AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[beachnut]

Google "NTSB Flight Path Study".

There is a whole list of pdf's you can download.

I have the FDR information in excel; I have the animation running now, I am a pilot of heavy jet aircraft, I am a trained aircraft accident investigator, and you ask me to google NTSB Flight Path Study due to the fact you have no clue what the NTSB does and does not do?

The p4t have no school trained pilot aircraft accident investigators; do they? Working on an accident board is not school trained my safety office would train board members as required.

I have all the information right here. I can see the Pentagon is lined up wrong with respect to the track data in the FDR, and the Pentagon image is wrong, not the FDR information. That is a fact and you have no evidence which supports 77 not impacting the Pentagon, and not knocking down the lampposts seen by witnesses being hit by 77; not to mention witnesses you can’t refute watching 77 hit the Pentagon.

Explain why 77 on a true track of 61.2 degrees does not line up with a ground image of the Pentagon?

The Pentagon image is orientated wrong with respect to the information in the FDR, not the FDR is oriented wrong with respect to the Pentagon. There is no doubt the track information in the FDR is accurate to with in a degree or so, but the Pentagon image is over 17 degrees off when compared to the FDR information which for heading and true track information matches the path flown on 911, verified if you wish by witnesses, RADAR, and physical evidence.

 

[jtribby]

And? It was a working copy for someone else. Those investigations and flightpath studies used different information.

The NTSB Flight Path Study didn't use FDR information? Really? Where did they get their information, the cracker jack box?

You may want to actually read what is in the National Security Archive. Your peers here claim it's filled with errors. For starters, your peers claim the "impact time" as plotted by the NTSB, is wrong. The NTSB makes no such claim of "impact time" error. It's in the National Security Archive. Really. Go check.

 

[beachnut]

The NTSB Flight Path Study didn't use FDR information? Really? Where did they get their information, the cracker jack box?

You may want to actually read whatis in the National Securiy Archive. Your peers here claim it's filled with errors.

The FDR support 77 impacting the Pentagon. What do you think happened? Cat got your tongue?

Please list any errors in the FDR you wish to discuss; the Pentagon image is not in the FDR, so the orientation of the Pentagon is not a FDR error.

Pentagon alignment is not a FDR error; so stop with the woo.

What errors are you talking about, or will your post remain shallow research, no follow up, failed hearsay, as you spin other people's posts in general with no real substance.

Post a FDR error to discuss.

 

[jtribby]

Rule 12 violation removed. Attack the argument not the arguer.

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

 

[Gravy]

yeah, and I flew the last space shuttle mission, did the Xmas 2008 routes for Santa cause he was busy with the Mrs, and am getting ready to hide egg's and baskets this Easter for Peter.

We can all be what we want online. It's fun, isn't it?

Way to insult a longtime Serviceman, jtribby. You're just full of class, aren't you?

 

[jtribby]

Way to insult a longtime Serviceman, jtribby. You're just full of class, aren't you?

Beachnut insults real servicemen who put their names and faces to their claims, he calls them "terrorist apologists". Have you ever been able to read through one of his posts? I highly doubt he ever flew an aircraft. Perhaps Microsoft Flight Simulator.

 

[dtugg]

They are terrorist apologists.

 

[Gravy]

The NTSB Flight Path Study didn't use FDR information? Really? Where did they get their information, the cracker jack box?

It did, but the primary information came from FAA, Dulles, and Air Force radar data.

 

[beachnut]

yeah, and I flew the last space shuttle mission, did the Xmas 2008 routes for Santa cause he was busy with the Mrs, and am getting ready to hide egg's and baskets this Easter for Peter.

We can all be what we want online. It's fun, isn't it?

I have proof of my claims you have a fantasy.

No, it is not fun, your implications are backed by hearsay, lies and fantasy. I use evidence, math, physics, engineering, and my training as a pilot and aircraft accident investigator to make rational conclusions.

You have delusions about 911.

 

[jtribby]

It did,.

Thanks, you may want to let "funk di fino" know as he thinks the information came from somewhere else.

 

[Gravy]

Beachnut insults real servicemen who put their names and faces to their claims, he calls them "terrorist apologists".

That wouldn't happen if they were able to face reality and place blame for the attacks on the terrorists. It's not his fault that they live in a pathetic, paranoid fantasy.

Have you ever been able to read through one of his posts? I highly doubt he ever flew an aircraft. Perhaps Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Ever served in the military yourself, jtribby?

And for the second time, do you believe that flight 77 hit the Pentagon?

 

[J. Wellington Wimpy]

Beachnut insults real servicemen who put their names and faces to their claims, he calls them "terrorist apologists". Have you ever been able to read through one of his posts? I highly doubt he ever flew an aircraft. Perhaps Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Argument from incredulity. Unless you can actually substantiate the smarmily coy insinuation that he is lying about his background, you owe beachnut an open apology.

 

[jtribby]

I have proof of my claims you have a fantasy.

No, it is not fun, your implications are backed by hearsay, lies and fantasy. I use evidence, math, physics, engineering, and my training as a pilot and aircraft accident investigator to make rational conclusions.

You have delusions about 911.

The above coming from the same guy who says the NTSB Flight Path Study impact time is wrong.

You may want to get a job at the NTSB and straighten them out over there. But I have a feeling they won't hire you. Microsoft Flight Sim time, and then investigating your crash into the Golden Gate when attempting to fly under it, doesn't work on a resume as "Heavy Jet Pilot" and "Aircraft Accident Investigator".

 

[jtribby]

Argument from incredulity. Unless you can actually substantiate the smarmily coy insinuation that he is lying about his background, you owe beachnut an open apology.

Impossible to prove a negative. I would think a "skeptic" would know such things.

However, I'm sure many aren't surprised you haven't asked Beachnut to prove his claims? Perhaps not....

 

[Gravy]

Thanks, you may want to let "funk di fino" know as he thinks the information came from somewhere else.

Most of it did come from somewhere else. He said, "Those investigations and flightpath studies used different information." You understand that "different" can connote "additional," correct?

 

[jtribby]

That wouldn't happen if they were able to face reality and place blame for the attacks on the terrorists. It's not his fault that they live in a pathetic, paranoid fantasy.

You may want to click on J. Wellington Wimpy link to "argument from incredulity".

Ever served in the military yourself, jtribby?

If you count being tracked by NORAD when I did my route for Santa, sure. Other than that, it's none of your business.

And for the second time, do you believe that flight 77 hit the Pentagon?

You have a hard time sticking to topic Gravy?

 

[dtugg]

 

[Gravy]

Welcome to ignore, jtribby. Good luck with your troubles.

 

[jtribby]

Most of it did come from somewhere else. He said, "Those investigations and flightpath studies used different information." You understand that "different" can connote "additional," correct?

But he replied to the post of...


"The NTSB files are dated 2002. The FOIA release wasn't until 2006. In between, there was an investigation and study sourcing such information. They are called the 9/11 Commission Report and the NTSB Flight Path Study."

When someone states they used "different information" in reply to the above, it means they didn't use the information claimed. He was wrong.

Nice try at spin though. Context matters. Try it next time.

 

[J. Wellington Wimpy]

Impossible to prove a negative. I would think a "skeptic" would know such things.

Intellectually bucktoothed. You are the one advancing the claim ("I highly doubt he ever flew an aircraft."). The burden of proof, therefore -- the second fundamental of logical debate with which you have indicated you are shockingly unaware, in as many postings -- falls upon you to actually support said claim with something significantly more substantive than "'cause that's just what I think, is all."

Stamp your hoof twice if I'm going too fast for you, here.