AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[TjW]

Well, here's a question for anyone who can answer it.
As I understand it, the FDR records on the order of 24 hours of data, simply wrapping around and overwriting the oldest frame.

There must have been some space between the most recent decodable frame and the oldest decodable frame. How much space was there? That should put an upper limit on the amount of data that could have been lost.

 

[jaydeehess]

"live' debates of a technical subject are useless!

It will always come down a "this way" vs. "no, this way" arguement, and you know it. It seems that the PfT believe that simply stating and re-stating their contentions is somehow 'winning' an arguement.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

YEs Jay, the whole live debate argument is avoidance. Pretending that he can't actually argue unless it's live and then pretending that people are running away when in reality the whole live debate excuse is simply Turbo running away and trying to put on a dog and pony show to hide this. Just like the bulk of his argument revolves around pretending that PFT and a salesman are experts, denouncing everyone else as not being experts, and then pretending that these non-experts are the reason he cannot win his argument. It's all cop outs here.

This is the same reason why Turbo and the other cons are PFT can't and WON'T get any real experts to verify their work. This is the reason they won't present a paper in engineering terms. This is why they can't even get the company who made the FDR and who they pretend is part of their panel of supposed experts to back up their findings. It's a fraud from top to bottom, and the whole "live debate" nonsense is just an excuse to try and get out of it.

In a live debate, he can try to get out of people pointing out articles and sources that prove he is wrong as keeps happening here. In a live debate he can rely more on hoping that people will just take his word on things and not keep pointing out that he is wrong. In a live debate he can help prevent information from REAL experts getting in the way. He can then bank on people not being able to consult with experts in areas they may not be experts.

Again, this is how the con game works, and these frauds make their living trying to sell DVDs and swag to people they can con.

 

[jaydeehess]

In a live debate, he can try to get out of people pointing out articles and sources that prove he is wrong as keeps happening here

I would say it is similar to PfT creating a video in which they 'say' that they have drawn lines perpendicular to a curved path and hoping that the viewer will not wonder just how they determined how these line were perpendicular to the tangent to the curve at that point.

 

[uruk]

Your 'puff' article doesn't refer to bit level corruption. Your article does
not state whether the device is EEPROM. The article does not state the
certifications for the device.

If youare refering to this article: http://support.atmel.no/bin/customer?=&action=viewKbEntry&id=4 It states eeprom several times throughout the article.

And it is not just about the EEPROM either. If you read it more closely you'll would have also seem that "dirty voltage" can also affect the CPU or microntroller that is handleing the the whole data aquizition process. The bit level error crap is a red herring. We are talking about whole blocks of data either corrupted, unreadable or plain missing.

Dirty voltage can cause erratic behaiviour from the microcontroller. That can mean that addressing can get screwed up, data corruption in the buffers, data drops and interrupts can go haywire.

Some EEPROMS require interrupts to be disabled for a write process, If the interrrupts are enabled by an erratic CPU during the write process, whole blocks of data can be lost.

 

[Turbofan]

No, I'm not referring to that article (See Mackey's link).

Funny JC, I don't see any sourced documentation, or references to support
any theories made by JREF members.

Like I said, this topic itself is based on assumptions made by Anti. He does
not have any valid information and the very first post claims he rounded up
information from 'public sources"

I gathered up all the publically available flight-data-recorder information,

Guess what? You're not going to find anything in public domain that allows
you to write a thread about "FDR Data Explained".

Everyone here jumps on the bandwagon because you're all buddies.
That's great research.

 

[uruk]

Actually, it looks a lot like Looney Tunes because of the shape of the hole.
vs. landing gear dimensions.

Your explanation of the exit hole is based on assumptions. If you had all
of the info and had an investigation report from the FBI, ASCE or something
to support such claims, it may be considered valid.

Caustic Logic has offered to talk with me live via phone. Why don`t you
take the offer as well? I`ll pay.

Wait what is this about landing gear and the hole in the wall? Wasn't the landing gear up when the plane hit the Pentagon? What would the landing gear have to do with the entry hole? Once the landing gear got loose from the rest of the disintegrating plane it can go just about anywhere bouncing off of columns.

 

[Turbofan]

That's right, the landing gear was up for 'entry', but explain the shape and
size of the exit hole due to landing gear. Dimensions please.

 

[WildCat]

That's right, the landing gear was up for 'entry', but explain the shape and
size of the exit hole due to landing gear. Dimensions please.

This thread is about the FDR. The C-Ring hole thread is here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108972

Stop the desperate attempt to change the subject here because you're doing badly.

 

[Turbofan]

Yup, I'm losing bad...I'm not the one who hasn't returned in weeks with a frame
layout to support a theory (Anti)...I am not the one declining public debate
and willing to put my name on the line (everyone here, except Caustic Logic).

It's ok WC. You're allowed to support your forum friends. It's expected.
Keep on winning that game in your own mind.

 

[DavidJames]

Yup, I'm losing bad...I'm not the one who hasn't returned in weeks with a frame
layout to support a theory (Anti)...I am not the one declining public debate
and willing to put my name on the line (everyone here, except Caustic Logic).

It's ok WC. You're allowed to support your forum friends. It's expected.
Keep on winning that game in your own mind.

How about those links waterboy.

 

[beachnut]

That's right, the landing gear was up for 'entry', but explain the shape and
size of the exit hole due to landing gear. Dimensions please.

The hole in the wall caused by Flight 77 impacting the Pentagon. You are unable to grasp that fact because your fantasy is Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, actually a lie.

The energy of impact was over 1000 pounds of TNT kinetic energy, this is more than enough energy to plow through the wall. There is office material, people parts, and aircraft parts whose mass formed the hole.

What crazy ideas do you have to offer as an alternative already debunked years ago. Take a look at the hole, there are the remains of passengers from Flight 77.

Your illusion of 77 not hitting the Pentagon blinds you to facts and evidence. Balsamo, the terrorist loyalist, would just call us government loyalist, stick us in the government loyalist ghetto, labeled, banned from exposing the truth, so only lies appear in the p4t terrorist apologist purity lie forum.

Try using physics. The landing gear is extremely strong and would help poke the hole made. No there is no bomb, there are no blast effects, just piles of body parts, plane parts, and office material. Why the diversion. AT p4t forum you would never post in this thread again. Looks like government loyalist believe in free speech. What is a GL? Oh, anyone who presents truth to Balsamo, the truth-NAZI at p4t.

Sorry, you always leave out your goal, the purpose of your post and ideas. Aimless posts while you have all that evidence to change the world.

So how many ways can a FDR be missing data?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

No, I'm not referring to that article (See Mackey's link).

Funny JC, I don't see any sourced documentation, or references to support
any theories made by JREF members.

Like I said, this topic itself is based on assumptions made by Anti. He does
not have any valid information and the very first post claims he rounded up
information from 'public sources"



Guess what? You're not going to find anything in public domain that allows
you to write a thread about "FDR Data Explained".

Everyone here jumps on the bandwagon because you're all buddies.
That's great research.

It does not surprise me that you don't see the documentation that gets sourced repeatedly. I think there's a crackpot gene that prevents people from seeing important posts so their defense mechanism allows them to pretend they don't exist.

Speaking of assumptions, you mean like a plane flying over the building in front of 1000s of people despite there being no evidence what so ever. Despite your own witnesses claiming to see the plane hit the building, the plane being in the building, the plane being tracked by RADAR, the phone calls form the plane.

No one here is buddies. We just have something in common. And that's not trying to use the weakest form of evidence, while making huge assumptions that that evidence is infallible despite being known for such issues, to dismiss the more reliable evidence. And on top of that we share that we don't believe in simply making up anything we want to fill the void.

The basis of your whole argument is simply casting doubt on one piece of evidence, ignoring the rest of the evidence, and then just submitting your own beliefs with NO evidence what so ever. You think casting opinionated doubt allows you to avoid having to provide the same evidence that you require of everyone else.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

That's right, the landing gear was up for 'entry', but explain the shape and
size of the exit hole due to landing gear. Dimensions please.

You mean the exist hole which was widened by rescue workers for access?

 

[WildCat]

Don't take the troll bait guys. Point Turbofan to the C-Ring hole thread, he's just trying desperately to change the subject here.

 

[Caustic Logic]

TF and JC, and Beachnut, we're conserving space here, take hole issues to the other thread please! It's not a good point against a plane hit, TF, but it is just ambiguous enough to be a good derailer, so please, no...

Caustic Logic has offered to talk with me live via phone. Why don`t you
take the offer as well? I`ll pay.

I did indeed sort of accidentally agree to this, but i'm all for it. Whether the others do is their own thing. Take this is your possible start point - follow through and we'll all hear how you do, and maybe that will change someone's mind to finally chat with you. Call me a trailblazer then.

 

[jaydeehess]

TF, so far various persons in this thread have found multiple instances of reported corrupted or lost data from EEPROMs due to voltage fluctuations. Only your bald assertion that this cannot happen backs up your contention that it does not occur in the specific EEPROM that the FDR used.

Also posted here are several instances in which data on an FDR indicates a loss of several seconds worth of data at the end of the flight which also would indicate that your premise, of the infallibility of the last frames of data in a crash situation, is incorrect.
Will one find a senario that exactly matches what occured to flight 77? No, not likely since it is very very unusual for an aircraft at cruise speed or greater, with no control or powering problems to impact the ground , much less concrete buildings, while in controlled flight.

It certainly looks like you are back pedaling and avoiding posting links to your electronic forum threads, and it is well noted that as soon as people started calling for those links that you bring up another subject, that of the entry and exit holes sizes and shapes. Which , BTW, I agree with the others that a discussion of that belongs in a thread on that subject. Seems to me that you are quick to point out that this is an FDR thread when someone asks you about where Flight 77 and its passengers went.

 

[uruk]

That's right, the landing gear was up for 'entry', but explain the shape and
size of the exit hole due to landing gear. Dimensions please.

If the landing gear hit the wall broad side it should leave quite a big hole especially if it was spinning or rotating around the short axis. If it hit the wall down the long axis without spining it might leave a hole with a smaller diameter. Either way it's not going to leave a landing gear shaped hole, cookie cutter style.

 

[beachnut]

TF and JC, and Beachnut, we're conserving space here, take hole issues to the other thread please! It's not a good point against a plane hit, TF, but it is just ambiguous enough to be a good derailer, so please, no...



I did indeed sort of accidentally agree to this, but i'm all for it. Whether the others do is their own thing. Take this is your possible start point - follow through and we'll all hear how you do, and maybe that will change someone's mind to finally chat with you. Call me a trailblazer then.

At least you know things you say will be randomly mined to make up lies.

I see it all the time, CIT and p4t take what you say and use it to imply their stupid lies.
You already know this.

 

[uruk]

TF and JC, and Beachnut, we're conserving space here, take hole issues to the other thread please! It's not a good point against a plane hit, TF, but it is just ambiguous enough to be a good derailer, so please, no...

Sorry for adding to the derailing

I did indeed sort of accidentally agree to this, but i'm all for it. Whether the others do is their own thing. Take this is your possible start point - follow through and we'll all hear how you do, and maybe that will change someone's mind to finally chat with you. Call me a trailblazer then.

The danger of doing this phone debate is that TF may use the shotgun tactic of jumping around to several different subjects and not allow you to finnish debating a single subject to it's conclusion. You see him doing here. Get him to agree to debate on one single subject and not side track.

The other is that you'll end up hearing your debate popup on the PfT website or DVD with the recording heavily and creatively edited.

Do not agree to be recorded or ask for a percentage of the DVD sales.