Jonnyclueless
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 5,546
"My experts will not come here to debate "
Which experts are those?
Which experts are those?
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
AA77 FDR Data, Explained
- Thread starter Anti-sophist
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aa77 flight data recorder
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
It's amazing, isn't it? According to Turbofan's "logic" Einstein's Theory of Relativity would be invalid if he had submitted it anonymously.
Why, all the pretend ones of course!
Who is your accident investigator and what class did he go to? I doubt a trained investigator is dumb enough to fall for the lies Balsasmo makes up. Bet he worked as a pilot expert, not a trained accident investigator. However there are a few people unable to comprehend issues even after training.
There are thousands of trained accident investigators who trump your single 35+ year dolt on 9/11 issues.
You have no qualified FDR experts or engineers who have valid information on 9/11 due to one really big reason which alludes your p4t friends with dirt dumb ideas on 9/11.
Beachnut, we went over this page after page and even copy/pasted several names. I am really starting to wonder if you're a stroke victim. Im not trying to attack you here, im just wondering. Especially considering your incoherent posts and asking the same questions when already answered ad nauseum. Not to mention you sound like a broken record with your constant attacks in your over 9000+ post count mostly typing the word "junk" over and over again. Did you ever have a stroke old timer?
Since you missed the copy/paste the first thousand times in this thread, here they are again... relevant parts bolded once again since you obviously missed it on past pages... or maybe you saw them, but just forgot.....
Jeff Latas
-Over 20 years in the USAF
--USAF Accident investigation Board President--Flew the F-111, T38, and F-15E
--Combat experience in the F-15E includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch
--Weapons Requirements Officer, USAF HQ, Pentagon
--Standard and Evaluations Flight Examiner, Command level
-Currently Captain for JetBlue Airways
George Nelson
Colonel USAF (Ret.)
30 year career managing aircraft maintenance activities
Licensed commercial pilot
Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic
Aircraft accident investigator
Colonel Michael Harley USAF (ret)
Command pilot
~ 6000 Total Flight Time
T-38,T-33, T-37,T-39, C-47, U-6, Uh-1, C130A, B, E, &
prototype H, Kc-135 and B-52.
26 years commissioned.
34 Years total service USAF Accident Investigator
Instructor Accident Investigation, Embry-Riddle University
Management analyst and IG, simulator instructor,
Instructor Pilot, Standardization Evaluation Pilot,
Chief of Standardization of a Sac Wing equipped with B-52, RC-135 and Kc-135
Flew Cessna 177, Twin Bonanza, Cherokee-6
~200 hours as civilian private pilot
Newspaper columnist for 10 years, now a freelance writer
J. Randall Reinhardt
Commercial, Multi, Instrument, CFI, ATP,
Commercial Glider, Advanced/ Instrument Ground Instructor,
Turbojet Type Rating - Learjet
Flying since 1961,
8,000+ hours in civil, military and Part 25 Transport category aircraft
J.D. degree in 1972 ,
30 years practicing trial law, with a concentration in aviation related litigation,
including FAA Part 91, 135, 121 and 141 accidents and FAA/NTSB matters
Forensic Director for U.S. Aviation Forensics with 30 years experience in aircraft accident investigation.Former FAA Accident Prevention Specialist
Former member U.S. Unlimited Aerobatic Team with unrestricted aerobatic waiver.
Jim Ritter
Chief Of Vehicle Performance
National Transportation Safety Board
Doesnt claim any "missing seconds"
Ed Santana
L3 Comminications Flight Data Recorder Division
Sales Manage/Engineer
Sells FDR's to Fleets Worldwide
Claims F2100 cannot be missing more than 0.5 seconds
Feel free to keep asking, it will be our pleasure to keep posting the names on future pages to keep it fresh in lurkers minds that we have verfied experts and you do not.
Well first, we have more than one. I know, you must have forgotten. Secondly, Name one who will step up to the plate to debate P4T and/or discuss the issue the names listed above. So far, it appears only P4T have verified and qualfied members regarding Aircraft Accident Investigation. JREF have zero.
Yet P4T was able to decode the FDR Raw file and you cant.
Beachnut, we went over this argument for many past pages, same thing day after day from you. Please come up with new material.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
No one missed it TF. The problem is none of them have experience decoding, engineering, manufacturing, or maintaining FDRs.
How's that math coming?
fitzgibbon
Master Poster
And how about a witness or two (or five) who just happened to see the plane flying back off into the wild blue yonder? Absent that (or any other proof viable to a rational individual), all your pretensions about decoding the FDR data are so much bunk
Jonnyclueless
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 5,546
U.S. Aviation Forensics?
It's hilarious he's added Jim Ritter, from the NTSB and Ed Santana from L3 as if they were members of pfffft! My dog is even laughing at that one.
Hey, Turbo you tout Latas as an FDR expert? Please tell me what aircraft he flew that had an FDR, besides as a pilot for Jet Blue? Obviously, you're ignoring that a Aircraft Accident Board President is an Administrative position. He didn't need to know squat about FDR's and since he didn't fly aircraft with an FDR it's highly likely that he didn't serve as a Board President of an accident that involved one either.
Other others, if they know anything more than the average pilot about FDR's I'd be very surprised. You've quoted NOTHING to indicate that they do.
Try again. Where are your experts?
Hey, Turbo you tout Latas as an FDR expert? Please tell me what aircraft he flew that had an FDR, besides as a pilot for Jet Blue? Obviously, you're ignoring that a Aircraft Accident Board President is an Administrative position. He didn't need to know squat about FDR's and since he didn't fly aircraft with an FDR it's highly likely that he didn't serve as a Board President of an accident that involved one either.
Other others, if they know anything more than the average pilot about FDR's I'd be very surprised. You've quoted NOTHING to indicate that they do.
Try again. Where are your experts?
Seems Beachnut did. Read two posts above yours or the quotes of Beachnut in mine. You ok Wildcat?
The Natonal Transporation Safety Board doesnt have such experience? Have you told them?
L3 Communications, the manufucaturer of the FDR doesnt have such experience? Have you informed them and the many fleets carrying their boxes?
You mean you havent found e^n's math refuting Reheats claims yet? Not surprised.
Members? No... but they dont make the claims you make (missing seconds) and they can be verified (unlike you).
We posted them. Where are yours? Can they be verified? Do you know more than L3 and the NTSB Reheat?
Last edited:
fitzgibbon
Master Poster
Turbo? How about a witness or two (or five) who just happened to see the plane flying back off into the wild blue yonder? Absent that (or any other proof viable to a rational individual), all your pretensions about decoding the FDR data are so much bunk
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Sure they do. That's why they don't agree with PfffT.
See above.
There is nobody at PffffT who is an FDR expert. All you have is a bunch of pretend FDR experts.
He wasn't using the flight path claimed by CIT.
But you probably know that already.
How's that math coming along TF?
Jonnyclueless
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 5,546
Well now you're being more than dishonest. Why don't you call L3 and the NTSB and ask them if they agree with you? Mackey pointed out very clearly how you are misrepresenting their claims. Because you are misrepresenting these two sources and taking their claims out of context (as has been proven in this thread by someone you brought in as well as others), it's likely that these other experts you are referring to are also being used out of context. Chances are they don't even have any involvement and are simply being used for their name and credentials only. As was pointed out the others are in administrative positions and don't actually have any hands on involvement with FDRs.
This would explain why you, nor any of your experts are able to provide any hard facts proving a conspiracy. We have read the quotes from these people that is responsible from them being added to the scam web site patriots4truth, and none of their claims are anything factual, but simply opinion. They present no actual evidence, just as you have not.
Add to that your habit of cherry picking evidence and even the statements from your own witnesses. And you wonder why you guys can't get any press?
Dont "agree" with P4T? Its their data Wildcat. They plotted altitude, they calculated impact time. If anything, they (The NTSB/L3) certainly dont agree with anyone here on the JREF regarding "missing seconds". You feeling ok?
How did we decode the FDR Raw file if we dont have "FDR Experts"?
There, i fixed your above quote.
CIT doesnt "claim" a flight path. 13 independently corroborated witnesses filmed on location state the flight path in the same general area, North of the Citgo. e^n proved its aerodynamically possible.
Again, you feeling ok Wildcat?
How's that math coming along TF?
Ask e^n. It appears its already done.
Last edited:
Your moron friends don't claim flight paths? Really? whats with all the impossible ones we've seen them draw?
From what I gather e^n left out a lot of the CIT witnesses AND that flight path would require the plane to be practically flying sideways which nobody saw.
So I take it you are not going to do any math like you promised. Damn! I had confidence in you!
Last edited:
Present one piece of evidence from your experts that supports your ideas.
You can't because not one of these guys is verified being an accident investigator, because in class we covered high speed impacts just like Flight 77 and Flight 93 and only and idiot would not see 77 and 93 as text book examples of high speed impacts of aircraft. So take your experts and go to CBS, NBC, and ABC and have them called fringe crazy people with nut case ideas.
You can't produce one thing form these dolts on 9/11 to support your ideas. Yes I have see their statements, they are dolts on 9/11 issues. Prove they are not full of nut case ideas on 9/11. You can't.
Prove they have evidence to support you ideas. You talk and post their history, darn, they lost the edge when it comes to 9/11 ideas.
Post some stuff from them or I will post their idiotic ideas on 9/11 and expose you and them as follows who believe in nut case ideas on 9/11, just like Balsamo.
Ed Santana said your ideas are nut case ideas on 9/11. Check it out! Call him up, tell him 77 did not hit the Pentagon. What a joke!
Jim Ritter says your ideas on 9/11 are pure junk. Check it out, call him up and tell him how 77 did not hit the Pentagon.
What class did your accident investigators attend? Can you prove it. Post their paper from the school, it looks like this. I have to see it so I can see how they failed to understand their training.
Post their school papers, so I can see they failed to retain knowledge.
Board Presidents are not school trained. So Latas is not a trained aircraft accident investigator. He is not an FDR expert!
I wonder where his famous analysis is? BTW, you can tell LtCol Latas, there were no accidents on 9/11, the terrorist did it on purpose. Latas has very personal and political motivations to support 9/11 truth and may not understand how stupid Balsamo is. Looks like his shallow analysis missed the real investigation. Plus he is using a working copy video to shape his failed ideas on 9/11. Good job!
J. Randall Reinhardt, JD – has he come up with anything to support your failed ideas? NO
Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Licensed commercial pilot. Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career. Must have early onset, he spews ideas about serial numbers and ignores all the evidence like you and Balsamo. A great guy who is not a USAF pilot, has no experience as a pilot on an accident investigation board. What did he do? What great stuff did he earn a Pulitzer Prize for exposing the 9/11 issues. What evidence supports your 77 did not hit the Pentagon lie? What did he do in the AF?
Another idiot who thinks 77 had an accident! What is wrong with these old guys?
Colonel Michael Harley USAF (ret) - Is he filler? What did Col Harley do? If he attended aircraft accident investigation school and believes the junk you do, he failed to learn anything at school. Doubt he has evidence to support your ideas. If he had some stuff you would post it. You failed to post it.
Verified experts on 9/11 junk ideas. That is all you have verified by presenting a list of people who have not done one thing to support your failed ideas.
Balsamo; he is your expert on what?
If these experts have anything to support your position, you better bring it on now; the lurkers (much smarter than I) see you have failed and left out the great support these super experts have for you and your FDR ideas.
Your salesman, you use as your FDR expert, thinks your idea of 77 not impacting the Pentagon is bogus. Why did you list your FDR salesman expert again?
Last edited:
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
PfffT doesn't know how to interpret the data. Because no one there is an expert.
You never had the raw FDR file. The FDR doesn't produce a file. The NTSB produced a file, which you clowns misinterpret.
Cute. But no one here claimed to be an expert, unlike you clowns who aren't experts but claim you are.
So you won't be providing any math like you promised? I figured you'd weasel out of it, because thet's the kind of run-away kind of guy you are.
Not with the CIT flight path.
Will you continue to lie about this?
CIT didnt draw the flight paths. The witnesses did when filmed on location. If you are going to debate the topic (which is actually off topic), you may want to at least watch the film.
The fact remains, the North Of Citgo flight path is aerodynamically possible. No one can expect a witness to state exact path down to the inch, within knots... etc, except of course JREFers like you?
Make up your minds. If i do the math, its impossible due to witnesses. If i dont do the math, its impossible because i didnt do the math. Bottom line, e^n proved the North of Citgo flight path is aerodynamically possible. Make your minds.
There, i fixed your above quote.
Wrong, the FDR produces a file with an extension of .fdr. Its a direct download from the FDR. The NTSB then decodes that file into a csv file (excel spreadsheet) and plots the information. The NTSB doesnt claim any "missing seconds" as claimed by your anonymous "experts".
Many can tell you dont have any experts. Thanks for verifying it. P4T actually gained more core members from this thread. Thanks for the publicity.
See reply above.
There is no such thing as "CIT Flight Path". It is a "Witness Flight Path" drawn by the witnesses filmed on location. When will a JREFer go there and confront these witnesses and tell them they are lying?
Last edited:
Yes, thanks for reminding the world p4t have no theory on 9/11, no clue, no real practical knowledge on anything to help them understand 9/11.
When will Balsamo correct his 11.2 G error?
Failed physics displayed for 9 months. Record open loop stupid on display at p4t web page.
The CIT witnesses all pointed to the south flight path. They all pointed to the "official flight path".
Not one witness supports your failed idea. Not one. Go to Arlington and find out!
When will someone tell CIT they are full of junk ideas and incapable of figuring out 9/11? Oops, we already did.
Last edited: