I can't speak for beachnut, but I like to learn. Give me a lesson on PA. Go ahead the floor is yours....
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
AA77 FDR Data, Explained
- Thread starter Anti-sophist
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aa77 flight data recorder
I can't speak for beachnut, but I like to learn. Give me a lesson on PA. Go ahead the floor is yours....
The FDR has 40 feet; the animation uses an offset to show what the pilots see on the Altimeter based on 40 FEET. NO MISMATCH 40 feet PA is 300 feet on the altimeter as the pilots saw with the proper altimeter setting in the little window on the altimeter, the pilot sets it! It is even in the FDR, this can be automated for the animation.
At 12:28:01 on the animation 77's alt rolls back as the pilots set 2992 in the little window, or the NTSB adjusted back to the PA free of correction. On the FDR, near that time the Pilots set 2992, you can see it, it confirms reality.
You need the lesson on PA relative to flying, not I; go ahead make my day.
Me too, teach me, school me, throw me in the briar patch
Last edited:
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
The FDR does show 40 feet; correct with local altimeter setting the value is 300 feet. The animation used a correct value for local altimeter to 18000 feet.
You missed something on the PA, and why I am correct.
You got something right. Good work
But correct the NTSB working copy animation does not correct the end altimeter setting. Working copy ...
Last edited:
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
I hadn't clicked on the "ignore" button yet, so I'll add this.
It should concern you that it is 2009 and you haven't figured out that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. The reason you haven't figured it out is stated clearly in your second sentence above: you're focused on a completely inconsequential molehill that isn't part of the "official story" and are ignoring the Himalayan-sized mountains of evidence that are the official story.
Claims that flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon were considered by the truth movement to be the most damaging to its cause, in a 2007 poll:
77. Please name the three theories promoted by TM members that you think have been most damaging in terms of public perception of the movement. Rank them from most to least damaging.
1) No plane at Pentagon, 39%
2) No planes at WTC, 32%
3) Pod theory, 14%
In the same poll, truthers chose "The Pentacon" as the video they would be least likely to recommend to others.
Your belief is held by a handful of people at the very fringe of a thoroughly-discredited fringe movement. Your belief is, in fact, completely absurd.
Scott, I hope that what's most important to you, here in 2009, is learning what actually happened on flight 77 and at the Pentagon. You will learn that by reading about the eyewitness accounts and the physical evidence gathered by thousands of qualified investigators and technicians. I encourage you to communicate with them personally. It's important to remember that this isn't an event that played out inside a computer, but that it happened to real people in the real world.
Reality is trying to stare you in the face, but you keep turning away and brooding over a few details of an animation that was never used for any official purpose.
You're better than that. Don't marginalize yourself further by clinging to nonsense. If this matters to you, please stop being a programmer (plenty of those, erm, highly-focused types are skeptics also
), and start using your whole brain to objectively examine all the evidence. You can always come back and nitpick at anomalies that interest you later.Sincerely,
Mark Roberts
To be ruled by ideas for which you have no evidence (and which therefore cannot be justified in conversation with other human beings) is generally a sign that something is seriously wrong with your mind. –Sam Harris
Last edited:
Scott_Milner
Scholar
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2009
- Messages
- 59
No offense sir, but you are clearly showing your weakness on how this software operates.
The software does not arbitrarily single out certain frames of data and convert them. If you expect me to believe the correction was applied to only a select set of frames and then magically adjusted properly for 29.92, you are sadly mistaken.
Once again, call up a software company or talk to a computer programmer. Alternatively, list the software which you claim corrects only certain frames and leaves others alone.
Reheat, I will gladly start a new thread to discuss Pressure Altitude. I will send you a PM with a link shortly. We can continue tomorrow as it's 2:00 AM here.
Last edited:
Scott_Milner
Scholar
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2009
- Messages
- 59
thank you for your comments Mark. Unfortunately, software doesn't work by changing CSV values whether it's an official copy or not. The coding which exports these CSV data do not care whether the animation was meant for official purposes.
If you like, we can start another thread on basic programming code which will show that no matter what the colour of the leaves may be...the output never changes. Send me a PM if you' re interested.
So, are you "just asking questions" Scott or do you have an alternative explanation for these supposed anomalies?
Apparently you think you've blown the lid off this thing, but you haven't articulated why these anomlies are important and how they show that Flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon. Am I missing something? Why is this important?
BTW, welcome to the forum.
Apparently you think you've blown the lid off this thing, but you haven't articulated why these anomlies are important and how they show that Flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon. Am I missing something? Why is this important?
BTW, welcome to the forum.
I would listen to Gravy, and save the task of learning how to fly.
Gravy’s posts are a reality check for the idiot ideas spewed by p4t and 911Truth entities. Don’t get me wrong, you can study flying but so far you have no clue what or we you are trying to prove with PA for starters.
The FDR supports 77 impacts. If you check the final track of 77 on the FDR it matches with in a degree or two the impact damage created by an aircraft going over 530 mph as the engineers determined was indicative of the damage to the Pentagon.
I can’t find one thing in the FDR that refutes 77 impacting the Pentagon.
The PA matches the RADAR data when corrected with the proper values and you can use this to help match the FDR data to RADAR data, which confirms 77, is on track to impact the Pentagon.
The FDR in no way refutes 77 impacting the Pentagon. It supports 77 being where RADAR said it was.
The thing about flying is the terminology, and the culture does not offer an easy understanding of what the heck pilots are talking about.
We have heading, but this is not our track over the ground, we have wind drift, magnetic heading, true headings, ground speed, airspeed, true airspeed, calibrated airspeed, KIAS, knots, nautical miles, DME, VOR, ADI, VVI, RADAR Altimeter, QNH, QNE, variation, and it only gets worse.
There are few doltish thinking pilots on 911 issues who say the FDR does not support this or that in their version of 911. These pilots harbor nonsensical ideas about DNA being planted, aircraft parts being planted, and the FDR being altered.
Since this p4t fringe group has such a vast following, I would say less than 0.001 percent of all pilots, I fail to understand how anyone can adopt their idiotic ideas as you seem to be aligned with. The fact you believe the lie that 77 did not impact the Pentagon is a reflection of poor research and means you are calling me (on active duty on 911) and my fellow soldiers liars and murderers for 911. That is what it boils down to.
You must find the terrorist plot why too complicated to understand; let me see the terrorist had two steps so even morons could remember;
1 - Kill pilots
2 - Crash planes into large buildings
Super complicated so I see why you went for the NTSB faking the FDR, the NAVY making sure the DNA was faked (cause they were monitoring the DNA analysis since the terrorist you apologize for killed their PEOPLE!), the FAA faking the RADAR data, the military including me standing down, the military faking the plane parts, all the DoD civilians spreading DNA all over the Pentagon impact area, a bomb that does not cause a fatal conclusion was invented to make an impact just like a 757, 6,000 gallons of jet fuel was somehow beamed into the Pentagon making an exact replica of a fire ball from a 500 mph 757 impact! What did I miss?
Great, your failure to understand the FDR after what, 10 minutes of google junk, is proof of no 77 impact? How intellectual of you, how perfect.
Too hard?
1 – kill pilots (too hard for terrorist? no)
2 – crash planes into big buildings (much harder than landing on 40-foot wide runway! NOT)
Very complicated?
Two simple steps, but you prefer to call the entire military murderers and I for 911. Good job based on your lack of knowledge on flying, FDR, etc. You prefer some impossible scheme based on the bat crazy raving of fringe pilots who can’t do math.
Please school me again on PA. Sorry, the animation clearly shows the local altimeter setting was used to correct 40 feet to 300 for the animation, and it can be programmed in the software if they want to do that. I know I am a programmer, I am an engineer, I am a trained aircraft accident investigator, I have over 4000 hours in heavy jets, I was trained to fly jets by the USAF, I have worked with NTSB products since 1974, I have used FDR to analyze actually aircraft accidents, I have worked aircraft accidents, and we can clearly see the animation uses a corrected PA to display in the takeoff climb out of 77. I told you the exact position of the change to 2992, which is the PA in the FDR.
The animation is a working copy. What is you point again, and I am waiting for the class on PA.
Im confused. Why doesn't the NTSB disclose such a blatant error on their part? The NTSB states in the same letter that they want everything as accurate as possible when distributing information through the FOIA. They disclose an error in the clock annotation, but they make no mention of a "failure to account for magnetic deviation". The NTSB has set precedent in correcting their errors on such an issue. Google American 1420 in Little Rock. The NTSB corrected just a small 3 deg error in their animation. Why havent they corrected it in the American 77 animation when they disclose other errors such as the clock? Has he NTSB become incompetent? Is there really an error? One would think the NTSB would disclose such a blatant error since they disclose other errors. Does anyone here know more than the NTSB?
Also, Scott, the reason the csv and animation don't match with respect to the climb is due to pressure altitude vs. true altitude. However, it is interesting to note that they do match on the descent through 18,000 all the way to end of animation. Why did the NTSB remove the atimeter setting data on the descent in the animation? To make the aircraft appear lower than true altitude? If this data was not omitted, the animation altimeter would read almost 300 feet higher, as it does at departure at IAD.
Interesting....
There was a poster here Turbofan, whose real name was Tino Desideri. God that guy was stupid. Just really really dumb. Seriously. He liked to share what he learned at Google U. He liked to badmouth the JREF, like you. He was Canadian, like you. Man, he said the dumbest stuff. Just look at nicepant's sig. He didn't have the slightest clue in the subject matter he was discussing. He "debated" JREF poster Caustic Logic via telephone and couldn't Google fast enough so he had no idea what to say. He really embarrassed himself. He was a car mechanic trying to pass himself off as some kind of expert on device physics. Man, that guy was dumb.
Last edited:
Ok since no people were involved placing the imagery or in any way manipulating the animation, you are basically saying here the you know the following to be true : the animation software places ground floor imagery of start and finishing points in the flight automatically, rotating them with respect to magnetic north; accounts for magentic variation when placing these floor maps, and accounts for lateral position error(IRS entry error) when no such correction can possibly be coming from the DFDAU via the aircrafts navigation system. On this last point, re-read what beachnut was talking about with respect the start point in the CSV vs. the animation, there is about 2,000' of difference in the aircrafts initial position.
..and you know these things without knowing what software the NTSB used, let alone which version they used. Humm.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
A rational explanation is that no one had brought the error to their attention by the time the FOIA response was made.
But why are you asking me? I place no importance on this error. Since it is so important to you, surely you've asked the NTSB these questions, right?
What did they say?
Wait, I thought these animations were infallable?
Doesn't the final FDR reading show the aircraft around 200' MSL. Are you saying the aircraft actually was closer to 500' MSL? Yeahhh I could see how hundreds of people would confuse that with an impact.
Last edited:
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Didn't the NTSB get the big red "Easy" buttons we sent from NWO HQ in 2000?
jtribby, did the NTSB explain the cause of that 3-degree animation error? Also, a link would be helpful since you're familiar with the issue.
Edit: ah, I see that the animation is on the NTSB website. That's probably because it was used by investigators to visualize the event, to help determine what wen't wrong. In the case of the 9/11 planes, we know what went wrong: terrorists deliberately crashed them. There were no airworthiness or pilot errors to figure out, and no NTSB aircraft accident reports to complete.
Last edited:
Pilots For 9/11 Truth called the NTSB and emailed them regarding such a discrepency, its listed in their forum. They spoke to the guy who actually signed off on the reports, Jim Ritter, as well as the NTSB Spokeperson Ted Lopatkiewicz on 10/26/06.
The letter you reference is dated March 22, 2007. If the NTSB couldn't catch their own error since 2002 (dates of the original csv file), they were notified of such discrepencies almost 6 months prior to the letter you reference. The NTSB has never made any mention of a "failure to account for magnetic deviation" and they are aware of such a discrepency in their "working copy" which they state they want everything to be as accurate as possible.
The only people I have seen make the claim of a magetic deivation are people here. The NTSB makes no such claim while admitting to other errors. And as show above, they were aware of the flight path discrepencies.
Yes, they did. Google American 1420 as I suggested above. Sorry, can't post links yet.
Actually, it's magnetic variation. AFAIK noone here has had a problem with AA77's last compass swing. And it's just a guess, since what is seen in the animation would happen if the ground image was rotated in the wrong direction.
You've likely found this already, but I thought I'd post it anyways..
Animation of Flight 1420 landing [2.2M]
[SIZE=-1][Windows Media Format - requires Media Player][/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]Summary:[/SIZE]
This animation shows the last minute of flight for American Airlines Flight 1420, which crashed while landing at Little Rock, Arkansas on June 1, 1999. The reconstruction uses data retrieved from the Digital Flight Data Recorder and excerpts from the Cockpit Voice Recorder transcript. The animation starts with the airplane at a barometric altitude of 664 feet, an airspeed of 154 knots, a Localizer beam deviation of 0.4 DOTS to the right and 0.6 DOTS above the Glide Slope. The animation shows the airplane touching down to the right of the runway centerline and continuing to track to the right nearly reaching the right edge of the runway before changing direction to left. The remaining landing roll shows the airplane passing through the runway centerline and eventually departing the left edge of the runway just before reaching the end of the runway.
The instruments displayed represent the following (from upper right to lower left): Airspeed, Altitude, Artificial Horizon, Heading with Localizer and Glideslope Deviation, Rudder Position, Right inboard spoiler position, Derived control wheel position, Left outboard spoiler position, Thrust reverser position (unlocked or deployed), and Engine Pressure Ratio.
Correction: The aircraft motion depicted in the animation is accurate. However, heading data values and rudder pointers are corrected in the updated version shown at the Board Meeting October 23, 2001.
Link. Bolding mine.
hmmm. I wonder why it was wrong in the first version......any ideas Scott?
Last edited: