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.
You guys said the software was stolen. I found your discussion by google your fantasy web sites it revealed, the person supplying the software had to be secret or get fired. That sounds like stolen to me. Clear it up and source the software supplied; names, companies etc. Please clear this up. Who supplied the software and what company was it from.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
The NTSB Flight Path Study and csv file provided by the NTSB claimed to be decoded by the NTSB from AA77 FDR, conflicts with Warren's data.
The software used by P4T to decode the FDR file was not stolen. Yet another unproven libelous false accusation from those who find anything to support their government dictated theory.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Originally posted by tomk52
You may want to look up the term "irrelevant". The dihedral is "irrelevant" to the relative position between the wings & the static ports.
757 Diagram
Tom, Dihedral is very relevant. Take that front view above, diagram the location of the static port, and draw a line from the static port to the tip of the wing parallel to the ground.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
The static port is below the wing chord for the length of the wing and therefore in the high pressure zone.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
The static port is NOT in the low pressure zone above the wing, which is required for your theory.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Pitch attitude does not matter as the static port will always be in the high pressure zone below the wing chord.
Originally posted by tomk52
The static ports are NOT mounted in any high pressure areas. Most specifically not in the one below the wings.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Originally posted by tomk52
Nonetheless, I have read it carefully. And it simply reinforced the points that I made.
If you read it, you would know that it does not reinforce anything you have been saying and in fact proves how errors are removed from the static system during type certificate testing.
No,... Anaeroid[sic] wafers do not "wear".
Make a phone call and learn.
www.google.com...=en&q=duncan+avionics&aq=f&aqi=g1&oq=&fp=642c18fb4411ca2e
Originally posted by tomk52
I don't need to make a phone call.
And Duncan Aviation is a "Systems integrator". They don't make the components. They install them. They replace them. They calibrate them.
The typical, long term failure modes of aneroids are:
1) a pinhole leak that loses the internal vacuum.
A stack of sealed aneroid wafers comprise the main component of the altimeter. An aneroid wafer is a sealed wafer that is evacuated to an internal pressure of 29.92 inches of mercury (29.92 "Hg).
2) aging of the diaphragm material (i.e., loss of temper).
Originally posted by R_Mackey
... blah, blah, techno-babble ...
Check the static port on any high wing aircraft. It is below the wing. A Cherokee has ...
Originally posted by R_Mackey
blah, blah, blah...
misdirection, misdirection, misdirection...
technobabble, technobabble, technobabble...
This is why static ports are located below the wing, in the "high pressure zone" (as compared to above the wing).
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Now, you noticed the PA dropped in altitude at rotation, it can only drop in altitude if the pressure is higher than previously. How do you think the pressure got higher at the static port during rotation?
Originally posted by R_Mackey
You are correct 911Files. The curvature of the upper surface of the wing creates a low pressure, therefore a higher pressure under the wing. High pressure always travels to low. This creates lift. This is basic aerodynamics 101.
Unfortunately for your theory, the static port is located below the wing chord (notice Tom dropped this argument when I asked him to provide a front view of static port location). Being that the static port is located below the wing, and therefore in a high pressure zone, and the fact the aircraft was "pulling G's" at such a time, this would artificially create a lower reading in PA due to high pressure. Meaning the actual aircraft altitude is higher than the PA data point, if there were any such error.
911Files, do you also agree with Ryan Mackey that Boeing's "typically cruise" above their critical mach?
Originally posted by tomk52
Originally posted by R_Mackey
... blah, blah, techno-babble ...
Check the static port on any high wing aircraft. It is below the wing. A Cherokee has ...
Originally posted by R_Mackey
blah, blah, blah...
misdirection, misdirection, misdirection...
technobabble, technobabble, technobabble...
This is why static ports are located below the wing, in the "high pressure zone" (as compared to above the wing).
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Originally posted by tomk52
The typical, long term failure modes of aneroids are:
1) a pinhole leak that loses the internal vacuum.
This is known as Tear.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
They are sealed at 29.92, not in a vacuum.
An aneroid wafer is a sealed wafer that is evacuated to an internal pressure of 29.92 inches of mercury (29.92 "Hg).
The Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge
"Aneroid. The sensitive component in an altimeter or barometer that measures the absolute pressure of the air. It is a sealed, flat capsule made of thin disks of corrugated metal soldered together and evacuated by pumping all of the air out of it."
Appendix / Glossary
Page G-3
Originally posted by R_Mackey
If they were sealed in a vacuum, they wouldn't move with changes in static pressure and be flat all the time.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
You sure you build these things?
Originally posted by R_Mackey
2) aging of the diaphragm material (i.e., loss of temper).
This is known as wear.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Wear and tear, just what I said...
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Good evening Tom,
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Originally posted by tomk52
Originally posted by R_Mackey
... blah, blah, techno-babble ...
Check the static port on any high wing aircraft. It is below the wing. A Cherokee has ...
Originally posted by R_Mackey
blah, blah, blah...
misdirection, misdirection, misdirection...
technobabble, technobabble, technobabble...
This is why static ports are located below the wing, in the "high pressure zone" (as compared to above the wing).
Editing quotes. Very mature Tom.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Tom, I'll be honest with you. I am a bit tired of going round and round with someone who is unable to make a post without personal attacks. I have let it slide that you refer to me as "Rob", "Fraud", "Poser". without proof (which I believe is also against ATS T&C), but the personal attacks in every-single-post you type are just getting to be a bit much for an adult discussion.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
If this were a debate in a proper venue, you would have lost long ago.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
When you claimed that aneroid wafers are sealed with an internal vacuum for the purpose of measuring pressure just confirmed my suspicions that this argument is a waste of time and it appears you are just making stuff up as you post, ...
Originally posted by R_Mackey
... perhaps googling the terms while trying to keep up, as did Ryan Mackey when he parroted the Wiki claims that Boeing's typically cruise above their critical mach.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
... if you accept Warren's AA77 decoded data, you must accept UA93 data. ... The "error" at take-off is the same exact "error" at end of data, ...
... have not provided any proof for their claims. Photographs are not proof. Parroting DNA claims as made by the govt is not proof (especially when it is known labs can and do fabricate DNA). Claiming Warren's data is authentic without even verifying the code, and the fact it conflicts with the NTSB Flight Path Study and the NTSB provided csv files, is not proof of an impact.
Originally posted by iSunTzu
The takeoff errors in the altimeter for 77 were confirmed by you to be greater than 50 feet.
Originally posted by turbofan
I'd be happy if someone would concede the '50 foot error'
nonsense of static port intergration[sic] to the vent of a pressure altimeter.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Wow, a 3 post reply from Tom with multiple edits for each. I feel so honored.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
Tom, I didn't bother to read your posts thoroughly ...
Originally posted by R_Mackey
I will concede the wafers are sealed in a vacuum.
Originally posted by R_Mackey
When you claimed that aneroid wafers are sealed with an internal vacuum for the purpose of measuring pressure just confirmed my suspicions that this argument is a waste of time and it appears you are just making stuff up as you post, perhaps googling the terms while trying to keep up
Originally posted by R_Mackey
I recalled it was based on pressure changes from 29.92 and therefore air in the container so I did a quick search for a source and posted it. I forgot it was based on spring action as I was taught this stuff long ago.