AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[Jonnyclueless]

Why do they keep thinking that Mackey said that it stopped recording 6 seconds before the impact? DO these guys even know how to read?

 

[beachnut]

Wrong CL.

If you're basing a decision on my 'laughing' you are in big trouble like Mackey
and he's too bold to own up.

You either believe 1 of his 5 excuses, or the NTSB is 6 seconds off.

Pick one and stick to it!

The NTSB never did an investigation into Flight 77, it was not an accident. The NTSB prepared the FDR for the FBI if needed. The NTSB did an animation which fooled the p4t terrorist apologist experts and they have tried to back in lies and implication of lies; they fooled you. Sorry, but based on the evidence, impact time based on the FDR is 13:37:50 or more. If you used evidence you could be more knowledgeable.

The FBI is lead, you may of missed it. Time is relative, you may of missed that.

The fact is the RADAR data is about 10 to 20 times more accurate than the INS system and DME in Flight 77. If you fail to position Flight 77 with the most accurate data and the correct times, you have failed!

You have failed. You can't handle reality as Mackey hands it out and apply it with rational thought to gain knowledge. If you would listen to Mackey, he is giving you insight you could use to illumination your fall into the ignorance of p4t implications of lies.

If the data stored in the FDR is correct there is over 6 seconds not in the FDR. The reason for the data stopping could be as simples as turning off the electric on the overhead panel, or pulling circuit breakers, or any number of possible causes. The FDR was damaged, it looks like the chip did fine. There are so many reasons and cause data can be missing. You have not even tried to help on this issue, you deny it and are proven wrong by history! The history of FDR missing data is long. The fact we have a legacy system at the limit of it's performance, does no help our cause; the 256 wps storage is the upper limit of this unit I believe. There are possible problem in the system, you refuse to help discover causes for lost data. But history provide numerous examples which include power problems which only in the past several years are being addressed to ensure no lost data due to loss of power! Sad to see you are not really searching for truth, but have chosen to support the terrorist apologist who really sell implications of lies on DVD for 15 bucks.

 

[WildCat]

Why do they keep thinking that Mackey said that it stopped recording 6 seconds before the impact? DO these guys even know how to read?

Poor reading comprehension is a requirement for truthers apparently.

 

[chillzero]

I've moved some off topic posts to a new thread. Turbofan can post his links there. Please keep this thread on topic.

Link: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124431

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

 

[funk de fino]

I would be more civil if he owned up to his error. Sorry you don't understand
EEPROM;s either.

His story doesn't make sense, but you can't see it.

There is no misunderstanding his replies.

1. The FDR should have recorded up until impact according to Mackey.

2. According to Mackey, there are six seconds of data missing.

3. You can't erase single cells, or just seconds of data by electrical transients,
during write time, or after.

4. The CPM was found intact. No damage due to impact and the data
was retrieved just fine.
5. After impact, Mackey calculates 200 msecs. 200 msecs of corrupt
write time does not account for 5.8 seconds of missing data!

6. The times stamps are no way in hell out of sync by six seconds!

No matter how you want to read it, neither of his excuses work.

Except that bolded part is untrue. There are parameters missing and not verified as having been recorded. They are listed in the FDR report.

Why is that? Why is there some missing parameters in the NTSB report? Were they not readable? Were they not recorded?

All the evidence points to 2-6 secs of missing data. Instead of getting made a fool of here you would be better to ask the NTSB why.

Got a FDR name yet for me? I am getting fed up asking? I cannot yet see any on your list with my experience.

 

[bje]

Don't you love how Turbofan keeps referring to the "impact?"

 

[Reheat]

Got a FDR name yet for me?

I think you're best bet is to start taking odds on a bet as to whether or not he even shows up here again. He can not answer your question, so you might stand to make some money on speculation about his appearance again. Although dismal the latter is better odds than an answer to your question....

 

[Turbofan]

Yup, I stayed home on a Saturday night and registered to all of the EE forums
to please WC!

I didn't say anything, MACKEY said it and it's quoted. Now he's trying to
squirm out.

He's stating that transients can wipe out single gates, without burning out
the prior buffer circuitry, or blowing the chip entirely.

He's stating that the transients (which don't burn up individual gates) can
alter bit states of adjacent words ( < wow for that one!).

Mackey is stating that six seconds of data is 'missing' even though power was
completely lost after 200 msecs after impact.

If all that BS isn't enough, he lies about damage to the CPM chip upon which
data was retrieved.

Pick your poison people. In order for any of the lies above to make sense,
the NTSB impact time MUST ALSO be incorrect by six seconds and DME had
to record out of tolerance.

Believe all this and more on 9/11!

 

[X]

Yup, I stayed home on a Saturday night and registered to all of the EE forums
to please WC!

I didn't say anything, MACKEY said it and it's quoted. Now he's trying to
squirm out.

He's stating that transients can wipe out single gates, without burning out
the prior buffer circuitry, or blowing the chip entirely.

He's stating that the transients (which don't burn up individual gates) can
alter bit states of adjacent words ( < wow for that one!).

Mackey is stating that six seconds of data is 'missing' even though power was
completely lost after 200 msecs after impact.

If all that BS isn't enough, he lies about damage to the CPM chip upon which
data was retrieved.

Pick your poison people. In order for any of the lies above to make sense,
the NTSB impact time MUST ALSO be incorrect by six seconds and DME had
to record out of tolerance.

Believe all this and more on 9/11!

1) I hope you provided quotes of what Ryan Mackey actually said, nd lks for context.

2) Links, please.

 

[Turbofan]

Except that bolded part is untrue. There are parameters missing and not verified as having been recorded. They are listed in the FDR report.

Why is that? Why is there some missing parameters in the NTSB report? Were they not readable? Were they not recorded?

All the evidence points to 2-6 secs of missing data. Instead of getting made a fool of here you would be better to ask the NTSB why.

Got a FDR name yet for me? I am getting fed up asking? I cannot yet see any on your list with my experience.

You mean like RAD ALT? Something that the NTSB left out, but PFT decoded?
It works just fine.

You might also want to read this document from the NTSB:

http://www.ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf

"An examination of the recovered data indicated that the recorder operated normally"

Mackey when are you going to debate PFT accident investigators? Are you
scared to leave the comfort of all your buddies that know little to nothing
about data/electronics?

When are you going to contact the NTSB to correct the impact time? Gee,
it's not that important...it only means the difference between hit and miss.

Keep in mind the Flight Study and CSV files are not working copies!

 

[Reheat]

Pick your poison people. In order for any of the lies above to make sense, the NTSB impact time MUST ALSO be incorrect by six seconds and DME had to record out of tolerance.

Believe all this and more on 9/11!

What's the big deal on a six second impact time error. After all it's only important to you and those of similar delusion.s It makes absolutely no difference in the conclusions

You and your ilk have decided that the FDR is the end all to be all regarding the Pentagon attack. You merely look up a goat's ass with one eyeball disregarding everything else.

I will remind you again that what you have is not a traditional NTSB product. It was not an Accident Investigation, it was a Flight Path Study for the FBI done in a relatively short period of time. The fact that you and you're ilk pretend differently is your problem.

The fact that you have convinced no one here of your position should be painfully obvious by now. You have typed a lot of words for naught and wasted hours of you life for nothing. In fact, if you have any pride left you should go into hiding....

 

[bje]

Mackey is stating that six seconds of data is 'missing' even though power was completely lost after 200 msecs after impact.

(emphasis mine)

Turbofan,

You've admitted in several posts in this thread alone that AA77 impacted the Pentagon, forgetting in your obsession that you have claimed all along that it didn't.

It's really time to quit faking it.

 

[Turbofan]

Yes BJE, you're a bright one.

I don't believe AA77 hit the Pentagon. If you were able to keep up with the
technical aspect of this thread, you would understand that we're talking
about Mackey's hypothetical nonsense, and that Mackey stated the
FDAU/FDR retained power up to 200 msec after impact.

Do you get paid to spin my posts?

What's the big deal on a six second impact time error. After all it's only important to you and those of similar delusion.s It makes absolutely no difference in the conclusions
You and your ilk have decided that the FDR is the end all to be all regarding the Pentagon attack. You merely look up a goat's ass with one eyeball disregarding everything else.

Yes, and you keep overlooking our witness accounts and impossible
damage to the Pentagon.

You and your kind would rather believe the fuselage upon entry can leave
an 18 foot diameter hole...but landing gear can punch out a near perfect
round hole upon exit...which is several times larger in diameter than the landing
gear.

I will remind you again that what you have is not a traditional NTSB product. It was not an Accident Investigation, it was a Flight Path Study for the FBI done in a relatively short period of time. The fact that you and you're ilk pretend differently is your problem.

So now you admit the 'investigation' was a scam and the info doesn't make
sense. You stand behind the FBI after admitting this?

Don't you think it's time for a real investigation?

The fact that you have convinced no one here of your position should be painfully obvious by now. You have typed a lot of words for naught and wasted hours of you life for nothing. In fact, if you have any pride left you should go into hiding....

I don't waste hours of my life. I'm multi-tasking. I do what I want, so get
used to it. The fact that none of your excuses make any sense to fit your
OGCT is a waste of time itself.

You're back here trying to support Mackey and his errors. Strength in numbers
huh?

I see the beating you're taking on ATS. Maybe it's better that you stay here
with all of your friends.

BTW, the links will be available soon. First, I want to back up my harddrive
before the next lightning storm. I don't want my data to get re-written from transients!

 

[uk_dave]

Yes, and you keep overlooking our witness accounts and impossible
damage to the Pentagon.

You have no expertise in assessing the veracity of what someone may think they witnessed.

You have no expertise in assessing whether or not the building damage was 'impossible'

You're an amatuer.

You and your kind would rather believe the fuselage upon entry can leave
an 18 foot diameter hole...but landing gear can punch out a near perfect
round hole upon exit...which is several times larger in diameter than the landing
gear.

Doesn't it ever worry you that the impact damage was so blindingly obviously faked to a non-expert such as yourself, and yet millions of people all over the world do not see this blindingly obvious evidence of fakery?

Do you never pause and wonder about your own abilities? Your own limitations?

I suspect that you don't.

I advise that you do.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

"Yes, and you keep overlooking our witness accounts and impossible
damage to the Pentagon."

You mean like your witnesses who saw the plane hit the building? Yeah, we keep overlooking that....

And what impossible damage are you referring to?

The whole was not only 18 feet and the landing gear did not punch a perfectly round hole at the other end. You really need to stop reading the crackpot web sites who feed you this silly information.

 

[Turbofan]

You have no expertise in assessing the veracity of what someone may think they witnessed.

You have no expertise in assessing whether or not the building damage was 'impossible'

You're an amatuer.


Doesn't it ever worry you that the impact damage was so blindingly obviously faked to a non-expert such as yourself, and yet millions of people all over the world do not see this blindingly obvious evidence of fakery?

Do you never pause and wonder about your own abilities? Your own limitations?

I suspect that you don't.

I advise that you do.

Hey UK_Dave, you seem to have a big mouth, but not much to back it up.

Tell me something? What is the diameter of the landing gear?

What is the diameter of the exit hole?

What is the diameter of AA77's fuselage?

P.S. JC, my witness accounts don't support light pole damage. Remember,
you have to account for all of the info available. That is what smart people do.

 

[beachnut]

Hey UK_Dave, you seem to have a big mouth, but not much to back it up.

Tell me something? What is the diameter of the landing gear?

What is the diameter of the exit hole?

What is the diameter of AA77's fuselage?

P.S. JC, my witness accounts don't support light pole damage. Remember,
you have to account for all of the info available. That is what smart people do.

Now your lie can't deny the exit hole. Physics? No you choose to lie. Why do you make excuses for the terrorist who take credit and don't lie like you do?

12 feet wide fuselage, the landing gear at 500 mph would make short work of brick wall; my college room could knock a hole that big when he was drunk, we use to replace walls for a hobby after a big weekend of drinking. You pick the easiest things to not understand. Your 1.5 DME failure comes to mind with 64 wps, and 11.2 Gs, now just as bad with a .2 second pull-up of 10.14 Gs. You are not getting better, you are getting worse.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

"
P.S. JC, my witness accounts don't support light pole damage. Remember,
you have to account for all of the info available. That is what smart people do. "

Uh, yes they do. And you are the one not accounting for all the info available. You're the one trying to dismiss the reliable evidence by using the least reliable evidence.

And now you're getting caught in lies that can't be hidden by your completely wrong claims that Mackey has made errors. You can keep stomping your feet all you want and making such claims, but we all know you're completely wrong and you have been shown to be completely wrong. Continue with the dog and pony show.

 

[Evilgiraffe]

I don't believe AA77 hit the Pentagon.

What happened to it then?

 

[beachnut]

Pick your poison people. In order for any of the lies above to make sense,
the NTSB impact time MUST ALSO be incorrect by six seconds and DME had
to record out of tolerance.

Believe all this and more on 9/11!

Data is missing from the FDR, it happens to the same model and other FDRs. It is a fact.

DME is only stored with 0.25 NM resolution, that and the accuracy of 0.23 NM pretty much kills using DME for exact placement of 77. The resolution issue and accuracy leaves a 1600 to 3000 foot uncertainty in DME stored in the FDR. It is backed up by AIM, and the INS accuracy, which is updated with DME. Everything p4t says is false.

Balsamo says the INS crashed due to the extreme maneuver and acceleration. Sorry, the terrorist did NO extreme maneuver and acceleration, Balsamo is a liar terrorist apologist. On takeoff alone the acceleration is greater than later in flight, the INS did not crash on takeoff and Balsamo is wrong, just like his failure to know the feet in a NM, the frequency the RADALT works at, and physics!

Data is missing from the FDR, it happens to the same model and other FDRs. It is a fact.

DME is only stored with 0.25 NM resolution, that and the accuracy of 0.23 NM pretty much kills using DME for exact placement of 77. The resolution issue and accuracy leaves a 1600 to 3000 foot uncertainty in DME stored in the FDR. It is backed up by AIM, and the INS accuracy, which is updated with DME. Everything p4t says is false.

Balsamo says the INS crashed due to the extreme maneuver and acceleration. Sorry, the terrorist did NO extreme maneuver and acceleration, Balsamo is a liar terrorist apologist. On takeoff alone the acceleration is greater than later in flight, the INS did not crash on takeoff and Balsamo is wrong, just like his failure to know the feet in a NM, the frequency the RADALT works at, and physics!

The data is missing from the FDR, it could be as simple as tripping power ot the system or system errors in storage due to pipeline issues on these early models of SSFDRs, now forced to do better with ED-112 specifications, the new regulations. There were issues with SSFDRs early units, why do you think the regulations changed from ED-55 to ED-112.

Too bad you can't compare 77 with 93, they had different black boxes, and different engines.

You lack insight into why there is missing data, you are not trying to learn the truth, you have decided to lie and be a terrorist apologist based on flawed physics and the inability to understand 0.25 NM resolution, and 0.23 NM DME typical accuracy. Please do not repeat the 0.1 NM accuracy for DME test equipment, and ground transmitters, the combined accuracy of ground transmitters with 0.1 NM accuracy and airborne units like Flight 77 DME, is 0.23 NM (find the study super research man), anyone can see the moving plane accuracy in DME is a system accuracy issue, the accuracy of the transmitter and receiver unit have to be used. Your failure to understand real electronics in practical problems exposes your lack of knowledge.

Ignore evidence, you must, to sustain your lie. A lie the p4t terrorist loyalist only imply.

Notes on DME.
DME on Flight 77 stored in the FDR; a true DME of 1.854 (THE REAL POSITION OF 77 in NM from DCA VOR) could be stored as 1.5 DME.
DME storage resolution required by FAA, 1 NN in the FDR.
If you have flown, the DME in many planes is a single counter in miles; you have to interpolate to get 5.8 DME etc. Accuracy…