9/11 acars

[RossFW]

I'm sure it's here somewhere, but can someone steer me to the debunk of this rubbish-

ACARS CONFIRMED - 9/11 AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE LONG AFTER CRASH
UNITED 175 IN THE VICINITY OF HARRISBURG AND PITTSBURGH, PA





(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) is a device used to send messages to and from an aircraft. Very similar to text messages and email we use today, Air Traffic Control, the airline itself, and other airplanes can communicate with each other via this "texting" system. ACARS was developed in 1978 and is still used today. Similar to cell phone networks, the ACARS network has remote ground stations installed around the world to route messages from ATC, the airline, etc, to the aircraft depending on it's location and vice versa. ACARS Messages have been provided through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) which demonstrate that the aircraft received messages through ground stations located in Harrisburg, PA, and then later routed through a ground station in Pittsburgh, 20 minutes after the aircraft allegedly impacted the South Tower in New York. How can messages be routed through such remote locations if the aircraft was in NY, not to mention how can messages be routed to an aircraft which allegedly crashed 20 minutes earlier? Pilots For 9/11 Truth have briefly touched on this subject in 9/11: Intercepted through the excellent research of "Woody Box", who initially discovered such alarming information in the released FOIA documents(1). We now have further information which confirms the aircraft was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred. read more...

 

[Oystein]

It's been discussed here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=177005&highlight=ACARS

I am currently reading that thread, have progressed to post 52 (checking links is time consuming). Pay attention to Femr2, apathoid and CtColumbo and ztry to ignore the bickering by beachnut and others.


ETA: That thread never came to a definite conclusion, but this seems to be the gist:

• The ACARS messages involving UA175 were messages to the plane, not from the plane. Obviously, it is possible to send a message to a receiver that is already destroyed.
• ACARS messages get transmitted via VHF radio antennae on the ground near the plane - for planes at cruising altitude, "near" can be up to 200 miles away. Sender must include the ground station in the message. It seems that the ground station is usually determined from flight plans, not from live information about the plane's actual location. It seems Harrisburg (and 20 minutes later: Pittsburgh) was near the expected location of UA175 according to flight plan, had it not been hijacked, re-routed, and later crashed. If senders were not informed, or not sure, about the hijack, then sending via flight plan location was a reasonable thing to do. Message content assumed (or hoped) pilots were still in control.
• An open issue is whether or not the message would have been recorded (printed out) without some technical acknowledgment from the plane's ACARS system that it has been received. Femr2 thinks that ACARS protocols (always?) include such automatic acknowledgements, apathoid and CptColumbo doubt it. Even if an ACK would have been the rule, it is not clear if an ACK was received or not. Furthermore, it is nor clear if the sent message would not have been recorded if an ACK was exected but not received

In short, having records of messages being send to (or via) Ground Radio in Pennsylvania is no proof of the plane actually being in Pennsylvania at that time, unless it can be proven that the ACARS ground system received an acknowledgment from the plane that it had received the message.

 

[beachnut]

I'm sure it's here somewhere, but can someone steer me to the debunk of this rubbish-

...

information which confirms the aircraft was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred.

What an idiotic claim. Is equal to calling out your mom's name, yell "mom" in your backyard in California, when she is really in Georgia, then claim she is in California. It is that simple. If someone argues/supports the ACARS point, they are nuts, or a liar. RADAR alone proves where all the planes on 911 were, ACARS proves there are nuts who prefer to celebrate ignorance over the truth.

 

[Oystein]

...

What an idiotic claim. Is equal to calling out your mom's name, yell "mom" in your backyard in California, when she is really in Georgia, then claim she is in California. It is that simple. If someone argues/supports the ACARS point, they are nuts, or a liar. RADAR alone proves where all the planes on 911 were, ACARS proves there are nuts who prefer to celebrate ignorance over the truth.

I am 100% sure that this "information" will NOT help Ross in any argument with anyone.

 

[beachnut]

I am 100% sure that this "information" will NOT help Ross in any argument with anyone.

I said RADAR proves where all the flights on 911 were. RADAR debunks the insane ACARS claim. It really is that simple. When we investigated aircraft accidents, we used RADAR to prove where the plane was, not ACARS, not messages.

...

... RADAR alone proves where all the planes on 911 were, ACARS proves there are nuts who prefer to celebrate ignorance over the truth.

My analogy was good too, I know ACARS. But all we need is RADAR to shoot down the many lies in the statement by p4t.

Is the information, RADAR proves the statement is false, wrong? No. It is a fact, it is the real evidence of where the planes were.

There is nothing wrong with learning about ACARS, but it is not needed to debunk the lie in question.

 

[Mudcat]

*snip bickering*

Relax beachnut, no one is making any claims to the contrary. In this thread. At least yet. Give it time, I'm sure one of the resident truthers will come along and try to wow us with long debunked crap.

 

[vtbub]

It's been discussed here:

*snip*
[*]An open issue is whether or not the message would have been recorded (printed out) without some technical acknowledgment from the plane's ACARS system that it has been received. Femr2 thinks that ACARS protocols (always?) include such automatic acknowledgements, apathoid and CptColumbo doubt it. Even if an ACK would have been the rule, it is not clear if an ACK was received or not. Furthermore, it is nor clear if the sent message would not have been recorded if an ACK was exected but not received.

ACARS goes over the same range of frequencies that all commercial aircraft use. They aren't encrypted and can be decoded by software in home computers. It sounds like a quick data burst. I've actually decoded a few via radios in the web. Dunno about the ACK thing, but anyone with a scanner and a soundcard can read ACARS.

 

[Oystein]

I said RADAR proves where all the flights on 911 were. RADAR debunks the insane ACARS claim. It really is that simple. When we investigated aircraft accidents, we used RADAR to prove where the plane was, not ACARS, not messages.



My analogy was good too, I know ACARS. But all we need is RADAR to shoot down the many lies in the statement by p4t.

Is the information, RADAR proves the statement is false, wrong? No. It is a fact, it is the real evidence of where the planes were.

There is nothing wrong with learning about ACARS, but it is not needed to debunk the lie in question.

You know ACARS. That doesn't help RossFW to argue against anybody.

No, the information is not wrong, but RossFW has to take it by faith alone. You're not helping him very much. Would be better to reference a source of information - an old thread here, or whatever has radar tracks etc.
See, Woody Box does not deny that a plane crashed into the south tower - the one seen on radar that you are talking about. Woody Box speculates that there is a second plane that UA tried to talk to. Do we have all radar tracks of all planes that flew over PA in that time frame to rule out a "second" UA175? Or would it not be easier to explain what ACARS does, and what it doesn't, to show that ACARS message to plane is no proof that plane was there?

 

[Oystein]

ACARS goes over the same range of frequencies that all commercial aircraft use. They aren't encrypted and can be decoded by software in home computers. It sounds like a quick data burst. I've actually decoded a few via radios in the web. Dunno about the ACK thing, but anyone with a scanner and a soundcard can read ACARS.

Yes I know, and any message back that acknowledged receipt would be in the same format, wouldn't it? I read about software that decodes ACARS messages, but it seemed it is most conveniently fed by internet sources - which give you what message servers transmit. With a radio scanner, do you pick up directly what planes broadcast? If so, then ten minutes worth of scanning ACARS traffic between a ground station an planes would reveal if planes send back acknowledgement messages.

 

[vtbub]

Yes I know, and any message back that acknowledged receipt would be in the same format, wouldn't it? I read about software that decodes ACARS messages, but it seemed it is most conveniently fed by internet sources - which give you what message servers transmit. With a radio scanner, do you pick up directly what planes broadcast? If so, then ten minutes worth of scanning ACARS traffic between a ground station an planes would reveal if planes send back acknowledgement messages.

The stuff I've done was radio over the internet based. Someone fed their scanner on the web and another program decipherd the data bursts. You would hear what the planes send back as it's the same channel used.

 

[beachnut]

You know ACARS. That doesn't help RossFW to argue against anybody.

No, the information is not wrong, but RossFW has to take it by faith alone. You're not helping him very much. Would be better to reference a source of information - an old thread here, or whatever has radar tracks etc.
...?

RADAR is not faith, and for 911 issues the RADAR data is common knowledge for anyone who can google , radar ntsb flight 175. Saying RADAR proves the claim wrong is not faith, it is repeating a known fact from a rational 911 investigation. If you want to check the work done by the NTSB, you can get the raw RADAR data, unlike the silly evidence free claims made by morons selling DVDs to the gullible.


The claim boils down to, because they have a ACARS to flight 175, flight 175 can't be in NYC. And it is worse, because they have one 20 minutes after 175 impacted the WTC. An idiotic claim of face value.

ACARS CONFIRMED - 9/11 AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE LONG AFTER CRASH
UNITED 175 IN THE VICINITY OF HARRISBURG AND PITTSBURGH, PA

(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) is a device (a system) used to send messages to and from an aircraft. Very similar to text messages and email we use today, Air Traffic Control, the airline itself, and other airplanes can communicate with each other via this "texting" system. ACARS was developed in 1978 and is still used today. Similar to cell phone networks, the ACARS network has remote ground stations installed around the world to route messages from ATC, the airline, etc, to the aircraft depending on it's location and vice versa. ACARS Messages have been provided through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) which demonstrate that the aircraft received messages (this is exactly like claiming my mom received yelling mom out the back-door, 2400 miles away) through ground stations located in Harrisburg, PA, (A BIG lie, that that the aircraft received the message, super dumbed down when you know 175 is gone) and then later routed through a ground station in Pittsburgh, 20 minutes after the aircraft allegedly impacted the South Tower in New York. How can messages be routed through such remote locations if the aircraft was in NY, not to mention how can messages be routed to an aircraft which allegedly crashed 20 minutes earlier? Pilots For 9/11 Truth have briefly touched on this subject in 9/11: Intercepted through the excellent research of "Woody Box", who initially discovered such alarming information in the released FOIA documents(1). We now have further information which confirms the aircraft was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred. read more...

Clearly they claim 175 was not in NYC. An idiotic lie used by Balsamo to sell DVDs to gullible people.

The claim is 175 was not in NYC. RADAR debunks the claim. No need to go learn ACARS which is geeky as I, as I watch TV recorded and edit video on my quad tuner VTR new quiet cool, fast, hand built computer.

The RADAR data proves 175 took-off and crashed into the WTC.

The ACARS delusional claim is that 175 was over Pittsburgh, not in NYC. RADAR data shows that is false. This is not faith, it is fact. One of the first things we get when we investigate aircraft mishaps, RADAR data.

The first google search result for, radar ntsb flight 175, -
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc03.pdf
Cure for faith in this case is google the correct key words.

Review for what Balsamo said, and remember, according to Balsamo I have had a stroke (big lie so far).

ACARS CONFIRMED - 9/11 AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE LONG AFTER CRASH
UNITED 175 IN THE VICINITY OF HARRISBURG AND PITTSBURGH, PA

(PilotsFor911Truth.org) -... We now have further information which confirms the aircraft was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred. read more...

How many lies do we have?
Aircraft airborne long after crash.
Further information which confirms the aircraft was not in ... NYC.
Further information implies many more lies they can't define... or what?

As a trained, experienced aircraft accident investigator, I claim RADAR debunks this idiotic lie. Will RADAR debunk the lie for the person who plagiarized the lie, who defends the lie out of ignorance, who is too gullible to google radar NTSB flight 175? ???
The best part, it does not take a pilot or an engineers to figure out Balsamo is spreading lies. Learning about ACARS is not needed, but JREF is about education, knowing more is good, learning about ACARS is good. Knowing you don't need to know anything about ACARS to debunk the crazy claim, is cool.

When you look at the messages, they are routed to where 175 should be if it was not taken. In addition, for over 20 minutes 175 possible line of sight distance was 200 to 250 nm. The sad part is Balsamo is still selling lies and spitting on the dead.

The reason this is "new", Balsamo needs money for crowns, and Christmas. It is funny he is SPAMMING old lies as being new.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21754
What a pathetic liar.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONFIRMED-911-AIRCRAFT-AIRBORNE-LONG-AFTER-CRASH.html

MDT is only 129.44 nm from WTC. No wonder the plane could automatically receive the message, the crew was dead, not to be confused with brain-dead but breathing like Balsamo. At 8:59, Flt 175 was high enough to receive transmissions from MDT. Balsamo never flew heavy jets left seat, he sells idiotic lies on DVD. Balsamo does not do RADAR. RADAR debunks Balsamo. Nothing in the Balsamo delusion proves the messages were received by Flt 175. Balsamo made it up, and will use hearsay and lies to support his delusion.

This is a "new" attempt to support the old claim. Balsamo needs money.

SPAMMING the internet... http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/470537-acars-confirmed-9-11-aircraft-airborne-long-after-crash.html

He is pushing it all over, watch out for flying lies, all that Balsamo can pilot now.

 

[Oystein]

Thx for the lnx, beachnut

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Knowing you don't need to know anything about ACARS to debunk the crazy claim, is cool.

I would like to know if and how ACARS transmissions are acknowledged by the aircraft supposted to receive them......Balsammos claim of 200 mile range seems dubious, as googling ACARS range shows that amateurs can easily track at least 200 mile with cheap ground station setup which is unlikely to be as good as the equipment on the aircraft or the official ground stations

The fact that the message was repeated seems to indicate that there is no automatic acknowledgement or otherwise why bother repeating what is already acknowledged?

 

[George 152]

I would like to know if and how ACARS transmissions are acknowledged by the aircraft supposted to receive them......Balsammos claim of 200 mile range seems dubious, as googling ACARS range shows that amateurs can easily track at least 200 mile with cheap ground station setup which is unlikely to be as good as the equipment on the aircraft or the official ground stations

The fact that the message was repeated seems to indicate that there is no automatic acknowledgement or otherwise why bother repeating what is already acknowledged?

It's a line of sight thing
When Cap'n Bob makes a claim you can guarantee he's wrong

 

[Reheat]

I would like to know if and how ACARS transmissions are acknowledged by the aircraft supposted to receive them

While I do not know the specific answer to your question there has been a lengthy discussion at ATS regarding the issue with both Ranke and Ballsucker attempting to muddy the waters with their typical innuendo and false bravado along with a mixture of techno babble thrown in.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread781617/pg1

The crew may manually specifically confirm receipt if requested to do so. It does appear that the time stamp at the end of the msg upon which Ballsucker is basing part of his fraud is simply a time stamp of when the msg finished printing AT THE DISPATCH OFFICE which sent it, not an acknowledgement from the aircraft. Ballsucker is now attempting to use the distance issue with speculation and incredulity along with the opinion and pfffft conclusions based on testimony from a Dispatcher from United Airlines to the 911 Commission.

The definitive answer is not likely to be revealed except with proprietary information from AIRINC, which is not available online.

In the meantime, the various radars which tracked both UA 175 and UA 93 and the physical evidence at both crash sites are the best refutation at this point....

 

[beachnut]

Balsamo is spreading insane delusions based on his standard 11.2g failed moron logic. One of the only pilots in the world who claims he can't fly as well as terrorist pilots, he can't hit the WTC or the giant Pentagon in a modern jet. What a tool, a bone head who can't earn a Pulitzer with claims, if true, would be the biggest story in history. But, Balsamo is making up delusions using hearsay, and moronic logic to fool idiots who can't figure out 911. Indicative of Balsamo's moron math which gave us 11.2g of ignorance, his ACARS delusion is dumber.


RADAR is the fact, not some message system which did not confirm receipt except in Balsamo's empty head. Balsamo must be all the posters at p4t, you can't find that many idiots, that many yes men who are morons.

RADAR data is available, multiple RADAR sites tracking each aircraft. Beats ACARS.

The message system will work line of sight and further, these messages are very short in time. Nothing would stop messages being received while airborne, even 100 to over 200 miles away, depending on altitude and signal strength.

After each plane crashed, Balsamo's claim the planes were still airborne becomes insanity. Only morons would ignore RADAR and believe Balsamo. Bet the morons posting at p4t are socks of Balsamo, there can't be that many idiots.

Saying Flight 93 was still airborne after everyone was buried in the ground in PA, is insanity. The claim is expected Balsamo behavior for a failed pilot who can't do math and physics, a pilot who never flew heavy jets left seat, and never will. Most the posters on the internet must be socks of Balsamo, no one can be that stupid, unable to think for themselves. RADAR is the fact, DNA is proof. Once again we have lies from Balsamo, a failed pilot, who fails to be more than a fraud spreading insane claims based on ignorance.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc03.pdf
After you have RADAR data, you can see Balsamo is a moron, an insane failed pilot who can't do math. If you can't see that, you are a bigger moron than Balsamo, it is amazing you can read and type.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc03.pdf

 

[sheeplesnshills]

The crew may manually specifically confirm receipt if requested to do so. It does appear that the time stamp at the end of the msg upon which Ballsucker is basing part of his fraud is simply a time stamp of when the msg finished printing AT THE DISPATCH OFFICE which sent it, not an acknowledgement from the aircraft.

I suspected it was something like that. thanks.

 

[beachnut]

I would like to know if and how ACARS transmissions are acknowledged by the aircraft supposted to receive them......Balsammos claim of 200 mile range seems dubious, as googling ACARS range shows that amateurs can easily track at least 200 mile with cheap ground station setup which is unlikely to be as good as the equipment on the aircraft or the official ground stations

The fact that the message was repeated seems to indicate that there is no automatic acknowledgement or otherwise why bother repeating what is already acknowledged?

(if the amateurs use HF (2-30MHz), the range can be worldwide, okay, 2,000 to 6,000 miles, most likely VHF ACARS on 911, line of sight plus a little)

The VHF radio easily goes to the horizon, line of sight. In the military we used UHF and later we also used VHF. The UHF was was line of sight, and the VHF did better than line of sight. If you can see the station, you can transmit to it plus a little for VHF. 200 miles is easy, and for some of the flights they could receive from over 220 miles or further while at altitude. This is math, Balsamo will not be able to handle the math parts.

The dispatcher has no idea if the crew receives messages unless the crew confirms the message. Balsamo is in standard insane ignorance mode, stringing hearsay and lies together to form his new/old/insane/moronic smoking gun. His dumb as dirt p4t cult members are going nuts about this insane claim.

Balsamo posts an insane claim, and his Followers (big F for failure), respond mindlessly to fraud and insanity.
"Great work Rob. Let me be the first to congratulate you on it."
"Watch the GLs scrambling with this one!"
"TRUTH can never be curbed nor eradicated."
"Excellent work Rob, and many thanks for your perseverance and determination"
"Now thats some dark clouds coming up on the horizon!! "
"I wonder how the duh bunkers are going to spin this one?"
,"why in the hell is this not front page news in every newspaper in America??"
"To me it is still not clear how you can know that skyjackers were on board."
"If UA 93 was actually airborne, where did it land and what happened to the passengers?"
"Bottom line I think people are starting to pay attention."
"I stand in awe of all of the real patriots at P4T and CIT."
"Please, never give up this vital work. Our way of life is at stake."
"There is no speculation in the article. Every assertion is backed by official documents." (poor dolt, he falls for Balsamo's lies and repeats them with more lies)
" that old goofhead beachnut is claiming that RADAR debunks the ACARS messages" (RADAR does debunk Balsamo's claim, I am a goofhead, but I am right and this poor cult member is dumber than dirt, a perfect member for p4t lies and insanity. Proud to be in ignorance, and he has no clue his superior intelligence is a fantasy)
How many of these are Balsamo Socks? How many are GL socks? lol

It is funny, a couple of these posters are playing with Balsamo. No one can be that stupid to fall for Balsamo's insane claim.



Balsamo's formula for keeping his cult members in the dark; Pick something technical, proprietary, hard to find information on, generate lies about the subject, have real evidence to support the fraud from government sources, create the false theory (which p4t does not have a theory as Balsamo breaks his own rule) and let the gullible, ignorant, morons who refuse to think for themselves spread the lie on the Internet, brainless drones programed to be simpletons, lapping up the lies and regurgitating them mindlessly, because Balsamo said so.

Pathetic Web sites posts this nonsense as news. The web site administrators are too stupid, too lazy, to select real news, and post lies based on ignorance. People too lazy to check the facts, letting morons post junk on the Internet. If you are bored while on the thrown, take the laptop and google, "ACARS CONFIRMED – 9/11 AIRCRAFT", could be 50 web sites blinding letting Balsamo spread lies.

goofhead beachnut

 

[George 152]

The one good thing about aviation is those who do do and those who don't make it up.
May the cockpit door ever remain a stupidity filter !

 

[wstutt]

Hi,

I have a file which disproves assertions of P4T regarding ACARS messages to UAL93. This is my post on P4T discussing this.

Warren.