AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[Turbofan]

Please tell me how you arrive at the impact time.

I don't arrive at the impact time; the NTSB states it for you!


These calculations you are all referring to will be addressed accordingly.

Your bigger worries should be focused on why your so called "pros" haven't
come forth to explain themselves, or tell you how they can be so bold to
start a thread about a system of which they have ZERO references, or
specification.

We have a few people waiting to ask questions of Anti, Beachnut, ReHeat, and the gang.

Why don't you ask these guys to produce some diagrams, frame layouts,
specifications about the system they are claiming to know about?

You'll be surprised at how much you've been strung along all this time whether
you believe the truth movement, or not. Don't take my word for it, Check it out for yourselves. they've been exposed.

 

[WildCat]

Turbofan, has the PffffT contacted any actual FDR experts to corroborate the findings of the pretend FDR experts at PffffT?

Of course, we all know they haven't and we also know why they haven't, don't we?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

I don't arrive at the impact time; the NTSB states it for you!


These calculations you are all referring to will be addressed accordingly.

Your bigger worries should be focused on why your so called "pros" haven't
come forth to explain themselves, or tell you how they can be so bold to
start a thread about a system of which they have ZERO references, or
specification.

We have a few people waiting to ask questions of Anti, Beachnut, ReHeat, and the gang.

Why don't you ask these guys to produce some diagrams, frame layouts,
specifications about the system they are claiming to know about?

You'll be surprised at how much you've been strung along all this time whether
you believe the truth movement, or not. Don't take my word for it, Check it out for yourselves. they've been exposed.

So by impact time, you mean the end of the data that you assume must be the impact time as opposed to simply where the data stops?

And again, you keep referring to pros. What expertise in FDRs do the members of PFT have? You do mention talking to L3. Does L3 agree with the findings of PFT and the claims made by PFT?

And isn't it a bit odd that you arr gungho to ask questions to people who don't have FDR expertise instead of people who DO? Shouldn't you be trying to consult with FDR experts instead? I guess because PFT are cowards they prefer to try and enforce their beliefs by debating people who aren't experts in the field and make claims based on their own lack of expertise.

So let me just sum this up to be clear. your group has absolutely no expertise in this area. But you want to prove your findings, by debating other people who have no expertise? Am I getting this wrong here? And are you guys still questioning why you are not taken seriously?

And yes yes, your usual 3rd grade tough guy rhetoric that makes you look like an idiot, we get it. I am too scared to imagine what you're trying to over compensate for.

 

[Turbofan]

So by impact time, you mean the end of the data that you assume must be the impact time as opposed to simply where the data stops?

The data 'stops'

Are you still on that bandwagon. Have any of you come up with a valid,
logical excus...I mean reason for the FDR to stop recording? LMAO!

And again, you keep referring to pros. What expertise in FDRs do the members of PFT have? You do mention talking to L3. Does L3 agree with the findings of PFT and the claims made by PFT?

Read, and read again. The credentials are listed OVER and OVER and OVER
again. L3 has neither rejected, nor approved the research.

I keep reading this crap about FDR experts. Again, I ask:

What makes an FDR expert, an expert? Is there a course you can take
in school? Do a team of IT, electronics, pilots, etc. round out that list
of qualifications?

Do you need a degree to read numbers from a CSV file? Nice argument.

And isn't it a bit odd that you arr gungho to ask questions to people who don't have FDR expertise instead of people who DO? Shouldn't you be trying to consult with FDR experts instead? I guess because PFT are cowards they prefer to try and enforce their beliefs by debating people who aren't experts in the field and make claims based on their own lack of expertise.

Cowards? PFT? Ha! I'm still waiting for any of your peon experts to state
their name and confront PFT.

They sure like to hide behind the screen and spew BS, but they can't
debate us.

Chickens. Liars. Has-beens.

You see, nobody has taken me up on the live debate. Nobody has
signed up at PFT. Nobody has confronted Rob, or the team at PFT
for an interview.

If nothing else, it's because your 'pros' will get drilled by the PFT crew.

So let me just sum this up to be clear. your group has absolutely no expertise in this area. But you want to prove your findings, by debating other people who have no expertise? Am I getting this wrong here? And are you guys still questioning why you are not taken seriously?

Let me say we collectively have found errors from the NTSB. That shows
we (PFT) are competent.

We collectively have decoded the raw file successfully. Probably the only
organization aside from the NTSB that has done so, and gone public.

I will state that the term "we" is used losely in the sense that I did not
contribute to decoding the raw file, or finding the errors. "We" meaning
PFT and the support I give those courageous professionals for speaking
up and asking questions.

And yes yes, your usual 3rd grade tough guy rhetoric that makes you look like an idiot, we get it. I am too scared to imagine what you're trying to over compensate for.

Tough guy? yeah, I'm really scary over the internet.

Still waiting for Beachnut to tell me all about gates, and flash memory.
I'm not holding my breath.

Please keep in mind the Membership Agreement and do not use personal attacks to argue your point.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson

 

[Jonnyclueless]

The data 'stops'

Are you still on that bandwagon. Have any of you come up with a valid,
logical excus...I mean reason for the FDR to stop recording? LMAO!

Seriously? That's it? The data stops and that's your determination for the impact time? seriously? And you wonder why you aren't taken seriously? And I sit here and wonder why you haven't consulted experts. It's no wonder you are too afraid to consult experts!

Read, and read again. The credentials are listed OVER and OVER and OVER
again. L3 has neither rejected, nor approved the research.

So in other words NONE. No experience what so ever. Why can't you just openly say this? And thank you for admitting that L3 does not support your findings or claims. This is important because you keep pushing their endorsement when not only is there none, but you have indeed tried unsuccessfully to get one.

I keep reading this crap about FDR experts. Again, I ask:

What makes an FDR expert, an expert? Is there a course you can take
in school? Do a team of IT, electronics, pilots, etc. round out that list
of qualifications?

People who for a living recover, extract, and work with FDRs. As opposed to people who have no experience what so ever working with them. That means not people who read manuals and consult salesmen, but actual experts. Someone who has EXPERTISE working with them. It's really not hard to understand, it's just hard for you to accept.

YOU have no experience with FDRs. PFT has NO experience with FDRs.

Do you need a degree to read numbers from a CSV file? Nice argument.

That's the best you can do? Yes you DO need experience to read one because otherwise you get people like you who don't know what they are doing making HUGE assumptions and speculations about what they mean. It's no wonder you guys aren't taken seriously. You think you can read the numbers and suddenly you are experts who know about plane crashes while calling REAL experts incompetent. What a bunch of clowns you guys are. It's no wonder you aren't taken seriously and no wonder you can't get any experts to help you out.

Cowards? PFT? Ha! I'm still waiting for any of your peon experts to state
their name and confront PFT.

Yes COWARD. Because you don't have the guts to actualy debate experts. Instead you choose to debate people who have no expertise and feel that pushing your crackpot theories on non-experts will somehow make you experts. It's pretty clear that PFT is nothing more than a circus act and continues to be laughed at by everyone.

They sure like to hide behind the screen and spew BS, but they can't
debate us.

That's pretty funny coming from some kid hiding behind a computer screen. I don't see you using your real name. How can you be such an obnoxious hypocrit? How do you expect tpo be taken seriously when you run around accusing people of hiding, when you're hiding? And no one here is actually hiding. No one here sough you and your crackpot group out. YOU came here. People here use screen names becauswe the tendency of crackpots like you being stlkers. Just look at Rob. He is a certified stalker and makes death threats. We don't need you psychos stalking us.

But again, if you're going to accuse people of hiding, then maybe you shouldn't be hiding yourself. Does that not make any sense to you?

Chickens. Liars. Has-beens.

Oh look. You little baby. Waaah waaah!!! Crackpots and nobodies PFT is. Can't get any attention so they come here to try and taunt people into listening to their nonsense.

You see, nobody has taken me up on the live debate. Nobody has
signed up at PFT. Nobody has confronted Rob, or the team at PFT
for an interview.

And nobody will. Your claims don't have enough merit to be taken seriously. Sorry kiddo, but why would anyone want to interview Rob? Why would anyone want to sign up on a crackpot forum? We are on this forum. You're welcome to continue making a fool of yourself here, but no one is going to waste their time on a crackpot forum.

If nothing else, it's because your 'pros' will get drilled by the PFT crew.

Byt the PFT crew, you mean one kid who's an IT at a dead end job and knows nothing about FDRs? Wow, what a crew....Oh yeah and a leader who isn't even a pilot. Wow, impressive. Keep pretending that you "drill" people (what are you 6?) when you keep getting your arse handed to you.

Let me say we collectively have found errors from the NTSB. That shows
we (PFT) are competent.

WRONG. You have shown that you don't even understand the most basic principles on the issue. You haven't found errors, you simply don't understand what you're talking about. And the fact that you keep ignoring everyone that points this out and pretending that it doesn't happen, and pretending to not happen to see the questions posed to you? Shows you guys are anything BUT competent.

We collectively have decoded the raw file successfully. Probably the only
organization aside from the NTSB that has done so, and gone public.

And then still refer to the working animation. And anyone can decode the raw file. That doesn't mean you understand it. You guys have proven you don't. This is why experts are used and not a bunch of crackpots.

I will state that the term "we" is used losely in the sense that I did not
contribute to decoding the raw file, or finding the errors. "We" meaning
PFT and the support I give those courageous professionals for speaking
up and asking questions.

Yes, the group of crackpots. As if a group of crackpots somehow is better than a lone crackpot. Why don't you consult experts? There's experts out there who deal with FDRs. You have been provided with the listings of some of them. If you're so sure that your crackpot team is correct, why don't you verify it with actual experts?

Tough guy? yeah, I'm really scary over the internet.

No, you're not. In fact you remind me of one of those little tiny dogs that barks a lot and makes it tempting to step on to silence the obnoxious noises. And likewise those little dogs seem to think they are in some way intimidating. Hal of your argument is an adolescent act. It's to make up for the fact that none of you are experts and have no experience in this area. It's to make up for not being able to address many of the arguments made to you and to hide all the posts that you want to pretend don't exist.

Still waiting for Beachnut to tell me all about gates, and flash memory.
I'm not holding my breath.

Still waiting for you to address the dozen or so ageuments that have been presented to YOU. Still waiting for you to have the guts to actually admit you have no expertinec,e nor does PFT, and that you have no experts that will endorcse your findings without giving everyone some runaround. The runaround pretty much verifies that you know you are being dishonest. If you felt there was no issue with this, then you wouldn't keep playing these games and dodging the issue. But of course these things such as expertise would not even come up if all of your arguments weren't based on accusations about other people's expertise.


Once again, here is the jist of it:

You and the crackpots at PFT all combined have absolutely no experience or expertise what so ever in dealing with FDRs. But in an attempt to prove you are experts anyways, you want to challenge a group of people who are not experts instead o actually debating actual experts.

If that's not fraud, I don't know what is.

 

[beachnut]

The data 'stops'

Yes the data stops and the FDR shows 77 over 6000 feet from the Pentagon. What else can you say?

Chickens. Liars. Has-beens.

That dooms your failed, flawed, and physically impossible NoC path.
That dooms your too high to hit the Pentagon theory.
That dooms all your other implications of lies about 9/11.

You have zero evidence to make zero theories, and the implied conclusions you and p4t make are pure fantasy fueled by ignorance in math, physics, and flying.

You have zero FDR experts, they can't even explain why the DME values are not updated every 4 seconds. You also avoided telling me when the memory chip was manufactured.

You and p4t can't explain or come up with much, it took me hours just to get you to post the FAR.

What year did 77 first fly?
What year was 77's FDR installed?
What year this chip was first released? TE28F128J3C-150 ?

Do you need help with the easy stuff? Show us your experts who say 77 was too high to hit the Pentagon when the FDR says it is 6000 feet from the Pentagon. Oh no, the RADAR data shows 77 on the course which hits the lampposts, and on course to impact the Pentagon at 530 mph. The RADAR data from multiple sources confirms 77 is on course and shows the impact time is 13:37:50 on the FDR time. Verified RADAR data proves your ideas are fantasy. You are now stuck on chips and a working copy of an animation the p4t use to support a made up NoC.

We collectively have decoded the raw file successfully. Probably the only organization aside from the NTSB that has done so, and gone public.

But you can't explain why p4t experts blindly listed DME every secod of each frame, or why DME is not updated every four second like the FAR says now in 2008. Wonder what the FAR read in 2001, or when the FDR was installed in 77? Do you wonder about that? Why is the p4t decode WRONG! They list DME every second, the NTSB lists the DME every 4 seconds. Your experts are not!

You don't understand a working copy animation, or how the NTSB placed the images under the FDR derived animation. I will remind you, there is no data in the FDR to precisely place the ground images found in the animation. The FDR shows 77 2000 feet south of the runway, and therefore the NTSB manually place the runway image under the animation. This is a fact and you can't show me the data the NTSB used to place the runway image. The same goes for the Pentagon image. If they used the FDR the animation would stop 6000 feet from the Pentagon. The working copy was not finished. Animations are used to see what went wrong with the aircraft. On 9/11 we know what went wrong, and we know where all the planes ended up. Only a few fools who make up lies, false information and fantasies about 9/11 are unable to understand the animation and FDR. Your fringe group makes up implications of lies about 9/11. The big failed idea, Balsamo makes up, "77 was too high to hit the Pentagon". Balsamo's too high to hit theory was a lie, over 6 years ago; p4t are failures at making a valid point, theory, or conclusion.

When will you fix the 11.2 G errors displaying the worse physics ever seen on earth. Can you fix it?

Let me say we collectively have found errors from the NTSB. That shows we (PFT) are competent.

Big lie, you have found no errors from the NTSB. You can't even list them and support your ideas. The only thing you can do is call others.

Chickens. Liars. Has-beens.

 

[funk de fino]

I don't arrive at the impact time; the NTSB states it for you!

Please tell me the exact impact time of Flight 77 and how you came by this?

These calculations you are all referring to will be addressed accordingly.

Your bigger worries should be focused on why your so called "pros" haven't
come forth to explain themselves, or tell you how they can be so bold to
start a thread about a system of which they have ZERO references, or
specification.

We have a few people waiting to ask questions of Anti, Beachnut, ReHeat, and the gang.

Why don't you ask these guys to produce some diagrams, frame layouts,
specifications about the system they are claiming to know about?

I will repeat this part of my last post you ignored.

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?

You'll be surprised at how much you've been strung along all this time whether you believe the truth movement, or not. Don't take my word for it, Check it out for yourselves. they've been exposed.

The only thing that surpirises me is the willful stupidity and ignorance of little interent commandos who know nothing. I worked fast jet aircraft for 12 years, I know about FDR, I know about Rolls Royce engines, I know about avionics, I know about radar and weapons systems, I know about missiles.

Why should any lurker take your word over mine, or beachnut, or amtman, or anti or reheat?

Please supply one person off your list who has my 1st and 2nd line experience. Not pilots or flight attendants please, techs or engineers with specific FDR experience. Just one.

 

[Caustic Logic]

I don't arrive at the impact time; the NTSB states it for you!

So in English, you arrived at it by reading the NTSB, Jim Ritter's letter? It's not in FDR. No "impact" senseor that says it happens at this second. It does show lat-long data that puts it 1.3 miles from impact at your impact time. So did they fake the FDR wrong, or did the NTSB err is ever saying :45 was the time of impact?

That's it.

I'm waiting for your experts to provide a theory, a correction, some common sense, and even a shred of substantive honesty. Why do you keep badgering the pros when any layman can see that you have nothing?

These calculations you are all referring to will be addressed accordingly.

Yes, sure, just after the 11.2 G error is corrected, at the end of the rainbow where we also get free cookies and a million dollars. I just can't wait.

Your bigger worries should be focused on why your so called "pros" haven't
come forth to explain themselves, or tell you how they can be so bold to
start a thread about a system of which they have ZERO references, or
specification.

We have a few people waiting to ask questions of Anti, Beachnut, ReHeat, and the gang.

Why don't you ask these guys to produce some diagrams, frame layouts,
specifications about the system they are claiming to know about?

You'll be surprised at how much you've been strung along all this time whether
you believe the truth movement, or not. Don't take my word for it, Check it out for yourselves. they've been exposed.

Neat, Bobby, so you maybe have some people who've maybe spotted some technical errors they can harp on, prodce some docs showing some system procedure change Beachnut isn't familiar with, or something, in lieu of actually knowing anything of <i>substance</i>, or making sense even, or being even remotely honest.

That is sophistry. And where is Anti-Sophist these days?

 

[Reheat]

If it was not obvious previously (it was) this thread painfully reveals the true nature of the pffft intentions. They are not truly interested in resolving FDR problems for safety reasons, they are interested in perpetuating their paranoid believe that the evil Gubmint was responsible for 9/11 in order to build the ego of Capt Bob and many of the others who post on their site. Capt Bob is also very interested in a continuing market for his merchandise.

Most (if not all) of their more highly qualified members (they actually have very few) of the "core" group do not post on their Forum and there is no visible evidence that they assisted in any way with the interpretation of the FDR Data. In fact, I wonder how many of those still on their membership list still support their delusions. As has been pointed out very plainly in this thread they are mostly a group of hacks with an underlying political agenda similar to all the rest of the "troofer club". It's quite similar to CIT with interpretations of supposed anomalies revealing an underlying motivation to support a political agenda.

They won't ever write a comprehensive paper on their analysis because to do so would reveal flaws in their analysis and at the same time it would reveal their true agenda. It's easier to produce videos and razzle dazzle gullible fools to join, support them, or buy their merchandise. I believe it's too late in the game for a technical paper anyway, because they have ruined their chance of ever getting the attention of any legitimate group whether Government or Media or anyone else who matters simply because of past behavior.

The live debate nonsense is simply to gain publicity for all of the above reasons and it would be foolish for anyone to accept that for any reason. It would accomplish nothing in the way of legitimacy, but would merely give them the publicity for which they hunger. It is not the appropriate forum for this type of issue anyway for all of the reasons previously mention by several posters.

Quite frankly, they are already reduced to the "fringe lunatic" element to which they belong because of all of the evidence supporting the "generally accepted" scenario regarding the Pentagon attack. With CIT's nonsense totally defeated it's just a matter of time until their support dwindles to near nothing too, if that's not already the case. It's not time to completely ignore them, but we should continue what's being done here and they will eventually defeat themselves just as Turbofan is doing in this thread.

 

[Disbelief]

Read, and read again. The credentials are listed OVER and OVER and OVER
again.

And it has been shown to you OVER and OVER and OVER again that none of these credentials have anything to do with FDRs.

I keep reading this crap about FDR experts. Again, I ask:

What makes an FDR expert, an expert? Is there a course you can take
in school? Do a team of IT, electronics, pilots, etc. round out that list
of qualifications?

Well, how about I post this for the third time:

http://www.jurispro.com/category/bla...recorder-s-13/

This will link you to recognized experts. Why not make a few calls and see if they can answer these questions?

 

[jaydeehess]

When will you fix the 11.2 G errors displaying the worse physics ever seen on earth.

Now Beachnut, that is a bit of exaggeration. We all know that Killtown enjoys the distinction of displaying that he is the worst at math and physics on this planet.

The members at PfT are very good at it compared to Killtown.

 

[jaydeehess]

Well, how about I post this for the third time:

http://www.jurispro.com/category/bla...recorder-s-13/

This will link you to recognized experts. Why not make a few calls and see if they can answer these questions?

Bump for TF

Disbelief supplies you with a list of more organizations and individuals besides the NTSB, L3, ICAO, and the pilot's unions(the unions would likely use some person or organization on the list anyway) to whom you OR PfT can submit a comprehensive and purely 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.

Instead you continue to debate anonymous internet denizens who you do not consider experts in the feild and push for a verbal debate with these same people.

Can you or the PfT get anyone or organization on Disbelief's linked list to agree with the contentions made?

 

[Turbofan]

Where is Anti-Sophist these days?

He's probably smart enough not to answer anymore since I've questioned
his T4-T5 timing which does not have a thing to do with "lag", or delay
when writing sensor data to crash protected memory.

So you smart guys realize that the FDR is nothing more than a storage
device which holds data, correct?

You also know that the FDR contains flash memory just like your USB
drives, or IPODs, etc...correct?

You are aware that members of the PFT research team met with ARINC
employees and had the raw file decoded by industry professionals...ya?

Ummm...let's see...you know that our members have access to the frame
layout and actual ARINC documentation, right?

What else do you guys want? It's not rocket science after that point.
The data is within a format which can be read back intuitively; it's no longer
scrambled 1's and 0's!

Anyway, Beachnut is still CLUELESS about the difference between raw data
and the CSV file. He wants me to explain a question that doesn't make
sense.

I've already told him a few times that the DME holds the last value until
the next update, and there are two transmitters alternating DME every
two seconds.

Write it down Beachnut. Draw some lines. Sound it out S-L-O-W-L-Y.
Get your kid to help you out. Maybe I can phone you later and explain it?

By the way kids, L3 did not reply. That does not mean they
don't support it. Until L3 denounces the study (or any other organization),
consider them scared, or gagged.

Get real. We're talking about an entire company with government contracts.
Getting a reply from a source such as L3 for/against will be near impossible.

Ed Santana verified a specification for PFT research, which also burns a hole
in Anti's claim that two seconds of data can be missing!

Where's the broom? I need to sweep up all of these chicken feathers.
Still nobody wants to talk huh?

 

[WildCat]

I note this is another day that the PfffT has failed to contact actual FDR experts to corroborate the findings of their fake FDR experts. Disbelief linked to a good place to start: http://www.jurispro.com/category/black-box-data-recorder-s-13/

And yet, it appears that the PfffT isn't at all interested in doing this critical step to get away from their status as fringe lunatics.

And people should take you seriously why?

 

[applecorped]

He's probably smart enough not to answer anymore since I've questioned
his T4-T5 timing which does not have a thing to do with "lag", or delay
when writing sensor data to crash protected memory.

So you smart guys realize that the FDR is nothing more than a storage
device which holds data, correct?

You also know that the FDR contains flash memory just like your USB
drives, or IPODs, etc...correct?

You are aware that members of the PFT research team met with ARINC
employees and had the raw file decoded by industry professionals...ya?

Ummm...let's see...you know that our members have access to the frame
layout and actual ARINC documentation, right?

What else do you guys want? It's not rocket science after that point.
The data is within a format which can be read back intuitively; it's no longer
scrambled 1's and 0's!

Anyway, Beachnut is still CLUELESS about the difference between raw data
and the CSV file. He wants me to explain a question that doesn't make
sense.

I've already told him a few times that the DME holds the last value until
the next update, and there are two transmitters alternating DME every
two seconds.

Write it down Beachnut. Draw some lines. Sound it out S-L-O-W-L-Y.
Get your kid to help you out. Maybe I can phone you later and explain it?

By the way kids, L3 did not reply. That does not mean they
don't support it. Until L3 denounces the study (or any other organization),
consider them scared, or gagged.

Get real. We're talking about an entire company with government contracts.
Getting a reply from a source such as L3 for/against will be near impossible.

Ed Santana verified a specification for PFT research, which also burns a hole
in Anti's claim that two seconds of data can be missing!

Where's the broom? I need to sweep up all of these chicken feathers.
Still nobody wants to talk huh?

Take a deep breath.

It's okay. Look...I'm not armed. I have no facts on me at all. I can't hurt you.

Why don't you just come down and will talk.

Want a cigarette?

Why are you doing this? It's not that bad is it?

Look, you got people that love you and care about you. Think about them.

If you can't do it for yourself, do it for them.

Give me your hand.

 

[beachnut]

Ed Santana verified a specification for PFT research, which also burns a hole in Anti's claim that two seconds of data can be missing!

A salesman is your expert on FDR. Cool. But the salesman never said the FDR can't stop. Gee, there are many examples of data missing from the FDR. On 9/11 the data on 77 stopped on a true track course of 61.2 degrees, lined up to hit the lampposts and impact the Pentagon within 1 or 2 degrees of impact heading. Why is this significant. Because at 530 mph 77 can not turn more than a degree or two in the 6 seconds left to impact time. An impact time verified by multiple RADAR stations you ignore. You failed to figure out 9/11 and have no rational story of your own.

Your p4t are liars when they say 77 is too high to hit the Pentagon.
If only you could prove anything of your fantasy ideas, you wouild have a Pulitzer Prize! Got evidence? No you don’t'.

Have you fixed that 11.2 G error yet? Good for you, you have salesman who does not say the FDR can not be missing data. Gee, if he does he is a liar, because there are many reasons a FDR can be missing data.

A salesman is your expert, and your p4t decoders can't answer why the DME is in every second of every frame of the p4t decode. Why? Did you show your experts the FAR I got you to look up!

 

[Turbofan]

I note this is another day that the PfffT has failed to contact actual FDR experts to corroborate the findings of their fake FDR experts. Disbelief linked to a good place to start: http://www.jurispro.com/category/black-box-data-recorder-s-13/

And yet, it appears that the PfffT isn't at all interested in doing this critical step to get away from their status as fringe lunatics.

And people should take you seriously why?

Maybe I'm blind, but I can't seem to find any "FDR Experts" on that page.

Can you help me out? Here's the list that I see:

http://www.jurispro.com/category/aviation-s-10/


It's actually the anonymous "experts" of JREF who fail to contact "FDR
Experts". PFT have several recordings, emails and exchanges with L3 and
other FDR companies around the world.

How do you think P4T was able to decode the raw data that "beachnut" or
"Anti-Sophist" couldnt even decode themselves?

If you want anyone to take YOUR 'experts' seriously', perhaps they should
put their name on their claims, or man-up to a live debate.

How can you blindly follow these guys and ride the bandwagon, when they
can't even explain what they see in raw data for DME?

Once again, how do you think PFT managed to decode the raw data without
the help of industry pros/experts?

 

[jaydeehess]

So the comprehensive, purely technical paper detailing the steps that PfT has taken to come to the conclusion that the FDR data stored on the FDR,that officially was which was in Flight 77 and which officially is accepted as having hit the Pentagon, does not match the officially accepted path of ground damage from Flight 77's passage is/has been sent to L3?

Nah, I thought not.............. You seem to feel that you understand the issue. Why not take a couple of weeks off from argueing on the internet with people you despise and believe to be ill-informed and ignorant concerning this issue, and create such a paper yourself.? You could then submit it to all organizations with the expertise to comment on it, including, of course, L3.

Until that happens L3 does not have enough of PfT's work to even begin to comment on it.

You must see the obvious interest that L3 would have if such is true. It would mean that their FDR can be shown to have not recorded data properly. If such is true then this absolutly requires that they address it as a safety issue.

You are aware that members of the PFT research team met with ARINC
employees and had the raw file decoded by industry professionals...ya?

Ummm...let's see...you know that our members have access to the frame
layout and actual ARINC documentation, right?

Who were these people and what are their credentials (do try to be specific), and where is their statement to the effect that what PfT is working with is correct? Do they also support the PfT conclusion that the FDR data stored on the FDR,that officially was which was in Flight 77 and which officially is accepted as having hit the Pentagon, does not match the officially accepted path of ground damage from Flight 77's passage? Where are their statements to that effect?

Until those are forthcoming we have but PfT's word for it. Given that PfT would never deign to take any 'gov't loyalist' at their word you will of course forgive us GL's for not taking a TM's word as gospel either.

 

[applecorped]

Maybe I'm blind, but I can't seem to find any "FDR Experts" on that page.

Can you help me out? Here's the list that I see:

http://www.jurispro.com/category/aviation-s-10/


It's actually the anonymous "experts" of JREF who fail to contact "FDR
Experts". PFT have several recordings, emails and exchanges with L3 and
other FDR companies around the world.

How do you think P4T was able to decode the raw data that "beachnut" or
"Anti-Sophist" couldnt even decode themselves?

If you want anyone to take YOUR 'experts' seriously', perhaps they should
put their name on their claims, or man-up to a live debate.

How can you blindly follow these guys and ride the bandwagon, when they
can't even explain what they see in raw data for DME?

Once again, how do you think PFT managed to decode the raw data without
the help of industry pros/experts?

Let me help you to help yourself.

Look, I've got your boyfriend here and he want to say something.

"Honey! I'm sorry about what I said. I didn't mean it. I love you! Please come down! [sob, sob].

C'mon. Come on down. I'll listen. I know nobody else listens but I will.

Give me your hand.

 

[beachnut]

Anyway, Beachnut is still CLUELESS about the difference between raw data and the CSV file. He wants me to explain a question that doesn't make sense.

I've already told him a few times that the DME holds the last value until
the next update, and there are two transmitters alternating DME every
two seconds.

Write it down Beachnut. Draw some lines. Sound it out S-L-O-W-L-Y.
Get your kid to help you out. Maybe I can phone you later and explain it?

So you are saying your p4t expert decoders made an error in repeating the DME every second when the FAR states it is sampled each 4 seconds.

But gee, why is the DME not changing every 4 seconds when the plane is moving over 300 mph towards DCA. Explain why the FDR is not updating the DME! You can't?

See the 17 DME!

See the p4t decode in the last seconds. They list DME every second in each frame. Why did p4t experts post errors in the FDR?

Notice the NTSB decoded file list DME each four seconds. Notice the DME does not change each four seconds!

I asked you to ask your expert FDR guys to explain why the DME is not updated each 4 seconds. I also asked why your expert decoders listed DME each second in ERROR! Why is p4t decode in error?

Do you understand the DME is only stored as X.0, X.2, X.5, X.8? Can you explain why?


What year did 77 first fly?
What year was 77's FDR installed?
What year this chip was first released? TE28F128J3C-150 ?
Please tell me the chip you said was in 77's FDR, what year was it first introduced. ??

Got physics? Got research?