AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[WildCat]

i claimed usualy NTSB mentions the Serial numbers and when they are missing they mentions this, i still claim this.

NTSB did the data outread and made that report , for another agency, i find it strange they do not mention the serial numbers especially beacuse it is for another agency and not for themself.

If there was a conspiracy, how would not mentioning the serial number further the conspiracy?

 

[twinstead]

If there was a conspiracy, how would not mentioning the serial number further the conspiracy?

Yup. I would find it odd that somebody who could manage all the evidence planting required that day couldn't fake a couple serial numbers.

 

[DC]

Yup. I would find it odd that somebody who could manage all the evidence planting required that day couldn't fake a couple serial numbers.

dunno, i never conspired, but i guess that would involve more people then, and i would asume you will try to keep the number as small as possible.

 

[WildCat]

dunno, i never conspired, but i guess that would involve more people then, and i would asume you will try to keep the number as small as possible.

How would it involve more people? All it takes is for your guys who are disappearing the plane used for Flight 77 (and any theory that doesn't involve Flight 77 actually hitting the Pentagon requires this step) to relay the serial number to you. No extra people required.

So please explain how no serial number furthers the conspiracy.

 

[funk de fino]

i claimed usualy NTSB mentions the Serial numbers and when they are missing they mentions this, i still claim this.

Dont be forgetful, I already posted reports that proved this claim wrong, go back and look in the threads again DC

ETA - IIRC your initial claim was they are always mentioned which you backed down on later when proved wrong on that?

NTSB did the data outread and made that report , for another agency, i find it strange they do not mention the serial numbers especially beacuse it is for another agency and not for themself.

You, a lay person thinks it is strange means nothing I am afraid. Serial numbers are taken and recorded for a reason in aircraft accidents. This was not an accident with an unknown cause. The serial number would have meant nothing to the FBI

also in case that indeed the last few seconds of data would be missing, i find it very strange they dont mention that, especially because they did the dataoutread for another agency.

Again that a lay person like you thinks it is strange means nothing. There may be data missing, there may be slight errors there may be an incorrect impact time. That is the problem, only NTSB can tell pffffft the answer to their questions. They are making incorrect assumptions based on ignorance while ignoring 100% of all the other evidence. Surely you see their position is untenable?

 

[funk de fino]

dunno, i never conspired, but i guess that would involve more people then, and i would asume you will try to keep the number as small as possible.

How many people to plant the poles, the aircraft parts, the bodies, breach the wall, plant the explosives, fire the missile, control the fake plane etc etc etc

One person to fake a serial number is nothing.

 

[lapman]

I see that TF has completely ignored post #2089. Why am I not surprised.

 

[Turbofan]

I see that TF has completely ignored post #2089. Why am I not surprised.

It has been ignored for good reason.

The questions have been addressed in this 53+ page thread already.

I'm kinda tired of repeating myself when a new participant arrives restating
the same opinion. Although I respect his somewhat civil approach, there's
nothing in that reply that hasn't been talked about.

You on the other hand can't offer anything to support Beachnut's crazy
idea, so you just point out the obvious and turn it back on me.

Step up to the mic and debate us live chicken.

 

[funk de fino]

It has been ignored for good reason.

The questions have been addressed in this 53+ page thread already.

I'm kinda tired of repeating myself when a new participant arrives restating
the same opinion. Although I respect his somewhat civil approach, there's
nothing in that reply that hasn't been talked about.

You on the other hand can't offer anything to support Beachnut's crazy
idea, so you just point out the obvious and turn it back on me.

Step up to the mic and debate us live chicken.

repeat again

Care to bring a name from your list of pilots and flight attendants this time? FDR/CVR 1st and 2nd line experience? Just one?

Pleeeaaase?

 

[lapman]

It has been ignored for good reason.

The questions have been addressed in this 53+ page thread already.

I'm kinda tired of repeating myself when a new participant arrives restating
the same opinion. Although I respect his somewhat civil approach, there's
nothing in that reply that hasn't been talked about.

You on the other hand can't offer anything to support Beachnut's crazy
idea, so you just point out the obvious and turn it back on me.

Step up to the mic and debate us live chicken.

Why should I attempt to debate someone that has no intention of actually debating? You have shown that you have no idea of how the FDR works. Do you even know the difference between an EPROM and an EEPROM?

 

[beachnut]

... chicken.

You have a fantasy and have to resort to calling names just like Capt Bob.

... data transfer rate of 64 words per second,

Wrong! Do you need help, you are off by a factor of 4; like your 11.2 G error!

You never did post the answers from your p4t experts who know all woo on 9/11.
What year did 77 first fly?
What year was 77's FDR installed?
What year this chip was first released? TE28F128J3C-150 ?


Why did the p4t expert decoders make an error listing DME every second?

Why do the p4t decoder experts leave out 87% of the vertical accelerations?

 

[jaydeehess]

Well TF, will PfT create and submit a comprehensive, technical analysis of the FDR data and the physical ground damage patterns to any of these organizations?

If so when?

How do you know they haven't? YOu will soon find out who we've contacted
and expose the spins Beachnut has been putting on 11.2G's. You're not
going to be too happy.

I'd like to see him squirm his way out of the clarified explanation.

Read this for further info:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/descent_rate031308.html

I replied in post 2064 Turbofan.

I replied both to your assurance that the ridiculous calculations of 11+ g's being required for the plane to endure, will be corrected, and to your insinuation that PfT has indeed created a comprehensive technical paper outling how they arrive at the conclusion that the FDR data describes a grossly different path than the damage pattern on the ground would indicate as the flight path and having actually submitted this docuement to some interested parties for evaluation.

So:
1) when will we see the web page be corrected?

2) when will the comprehensive technical paper be available to all on the internet?

3) who has this docuement gone to and when?


ETA: you do see that you conflated two issues there as well, right TF?
perhaps you'd like to suggest to PfT that the revised version of that web page be submitted to a 1st year physics class for comment and correction as well?

 

[jsiv]

It's not going to happen unless the report can be sold on a DVD with a baseball cap and maybe a few t-shirts.

 

[WildCat]

How do you know they haven't? YOu will soon find out who we've contacted
and expose the spins Beachnut has been putting on 11.2G's. You're not
going to be too happy.

Charlie Sheen? Ed Asner? Rosie? Willie Nelson? I'm dying to know!

 

[jaydeehess]

bah,
deleted

see ETA in my last post

 

[Drudgewire]

Charlie Sheen? Ed Asner? Rosie? Willie Nelson? I'm dying to know!

I hope it's Margaret Cho. Beachnut's comeuppance would be so much more complete if it was delivered in a racist stereotype Korean accent.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

I'd just like to echo what jaydeehess has been saying for quite some time now.

Analyzing Flight Data Recorder data is best left to an expert in the field. I personally have no expertise in the field, and in fact, much of this discussion is well beyond my training or experience level.

However, give the fact that all the other evidence points to the fact that Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon, and it is Turbofan (and by proxy, I suppose, Pilots for Truth) that is making the (outrageous, IMHO) claim that no plane hit the Pentagon, it's up to him to go to the experts to prove it.

This won't be settled by the discussion here. Turbofan doesn't believe Beachnut or anyone else here using debate, so I agree with jaydeehess that it's time for PFT to commit their analysis to paper and submit it for peer review.

ETA: I'd suggest a publication like Avation Week & Space Technology or the equivalent for peer review submission.

 

[Turbofan]

Wrong! Do you need help, you are off by a factor of 4; like your 11.2 G error!

Off by a factor of 4 huh? This is a perfect example of Beachnut spreading
lies and/or showing his lack of knowledge for the flight data system.

Here is a paragraph from the ARINC document which YOU DO NOT HAVE.
I've also put a watermark on this image so that when you COPY it, you
have a reference. Thank you UnderTow for providing this document to
our research team:

http://procision-auto.com/911/911_FDR_data_rate.jpg

The other questions can be answered by clicking the link I left in several
of my other replies. CLICK IT and RESEARCH you fool.

 

[Turbofan]

If so when?

So:
1) when will we see the web page be corrected?

2) when will the comprehensive technical paper be available to all on the internet?

3) who has this docuement gone to and when?

Let's just say that the upcoming correction will address all of the issues
which the government loyalists have been screaming about for the past
while.

It will be released in the next couple of weeks.

I don't believe a technical paper will be necessary as the press release,
and video documentary have outlined the errors. Maybe once we can get
the NTSB to respond, we can submit a detailed technical paper to highlight
the already proven errors.

 

[Turbofan]

Hey Funk et al,

You all know that military FDR is not the same as commercial FDR, right?

Can someone please outline what an "expert FDR specialist" really is?

I mean, you linked me to Juris Pro, but I don't see an FDR specialist/expert
on there? I've searched a few times and another attempt before posting.

So, PFT decodes a raw file, has industry pros help them decode the raw file.
The only known public organization to have pulled off this task, and nobody
gives them props?

If Beachnut and Anti can't crack the raw file and they work with
data recorders every day, then what sort of experience do they have?

P.S. Beachnut, calling names is only bad when it's not true. You are a
chicken. The day Pomeroo asked you to debate PFT , you declined. YOu
said nothing was to debate.

Then we find you online posting your opinion as the interview progresses LIVE!

So, again...you are a chicken for hiding behind your keyboard when you had
the chance to say all of that LIVE via radio.

CHICKEN is what you are. YOu left Pomeroo hanging, with no opposition to
debate PFT.

YOu also lied about contacting PFT directly. That my friend is a chicken.