New FDR Decode

Originally posted by tezzajw
reply to post by R_Mackey

 

Yeah I am almost certain that ATS forbids previously banned members to login again.

Anyway, I'm still waiting to read a definitive 100% reason that explains the door being shut. There probably could be a simple solution, so why has it taken so long?

EDIT: Ok, I wasn't sure if Rob was banned on ATS. I know that pinch was banned, last visit in April 2009. trebor registered in May, 2009.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by tezzajw]

He's not banned.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So, I'll ask again, who in this thread is Rob? No one? Why is he in hiding?

Originally posted by 767doctor
So, I'll ask again, who in this thread is Rob? No one? Why is he in hiding?

You can probably contact Rob through the P4T website and ask him yourself.

Further speculation by you on this matter, in this thread, is pointless.

Do you have a definitive 100% reason for why the door was recorded as CLOSED on the alleged FDR data?

Originally posted by R_Mackey
I think ATS has a policy against previous banned members registering as socks?

ATS has banned Rob Balsamo from posting on ATS, long ago.

If what you say is true (and I have no reason to doubt
your knowledge of Balsamo's character and status), then
it's just incredible he hasn't attempted to evade that
ban in some fundamentally dishonest way.

Can't say I've missed him. After hearing that a missing
or incorrect value for the 1-bit FLT DECK DOOR parameter
would have been recorded as something other than a 0 or 1,
I don't see how Balsamo's unique technical insights could
have made this thread any funnier.

Will

Originally posted by cesura
If what you say is true (and I have no reason to doubt
your knowledge of Balsamo's character and status), then
it's just incredible he hasn't attempted to evade that
ban in some fundamentally dishonest way.

According to 767Doctor, Balsamo wasn't banned.

I guess it's a question for the mods?

Some say Balsamo was banned, others say he isn't but claim I'm "Robby" with an already active account under "johndoex".

Make up your mind.

Now, does anyone wish to get back to topic? Or is the focus on character assassination of Balsamo?

Originally posted by R_Mackey
According to 767Doctor, Balsamo wasn't banned.

My mistake: I should have trusted him instead of you.

Some say Balsamo was banned, others say he isn't but claim I'm "Robby" with an already active account under "johndoex".

Make up your mind.

Hey, you're the one who said Balsamo has been banned!

Now, does anyone wish to get back to topic? Or is the focus on character assassination of Balsamo?

So long as you continue to cite Balsamo as your
main authority, his remarkable history of technical
incompetence will remain relevant. That's not
character assassination, just an honest assessment
of your sources. If you want to remove Balsamo
from the conversation, try thinking for yourself
instead of relying so much on Balsamo and PfT.

But here's something for 911files: It looks
like the acceleration parameters are relative to
the aircraft's axes, and should be rotated into
the coordinate frame implied by the direction of
motion using the FLT DIR - PITCH CAPT (DEG) and
FLT DIR - ROLL CAPT (DEG) parameters.

Will

Originally posted by tezzajw
Do you have a definitive 100% reason for why the door was recorded as CLOSED on the alleged FDR data?

Conversely, does PfT and the "R_Mackey" sock and his minions have a definitive 100% reason why the 40 hours of flight time during 12 flights recorded in the FDR in question shows zero door openings in the pre-9/11 days when cockpit security and comings and goings on the flight deck were not that big a deal and the 757-200 class medium-range passenger jet was one of the work-horses of the transcontinental fleet?

I didn't think so.

You have a very, very, very difficult row to hoe in convincing anyone outside the standard PfT mindless apparatchik that in the recorded previous 40 hours of flight time the cockpit door was never.opened.once.

Originally posted by trebor451
Conversely, does PfT and the "R_Mackey" sock and his minions have a definitive 100% reason why the 40 hours of flight time during 12 flights recorded in the FDR in question shows zero door openings

trebor, I have stated that I have not seen a 100% definitive reason for why the alleged FDR data has recorded the door being CLOSED.

Originally posted by trebor451
in the pre-9/11 days when cockpit security and comings and goings on the flight deck were not that big a deal and the 757-200 class medium-range passenger jet was one of the work-horses of the transcontinental fleet?

So you can definitively prove that the door was opened, despite the alleged FDR data showing that it was CLOSED? Go ahead, please... lots of people will be interested in your proof.

Originally posted by trebor451
You have a very, very, very difficult row to hoe in convincing anyone outside the standard PfT mindless apparatchik that in the recorded previous 40 hours of flight time the cockpit door was never.opened.once.

trebor, in your self alleged 25 year career as a veteran 'civil servant' employee for the government DoD, did it ever occur to you that you should read what people have typed before you make a comment?

You look more than foolish when you try to imply a course of action that I do not need to take.

In your next post, can you definitively 100% explain why the alleged FDR recorded the door value being CLOSED?

Note that I have applied no other conditions, implications, tangents, claims, statements or anything else for you to stumble over and get wrong... like you got it wrong in your above quote. I have made no assumptions at all, in any way, other than to ask a question.

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by tomk52
Run away, little boy.

A personal attack that I would expect from someone who doesn't know how to debate properly.

"Little boy" was NOT a personal attack. It was an objective assessment of the (im)maturity level of your posts. Which lack any depth, and constitute simple baiting.

As I'll PROVE in a moment.

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by tomk52
I don't have time or patience for the juvenile level of debate that you've shown.

So you can't answer me why you chose those subjective probabilities of 98%, 1% and unknown? Why can't you answer me?

If you were competent at logic, you'd realize that my percentages added to 100%.
The specific numbers were my judgment calls, based on 35 years of successful project engineering experience. Experience that has put me in charge of projects to design & build high tech devices that have successfully gone to the bottom of the Marianas Trench, to Saturn, and have repaired about 100,000 human hearts.

Tell me, tezza. What's the basis for YOUR judgments?

If you were capable of reading for comprehension, BTW you'd realize that I DID answer your silly probability question. In the precise post in which I cited those numbers.

Originally posted by tezzajw
You made an incomplete, subjective assignment of probabilities for your reasons why the FDR recorded the CLOSED parameter.

No, I did not. You're not very good at comprehending what you read.

Try reading it again.

I HAVE made that judgment. I've never posted my assessment of that reason here.

Originally posted by tomk52
PS. If you have a "closed door" explanation to the clear, concise statements of indisputed facts that I posted along with those probabilities, you're welcome to post them. If you say something insightful, I'll respond.

Originally posted by tezzajw
No,

Originally posted by tezzajw
you made the 98%, 1%, unknown claim. It is your responsibility to explain why.

And THESE are the two responses that show you to have the maturity level of a 15 year old.

"No, I won't answer your question."
"But you OWE ME .... [blah, blah, blah].

The pathologically hypertrophied sense of entitlement, sense that the world OWES you whatever shiny little bauble your tiny walnut of a brain momentarily fixes upon, which is common to testosterone-addled adolescents the world over.

I don't have any "responsibility" to provide you with shyte, son.

Originally posted by tezzajw
For some reason you still have not provided a definitive reason why the FDR recorded a CLOSED value. Why is that? Can't you be 100% sure?

Combined with adolescent taunting.

Yeah. THAT'S gonna move me...

LoL.

Tell ya what, kid. You answer MY questions about how the pilots swapped without opening the door.
Then I'll tell you, with 98% certainty what I have NOT said thus far: Why the FDR recorded the doors as "closed".

TomK

Originally posted by R_Mackey
Thank you tezzajw,

I was going to hold off on this till page 50. But close enough.

I think ATS has a policy against previous banned members registering as socks?

ATS has banned Rob Balsamo from posting on ATS, long ago. And from what I have read through the archives, for much less offense than those seen by TomK, jthomas, ImAPepper, Reheat, trebor/Pinch, etc.


[edit on 30-11-2009 by R_Mackey]

... and, while lamenting the oh-so-unfair treatment of the no-longer banned Cap'n Bobby, conspicuous in its absence is the sentence "No, I (R_Mackey) am not Rob Balsamo".

There is zero doubt that Bobby is here. This thread positively REEKS of Balsamo spoor.



TomK

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Some say Balsamo was banned, others say he isn't but claim I'm "Robby" with an already active account under "johndoex".

Make up your mind.

There is nothing mutually exclusive about any of those 3 conditions.

Originally posted by R_Mackey
Now, does anyone wish to get back to topic? Or is the focus on character assassination of Balsamo?

By several orders of magnitude, the person who assassinates Balsamo's character the most would be .. you, Rob.

TomK

PS. Boy, you sure went quiet about 91.312(d). Did you have a revelation?

[edit on 1-12-2009 by tomk52]

Originally posted by tomk52
"Little boy" was NOT a personal attack.

Yes it was. You fail to see this is your problem, not mine. I assure you.

Originally posted by tomk52
Tell me, tezza. What's the basis for YOUR judgments?

I haven't made any judgements about the alleged FDR records showing the door being CLOSED.

Why would you state that I had?

Originally posted by tomk52
I don't have any "responsibility" to provide you with shyte, son.

Personal attack noted with the circumvention of the swear-word censor also noted. Keep it up and your time on ATS will be short. The Moderators do watch for that kind of stuff. You should know, you've had one warning already.

If you don't know for certain, with a 100% confident reason, then just admit to it, rather than deflect from it.

98% sure still leaves room for you to be wrong. Would a self alleged 35 year project engineer be satisfied having a subjective 2% chance for being totally wrong?

Originally posted by tomk52
Tell ya what, kid. You answer MY questions about how the pilots swapped without opening the door.

If that's what you claimed they did, then that's for you to demonstrate. I really don't see how this tangent helps you explain the alleged FDR door reading.

At this point in time, tomk52, the situation is that the alleged FDR data shows the door CLOSED. You have yet to explain the reason for this with 100% certainty. I have not seen anyone explain it with 100% certainty.

Perhaps it won't take long for someone to figure it out. I'm sure there are lots of official government story believers out there, right now, checking their data to make sure the government got it right.

[edit on 1-12-2009 by tezzajw]

FDR door? could have bene forced open. Faulty circuit. Faulty sensor.
Or simply that parameter is NEVER recorded and is always set at a 'closed' state.

We already know that the cockpit door is not pertinent to a flight (anyone who has flown on a military transport or a FEDEX/UPS plane knows that the cockpits on these planes have no door), since any opening of the door would be caught by the CVR on board. so the recording of that parameter would be the lowest of priorities.

Originally posted by cesura
But here's something for 911files: It looks
like the acceleration parameters are relative to
the aircraft's axes, and should be rotated into
the coordinate frame implied by the direction of
motion using the FLT DIR - PITCH CAPT (DEG) and
FLT DIR - ROLL CAPT (DEG) parameters.

I reached the same conclusion. I am withdrawing from the 'debate' to concentrate on my main project without distraction. I'll be monitoring this thread though to see if anything useful develops among the 'noise'. I noticed that someone on JREF is wanting to know how to reach me. I cancelled my membership at JREF a year ago, so ATS PM is one way.

Sean Boger's Point of View.

Sean Boger was name was brought up earlier in this thread as a witness. The guy always seemed pretty sharp to me and definite about what he saw, so I decided to lay out his vantage point on Google Earth.

I started by clicking the ruler tool on the control tower of the heliport.



Sean said he spotted the plane 8 to 15 seconds before impact, so I extended the ruler out approximately 12 to 13 seconds from the pentagon.



I placed the other end of the ruler directly over Columbia Pike as if the plane was flying straight down Columbia Pike.



As you can see Sean's line of sight to the airplane would be slightly north of the citgo



This it how the plane would have looked to Sean as it approached.

The red plane is over Columbia Pike and 12 to 13 seconds away from impact.

The blue plane is beside the VDOT Antenna and over Columbia Pike 4 seconds from impact.





[edit on 1-12-2009 by waypastvne]

reply to post by waypastvne

A couple of things about your post. First, it probably belongs in another thread, as it doesn't have much to do with the alleged FDR data.

Second, Boger stated that he saw a NoC flight path. If the plane he saw actually flew NoC, then that contradicts the official government story flight path, meaning that the speed of the plane may not have been as fast as what the official government story states.

All of the official government story alleged Flight AA77 flight path data must be believed as a complete package. If some of it can be shown to be false, then there's no reason to necessarily believe any of it. It could all be suspect, some may be true, but none of it should be taken true 'at face value' if some of it is proven false.

Where you place the plane 12 to 13 seconds away, may not be where Boger saw it, as it could have been a lot closer, travelling slower, if the plane was not flying according to the official government script.

Third, you mention nothing about the banked, tilted wings that Boger described. Is this supported in the alleged FDR data?

I wish I knew what happened, that's for sure.

Originally posted by RipCurl
FDR door? could have bene forced open. Faulty circuit. Faulty sensor.
Or simply that parameter is NEVER recorded and is always set at a 'closed' state.

We already know that the cockpit door is not pertinent to a flight (anyone who has flown on a military transport or a FEDEX/UPS plane knows that the cockpits on these planes have no door), since any opening of the door would be caught by the CVR on board. so the recording of that parameter would be the lowest of priorities.

We have already gone through this using current and proper B757 documetnation. A kicked down door, or faulty sensor would read OPEN
due to the proximity sensor and circuitry used.

Feel free to view the schematic here:

pilotsfor911truth.org...

As you'll see, a damaged/faulty proximity switch, or kicking down the door
will do nothing to maintain a "logic 0" state.

Also, let it be known we have links to the FAA to show N644AA
was updated prior to 9.11.01 to monitor the FLT DECK DOOR.

registry.faa.gov...

www.boeing.com...

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by 911files

 

Nope, not stupid at all. Settle down John, I already explained that you
can't find it because it's not in the FDR file to begin with.

You are dumb as a rock. The binary bits and the WORD are in the FDR. The data ain't (a bunch of 0's). So thank you. Since it is exactly the same case as the FLT DECK DOOR, you just admitted that it was not in the FDR to begin with either.

No, YOU must be dumb as a rock because you don't understand what I'm saying.

YOU CANNOT find a PARAMETER that is LISTED in the file REQUIRED by
the FAA, or Boeing assigned parameter that is NOT updating.

I KNOW full well the frame length never changes.

P.S. Did you see the links above showing N644AA was certified and updated
prior to 9.11.01?

[edit on 1-12-2009 by turbofan]

reply to post by turbofan


I have looked at your sources but I did not see references to the Flt Deck Door. Can you help me out please ?

reply to post by Alfie1


Certainly:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f6bffbbcaaee.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/48915ff55790.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by turbofan


Thanks for that but, perhaps I am missing something, I haven't yet seen anything " to show N644AA was updated prior to 9-11-01 to monitor the Flt Deck Door " as you posted above.

The second doc you just posted to me doesn't mention N644AA and in fact is headed 757-3, a different model.

Can you please show me something, or direct me somewhere that will confirm N644AA was updated to include the Flt Deck Door monitoring as you stated ?