What happened to the plane TWA Flight 847
Executive summary
TWA Flight 847, a Trans World Airlines Boeing 727 en route from Athens to Rome on June 14, 1985, was seized minutes after takeoff by armed Lebanese Shiite hijackers and forced on a 17-day odyssey that shuttled the jet between Beirut and Algiers while passengers were held hostage and at least one American passenger was murdered [1] [2] [3]. The crisis ended after some of the hijackers’ demands were met, several hostages were released over the course of the incident, and later prosecutions of identified hijackers occurred in European courts [3] [4].
1. The seizure and immediate aftermath: weapons, demands and diversion
Twenty minutes into the flight from Athens, two armed Lebanese Shiite men stood, brandished grenades and a 9‑mm pistol, and took control of the cabin, demanding to know passengers’ identities and later seeking the release of hundreds of Shia prisoners; the plane was ordered to land first in Beirut and then rerouted repeatedly to Algiers and back [5] [6] [1]. Sources concur that the hijackers’ public demands included the release of dozens to hundreds of Shia detainees held by Israel, and that the hijackers separated and interrogated passengers by nationality and perceived religion during the ordeal [1] [7].
2. The route of the hijacking: Beirut, Algiers and repeated returns
Over the 17‑day crisis the aircraft was flown multiple times between Beirut and Algiers and made at least two landings in Beirut and two in Algiers, with groups of passengers released at different points; the back‑and‑forth movement reflected both the hijackers’ operational choices and the fractured, violent context of Lebanon during its civil war [2] [3] [1]. Accounts from government histories and contemporary reporting describe the plane itself often remaining under hijacker control while passengers were dispersed or held in different locations in Lebanon, increasing the crisis’s geopolitical complexity [3] [8].
3. Violence aboard and the killing of an American
During a stop in Beirut the hijackers singled out U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem and murdered him, dumping his body on the runway; that killing became the defining violent act of the crisis and intensified U.S. diplomatic and public attention [7] [3]. Reporting and historical summaries emphasize that Stethem’s murder, and the physical abuse of some servicemen on board, underscored the grave human toll even as many hostages were eventually released [5] [3].
4. Media, negotiation and international response
The hijacking became a high‑visibility international incident, with live broadcasts, exclusive interviews from Beirut, and active diplomatic negotiation involving multiple states and leaders; media presence both informed the public and, according to some commentators, complicated negotiations by turning the event into a “macabre media event” [8] [5]. U.S. government records and scholarly case studies document involvement at the presidential level and highlight contested claims about concessions — for example, whether Israel’s prisoner releases were preexisting or connected to the hijacking remains disputed in some accounts [3] [9].
5. Resolution, prosecutions and lingering questions
The ordeal concluded when the hijackers agreed to free the remaining hostages after several concessions and international pressure, and later legal efforts led to arrests and prosecutions of some participants — Mohammed Ali Hammadi was tried and convicted in Germany, receiving a life sentence — while other alleged perpetrators remained at large for years and attribution to groups like Hezbollah has been asserted but sometimes officially denied [4] [1] [9]. Contemporary sources note that due to Lebanon’s lawlessness at the time and the transnational nature of the actors, many believed accountability would be limited, an expectation partially borne out by the long, uneven trail of arrests and convictions [1] [3].
6. Legacy and contested narratives
TWA 847 became emblematic of 1980s Middle East terrorism, affecting aviation security policy, public memory and popular culture (films and first‑hand accounts followed), yet the incident’s interpretation remains contested: some survivors later expressed sympathy for aspects of the hijackers’ political aims even as governments treated it as criminal terrorism, and groups attributed with responsibility sometimes denied involvement, creating a layered historical record that demands careful source comparison [10] [11] [1]. Available documentation provides a consistent core narrative about what happened to the plane, but gaps remain in attribution details and in full accountability for every participant [4] [1].