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.

 

New FDR Decode

page: 50
12
<< 47  48  49    51  52  53 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by Orphia Nay
Have you uploaded the full 42 hour csv file to your site at all? I'd be interested in double-checking the data. I'm surprised no-one from PFT has offered to do the same.


I posted the FLT DECK OPEN csv with all 42 hours worth of data here already.

FLT DECK OPEN csv

But just for you, I ran the entire file with everything Warren is extracting in it. It is like 41 individual csv files in a zip file of around 27mb. Enjoy!

EVERYTHING

It's done...

JREF Ninjas


[edit on 2-12-2009 by 911files]

[edit on 2-12-2009 by 911files]


Thanks very much! Much appreciated.

I downloaded and unzipped the file(s), and did searches of all of them for "OPEN" (and "open" to be pedantic) and there were no results.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the csv file parameter for "1" was set to "OPEN" wasn't it?




posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor
Read my first post of the day. Show us proof that AA had this parameter operational or withdraw your BS claim. .


As of this point in time, everything points to the Cockpit door closed, altitude too high to hit the Pentagon, the list goes on.

You have not provided any EVIDENCE to the contrary. You want to use RadAlt as your proof? Well, its listed under the same group of parameter as FLT DECK DOOR you claim wasn't recorded.

Take my King, but I'm gonna take your's and end the game with Pressure Altitude.

Matter of fact, you have provided information that the claims you make COULD be the opposite based on proxy switches.

I'll let you in on a little secret, The 757-200 has a proxy switch on the Cockpit door sensor.

You just lost your King without a sacrifice of mine.

(although it's not really a secret for anyone who works on the 757)

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Orphia Nay

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by Orphia Nay
Have you uploaded the full 42 hour csv file to your site at all? I'd be interested in double-checking the data. I'm surprised no-one from PFT has offered to do the same.


I posted the FLT DECK OPEN csv with all 42 hours worth of data here already.

FLT DECK OPEN csv

But just for you, I ran the entire file with everything Warren is extracting in it. It is like 41 individual csv files in a zip file of around 27mb. Enjoy!

EVERYTHING

It's done...

JREF Ninjas


[edit on 2-12-2009 by 911files]

[edit on 2-12-2009 by 911files]


Thanks very much! Much appreciated.

I downloaded and unzipped the file(s), and did searches of all of them for "OPEN" (and "open" to be pedantic) and there were no results.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the csv file parameter for "1" was set to "OPEN" wasn't it?


Anyone can input numbers into a csv file. Orphia, the program used to decode the above information was developed independently of the NTSB. The software used by the NTSB is worth 10's of thousands of dollars. 911Files claims he verfied it with Visual Basic.

Thats hilarious.

Orphia, how well do you know VB, C#, RAPS software?

In other words, in order to verify the data, you must verify the software which decoded the data. You're a skeptic no?

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Matter of fact, you have provided information that the claims you make COULD be the opposite based on proxy switches.

I'll let you in on a little secret, The 757-200 has a proxy switch on the Cockpit door sensor.

You just lost your King without a sacrifice of mine.
(although it's not really a secret for anyone who works on the 757)

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]


Yawn. Dude, could you be any more predictable with your insults? Yes, I'm so terribly unproficient on the 757's flight deck door warning! They should can my worthless ass right now! Are you serious? It's one of the bazillion things I'm responsible for on an airplane.

However, when a pilot has no concept of MEL relief, that's telling. Doesn't get much more basic than that. Tell me again, how does it go, Rob?

"If its on the airplane, its required equipment"





[edit on 2-12-2009 by 767doctor]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor


767Doctor,

How can the FDR record a grounded parameter when you've stated if it's not used, the wiring is just left open?


Ok, first of all, your question didn't make any sense....but I'll try to answer anyways. When that parameter is installed on an airplane, the FDAU(and the EICAS computer as well) is gonna see either a ground or an open. My instincts tell me that the EICAS computer is looking for a ground to trigger the door warning, because that's the way similar systems work, in my experience.

Do you follow so far? Lets just assume for a second that on a perfectly functional plane, a door is closed in flight, the EICAS computer as a result is getting an open; so is the FDAU, so it records a logic 0. Now an FA opens the door, EICAS sees a ground has been made and triggers the message; FDAU now records a logic 1. Two states. 0 or 1. Ground or open. Purdy simple stuff....nite folks.

on edit: it can work the other way around too. For example, Passenger Doors and Access hatches uses inductive proximity sensors, instead of mechanical switches. Those would work the opposite of the way I describe above. You obviously want the light to come on when there is suddenly an open. Mechanical switches can be wired either way.


Those reading, read the above and the edit I bolded.

Cockpit door sensors on the 757-200 are a proxy switch.

Now read this again as stated by 767Doc



the EICAS computer as a result is getting an open; so is the FDAU, so it records a logic 0


Therefore, 767Doctor (not "757Doctor" as N644AA was a 757), just confirmed the FDR will record a 1 as the default if the switch is a proxy sensor (as is logical). Again, the cockpit door is on a proxy. For a 767"Doctor" (implying elite, but in this case clearly narcissism) to not know the cockpit door sensor is on a proxy is disturbing in itself.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   
Ah, so you have the wiring diagram manual. Now flip to chapter 31, find the FDAU inputs and discretes section and post it here. Time to solve this mystery Rob. Whats that? You don't have the wiring diagram manual? Your little sidekick googled "cockpit door sensor"....and found some rudimentry schematic?

BTW, skippy, post 9/11 cockpit doors come from multiple vendors(you remember Mr Airline pilot, we had to change them all!) so every airline and every airplane is different. To say all 757's use prox (not proxy lol) sensors would be like saying all 757 engines use 2380 oil(if you haven't figured out by now, I'm alluding to the fact that some 757s are Rolls and some are Pratt)

And about that PA: how do you explain Radalt? The plane cleared the Pentagon roof by 4 feet?! Well, it had to be a pull up then right, since the frame before shows like 50' and the Pentagon wall is 77'? So where is the pullup on the PA?

Now you're gonna tell me it lags!


[edit on 2-12-2009 by 767doctor]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Anyone can input numbers into a csv file. Orphia, the program used to decode the above information was developed independently of the NTSB. The software used by the NTSB is worth 10's of thousands of dollars. 911Files claims he verfied it with Visual Basic.

Thats hilarious.

Orphia, how well do you know VB, C#, RAPS software?

In other words, in order to verify the data, you must verify the software which decoded the data. You're a skeptic no?


I'm familiar with VB, C# but not RAPS and was interested enough to examine the source code kindly posted by Warren. I can assure you that it is NOT inventing the data it extracts and that it contains nothing malicious like a 'phone home' routine, keystroke logger or whatever.

It extracts data from the same raw file used by the NTSB and their decoder plus, interestingly, generates the same data for fields extracted by NTSB. It's absolutely not making it up. With a little 'dressing up', Warren's code would be far superior for the job

The NTSB-used software might cost 10's of 1000s of dollars but being worth it is something else. It's proprietary software with a limited user base and that's why it's so expensive, not because of the magic it does.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Anyone can input numbers into a csv file. Orphia, the program used to decode the above information was developed independently of the NTSB. The software used by the NTSB is worth 10's of thousands of dollars. 911Files claims he verfied it with Visual Basic.

Thats hilarious.

Orphia, how well do you know VB, C#, RAPS software?

In other words, in order to verify the data, you must verify the software which decoded the data. You're a skeptic no?


I'm familiar with VB, C# but not RAPS and was interested enough to examine the source code kindly posted by Warren. I can assure you that it is NOT inventing the data it extracts and that it contains nothing malicious like a 'phone home' routine, keystroke logger or whatever.

It extracts data from the same raw file used by the NTSB and their decoder plus, interestingly, generates the same data for fields extracted by NTSB. It's absolutely not making it up. With a little 'dressing up', Warren's code would be far superior for the job

The NTSB-used software might cost 10's of 1000s of dollars but being worth it is something else. It's proprietary software with a limited user base and that's why it's so expensive, not because of the magic it does.


Thank you for that Pilgrum.

But if you want your post to have any weight, I highly recommend you post your full name and credentials as Warren Stutt did.



I do not have any specific credentials to investigate FDRs or aircraft accidents. I do however have a BSc(Hons) degree in Computer Science as well as several years of commercial experience as a computer programmer.

I am not affiliated with nor have I ever worked with or for neither the US National Transport Safety Board (NTSB) nor any other aircraft accident investigator.

I am neither a pilot nor an aircraft engineer and have never flown an aircraft. I am not affiliated with nor have I ever worked with or for any airline, any pilots’ organisation, any aircraft engineering organisation or any FDR manufacturer.

My investigation in to the events of September 11th 2001 is unofficial, independent and completely voluntary.

www.warrenstutt.com...


@767Doctor,

Do the 757's cockpit door sensors at Delta have proxy sensors? If so, why didn't you mention that in your edit with the other doors?

Face it 767Doctor, you haven't a clue unless you look it up.

Hey "Doc", does Delta record their 757 Cockpit Doors status? What type recorder? Why type Data Frame Layout?

Don't make excuses "pre/post" 911. Is it recorded or not? You have all this access, provide the doc's.

P4T provided the doc's. They are dated pre-911. You can't download them perhaps? Perhaps banned from P4T because you "disagree" with P4T? Or is it because of the attitude you display here. Try a sock "Doctor".

@Orphia,

"767Doctor" is apathoid.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Thank you for that Pilgrum.

But if you want your post to have any weight, I highly recommend you post your full name and credentials as Warren Stutt did.



Sorry

The less you know about my experience & qualifications, the better I'll feel about it.

Apply whatever weight you like to any opinions I express and I highly recommend getting 2nd and 3rd opinions from appropriately experienced people for your own peace of mind.

Just remember it's not about me, or you, or anyone else posting in this thread.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:50 AM
link   
Thats it huh? You just want your little "neener neener" moment. No, I'm not creating a sock to come to your little circle-jerk club. If you have something, post it here. If not, we are pretty much at a stand-still.

And yes, pre/post 9/11 does matter. You see, if you were a real airline pilot, you'd know they were all changed after 9/11 you silly!



Face it 767Doctor, you haven't a clue unless you look it up.


lol....what have I looked up? You're lucky i haven't looked anything up at work, the last thing I looked up was that mystery part that your whole organization spent weeks trying to find!

www.911blogger.com...

LMAO



[edit on 2-12-2009 by 767doctor]

[edit on 2-12-2009 by 767doctor]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum

Just remember it's not about me, or you, or anyone else posting in this thread.


Agreed. But if you are gong to offer your opinion based on your expertise you claim to have, you may want to put a name behind it for some weight so others can verfiy.

Making a post on ATS saying "I agree with Warren's decode and program" means nothing as anyone from "Santa Claus" to "Elvis Presley" can do the same.

Lest I remind you, I believe someone here stated "Warren is a programming Genius!"

This also came from an extremely biased and unconfirmed individual proven to be wrong numerous times and known to fly off the deep end and wig out.

So, how many here are "Programming Geniuses" to verify Warren's data?

P4T verified the last flight. They are unable to verify the rest of the "40 hours" of data at this point in time.

Warren admits he has zero experience in aviation or FDR's.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor
You see, if you were a real airline pilot, you'd know they were all changed after 9/11 you silly!

LMAO



The physical door was changed. Why would the door sensor if open or closed be changed?

So, you are unable to list the DFL and recorder for Delta 757's. Why am I not surprised.

And if you think I'm Rob Balsamo. Are you doubting Rob was/is an Airline pilot?

Apathoid/767Doctor, I believe you were provided with a Dispatch Release from Atlantic Coast Airlines with Balsamo listed as Flight Crew. Was ACA not a 121 Carrier? Why do you lie?

Do you need it provided again? Do you deny it? I will search for it.

Better yet, why not try faa.gov airmen inquiry.

Unless of course you disagree with all your peers here that in fact I'm not Rob Balsamo, therefore, your claim may hold weight. That I'm, not an airline pilot.

So, am I Rob Balsamo? Or am I not an Airline pilot? You can't have both.

Ughh... your tactics are transparent.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Originally posted by 767doctor
You see, if you were a real airline pilot, you'd know they were all changed after 9/11 you silly!

LMAO



The physical door was changed. Why would the door sensor if open or closed be changed?

So, you are unable to list the DFL and recorder for Delta 757's. Whjy am I not surprised.

And if you think I'm Rob Balsamo. Are you doubting Rob was/is an Airline pilot?

Apathoid/767Doctor, I believe you were provided with a Dispatch Release from Atlantic Coast Airlines with Balsamo listed as Flight Crew. Was ACA not a 121 Carrier? Why do you lie?

Do you need it provided again? Do you deny it? I will search for it.

Better yet, why not try faa.gov airmen inquiry.

Unless of course you disagree with all your peers here that in fact I'm not Rob Balsamo, therefore, your claim may hold weight. That I'm, not an airline pilot.

So, am I Rob Balsamo? Or am I not an Airline pilot? You can't have both.

Ughh... your tactics are transparent.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]


I really could give a rats ass if you flew commercially or not, I stopped caring some time ago.

And why the hell would I know the data frame layouts for our 757's? This is not something pilots or mechanics deal with. I'm probably the only AMT at Delta who knows they are in the first place...so what is your point? Do you want me to find out? Why is it relevant?



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor
I really could give a rats ass if you flew commercially or not, I stopped caring some time ago.


767Doctor,

How much time do you spend typing Balsamo's name or replying to claims made by Balsamo?

How much time does Balsamo spend typing yours?

You care about Balsamo. Balsamo probably doesn't even remember who you are.

As for DL 757 DFL, I'm not surprised why you think it's irrelevant. you're just lazy. Face it.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Warren admits he has zero experience in aviation or FDR's.



That's the rule , rather than the exception when it comes to coding. The skill is in being able to translate algorithms into machine executable code.

A name does not affect the accuracy of the output.

Warren is a fellow countryman of mine, well almost as he's actually a Kiwi but he lives in Oz these days so we're practically cousins


Are there any concerns about accuracy when comparing Warren's output to what PFT have obtained so far (the final flight) ?

[edit on 2/12/2009 by Pilgrum]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Are there any concerns about accuracy when comparing Warren's output to what PFT have abtained so far (the final flight) ?



Warren's decode for FLT DECK DOOR is verified by P4T for the last flight only.

As admitted, P4T doesn't have any "computer geniuses".

The NTSB Flight Path Study and 9/11 Commission Report conflicts with Warren's decode of the last 4 seconds.

Warren admits he has no experience in Aircraft Accident Investigation.

Perhaps the NTSB is less competent?

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 06:03 AM
link   
Before I sign off to get some sleep, has the day ended with anyone being able to explain why the alleged FDR data shows the door being CLOSED?

There's been an 85% reason posted by a self alleged project engineer - is anyone going to top that and solve it?

I guess I'll have to wait until the morning... I might get confused in my sleep thinking about it...


The silliest thing in all of this, is why has it taken eight bloody years for this data to surface? Why was the NTSB so incompetent not to have found the 'missing' data that Warren did? (Not just the door CLOSED data, I mean the whole four seconds)

Who funds the NTSB for such sloppy work? Still, those government departments sure have a lot of people who place a lot of faith in them...

Have a good morning, USA.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Warren's decode for FLT DECK DOOR is verified by P4T for the last flight only.

As admitted, P4T doesn't have any "computer geniuses".

The NTSB Flight Path Study and 9/11 Commission Report conflicts with Warren's decode of the last 4 seconds.

Warren admits he has no experience in Aircraft Accident Investigation.

Perhaps the NTSB is less competent?

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]


The lack of any declarations of other 'errors' in the final flight decode tells me that you've confirmed that the other parameters match as well. The final 4 seconds is extracted from the same raw file via the same algorithm so is there any valid reason to doubt it? Seems the software NTSB used simply discarded incomplete frames as corrupt whereas Warren's software did not and your only bone of contention is that final 4 seconds.

NTSB's area of expertise would be in analysis of the decoded data using tools provided by external parties closely associated with the manufacturers of the FDRs. You needn't be a programmer to use specialised software just as FDR designers don't need to be pilots or mechanics.

Why is 4 extra seconds of data so confronting when we're all looking for truth here?



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Why is 4 extra seconds of data so confronting when we're all looking for truth here?



Why is a United States Govt agency tasked to protect the flying public, and a Commssion tasked to investigate 9/11 not able to come to the same conclusion as your Aussie "cousin"?

[edit on 2-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 10:23 AM
link   
The anonymous nobody who's been hiding behind the
misleading screen name "R_Mackey" is dismissing
his opponents' arguments because some haven't
identified themselves using their full name.

It comes as no surprise that this poseur's posts
are a morass of disinformation and technobabble.
A few examples:


Originally posted by R_Mackey
Orphia, itt's good you question the extra 40 hours of data. It appears you are a True Skeptic. None of you "peers" have asked for it to be verified. You may want to think about that.

Orphia took the trouble to examine at least two CSV
files for the extra 40 hours, extracted independently
by two of his "peers".


Orphia, how well do you know VB, C#, RAPS software?

In other words, in order to verify the data, you must verify the software which decoded the data. You're a skeptic no?

The fake R_Mackey has demonstrated no knowledge of
software or verification. He's just technobabbling.

Pilgrum responding by saying he was familiar with
C# and had taken the trouble to examine Warren's
code. Pilgrum assured us "that it is NOT inventing
the data it extracts". The fake R_Mackey responded:


But if you want your post to have any weight, I highly recommend you post your full name and credentials as Warren Stutt did.

Pilgrum did state his relevant credentials, but
why should he give his name to an anonymous poseur?


Agreed. But if you are gong to offer your opinion based on your expertise you claim to have, you may want to put a name behind it for some weight so others can verfiy.

Making a post on ATS saying "I agree with Warren's decode and program" means nothing as anyone from "Santa Claus" to "Elvis Presley" can do the same.

Which implies the fake R_Mackey's posts mean nothing.

I, too, have looked at Warren Stutt's code and
tested it enough to confirm Pilgrum's conclusions.
My full name and some of my credentials are online
at www.ccs.neu.edu...



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 47  48  49    51  52  53 >>

log in

join