ACARS messages to UA175 and UA93

[femr2]

http://www.wavecom.ch/onlinehelp/WCODE/default.htm?turl=WordDocuments/acars.htm

Well that's a bit clearer...

Positive acknowledgement from the aircraft consists of the transmission of the Uplink Block Identifier of the correctly received block. Positive acknowledgement from the ground station consists of a similar transmission of the Downlink Block Identifier.

Acknowledgements are placed in the Technical Acknowledgement field.

So, there is automated ackowledgement from the aircraft from uplink block transmission.

To resolve the suggested *anomaly* we now need to determine whether the last uplink to Flight 175 was acknowledged by the aircraft or not.

Logic would suggest not, as it's in bits in and around WTC 2 at that time.

So another question that must be attempted to answer is whether the messages on the scanned printouts were acknowledged or not.

Doesn't seem like the *Technical Acknowledgement* field is included within the printout, so not quite sure how to progress.

Hmm.

 

[carlitos]

not quite sure how to progress.

Hmm.

Stop wasting time on minutia that mean nothing to the story of 9/11?

 

[femr2]

Stop wasting time on minutia that mean nothing to the story of 9/11?

The way to look at it is that until there is a definitive answer, there's no way to stop stuff like the OP.

Through this discussion the transmission location details have already been cleared up, taking out half the OP *argument*.

If the post-impact messages can also be definitively cleared up, then the book get's closed.

Anyone subsequently mentioning the same details can be pointed to the definitive answer.

Saves time in the long run.

 

[carlitos]

Be honest. Turning off the internet would save time, because that's the only place the *argument* takes place. There is no answer needed, since in the real world, there is no question.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The way to look at it is that until there is a definitive answer, there's no way to stop stuff like the OP.

Nor, sadly, is there any way to stop it even if there is a definitive answer. Only last week, David Ray Griffin wrote, "However, the passenger manifests for the four airliners did not contain the names of any of the alleged hijackers and, moreover, they contained no Arab names whatsoever", despite the fact that he has previously admitted this was not true. Definitive answers to questions are irrelevant to those who would rather simply tell lies.

Dave

ETA: I may be wrong here. I thought Griffin had admitted that the hijackers' names were on the passenger manifest, but claimed that it was suspicious that this information had taken so long to emerge; however, I can't find the Screw Loose Change blog post that I thought referred to his admission.

 

[femr2]

Nor, sadly, is there any way to stop it even if there is a definitive answer.

Well that may be true for some folk, but not the majority.

Might be an unanswerable question, but this would be the only way to know I rekn...

Does anyone know whether the raw block data is available anywhere, which includes the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

 

[MikeW]

ETA: I may be wrong here. I thought Griffin had admitted that the hijackers' names were on the passenger manifest, but claimed that it was suspicious that this information had taken so long to emerge

He has commented on the manifests, but only to handwave them away - see http://www.opednews.com/articles/16/Was-America-Attacked-by-Mu-by-David-Ray-Griffin-080909-536.html

So much the same as any other truther argument, really. Deceive people to make your own point (in this case, pretending that the CNN victims lists are complete and official manifests), then find all possible excuses to ignore other evidence, and finally declare victory on the grounds that you claim you haven't been debunked.

 

[stewieg]

Well that may be true for some folk, but not the majority.

Might be an unanswerable question, but this would be the only way to know I rekn...

Does anyone know whether the raw block data is available anywhere, which includes the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

With all this talk about ACARS don't you think that both United and American would have figured out if those planes were not their's?

 

[Reheat]

With all this talk about ACARS don't you think that both United and American would have figured out if those planes were not their's?

Don't you know that truthers are smarter than everyone else? By golly, just stick around........ In 8 more years Woody Box and FEMR2 will have found that "smoking gun" and will bring the perps to justice.

 

[femr2]

Don't you know that truthers are smarter than everyone else? By golly, just stick around........ In 8 more years Woody Box and FEMR2 will have found that "smoking gun" and will bring the perps to justice.

If you can't answer the following query, no worries. Don't waste your time whining about it. Go and do something less boring instead.

Does anyone know whether the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages are available, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

 

[Reheat]

If you can't answer the following query, no worries. Don't waste your time whining about it. Go and do something less boring instead.

If I wanted advice from you, I would have stepped on your chain, twoofie.

BTW, I don't find what you and your hero, Woody Box, are doing boring, I find it very stupid.

 

[femr2]

If I wanted advice from you, I would have stepped on your chain, twoofie.

You'll grow to like me

Does anyone have access to the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

 

[Dog Town]

Does anyone have access to the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

If you get this answer, what will you do? Was this the lynch pin you needed an answer for? Will ALL the other available info, showing the flight in question, now make senses to you? The minutia your question is meant to focus on, means nothing in the GRAND scheme of things, that day! As twoofers are so fond of saying.


WAKE UP!

PS
No...I don't ,personally, have the information you're looking for.

 

[Reheat]

You'll grow to like me

My thesaurus does not list "like" as a synonym for disgust or detest.

 

[femr2]

No...I don't ,personally, have the information you're looking for.

The only useful part of your post, and what was the point in saying so. Better to use your time for less boring activity and say nothing.

Does anyone have access to the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

 

[BigAl]

The only useful part of your post, and what was the point in saying so. Better to use your time for less boring activity and say nothing.

Does anyone have access to the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

What theory are you trying to prove? There is probably other evidence that can prove or disprove it.

 

[stewieg]

If you can't answer the following query, no worries. Don't waste your time whining about it. Go and do something less boring instead.

Does anyone know whether the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages are available, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

With all this talk about ACARS don't you think that both United and American would have figured out if those planes were not their's?

 

[Dog Town]

Better to use your time for less boring activity and say nothing.

Oh' the...




I also love that you take the moment, to ask the question again!
Priceless!

 

[carlitos]

He's doing it again.

Does anyone know whether the raw block data is available anywhere, which includes the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

Does anyone know whether the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages are available, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

Does anyone have access to the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

Does anyone have access to the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

Ignoring questions and spamming the forum, and then saying we'll "grow to like you." Good luck with that.

 

[DGM]

Does anyone have access to the raw block data for Flight 175 ACARS messages, which include the Technical Acknowledgement field ?

Where else are you looking? We wouldn't want to duplicate what your already doing. You've talked to the airlines and the ACARS administrators, I assume.