AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[Turbofan]

Good lord, is that the kind of circuit you work with, Turbofan? A 750-Watt electric heater? Running off 50VDC?

Answer 2d depends on which melts first, R2 or the power supply. Why are you using expensive 250W power transistors as heating elements? What do any of these junior high DC idealizations have to do with effects of transients on real microcircuits?

Respectfully,
Myriad

Notice Myriad comes to the resuce of the non techies.

No Myriad, I don't work with such basic circuits. It is simplicity which helps
rookies understand the big picture.

You were right about 'd', and you should have mentioned a,b, and c would
see VCC.

If you were bright enough, you would see the analogy.

Replace that 50 VDC cell with a transient/AC/ or your sock for all I care.

What are the answers now?

 

[WildCat]

What are the answers now?

Same as it's always been - Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. You and the PfffT haven't shown any evidence to the contrary.

 

[funk de fino]

When I look up Funk de Fino on FAA.gov, it comes back with, "some kid on JREF
without a name".

Try that with members of PFT


I'm off to go running now. Running with the Devil...saw them in concert
with Roth a few months ago and Eddie's kid. Not too bad.

So, I'm off before I make the lurkers sick. Have a nice night FdF.

Why would I be on the FAA website and what difference would it make if i was? I was a technician not a pilot. The pilots did not know their arse from their elbow when it came to technical stuff where I worked.

I have supplied my credentials to a truther type punter on this site. If you were not associated with balsamo the retard I would have possibly considered it with you but unfortunately I do not want my IP stolen, details published all over the net and threats made against my person. See my sig for good reason for this.

What does being a pilot have to do with servicing FDR? Just one name off the list who has 1st and 2nd line experience with FDR? Please?

 

[Reheat]

The pilots did not know their arse from their elbow when it came to technical stuff where I worked.

You could have at least supplied a banana with that comment!

 

[funk de fino]

You could have at least supplied a banana with that comment!

These were young brit RAF pilots, not much technical know how at all. Even our eng officers struggled a bit. We had one who tried to explain how the cooling worked for the AIM9L seeker head to a visitor while we all fell about laughing at his made up story (IIRC he thought the bottle went with the missile)

The pilots on here seem far and away more tech savy than the guys i worked with at that time.

 

[DC]

Why would I be on the FAA website and what difference would it make if i was? I was a technician not a pilot. The pilots did not know their arse from their elbow when it came to technical stuff where I worked.

I have supplied my credentials to a truther type punter on this site. If you were not associated with balsamo the retard I would have possibly considered it with you but unfortunately I do not want my IP stolen, details published all over the net and threats made against my person. See my sig for good reason for this.

What does being a pilot have to do with servicing FDR? Just one name off the list who has 1st and 2nd line experience with FDR? Please?

Punter- a term used to describe an individual who is deemed almost completely useless by his or her peers.

Are you talking about me?????

 

[funk de fino]

Punter- a term used to describe an individual who is deemed almost completely useless by his or her peers.

Are you talking about me?????

That is not what punter means DC. I was not being insulting. It is a UK term we use to describe a normal pearson. The Man on the street, the average bloke etc.

a few other proper definitions here

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/punter

 

[Dog Town]

Punter- a term used to describe an individual who is deemed almost completely useless by his or her peers.

Are you talking about me?????

Funk ,as well as others, might not, but I sure would! Call a spade, and all...

 

[DC]

That is not what punter means DC. I was not being insulting. It is a UK term we use to describe a normal pearson. The Man on the street, the average bloke etc.

a few other proper definitions here

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/punter

ah ok

 

[DC]

Funk ,as well as others, might not, but I sure would! Call a spade, and all...

Who are you?

 

[Reheat]

These were young brit RAF pilots, not much technical know how at all. Even our eng officers struggled a bit. We had one who tried to explain how the cooling worked for the AIM9L seeker head to a visitor while we all fell about laughing at his made up story (IIRC he thought the bottle went with the missile)

The pilots on here seem far and away more tech savy than the guys i worked with at that time.

I'm obviously just teasing you. You are substantially correct. Pilot qualifications in no way automatically indicates a level of understanding of the technical issues of anything.

Beachnut has a very high level of knowledge of FDR's because he is also an EE, not because he is a pilot.

You are correct in stating that NO ONE at pffft has evidence of more than a working knowledge of FDR's similar to what I have. Jeff Latas is the only one who comes even close. He claims to have been an Accident Board President, but we don't know of what type of aircraft or if they even had an FDR. Even so, Board Presidents are not the experts anyway, they are the Administrators with other members who are experts.

Turbofan has presented no evidence of any FDR experts at pffft because there are NONE. As has been stated over and over again, they are a "gaggle of wankers" bent on a perverse, fraudulent objective and that's all.

 

[Turbofan]

Yup, and you guys can't decode a raw file. Your experts are above us.

Still looking for that frame layout?

Need to borrow any of our diagrams, or raw decode again?

 

[Reheat]

Yup, and you guys can't decode a raw file. Your experts are above us.

Still looking for that frame layout?

Need to borrow any of our diagrams, or raw decode again?

Even after all this time it has never occurred to you that no one here gives a hoot?

I can not recall another twoofer who has appeared here who surpasses your level of obtuseness. You are in a special category with no contenders.

Let's hear it for other nominations......

 

[funk de fino]

Yup, and you guys can't decode a raw file. Your experts are above us.

Still looking for that frame layout?

Need to borrow any of our diagrams, or raw decode again?

keep on running.........

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Yup, and you guys can't decode a raw file. Your experts are above us.

Still looking for that frame layout?

Need to borrow any of our diagrams, or raw decode again?

Why do you think anyone here has even bothered to try or cared? Anyone on the forum who has attempted to decode the RAW file raise their hand.

No one?

The more important point here is having the expertise to know and understand how to interpret the FDR data. Something the non-experts at PFT have proven they are incapable of.

Still trying to explain that crashed plane in the Pentagon? Need a little help explaining that one there? I thought so.

 

[twinstead]

You mean all those plane parts and dead passengers the first responders found, Jonnyclueless? I'm not a technical person so I can't comment on the FDR, but I as well wonder how that pesky physical evidence at the site fits into PFT's calculations.

 

[beachnut]

Yup, and you guys can't decode a raw file. Your experts are above us.

You can't decode the raw data, and p4t did not decode it properly there are thousands of errors in layout. They even messed up the time. These are not big deals but in your pathetic world of quote mining, cherry picking; p4t decode has thousands of errors repeated over time and again.

You can't produce a frame layout, I doubt you can describe a frame.

With 11.2 G, 10.14 G, and 34 G math fiasco; proving p4t can not produce practical math solutions; no wonder the p4t decode contains errors in the thousands.

But the errors are not important, what is important p4t would harp on the errors and use it in their video, the terrorist loyalist Balsamo would say the government loyalist can't get anything right; as Balsamo posts a video of woo G hockey stick pull out maneuvers at 10 to 34 Gs. I can get 30 to 90 Gs, Balsamo does not understand his own first time discovered math methods. Got math? Got a practical solution?

Show us the frame layout and please decoded the fourth flight back for 77 FDR, since p4t have all 25 hours of flight.

 

[R.Mackey]

Agreed. This focus on decoding is completely pointless.

If we are to draw some sweeping conclusions from the data, we need to have confidence in those data. Decodes coming from the NTSB, Boeing, and especially Honeywell / Loral / Fairchild should be treated as credible at worst, definitive unless shown to be unreliable.

Anything we find on our own must be verified by these entities. The only value to doing it ourselves is to provide independent confirmation, or to help us understand how it works. Otherwise, if we come up with some totally new theory, the simplest explanation will be that we did the decode wrong. There's no way to test this without going to the experts.

So far, the only "revelation" from independent decoding that I'm aware of is that the initial NTSB report, considering only validated parameters, did not cover all of the useful data -- viz. there is some additional data that has to be extracted more carefully due to storage errors, corruption, or just poor configuration management. This is hardly unusual.

 

[Turbofan]

Why do you think anyone here has even bothered to try or cared?

I don't think, but I know nobody here can.

Your theories are so funny, they don't even make sense.

Let's see, the FDR is designed to handle aircraft crashes and fires. The purpose
of the recorder is to secure precious data concerning the final moments
of the plane's flight and conditions.

Do you think the engineers thought of impacts, transients and fires when
they drew up the circuits? As a matter of fact yes! We're seeing signs
of that on the EE forum! Amazing!

Nobody has posted an example of a SSFDR losing data after impact.

Nobody has provided an article explaning how single bit re-writes are
possible by transients.

Nobody has been able to explain the EEPROM diagram I posted either.

So, keep making excuses and assumptions.

 

[funk de fino]

I don't think, but I know nobody here can.

Your theories are so funny, they don't even make sense.

Let's see, the FDR is designed to handle aircraft crashes and fires. The purpose
of the recorder is to secure precious data concerning the final moments
of the plane's flight and conditions.

Do you think the engineers thought of impacts, transients and fires when
they drew up the circuits? As a matter of fact yes! We're seeing signs
of that on the EE forum! Amazing!

Nobody has posted an example of a SSFDR losing data after impact.

Nobody has provided an article explaning how single bit re-writes are
possible by transients.

Nobody has been able to explain the EEPROM diagram I posted either.

So, keep making excuses and assumptions.

"The remaining parameters either were not recorded properly or were not confirmed to have been recorded properly, and are not included in this report"