• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

serial numbers?

qarnos said:
It's funny someone should bring this up. There was an article in the Herald Sun newspaper today (link) about a guy who had a bolt from an overflying aircraft fall on his house. They mentioned the bolt had a serial number, but it seems it only allows them to trace it to the aircraft type.
Click to expand...


hmm, if I buy say, a DVD burner from Sony, it comes with a S/N. I have always assumed that was a unique number, only MY burner has that number. But to connect it to me MY unique identifier ( name, address, CC number) would have to be tied to the burners number. As in the case when I register my product with Sony. I wonder if this is what is done with planes.
 
alexg said:
OK, that's good. Not unique numbers to an individual aircraft but to a type of part? Is that correct. If so a SN or part num. would only go to show what? The exact type of part? Possibly used on multiple aircraft. Might narrow it down to belonging to a Boeing, say, vs. something else?

I have always assumed that was a unique number, only MY burner has that number. But to connect it to me MY unique identifier ( name, address, CC number) would have to be tied to the burners number. As in the case when I register my product with Sony. I wonder if this is what is done with planes.
Click to expand...

I cant believe that CTists are even talking about this. Its just....stupid.

Anyways, yes - most aircraft parts are serialized and its not to tie them to "parent" airplanes. They are serialized for tracking/maintenance purposes. Believe it or not, every serialized part(thousands per airplane) is tracked during that parts life until it is scrapped. When you replace serialized parts for maintenance, the old and new serial numbers are entered in the ships logbook, or routine Job Card and then entered into a maintenance database. So if you find a plane part in your yard that has a dataplate with a Manufacturer Part Number(MPN) - you can find out what type of airplane it came from(ie 767-323) and the effectivity(ie 301-333). If it has a serial number, you can find out what tail number it was last installed on(ie 315).

Almost all Manufacturer Part Numbers are unique to an aircraft type. These numbers can be BACC***(Boeing) numbers or vendor part numbers. We even have company part numbers to eliminate confusion(though it just adds to the confusion). There are also dash(-) numbers that may indicate a different subtype, or effectivity. There can be dozens of dash numbers for a single part number. One of those things mechanics really have to be careful of is installing the wrong part number and its very easy to do with multiple fleet effectivities(we have 15 "types" of 757s and I lost count of the 767's - it's well over 20).

A part may also have many assemblies made of "piece parts", each having a unique part number. For instance, you can order a 767 main landing gear assembly under a single part number, which obviously comes with hundreds of individual parts - or you can order them all individually. One day we actually found the assembly part number for the whole 757 airframe and ordered it just to see what the parts expediditors would say. They had no idea what it was and printed out a "Not In Stock" slip and left it on my toolbox hours later...:D

Many parts arent serialized(such as fasteners, light bulbs, electrical connectors, insulation blankets, carpet, coffee pots, etc..) and are deemed "free issue" or "throw away". Most anything under $500 is considered throw away and isnt tracked even if its serialized.

I guess the idea is that all the wreckage found at the Pentagon doesnt belong to a 757, or an AA 757, or N644AA......because they wont release the part numbers/serial numbers. Frankly, thats one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. I'm guessing this all got started because a particular denier wanted to sound smart....go figure.
 
matching up serial numbers are rediculous we all saw the planes hit right?

thats one way of looking at it, im not a big CSI guy, but i would imagine one of the first thing you would do is identify what craft impacted where...im sure when a car is crashed and burned they take steps to identify the car, so in a court of law they can say without a shadow of a doubt...YES THIS IS THE CAR...not, we saw it crash so yes this is the car, we dont need to varify that..
 
In the course of maintaining an aircraft many parts are replaced. What would an inconsistent serial number prove other than repairs/maintenance?
 
apathoid said:
I cant believe that CTists are even talking about this. Its just....stupid.


I guess the idea is that all the wreckage found at the Pentagon doesnt belong to a 757, or an AA 757, or N644AA......because they wont release the part numbers/serial numbers. Frankly, thats one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. I'm guessing this all got started because a particular denier wanted to sound smart....go figure.
Click to expand...


This has always been one of JohnDoes favorite comments. Why didn't they match up the parts. As if they would have faked the DNA evidence but not matched parts if it was important to the supposed coverup.
 
eeyore1954 said:
This has always been one of JohnDoes favorite comments. Why didn't they match up the parts. As if they would have faked the DNA evidence but not matched parts if it was important to the supposed coverup.
Click to expand...
what parts we talkin about?...flight 77?

well when you are in charge of a crime scene,lab work, evidence, you can kinda choose what is important..
 
rearnakedchoke said:
where is the evidence of it not being a failure? this can go on forever...
Click to expand...
Not really. The original poster raised as possibly important a "purported failure" to identify plane components from serial numbers. I'm just asking if there's any substance to that claim, or if someone's just made it up.

So, again, is there any evidence for this failure?
 
There are no serial numbers because there were no planes. It was all done by holograms. The real planes were flown to a secret ice cave in the arctic where the passengers had their memories wiped and reprogrammed, before being relocated to a secret town in New Mexico with CIA “husbands” and “wives.”

I know this because I am a paranoid cretin who watches too much TV and can’t diferentiate between fantasy and real life.
 
Lothian said:
There are no serial numbers because there were no planes. It was all done by holograms. The real planes were flown to a secret ice cave in the arctic where the passengers had their memories wiped and reprogrammed, before being relocated to a secret town in New Mexico with CIA “husbands” and “wives.”

I know this because I am a paranoid cretin who watches too much TV and can’t diferentiate between fantasy and real life.
Click to expand...
feel better now?
 
MikeW said:
Not really. The original poster raised as possibly important a "purported failure" to identify plane components from serial numbers. I'm just asking if there's any substance to that claim, or if someone's just made it up.

So, again, is there any evidence for this failure?
Click to expand...

ive read much of the 9/11 report, but not cover to cover, from what i have read of it, i never heard any mention of serial #'s....

if the 9/11 report mentions a serial # match up, please share the link.
 
Lothian said:
There are no serial numbers because there were no planes. It was all done by holograms. The real planes were flown to a secret ice cave in the arctic where the passengers had their memories wiped and reprogrammed, before being relocated to a secret town in New Mexico with CIA “husbands” and “wives.”

I know this because I am a paranoid cretin who watches too much TV and can’t diferentiate between fantasy and real life.
Click to expand...


At least you admit it!:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :)
 
rearnakedchoke said:
ive read much of the 9/11 report, but not cover to cover, from what i have read of it, i never heard any mention of serial #'s....

if the 9/11 report mentions a serial # match up, please share the link.
Click to expand...
I don't believe it does, however that's not evidence for a "purported failure" as claimed in the original post. (Not knowing if a particular test took place or not is not evidence for the failure of that test.)
 
MikeW said:
I don't believe it does, however that's not evidence for a "purported failure" as claimed in the original post. (Not knowing if a particular test took place or not is not evidence for the failure of that test.)
Click to expand...
well you're right about that...but lets be honest, its not like you can just call the pentagon and ask if they matched the serial #'s.
 
If the NTSB matches up part numbers why do they do this? Do you think they do it to ascertain what airplane was in the crash??? Or would it be to try to uncover the cause of the accident. Flight 77 was no accident they didn't need to determine what went wrong with the plane or what mistake the pilots made to cause the crash like in a normal NTSB investigation.
 
eeyore1954 said:
If the NTSB matches up part numbers why do they do this? Do you think they do it to ascertain what airplane was in the crash??? Or would it be to try to uncover the cause of the accident. Flight 77 was no accident they didn't need to determine what went wrong with the plane or what mistake the pilots made to cause the crash like in a normal NTSB investigation.
Click to expand...
everything has a paper trail, to say investigations dont bother with such things sounds kinda odd, imo
 
rearnakedchoke said:
well you're right about that...but lets be honest, its not like you can just call the pentagon and ask if they matched the serial #'s.
Click to expand...
I think Russell said he'd asked something similar and been refused, have to go check on that... I'm not sure that proves anything, though. If I were in the press office of any US Government body then I'd probably ignore such requests, either, because if you don't they'd never end.

If someone called and asked if they'd matched components, for instance, and they said yes, then it wouldn't end there. They'd just be accused of lying, asked to prove it.

Next up might come pictures of a warehouse full of wreckage. But how's anyone going to prove it's not been faked? Even if you personally visited, looked around, how could you know it really was from a particular flight?

Let's suppose you got some serial numbers, and they turned out to match parts on some audit trail that lead back to Flight 77. That audit trail would just be pieces of paper and computer records, something that I can't imagine would be difficult to fake, and so not everyone would believe those, either.

In other words, if you're someone who already believes the Government has faked/ lied about the retrieval and identification of the passengers from the sites, and the black boxes, then I think you'll probably go on making exactly the same "hoax" and "fake" and "lies" accusations against any other evidence that might appear. Doesn't mean I might not like to see it too, I just don't think any of it will end the argument, not now, not ever.
 
MikeW said:
I think Russell said he'd asked something similar and been refused, have to go check on that... I'm not sure that proves anything, though. If I were in the press office of any US Government body then I'd probably ignore such requests, either, because if you don't they'd never end.

If someone called and asked if they'd matched components, for instance, and they said yes, then it wouldn't end there. They'd just be accused of lying, asked to prove it.

Next up might come pictures of a warehouse full of wreckage. But how's anyone going to prove it's not been faked? Even if you personally visited, looked around, how could you know it really was from a particular flight?

Let's suppose you got some serial numbers, and they turned out to match parts on some audit trail that lead back to Flight 77. That audit trail would just be pieces of paper and computer records, something that I can't imagine would be difficult to fake, and so not everyone would believe those, either.

In other words, if you're someone who already believes the Government has faked/ lied about the retrieval and identification of the passengers from the sites, and the black boxes, then I think you'll probably go on making exactly the same "hoax" and "fake" and "lies" accusations against any other evidence that might appear. Doesn't mean I might not like to see it too, I just don't think any of it will end the argument, not now, not ever.
Click to expand...

if ALL of the parts matched flight 77 i would start leaning more towards flight 77 hitting the pentagon, and i dont mean the FBI releaseing a report saying "oh by the way the serial #'s matched".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom