It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Flight 77 FDR research

page: 7
9
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Not sure - want to look into that. Despite update frequency, can't find a DME station at that distance anywhere near the flight path. If it lost the signal I presume the FDR goes to zero as the unit itself displays ---- for the distance and the VOR2 needle goes to ==> (points directly to the right on the instrument regardless of heading to indicate no signal rather than instrument failure).




posted on Apr, 16 2007 @ 04:16 PM
link   
I needed to pop back in here with some recent updates regarding serious errors I made earlier in the thread:
I mistranscribed the altitude numbers from the original when modifying an FDR graphing from the "Flight Path Study" for presentation - dropping a zero across the board - this was accidental and I didn't notice the numbers not lining up - it threw my calculations off by a factor of 10! And then I used that to illustrate inconsistencies between the FDR Specialists Study/Flight Path Study and the animation, seeing one drop from 2500 feet to ground in 45 seconds, the other only showing 250 feet dropped. So in fact, both the animation and the more verifiable NTSB data agree on this final slope of about 2500 feet in the last 45 seconds. So the animation is not so off after all.
Also the altitude difference at final impact - if there is any - is too small to read by my data. Could you locate the 40-foot level on this? Or even the 180? (A new enhanced version of the final minutes - I fixed the numbers, but numbskull that I am I may have screwed something else up... please let me know).

I'm not like the Loose Change crew - I don't leave mistakes in on purpose so you can "discredit me and do the research yourselves." I just screw up sometimes - often enough actually - and then catch it when I do. You should do your own research and double-check whether someone's right or wrong. Period.

Peace y'all


[edit on 16-4-2007 by Caustic Logic]



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit
If you check my calcs on the altitude on Page 3 of this thread, and compare with the decoded FDR data found here: z9.invisionfree.com...

Accounting for the fact I have mis-calculated the altitude of the Pentagon lawn in my calcs, and making the differences up, I come to the same conclusion@ that it was 275 feet above the lawn of the Pentagon.

If it was descending at 5,500 ft/min, then in 1 second, the aircraft descended 5500 / 60 = 91 ft. In two seconds, it descended 91 x 2 ft = 182 ft.

275 - 182 = 93 ft AGL. It STILL didn't hit the Pentagon, even allowing for a two second gap in the data between the last reading and "impact".

The aircraft passed over the Pentagon with 93 - 70 = 23 ft to spare. Allowing for altimeter altitude (13 ft according to the Boeing tech drawings with the gear up to allow for the bottom of the engine nacelles) we get 23 - 13 = 10 ft clearance.

This still puts the aircraft 80 ft above the lawn, two seconds after the last data was recorded in the FDR.

Considering the aircraft clearly enters the official camera view LEVEL with the ground at about 15 ft, it is not possible that the aircraft suddenly dived in the last 150 ft and leveled out before hitting the Pentagon, at 450 kts. It would have gone nose first into the lawn (and we know that didn't happen).

We know it didn't bounce - the lawn is intact. Another point here: if it did bounce, it would leave the engines behind as these would impact first. Most people assume that when it "bounced" it bounced off the fuselage, but the engines are under-slung, and these would impact first, most likely ripping the wings off in the process, and creating a fireball SHORT of the Pentagon (think of the Boeing 720 fuel test aircraft from the 80s). We'd have scorched earth, a crater where it dug in, and a general mess. But the lawn is actually intact.

If it didn't dive, and therefore didn't/couldn't hit the bottom of the building as is claimed (with a level attitude), the only place it went was over. There is no-where else it could have gone given the damage to the Pentagon, the lack of damage to the lawn, and the aircraft altitude, speed, and rate of descent.

[edit on 13-3-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

Wondering why this thread just kind of died off? Seems like the FDR placed the plane too high to have hit the Pentagon, as many have said. It seems like the only rebuttal to this was altimeter lag or something like that. Well, for those that have not seen it, here is a pretty good explanation for why that "delay" or "lag" is impossible. Debunking Fdr Debunking is another good resource.
Also a bit off topic, but important none the less. Here JFK has put a pretty big hole in the RADES data as well, using Reheat's own calculator he used for self proclaiming he has debunked CIT's NoC flight path.(note that reheat's paper on CIT's NoC is also proven wrong in this thread)



new topics
 
9
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join