AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[uk_dave]

Then you asked me again about a report from an FDR Company. Why would we pay an FDR Company when the NTSB already provided the report?

Because you're trying to convince people of your theory but you lack the professional credentials to do so.

You people think the NTSB provided an error filled report, then pay a company for a second opinion, unless of course you accept the NTSB distributing error filled data through the FOIA to the American (and UK) public.

Then why are you arguing about the FDR data if it's already out there and decoded? Take it to the media NOW!

WE call FDR Companies, we meet with FDR experts

Why, you just claimed that the NTSB has already done the hard work. This is very confusing.

, we have several Aircraft Accident Investigators on our team,

Ahhhh, good. Where are their technical papers so that other AAI can offer comment?

we have numerous pilots and aviation professionals, all can be verified, the lists grow. None can be verified on your end.

Yes yes we know you have a list of pilots. Tell me, just out of curiousity, why do two of your pilots only comment on the collapse of the towers on the 'patriots' website? Are they also structural engineers? Does being a pilot automatically mean you're expert at everything else?

As a side note: you people attack us for raising funds through DVD sales (yet all our presentations are free on the web), then you want us to pay for an FDR Company to do a report the NTSB already provided?

Yeah. Maybe if you put up a notice saying you're going to raise 'x' amount of funds to finance an independant analysis of the data in order to prove your theory then you wouldn't be accused of being in this for personal gain. Will you do that?

The cheeb must be good on this board, i gotta come around here more often..

I have no idea what 'cheeb' is.

You know, the thing that certainly rankles me, and probably does others also, is the complete and utter arrogance of you guys. We saw it earlier in this thread after AS posted his reasoned explanation of the FDR data. Along came your mate 'Undertow' full of piss and vinegar. Though 'undertow' did leave rather suddenly and didn't have the good grace to apologise for his errors.

You people constantly demand debate but instead of presenting reasoned argument and being prepared to listen to and consider the plausible alternatives, you go off all holier than thou and, quite frankly, simply make yourselves legitimate targets for scorn.

You have the ball. It's your burden to prove the theories you propose. It's not up to anyone to defend anything or enter into debate with you if they choose not to. Your attitude goes a long way to informing the decision whether or not to debate.

You might want to curb the arrogance (though it's probably too late now) and at least concede that maybe you don't always get it right. The 11g math error is one such example that would have earned you some brownie points had you held your hand up to the fiasco rather than trying to bluff it.

 

[Reheat]

What lies? POint them out!

What does recruited mean TF?

I'll help funk de fino out a little here, if I may.

Post separation recruited by U.S. Navy in 1981, for U.S. Naval Flight Officer flight instructor duties.

Hehehehe. Wanna buy a bridge in Arizona? It's cheap!

 

[Turbofan]

Tell the head dolt at PffffT, a complete idiot blowhard ex-pilot named Rob Balsamo, that if he wants to convince anyone of his nonsense he needs to get an actual FDR expert on board at minimum to be taken seriously.

Do we have some forum rule issues here?

By the way, as I've already pointed out to you once before:

L3 Communications is not responsible for the flight path, or the government's
official conspiracy theory.

Do you call your cable company when you have a problem with the power
switch on your TV?

L3 Communications designs and manufactures flight data recorders.

L3 Communications does not study flight data from crashed airplanes.

L3 Communications does not study the government's theory that AA77 hit
the Pentagon.

Do you understand L3's role , or apparent misfit in your analogy Wildcat?

 

[hxstamper]

Because you're trying to convince people of your theory but you lack the professional credentials to do so.

Then why are you arguing about the FDR data if it's already out there and decoded? Take it to the media NOW!

Caught the above on the way out..

Sent to over 1000 mainstream, local and alternative media worldwide including congress.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pressrelease.html
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/UA93_Press_Release.html

Names and professional reputations signed on the above,
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html
(Im sure TAM will work this list next for character assassination?)

Why does the media cover and literally tout an animation (Mike Wilson) not based on any flight data whatsoever, but fails to cover the animation produced by the NTSB in which the NTSB claims is based on flight data? Unprecedented!

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/media_blackout022908.html


And for those using the tired old argument of "The FDR was found in the pentagon..."

Can the Govt Get Their Story Straight? - Location Of Flight Data Recorder
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/FDR_location_091607.html


Lies, Conflicting Reports, Cover-Up's
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/location_2.html


And for those who say "Rob Balsamo" was banned? No he wasnt. He was denied registration using his real name.

And... nicepants.. .you pay to much for training..

 

[WildCat]

Do we have some forum rule issues here?

How could we? Rules prevent me from insulting a forum member, but not someone who has been banned or isn't a member. See, I can say "Bush is an idiot" without violating forum rules but I can't say the same about you or anyone else who is a member.

Or are you suggesting the idiot Rob Balsamo is a member here?

By the way, as I've already pointed out to you once before:

L3 Communications is not responsible for the flight path, or the government's
official conspiracy theory.

Do you call your cable company when you have a problem with the power
switch on your TV?

L3 Communications designs and manufactures flight data recorders.

L3 Communications does not study flight data from crashed airplanes.

L3 Communications does not study the government's theory that AA77 hit
the Pentagon.

Do you understand L3's role , or apparent misfit in your analogy Wildcat?

L3 certainly understands how their FDRs work, don't they? They know how the data is accessed, stored, and recorded, don't they? And your cable analogy is flawed, since the cable company doesn't manufacture the television. L3 does manufacture FDRs!

And L3 doesn't support the PfffT.

 

[Anti-sophist]

I linked you up to the ARINC 717, and FDR documentation

Yes, you did. And then you proceeded to pretend it said things it didn't say. To make matters worse, your mental model of how FDRs work is laughably wrong and that severely exacerbates the problem.

Furthermore, you've been completely and utterly incapable of answering even the most basic questions I have about your theory. Mostly because the questions I ask expose the gaping holes therein.

As for me calling you, you cannot give me a single possible reason for this to be a useful exercise. You are working with an incorrect mental model of FDRs based on incorrect interprations of the standards and designs. And you are 100% convinced you are right, despite all the evidence to the contrary. There is no helping this situation. The fact that you denied the exisitence of a digital buffer not only belies fundamental ignorance of FDRs in specific, but of basic electronics in general.

Your view is childlike and your confidence is supreme. You are an uninformed zealot. There is no useful discussion to be had with ignorant zealots. If I thought for the slightest moment you were interested in the truth, instead of pushing your sad agenda, I'd consider the possibility of calling you and trying to re-explain my position to you for the 100th time. You've shown absolutely no evidence that you have any desire to learn anything, and instead simply seem to want to push your factually flawed interpretation on other people.

 

[WildCat]

And for those who say "Rob Balsamo" was banned? No he wasnt. He was denied registration using his real name.

Yes, he was. He was one of the multiple people posting under the weedwacker account, which is a violation of forum rules. The idiot could have registered here under his real name if he hadn't done that.

 

[lapman]

You can keep posting that all you'd like, it won't make those guys FDR experts.

Pilots, flight instructors, etc does not = "FDR expert".

Fact is, no one at the PffffT has any professional training or experience in analyzing or retreiving data from an FDR.

Add to that someone that can hook a FDR up to test equipment, press a button and has the ability to read "Pass" and "Fail" on a computer screen does not constitute an expert either

 

[stateofgrace]

Caught the above on the way out..

Sent to over 1000 mainstream, local and alternative media worldwide including congress.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pressrelease.html
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/UA93_Press_Release.html

1000? Didn't see that on your links,could you offer a link up please?

You evidence? Your actual evidence, not a petition, but the actual irrefutable evidence you have,of mass murder by the USG, why have you not sent that to the main stream media, the scientific community, the authorities etc?

Get your "evidence " together and blow this plot apart.

 

[nicepants]

Sent to over 1000 mainstream, local and alternative media worldwide including congress.

Wow, they must all be "in on it" too!

And... nicepants.. .you pay to much for training..

If you mean to say that the amount I pay is greater than necessary, the proper word is "too", meaning "in excess", and not "to", which indicates movement towards a position.

This was Rob's favorite ad-hom against me. "Don't listen to what nicepants says, he pays too much for flight training". Of course this personal opinion of robbies is never backed by any actual evidence other than his own personal incredulity and poor reading comprehension skills (like pretty much every other claim he makes)....I've actually paid less than most people in the stage of training that I'm in.

If you believe what I've paid to be in exces, simply explain what amount would be reasonable for my training thus far, and I'll show you, in detail, why you are wrong

 

[uk_dave]

Caught the above on the way out..

Sent to over 1000 mainstream, local and alternative media worldwide including congress.

Perhaps they would pay attention to a report from a reputable FDR analysis company if it backs up your claims. Just think how easy it would be to acheive the result you claim to desire. All it would take is a bit of cash and a comprehensive analysis from a professional company which could stand up to scrutiny by other FDR experts.

You could mobilise the entire 'truth' movement on this one issue. Get DR Griffin to contribute the profits from his books and avery the.... well, anyway, get a properly managed fund set up to raise the money necessary to commission a report from a company with FDR Analysis expertise. If you fail to raise enough (which is possible) you could always commit to donating what is raised to first responder charities.

You have faith in your convictions as should every 'truther' out there. You supposedly have some very wealthy supporters. Hell, even Alex Jones wants to raise $2million for a new studio. Isn't 9-11 'truth' more important than that?

You never know, you might start a trend. Maybe those millions of 'truthers' out there will be prepared to stump up for an analysis of the wtc towers collapse carried out by a reputable firm of structural engineers. Maybe some might be willing to pay for a proper, independant air crash analysis of the shanksville site.

Then the media will listen. Go for it.

 

[Turbofan]

Yes, you did. And then you proceeded to pretend it said things it didn't say. To make matters worse, your mental model of how FDRs work is laughably wrong and that severely exacerbates the problem.

Furthermore, you've been completely and utterly incapable of answering even the most basic questions I have about your theory. Mostly because the questions I ask expose the gaping holes therein.

As for me calling you, you cannot give me a single possible reason for this to be a useful exercise. You are working with an incorrect mental model of FDRs based on incorrect interprations of the standards and designs. And you are 100% convinced you are right, despite all the evidence to the contrary. There is no helping this situation. The fact that you denied the exisitence of a digital buffer not only belies fundamental ignorance of FDRs in specific, but of basic electronics in general.

Your view is childlike and your confidence is supreme. You are an uninformed zealot. There is no useful discussion to be had with ignorant zealots. If I thought for the slightest moment you were interested in the truth, instead of pushing your sad agenda, I'd consider the possibility of calling you and trying to re-explain my position to you for the 100th time. You've shown absolutely no evidence that you have any desire to learn anything, and instead simply seem to want to push your factually flawed interpretation on other people.

Wrong on all counts.

You asked me what the t1-t5 timing is for the ARINC 717.
I posted the link to the PDF, and also a link to the timing chart.
That information fully supports and answers your timing question.

The timing diagrams also shows the refresh of the buffer on ever
poll cycle.

That information totally blows your "old 2-6 second info" ASSUMPTION
out the window.

The other links and ARINC 717 PDF documents, aside from L3's e-mails
and voice call to ED Santana also support the <=500 msec timing from
sensor to CPM.

Three of your claims have been proven wrong.

Would you like to discuss data transfer, ARINC 717 and FDR over the phone
in real time so I can hear you babble and fumble your way through a scentence?

Man enough?

 

[WildCat]

So you will not be contacting L3 or any actual FDR experts to corroborate your findings, correct?

 

[johnny karate]

So you will not be contacting L3 or any actual FDR experts to corroborate your findings, correct?

... or presenting your evidence to any MSM outlets, law enforcement agencies, or investigative bodies?

 

[lapman]

TF, when are you going to respond to 1198?

 

[Turbofan]

TF, when are you going to respond to 1198?

After you respond to #1104 which comes well before #1198

(P.S. If you do some quick research you can answer 1198 for yourself
which a good researcher would initially do.)

 

[hxstamper]

Perhaps they would pay attention to a report from a reputable FDR analysis company

The NTSB is not "reputable" enough? Whats the excuse for mainstream media ignoring the animation produced by the NTSB, claimed to be from AA77, based on flight data, yet touting Mike Wilsons animation not based on any flight data whatsoever?

Dave, you sound like a reasonable guy that is why i am here to reply to your last post. Im sure you know the old saying, "Walk a mile in another mans shoes". You have yet to walk a foot yet you comment on many issues that have already been addressed or covered.

if it backs up your claims.

Its not our 'claims', its 'claims' from the NTSB. I apologize if you dont know the difference between pressure altitude, true altitude, radar altitude, but we have suggested to those who dont know how to define the data to take it to a local flight school or read the FAA Flight Training Handbook (jaydahees in particular, he got a bit nasty when someone didnt hold his hand and had to go).

The NTSB places the aircraft too high, on the wrong path, vertical speed too great.. .et al. This is fact. Not theory. You people make excuses/theory (missing seconds, altimeter lag, rotated map). Those who dont have the aeronautical knowledge on this board believe anonymous "experts" who claim they do.


Bottom line, Aircraft Accident Investigators, Aviation Professionals and FDR experts put their name, faces and professional reputations on the line. We have many more working behind the scenes (which will not be disclosed in fear of character assassination, or worse).

Hell, all your "experts" here are afraid to disclose their names in fear of "Rob Balsamo" putting a bullet in their head which stems from a heated internet argument from 2 years ago at a super bowl party in which everyone was laughing at Mark (one of your guys even called Rob a drunk, for drinking at a Super Bowl party! LMAO!). Mark Roberts still cries about it to this day. Is this guy a NYer or what? Ron Weick doesnt seem to be intimidated by Rob. Rob even has his number and address.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3704117&postcount=105

Everytime someone posts the 'heated argument' which Mark still cries about, cherry picked and has taken out of context, it shows your desperation. I assure you, Rob has never killed anyone, has actually saved lives (students who tried to kill him, CFI's will appreciate this, if there are any real CFI's here.. ), and plans on saving more.

With all that said, Dave, you do sound reasonable, If you want to know the lengths we have covered, and anticipate, feel free to contact us personally. Im sure you can find the email address.

Regards

(and nicepants, you still pay too much for flight trainnig, probably even more for car insurance... feel free to follow me around fixin me typos. )

 

[WildCat]

... or presenting your evidence to any MSM outlets, law enforcement agencies, or investigative bodies?

Because they're all in on it!

 

[jaydeehess]

Calling out Wildcat, Jaydeehess, Stateofgrace and Funk de Fino.

Make me a believer

The truly ironic thing about that post Turbofan is that , in this thread, I have been asking you/PfT/Balsamo to provide a technical paper to the NTSB/ICAO/the pilot's unions illustrating that the DFDR data of flight 77 does not match the physical evidence of the flight path of that air craft.

http://72.32.2.238/forumlive/showpost.php?p=3847487&postcount=588

That was on July 9th, its post # 588. You have yet to answer this fairly simple question.

It is no longer about us making a believer out of you or you making a believer out of any of us. The prime factor in this would be air craft safety. hxstamper said on page 25 IIRC that pilots learn 'what not to do' from FDR data.
If the allegations of PfT and you, are correct then this constitutes a serious problem. However instead of writing up a purely technical paper outlining these errors and submitting it to people who could do something about it you choose instead to argue inccessantly on the internet, with people you feel are not qualified to understand, or are capable of understanding, the technical aspects involved.

In point of fact, PfT makes quite a lot of hay about how the NTSB won't answer their questions. However as far as I know, PfT has still done nothing other than call the NTSB and rail on about a few technical details and demand answers right then and there on the phone. They have also written to the NTSB and inquired about FOIA requests and subsequently sent accusatory messages to the NTSB.

Why continue in this vein when it is patently obvious by now that this tact is not garnering anything useful? Why not take the suggestion of writing a technical paper and submitting it to the people who would be interested in any problems with FDR's? Why not submit that same paper to "Scientific American" or "Aviation and Space Technology Weekly" or even "Popular Science" or "Discover"?

I recall a paper in Sci-Am that called into question the military claims of success with their ABM tests. It detailed what the military claimed and what actually occured. (for eg. and IIRC, the military said that the missile targeted the real test warhead. Although this was true they had failed to mention that it also targeted the decoys as much as it had the 'true' target)

It is therefore not like Sci-Am is afraid of gov't officialdom. There have also been opinion pieces in it concerning the present administration's hamstringing of some lines of scientific research. Articles to that topic have also appeared in "Discover".

I asked for this before I was banned from PfT for doing so. That was in October of 2006 so it would seem that I have been calling out PfT to step up and do this right for quite some time now.

 

[WildCat]

Bottom line, Aircraft Accident Investigators, Aviation Professionals and FDR experts put their name, faces and professional reputations on the line. We have many more working behind the scenes (which will not be disclosed in fear of character assassination, or worse).

I bolded the lie. There are no FDR experts at PfffT. And the PffffT absolutely refuses to corroborate their findings with actual FDR experts.

Hell, all your "experts" here are afraid to disclose their names in fear of "Rob Balsamo"

Why the scare quotes? Is "Rob Balsamo" a fictional character?

putting a bullet in their head which stems from a heated internet argument from 2 years ago at a super bowl party in which everyone was laughing at Mark (one of your guys even called Rob a drunk, for drinking at a Super Bowl party! LMAO!). Mark Roberts still cries about it to this day. Is this guy a NYer or what? Ron Weick doesnt seem to be intimidated by Rob. Rob even has his number and address.

But now you're on a first-name basis with "Rob Balsamo"! Know him well, do you?

Maybe you could ask your buddy Rob why he doesn't contact actual FDR experts to corroborate his group's findings. For some reason the mission of PfffT seems to be pwning people on internet debates.