AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[pomeroo]

Flyover? sounds strange to me. how much G would that be then if leveling out, allegedly caused already such High G-Forces.

sepcific? we talk about those that have planted the FDR, in case it was planted.

Conspiracy-Deniers seem to belive that such Conspirators are perfect and never make misstakes.

Rationalists discern a difference between human imperfection and drooling idiocy. The Impossibly Vast Conspiracy behaves bizarrely, doing all sorts of mad, incredibly stupid things for no other purpose than to leave clues for angry, uneducated adolescents.

 

[DC]

ja forget it pomeroo.

 

[beachnut]

Those darn one hour office fires!

It's OK, I'm off to bed. Have a good night. I'll see you on the battle
field again tomorrow I'm sure. We'll talk more about FDR transients and
ask the EE forum a few more questions.

Take care.

One Meridian Plaza, not here any more, the entire High-Rise was weakened by fire. Are their no limits to your lack of knowledge and experience? Making fun of 9/11, making up lies, due to lack of knowledge on fire, flying, and more.

Off topic woo spews, this happens to all truthers as the façade of false knowledge is exposed. This is old stuff, what does fire have to do with FDR!? Oh, yes the FDR has to survive fire. Are office fires in that spec?
Why are FDR not spec'd out for hitting buildings at 500 to 600 mph?

FDR have data that should have been recorded but was not. Many examples. The data can stop prior to landing or crash.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Flyover? sounds strange to me. how much G would that be then if leveling out, allegedly caused already such High G-Forces.

sepcific? we talk about those that have planted the FDR, in case it was planted.

Conspiracy-Deniers seem to belive that such Conspirators are perfect and never make misstakes.

Well, it either hit the building or flew over. Lest you want to argue the suspended in mid air argument?

Those who planted the FDR? please provide evidence that it was planted, and define who "those" are.

Crackpots think the conspirators (who they can't even name because they have no evidence of their existence) live in the cartoon world. And this isn't about making mistakes, this is about intentionally incriminating themselves. Hmmm, simply say that the FDR was unrecoverable and cover all bases and assure no problems what so ever, or plant an FDR with incriminating evidence on it. Do you guys ever read this stuff after you write it?

 

[DC]

oh dear, forget it it johnny.......



now i oc claimed that the FDR was planted and AA77 flew over the pentagon.
that is clearly what my posts say......

 

[Turbofan]

Again, we note that you have spent no time answering my question.

Food for thought:

Who said the fly over plane passed over at the exact moment of the
exploision?

I'll leave you with that while you think about the tower tipping quesiton, and
the fucntion of a clamp circuit.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

oh dear, forget it it johnny.......



now i oc claimed that the FDR was planted and AA77 flew over the pentagon.
that is clearly what my posts say......

No, we're well aware that you, like all other cultists are a no claimer. You can't voice your beliefs because you know as soon as you do, you will debunk yourself. You, like Turbo and the other cultists all know that your own believes have so many more holes and problems than the research done by real experts do. You know that your own beliefs can't stand up to the same idiotic scrutiny and requirements you place on the experts.

But please Dick, share with us your explanation of what happened since you don't approve of the explanations given by the investigators. Let me guess "I just want a new investigation dude..." Give us a break.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Food for thought:

Who said the fly over plane passed over at the exact moment of the
exploision?

I'll leave you with that while you think about the tower tipping quesiton, and
the fucntion of a clamp circuit.

Ah, so now the 1000s of people there happened to all miss seeing flight 77 fly over after the big explosion? And then what was it they saw fly into the building?

 

[Turbofan]

Why not before?

Who says it was AA77?

Original news broadcasts claimed that it did not appear a plane had crashed.
We also heard talk of a small commuter jet, etc.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

So then some plane flew over before hand, then explosives went off and people saw something else fly into the building?

Do you have any evidence what so ever to back this up? I mean aside from determining what happened from a news broadcaster who was inside the building on the opposite end and would have no way of knowing what happened?

How about an explanation for how AA77 was put on RADAR screens and how some other plane or planes were removed from RADAR?

It's funny how you nit pick a tiny detail in order to try and dismiss everything else. But you cannot come up with an explanation that doesn't have 10,000x more problems or holes.

 

[roundhead]

Ah, so now the 1000s of people there happened to all miss seeing flight 77 fly over after the big explosion? And then what was it they saw fly into the building?

Your 1000's of witnesses statement has been completely debunked. It holds zero water. People the Govt "CLAIMED" as witnesses have been interviewed, and the real truth has emerged.

Other than the fine research done by CIT, which completely blows away the OCT, there isnt anything to support you wild assertion above.

Your delusions are simply that.

 

[R.Mackey]

Your 1000's of witnesses statement has been completely debunked. It holds zero water. People the Govt "CLAIMED" as witnesses have been interviewed, and the real truth has emerged.

Other than the fine research done by CIT, which completely blows away the OCT, there isnt anything to support you wild assertion above.

Your delusions are simply that.

"Fine research" done by CIT? You mean this??

And you call us delusional..?

 

[Turbofan]

Evidence: photos of impact wall, witness testimony, video

RADAR: War games, transponders on/off, talk of intentional inserting of
blips.

I pick at specific details on FDR because this thread is dedicated to
AA77 FDR info. There are several other events on that day that
don't add up; this isn't my only area of interest for calling a new
investigation.

Anyway, I'm out...

 

[applecorped]

Anyway, I'm out...

...of ideas.

 

[lapman]

Evidence: photos of impact wall, witness testimony, video

and DNA all prove conclusively that AA77 crashed into the Pentagon. Case closed.

RADAR: War games, transponders on/off, talk of intentional inserting of
blips.

You do know that turning a transponder "off" is simply turning a knob to the STBY position? War games and "inserts" are irrelevant since they did not affect the ATC radars.

I pick at specific details on FDR because this thread is dedicated to
AA77 FDR info. There are several other events on that day that
don't add up; this isn't my only area of interest for calling a new
investigation.

No, you pick minute details because that is all you can grasp onto since all other evidence completely proves your fantasies wrong.

Anyway, I'm out...

Is that a threat or a promise?

 

[jaydeehess]

Why not before?

Who says it was AA77?

Original news broadcasts claimed that it did not appear a plane had crashed.
We also heard talk of a small commuter jet, etc.

How long before? After all you hae to convince all witnesses that the plane was what caused the fireball, not that the fireball occured before the impact. Anyone believeing that the fireball occured before impact would find it rather an odd occurance and report it as such. No one did. Not even Turcois who's statement the CiT twist. He says that his view was "still obscured" when the plane hit the Pentagon. CiT mis-construe this to mean that the fireball obscured his view when he means that the highway embankment obscured his view, the plane having flown below his line of sight past it. Turcois believes that the crash caused the fireball not that the fireball somehow preceeded the crash.

AA77 went missing, AA77's passengers went missing, and there is ample evidence to support the idea that it did so because it crashed into the Pentagon. should anyone wish to argue otherwise then the onus would be on them to determine what became of AA77 and its occupants.

ONE news broadcaster stated that when he got there that there was little that he was able to see out in the open and a hundred feet from the Pentagon, that was indicative of large aircraft parts from a crash. Obviuosly that material was inside the building. The impact had destroyed 90-100 feet of the 1st floor wall. There was also little of that missing wall out in the lawn indicating that material had to also be inside the Pentagon.

 

[jaydeehess]

[derail]Oh , and in the south tower the tower tipped to the side with one corner suffering the hottest fire and with the most core column damage due to both impact and fire.

I asked you if you had read the new report concerning WTC 7. Its a simple 'yes' , 'no', or 'parts of it' question.[/derail]

 

[beachnut]

Evidence: photos of impact wall, witness testimony, video

RADAR: War games, transponders on/off, talk of intentional inserting of
blips.

I pick at specific details on FDR because this thread is dedicated to
AA77 FDR info. There are several other events on that day that
don't add up; this isn't my only area of interest for calling a new
investigation.

Anyway, I'm out...

7 years and you pathetically are reviewing everything that is already refuted. 9/11 truth and you have zero clue, and zero evidence, zero coherent scenarios, zero physics abilities applied to 9/11, zero math applied to 9/11 zero engineering, zero…

You are so bad, you can't stay on topic to fail in just one point, you have to fail on a broad spectrum of stupid 9/11 truth ideas and lies.

Here is your list of evidence to support your failed anti-intellectual ideas on 9/11:

1.





What a big list.




Transponder switch off! Even you could do it if you were not challenged on making up false ideas about 9/11.

Is the revelation the p4t terrorist loyalist are the only people on earth have tried to hit buildings in a jet simulator and can't. Is the failed flying of anti-intellectual terrorist apologist dumb pilots evidence for your pre-refuted ideas?

Or the fact is you finally realized a FDR could be missing data?
Or that the 1.5 DME can be off buy 2100 feet due to 0.25 resolution it is stored at and the residual errors in the system which give a 0.23 NM to 0.35 NM accuracy for DME flying near the station. ????

Failure is good, you can't learn if you don't fail. This may be your learning model, even you gave up 64 wps to grasp the 256 wps. There is hope.

 

[jaydeehess]

Evidence: photos of impact wall, witness testimony, video

100 feet of missing wall
dozens of witnesses who state the plane hit the Pentagon one of which was only a few dozen feet away, and no witnesses who claim a plane flew low, fast , and over the Pentagon (ala CiT)
no video contradicting the idea that AA77 hit the Pentagon(other than the ones produced by the likes of PfT)

RADAR: War games, transponders on/off, talk of intentional inserting of
blips

.

radar shows the track along the accepted path to the Pentagon
War games had nothing more than a momentray effect (is this real world? - Yes!)
transponders off limit radar to primary returns along with everything else in the sky

I pick at specific details on FDR because this thread is dedicated to
AA77 FDR info. .

You brought up the derail of the topic of this thread. got other concerns, start a new one.

Anyway, I'm out...

So long.

 

[WildCat]

the fine research done by CIT