had nine or more missing bodies never recovered, possibly all four.
Fact: Three crashes had number three engine ingesting foreign object damage, possibly all four.
Fact: Two crashes had mysterious blip before destruction door on radar, possibly all four.
Fact: Two crashes had crew talking on radio when catastrophic event occurred, possibly all four.
Fact: One crash had visual clue, possibly all four.
All of the above clues fit the puzzle that is solved by the inadvertent opening of the forward cargo door of early model high flight time Boeing 747s inflight.
Mr. pilot to pilot, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800.
Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Ms. Janet Reno, Attorney General,
Dear Ms. Attorney General, your late mother would have loved this cargo door story. It has everything: mystery, money, politics, death, red herrings, explosions, prime suspects, and of course, tragedy.
Prevention is not as glamorous but more powerful than curing. Please prevent more deaths in early model Boeing 747s rather than heal the injured after the crash.
Ms. Reno, former State Attorney from a former Preventive Medicine hearing conservationist, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Mr. Louis Freeh , Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Dear Mr. Director, the solution to the mystery of these plane crashes is a common mechanical fault. Although the previous investigations came to different conclusions, there is no cover up, there is no plot, there is no conspiracy; it is just honest people describing reality from their own best interest point of view, and they are wrong. We've all done it, not seeing the object we don't want to see, not hearing what we don't want to hear, and not believing what we don't want to believe.
Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity, and there is no qualifier in front of 'Investigation", and this email is unencrypted and sent in the clear, and man to man, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Mr. James Kallstrom, New York Field Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Dear Mr. Agent, there was an explosion in TWA Flight 800. It was called explosive decompression. It happened when the forward cargo door opened in flight exposing the higher pressure air in the cargo compartment to the lower outside air pressure. The decompression mimicked a bomb. The deceleration following the nose tearing off in the slipstream caused many items to smash into bulkheads, mimicking a bomb. The fuel from the disintegrating wing vaporized and exploded, mimicking a bomb.
The cargo door has a criminal profile that begs to be investigated. It has killed nine passengers already under similar circumstances and has two Airworthiness Directives against it. It is the prime suspect in TWA Flight 800. Please examine attached photo of damaged Boeing 747 for clues to determine how a nose of a 747 could tear off in a split second, as has happened several times already and may happen again.
Mr. Kallstrom, professional sleuth from amateur sleuth, I ask that you check out the forward cargo door as the cause of the crash of TWA Flight 800. Sincerely, John Barry Smith

Comment:

Contents
barry@corazon.com