AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[WildCat]

Hey mods, why is Beachnut allowed to post NSTB data, and I'm not? Shuold
he not get a warning as well?

I suspect it is because beachnut linked from his photobucket account, while you hotlinked from the NTSB site. Hotlinking isn't allowed here.

YOu don't even know what you're looking at! How pathetic! I DARE you
to send Undertow a message.

I will bet your JREF friends that you don't have the balls to message him
and ask.

I dare you or any of the incompetent frauds at the PfffT to contact actual FDR experts and see if they agree with their results. Of course, you won't and we all know the reason why, don't we?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Well if that's not a paragraph full of contradictions, I don't know what is!

So it's a working copy, and it's full of errors...and it doesn't show AA77
hitting the Pentagon, but we're not supposed be upset?

Beachnut, we you can figure out that the frame data for DME holds the last
known value until the receiver updates (4 seconds), then you might have
a chance at figuring this out.

While you're at it, try sourcing your material and labeling the columns
with parameter headings and frame info.

Listing a bunch of numbers from a column of excel doesn't mean squat without
labels.

So you don't understand what a working copy is? I guess it all makes sense now. And the fact that you think that makes it a contradiction now makes everything you've been saying more clear. Wow. And you call NTSB incompetent. Astounding...

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Not to get OT, but why should the forum mods care if something is hotlinked? Isn't that for the person hosting the site to take issue with? And if that site has their server set up to allow hot links, do they have much right to complain?

 

[GlennB]

Not to get OT, but why should the forum mods care if something is hotlinked? Isn't that for the person hosting the site to take issue with? And if that site has their server set up to allow hot links, do they have much right to complain?

As I understand it, hotlinking gives no control over what is actually displayed here (say). That is, what today is a photo of WTC could be replaced by something nasty tomorrow with exactly the same URL. By linking to your own website or PhotoBucket account at least you can control the content.
I imagine there may be copyright issues too.

 

[Caustic Logic]

[...] the combined expertise of pilots, electronics engineers, IT, etc. [...] a team of researchers with
backgrounds in specific keys areas [...] our members have attended ARINC seminars, [...] had/have help from industry professionals
that helped decode the data?[...]

Rob, or whatever your name is, soeery I missed the post where you said your name and what part of Canada your IP is listed as, I have to ask how does citing your members' vast expertise HELP you when everything you do is wrong? Doesn't this only help show how you should KNOW BETTER? If you're so smart, you can't even use your ignorance as an excuse. You are expert? You have no excuse.

you guys believe the NTSB issued a working copy with ERRORS,
[...]
PFT caught the errors and are demanding a correction/explanation.

Too bad you couldn't figure out the cause of the errors! Your organization said the NTSB "plotted" the plane "north of the Citgo." Show the plots you cannot! You show the correct animation over the wrongly-rotated map. If it was a map of Disney World, did they plot it north or south of Epcot Center? I'm a janitor who just watched the cartoon carefully and found out the error. Yes, it's an error. It's not the one you/your experts said. The grid is set to magnetic north and the map is rotated wrong from that. Balsamo only admits this when cornered. [several pages in here.] Watching all that evasive maneuvering, I'm thinking Capt. bob really is an experienced pilot.

 

[Turbofan]

Once again 'expert researchers', those images were linked from MY ftp
account!

I love the double standards around here.

A working copy with errors that doesn't support the government official
conspiracy theory, and has NEVER been corrected.

 

[Disbelief]

Ask these people:

http://www.jurispro.com/category/black-box-data-recorder-s-13/

By the way, where was the FDR found?

Turbo, have you contacted any of these experts yet?

 

[WildCat]

Maybe this will be the day the PffffT contacts actual FDR experts to corroborate the findings of their pretend FDR experts!

It might also be the day barnyard pigs sprout wings and fly.

 

[uk_dave]

A working copy with errors that doesn't support the government official
conspiracy theory, and has NEVER been corrected.

Maybe that is the significance which you're missing. The working copy was not intended for release to the public and was only released because someone asked for it via a FOIA request.

You guys have pointed out errors in the animated representation. Presumeably you have pointed out these errors to those who made the animation. And yet they can't be bothered to correct them.

Think about that with your real world, rational hat on. The people who made the animation don't care that it has errors. The only people who care are the CTists.

Why is that? Could it be that the CTists put way more reliance on the animation than the producers ever intended?

Couple of other points to make about P4T. Get yourself a professional marketing advisor, because you sorely need one.

You want the world to take you seriously and yet you happily proclaim that Lear is one of your core members. Cap'n Bob, in particular, was very happy to offer Lear as one of his experts. That is a seriously big mistake should you guys ever make it to the mainstream. On that one point alone you will be dismissed as total kooks by everyone without having to even look at your 'evidence'.

Secondly, the main issue in this thread appears to be that the FDR (you claim) does not show the flightpath claimed by those who investigated 9-11. People here point to missing data and yet you P4T deny that any data could be missing.

The simplest way to convince people that you are right and people here are wrong is to get confirmation of your analysis, explicit and unequivocal, from the manufaturers of the FDR. No salespeople or online manuals. Just a written confirmation from their technical department that your analysis of the data held by the FDR is correct.

Now I know you'll go off on the whole "but it's the NTSB who provided the data" speil, but I'm just saying, that if you really want to take this any further than an internet forum you've got to provide back up from real professionals from real companies on real headed paper. Without that it's simply what you think and what you believe and, quite frankly, that isn't worth anything in the real world.

 

[Darth Rotor]

AA77 FDR Data, Explained

Large aircraft flew into the side of the Pentagon.

Just to get back to basics.

Turbofan, converting fuel and air in to gas seems to be what you are best at. I guess your fuel is delusion.

Please carry on. Most entertaining.

Beachnut: keep on PWNing this willfully ignorant person. It never gets old.

DR

 

[Turbofan]

Maybe that is the significance which you're missing. The working copy was not intended for release to the public and was only released because someone asked for it via a FOIA request.

Try again. Errors in the animation, and the raw/CSV file contains data
positioning the plane too high and off course.

The only thing Beachnut is owning is how to screw up and misinterpret
specifications.

Poor guy has to copy Truther's images to make it appear that he has
researched this stuff before. Hey Beachnut, why don't you show everyone
your ARINC spec?

 

[uk_dave]

Try again. Errors in the animation, and the raw/CSV file contains data
positioning the plane too high and off course.

The only thing Beachnut is owning is how to screw up and misinterpret
specifications.

Poor guy has to copy Truther's images to make it appear that he has
researched this stuff before. Hey Beachnut, why don't you show everyone
your ARINC spec?

No, your word isn't good enough. Get some professional back up for this claim, otherwise it's just disposable crap on an internet forum. 9-11 and the conspiracy attached is worth more than this, yes?

C'mon turbo, take your claims to a professional company and get them to endorse it.

Should be simple to do, since you're so sure of yourself, right? You are sure, aren't you?

 

[beachnut]

Try again. Errors in the animation, and the raw/CSV file contains data
positioning the plane too high and off course.

The only thing Beachnut is owning is how to screw up and misinterpret
specifications.

Poor guy has to copy Truther's images to make it appear that he has
researched this stuff before. Hey Beachnut, why don't you show everyone
your ARINC spec?

You have failed to explain one error, not even your own p4t 11.2 G error.

Please list all the errors in the CVS file, and animation. The chip, you never answered the chip question.

Can't explain, or expose one error in anything, you can only sit on errors like your 11.2 G flawed physics.

 

[WildCat]

C'mon turbo, take your claims to a professional company and get them to endorse it.

Should be simple to do, since you're so sure of yourself, right? You are sure, aren't you?

Turbofan and the rest of the PfffT know they're full of crap, that's why they will never have actual FDR experts corroborate the findings of their pretend FDR experts.

At this point, it's all about pwning people on internet forums and whatever "radio show" Turbofan keeps blathering about.

 

[uk_dave]

Turbofan and the rest of the PfffT know they're full of crap, that's why they will never have actual FDR experts corroborate the findings of their pretend FDR experts.

At this point, it's all about pwning people on internet forums and whatever "radio show" Turbofan keeps blathering about.

ohh I know.

It's just fun (in an evil kinda way) to rub their noses in it.

They are never going to get beyond the fanboys on the internet unless they are prepared to excise the most extreme kooks from their midsts (likewise with other 'truther' groups and their nazi followers) and actually get some verifiable endorsement from real professional companies who specialise in the field of study.

It's interesting to note that many of the p4t core members, whilst proclaiming their pilotyness as something which give them better than average insight into the issues at hand, then go on to make most of their conspiracy claims concerning the collapse of the twin towers. Pilots = structural engineers? I think not. And just as soons as they get what they dream of, namely mainstream recognition of their beliefs, they will be faced with the full force of professional fdr experts and crash site investigators et al, who will eat them up for breakfast.

But then, it's in all 'truthers' best interests that these things are confined to the internet, where they can convince a few 'angry young boys' that there is a secret evil cabal at work in the world and for just $29.99 they too can have a t-shirt which will make them look cool amongst their friends and may go some way to countering 'the man' and his evil plan to deny them a girlfriend.

It's all great fun!

 

[beachnut]

Poor guy has to copy Truther's images to make it appear that he has researched this stuff before.

Did you tell the p4t guys about the sample every 4 seconds so they can fix the decode with a DME every second in the frame. You need to fix your p4t errors before you try to take on the world of 9/11. You are in a 9/11 truth group who main purpose is to make money off of implications of lies about 9/11. The lies, 77 is too high to hit the Pentagon, is one of those implications sold by p4t. You can't prove it, and the events of 9/11 prove this lie wrong. If you understood the FDR, you would not be a p4t supporter. 189 people died at the Pentagon from terrorist, you can't figure it out in 6 years. We were lucky to have people like the Passengers on Flight 93 who figured out 9/11 in minutes, too bad you disgrace their memory supporting false information from p4t. How pathetic, to mess up 9/11 events with lies and you can't even fix a major math/physics error in 5 months. 5 months to fix what was fixed in minutes by many! 6 years to mess up what was figured out in minutes by heroes!



The FARs are not truther images, you do not own the FARs. Your statement is silly! The image is showing the FAR, you don't own the FAR for your own use.

I have used FARs for 35 years.
It took me a few hours to get you to post an excerpt from a FAR.
The image is my own image from the FAR, you were hot-linking, so I had to make my own visual aid, since you do not share. You were crying about me using your image you ripped off from the FAR.
I have been using computers for over 37 years, making an image from an FAR is easy. I have used FARs for over 35 years ago, you just discovered them the other day.

Go to faa.gov, regulations and policy, etc… http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a25ab551c8e7c5393babea823ff9f4fd&rgn=div9&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.4.19.30.11.2.63&idno=14

I made my own image from two screen captures. You would not share your image.

 

[Turbofan]

Come on Beachnut, how long are you going to play this game? Tell me,
who did you contact at PFT? You keep spilling lies about the correspondence
you had with members of PilotsforTruth, but we have no record of your contact.

Why don't you clarify and restate when and whom you contacted.

You are also forgetting (repeatedly), that the NTSB released the flight
data, not PFT.

There is NOTHING animated, or in the form of a working copy when it comes
to the flight data. So what's YOUR excuse for the altitude, and impact time?

You can cry all you want about the animation having errors, but you can't
say a damn thing about the flight data.

Lastly, stop twisting my words. You "experts" here seem to think you can
write a paper, or start a thread explaining something you have no clue about.

You NEVER had a copy of the ARINC spec, or any of these Excel forms and
images that I conveniently linked for you. It's so sad that you, and Anti
are asking for resources ... yet you seem to have this "FDR Data Explained"
LMAO!

Pathetic.

By the way, I watched PBB2 again and I'll have to call you out JayDee.
The flight data, explanation and questions covered by the video totally
expose the OGCT.

Apparently, you were also shown links and research answering your very
questions.

So, what's up Beach and Anti? Who did you contact, and when are we
going to debate this stuff? The ball is in your court, and right now you're
all looking like a bunch of ignorant chickens.

 

[funk de fino]

Naomi Watson
Flight Attendant - Delta Airlines
Based Atlanta

Is she more qualified than me to discuss FDR or aircraft tech details?

How about pulling one off your list who is?

Live debate means nothing. Write a paper. Debate online. Take it to the press.

Live debate requests are sign of self importance and arrogance on display (as well as the scary "tell us who you are" shreiks)

Balsamo is a tit and I have heard his threats and seen them online. He is deranged, incompetant to talk about FDR and completely lacking in logic.

Please tell me how you arrive at the impact time.

 

[jaydeehess]

Once again 'expert researchers', those images were linked from MY ftp
account!

I love the double standards around here.

A working copy with errors that doesn't support the government official
conspiracy theory, and has NEVER been corrected.

Perhaps then PfT will be correcting the page of calculations in which the physics is so very incorrect?

Adding a disclaimer saying that the physics is incorrect doesn't cut it. Either correct it or take the page down.

Once again I ask when it will be that someone, anyone, you included, will bother to write up a prely technical paper outlining the case for PfT's claim that the FDR data describes a grossly different flight path than that illustrated by the damage path on the ground and submited it to L3, the NTSB, ICAO and the pilot's unions? (rather than argue it for sport, with anonymous internet denizens)

 

[Jonnyclueless]

If Turbo didn't have selective vision when reading the thread, then he might not have to repeat the same arguments.