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.
Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by apex
If that is what you chose to believe, feel free. There are solid forensic reasons, particularly with commercial aircraft, they do reconstructions. Those reasons have little to nothing to do with what they think is the cause of the destruction of aircraft.
hear·say 1. unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge.
Originally posted by OrionStars
If you wish an education in forensics and genetics, get it on your own time and at your own expense just as I did. Or prove me wrong.
The flight data recorder (FDR) is a flight recorder used to record specific aircraft performance parameters. A separate device is the cockpit voice recorder (CVR), although some versions (including the original) combine both in one unit. Popularly, though almost always falsely, known as the black box used for aircraft mishap analysis, the FDR is also used to study air safety issues, material degradation, and jet engine performance. These ICAO regulated "black box" devices are often used as an aid in investigating aircraft mishaps, and its recovery is second only in importance to the recovery of victims’ bodies. The device's shroud is usually painted bright orange and generally located in the tail section of the aircraft.
Originally posted by CaptainObviousThe evidence helped make repairs to this specific style aircraft so the problem would not happen again.
Tell me something Orion....
Flight 585 was referenced several posts ago (which you had no input about) The FDR was found along with the CVR. These tools along with the evidence found at the scene and a similar crash allowed them to determine the casue of the crash. (some time later)
Is this hearsay?
Do we ignore it ?
NO!
The evidence helped make repairs to this specific style aircraft so the problem would not happen again.
All the information I have posted has been verified.... and offical. You just keep on ignoring as long as it helps you sleep at night
Originally posted by johnlearTthat is a categorically false and misleading statement. UAL 585 in Colorado Springs was not due to a yamper damper failure. The flight data recorder information was specifically fabricated to match USAIR 427 in Pittsburgh which was also not due to a yaw damper failure.
Originally posted by OrionStars
The link to the Pentagon article stated why the FBI was not allowed. Nor were they allowed to investigate the WTC complex either. FEMA was instructed only FEMA was allowed. Then FEMA prevented NIST from taking but a small portion of the evidence to lab test. NIST could only take what FEMA allowed to be taken.
Originally posted by johnlear
Tthat is a categorically false and misleading statement. UAL 585 in Colorado Springs was not due to a yamper damper failure. The flight data recorder information was specifically fabricated to match USAIR 427 in Pittsburgh which was also not due to a yaw damper failure.
Both accidents was due to rudder PCU failure.
Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by Freaky_Animal
Both accidents was due to rudder PCU failure.
PCU over ride is 80 pounds. There was no indication in either accident that opposite rudder was ever attempted. In neither case was the power pulled back nor were the speed brakes deployed.
A PCU failure does not cause an airplane to roll inverted and split S into the ground.
Thanks for the post but neither accident was caused by a PCU failure and both probable causes were fabricated.
[edit on 8-1-2008 by johnlear]
Life is not a conspiracy.
Prove it !
You lack ANY evidence to back up your fantasy.
Originally posted by CaptainObvious
The plane was traveling at the speed of a .45 bullet. Thats why the comparison was made.