• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

serial numbers?

alexg

Muse
A
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
539
Would someone care to comment on the purported failure to match/find serial numbers from plane parts? I'm totaly in the dark on this one. I can show the pictures of the parts found but seems some CTs want serial numbers.
 
Serial numbers of what? They don't put serial numbers on rivets.

Furthermore, why would "them" finding serial numbers be proof of anything beyond "them" finding flight data recorders? Claiming the first piece of evidence is a plant is the hard part.. after that, it's easy to just keep throwing evidence out the window.
 
I gotta agree with Anti. Serial numbers won't convince them anymore than the flight Data recorders, reamains, and personal effects. If they are relesed they will just claim they were planted or faked.

(I'm dealing with the same thing on another board.):D
 
Here's what the guy is saying

"Again you people prove my point. Here you are trying to deflect the argument into whether the steel was melted or just weak and whether the fire was simply petroleum fueled or how much hotter the office contents would have made it, etc, when you and I know there are much larger issues afoot. Do you think they recovered any serial numbers from any of those 3 sites? Do you really believe all 8 black boxes were destroyed? "

I see your point about having numbers not proving anything to a CTer, yet it would help to have something to tell him. And I don't know if parts are numbered or if matching the numbers is possible. If not I'll tell him that.
 
That's hilarious. Who, exactly, are they asking for this information?

Well, why not have some fun with it. Here's an actual serial number from one of the 767s in New York. Tell them it's from the Left-Hand Skyhook.

87904536f5781476d.jpg


Better yet, download a Boeing parts list, assign your own serial number to each part, and release it to them as the official list. That should keep them busy for a while.
​
 
Uhm, they recovered the FDR from the pentagon and from flight 93, and we have video of the other two planes hitting the buildings. Which planes is he doubting existed?
 
Anti-sophist said:
Which planes is he doubting existed?
Click to expand...

Is this one of those nutters who claim that the planes were actually missiles pimped out to look like commerical air craft? I can't imagine how that project went? Were meeting minutes recorded? Was there a project number that the guy in charge of the paint job could bill his hours to?
 
Last edited:
alexg said:
Here's what the guy is saying

"Again you people prove my point. Here you are trying to deflect the argument into whether the steel was melted or just weak and whether the fire was simply petroleum fueled or how much hotter the office contents would have made it, etc, when you and I know there are much larger issues afoot. Do you think they recovered any serial numbers from any of those 3 sites? Do you really believe all 8 black boxes were destroyed? "

I see your point about having numbers not proving anything to a CTer, yet it would help to have something to tell him. And I don't know if parts are numbered or if matching the numbers is possible. If not I'll tell him that.
Click to expand...

A couple of them over at UM have been doing this as well. Since I didn't feel like digging, since I was already involved in enough over here, I went through explaning to them what the "god of the gaps" (argumentum ad ignoratum) is.
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
A couple of them over at UM have been doing this as well. Since I didn't feel like digging, since I was already involved in enough over here, I went through explaning to them what the "god of the gaps" (argumentum ad ignoratum) is.
Click to expand...

Make sure you point out that it's also the core tactic used by Intelligent Design.. and throw in an off-hand comment about how similiar CT and religion is. That tends to really piss them off.
 
There are part numbers and serial numbers on pretty much every major component of an aircraft. Not just the black boxes but every electronic box and even mechanical components like hydraulic pumps, actuators, engines and engine parts, etc.

The reason the parts are marked is so they can be tracked. For example, if there's a problem with a given hydraulic pump, similar pumps from the same manufacturer can be located in other aircraft, and the pumps can be pulled and tested to make sure they're ok. Also, the entire history of that failed pump will have been tracked. When and where it was made, when it was installed, where and when it was serviced, etc., all of that information is tracked and stored in a database somewhere.

In the aerospace world, these tracking numbers are part of the traceability of the parts. Here's a company that specializes in products used to mark parts for traceability purposes:

http://www.mecco.com/aerospace_traceability.html

As you can see, pretty much every part on an aircraft can be marked. Even rivets can be marked but they're generally marked for lot traceability, not a specific number for each rivet.
 
bjb said:
There are part numbers and serial numbers on pretty much every major component of an aircraft. Not just the black boxes but every electronic box and even mechanical components like hydraulic pumps, actuators, engines and engine parts, etc.

The reason the parts are marked is so they can be tracked. For example, if there's a problem with a given hydraulic pump, similar pumps from the same manufacturer can be located in other aircraft, and the pumps can be pulled and tested to make sure they're ok. Also, the entire history of that failed pump will have been tracked. When and where it was made, when it was installed, where and when it was serviced, etc., all of that information is tracked and stored in a database somewhere.

In the aerospace world, these tracking numbers are part of the traceability of the parts. Here's a company that specializes in products used to mark parts for traceability purposes:

http://www.mecco.com/aerospace_traceability.html

As you can see, pretty much every part on an aircraft can be marked. Even rivets can be marked but they're generally marked for lot traceability, not a specific number for each rivet.
Click to expand...

And the argument being used, at least by the posters I was dealing with, was that since the gov't has produced no aircraft parts from flight 77 that have serial numbers that can be traced to that aircraft... blah blah blah.
 
I don't really get the point of supposedly having serial numbers on every dang part of the airplane, the way the Deniers claim. Is there any real point?

"Hey Clem, here's one of the parts of that airplane that crashed!"

"Nah, that there's from t'other plane that crashed here back in '54--see, the serial number is wrong."
 
bjb said:
There are part numbers and serial numbers on pretty much every major component of an aircraft. Not just the black boxes but every electronic box and even mechanical components like hydraulic pumps, actuators, engines and engine parts, etc.

The reason the parts are marked is so they can be tracked. For example, if there's a problem with a given hydraulic pump, similar pumps from the same manufacturer can be located in other aircraft, and the pumps can be pulled and tested to make sure they're ok. Also, the entire history of that failed pump will have been tracked. When and where it was made, when it was installed, where and when it was serviced, etc., all of that information is tracked and stored in a database somewhere.

In the aerospace world, these tracking numbers are part of the traceability of the parts. Here's a company that specializes in products used to mark parts for traceability purposes:

http://www.mecco.com/aerospace_traceability.html

As you can see, pretty much every part on an aircraft can be marked. Even rivets can be marked but they're generally marked for lot traceability, not a specific number for each rivet.
Click to expand...


OK, that's good. Not unique numbers to an individual aircraft but to a type of part? Is that correct. If so a SN or part num. would only go to show what? The exact type of part? Possibly used on multiple aircraft. Might narrow it down to belonging to a Boeing, say, vs. something else?
 
bjb, rereading your post it sounds like the numbers are unique, is this correct? So a pump part on the plane that was 77 would have a unique number tying it to that plane alone?
 
alexg said:
bjb, rereading your post it sounds like the numbers are unique, is this correct? So a pump part on the plane that was 77 would have a unique number tying it to that plane alone?
Click to expand...

The purpose of a serial number is to uniquely indentify that specific piece of equipment. Using the serial number the equipment manufacturer should be able to obtain specifics of that piece of equipment. When I do a field survey, for any existing equipment, I always jot down the boilerplate info (model number, performance specs, electrical specs and serial number). If the usual boilerplate info is not available, I can call a manufacturer with the serial number, and get my needed info.
 
It's funny someone should bring this up. There was an article in the Herald Sun newspaper today (link) about a guy who had a bolt from an overflying aircraft fall on his house. They mentioned the bolt had a serial number, but it seems it only allows them to trace it to the aircraft type.
 
qarnos said:
It's funny someone should bring this up. There was an article in the Herald Sun newspaper today (link) about a guy who had a bolt from an overflying aircraft fall on his house. They mentioned the bolt had a serial number, but it seems it only allows them to trace it to the aircraft type.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. I didn't know that standard mechanical fastners and such were serial numbered for the aviation industry.

I had a friend that worked as an airline mechanic, and he used to tell me horror stories about all of his pot head co-workers who'd finish their shift with plenty of extra parts after they got done reassembling a plane.
 
Crungy said:
Hmmm. I didn't know that standard mechanical fastners and such were serial numbered for the aviation industry.
Click to expand...

I re-read the article and it could be that the serial number was just the manufactorers number... the article doesn't make that part clear.

I had a friend that worked as an airline mechanic, and he used to tell me horror stories about all of his pot head co-workers who'd finish their shift with plenty of extra parts after they got done reassembling a plane.
Click to expand...

I didn't know Ikea made aircraft! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom