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: 63
12
<< 60  61  62    64  65  66 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Probably because American bought TWA in 2001? And at that time didnt know if they were going to retire the TWA Pratt 757's?

Duh...

Jay, you sure you work for the airlines?

j/k..




Hm, I read your post, but didn't see an explanation....just a piece of commercial aviation trivia that I already knew.

Typical woosh-over-the-head response. No sh!t Sherlock. Those planes are now in widget colors, so I'm well aware of them. But how does that fact help your argument? I would have thought the logic would be simple enough for a first grader, but I show know better than to overestimate your intellect.


Jay, i have already proven that 757_3b_1 is very much different from the generic Boeing DFL. You claimed they were the same generic DFL's. You are wrong. 757_3b_1 is a modified version of 757-3b. Its custom.

Also, your static Bleed pressure is listed as "ENG1staticpressPW" (2 for the right engine of course) and is grounded, showing all 0's, just like the RSVD parameters. Clearly any aircraft accident investigator looking at that will readily know that its not working as the aircraft doesnt have Pratts and its clearly labeled. How will one know if the door parameter is functioning at first glance? According to your theory, they have to go digging.

Your other BLD ACT isnt listed in RO2 when doing a search. I searched all references from 757-3b_1.txt DFL.

Clearly its left in the DFL for future use. But its also clearly labeled as "PW" in the data, or not there at all.

Has anyone provided proof for an open door indication yet? Has anyone provided proof this data is from N644AA? Has anyone provided proof that N644AA is responsible for the damage at the Pentagon? Any proof for errors in an FAA required and VALIDATED Pressure Altitude?




posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor



Good post turbofan. Yes, the FDR records on the ground as long as an engine is running. So there should be plenty of 1's in the data, both in pre-flight as well as in flight. Pre-9/11 cockpit doors were open all the way up to the "prepare cabin for departure" PA announcement which came well after engine engine start.



Engines arent started till push back and cabin and flight deck are secure. Unless of course you need an air start, in which case the cabin and flight deck are still secured. This is SOP.

I dont think you can air start a 757 though as im not too sure they can defer the APU? Does the 757 have starter-generators for those big engines?

Jay, are both comparators required for flight?

4th time asked.

Anyone provided proof for an open door?

~100th time asked.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor
I still literally cant believe that a self anointed leader of a pilot organization believes that no pilot left his seat a single instance in 11 flights, which averaged over 3 hours a piece. Idiocy. That fact that the state never changes once alone debunks this retarded theory.


Just saw your edit above Jay,

To make such a claim, you first have to prove those flights existed as passenger service.

Please provide flight numbers, passenger and crew manifests and the Dispatch release for each.

Lat/Long coordinates arent enough, perhaps they are for you though.

Thanks.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey
Please provide flight numbers, passenger and crew manifests and the Dispatch release for each.


Rob, you are being silly again. As you alread know, your P4T folks have already pulled the flight information from BTS.

BTS Post At P4T

The flights match up with what your person posted. Now you are just going into fairyland where anything is 'possible'. Have you found an instance of the parameter changing yet Bob?



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Jay, i have already proven that 757_3b_1 is very much different from the generic Boeing DFL. You claimed they were the same generic DFL's. You are wrong. 757_3b_1 is a modified version of 757-3b. Its custom.


You know, repeating something that is untrue doesn't make it any less so. If it's custom for the airplane in question, why leave all the Pratt & Whitney parameters? You see? That falsifies your "if its in the DFL, its working" notion. You cannot squirm your way out of that.



Also, your static Bleed pressure is listed as "ENG1staticpressPW" (2 for the right engine of course) and is grounded, showing all 0's, just like the RSVD parameters. Clearly any aircraft accident investigator looking at that will readily know that its not working as the aircraft doesnt have Pratts and its clearly labeled.


Lets see...all 0's on a parameter, one that we know isn't being used. I thought you said earlier that such parameters would be blank?

You realize you refuted yourself here? You just admitted that:

- There are parameters in the DFL which aren't being used by the airplane.
- Such parameters will record logic 0's for the entirety of the data.




How will one know if the door parameter is functioning at first glance? According to your theory, they have to go digging.


Of course they research which parameters are installed and which ones aren't. It's not hard to figure out if you have access to the manuals. What do you suppose the appendix of "not working" and "unconfirmed" parameters are in the report?



Your other BLD ACT isnt listed in RO2 when doing a search. I searched all references from 757-3b_1.txt DFL.

Clearly its left in the DFL for future use. But its also clearly labeled as "PW" in the data, or not there at all.


Yeah they left it in there just in case they re-engined the fleet from RR to PW.


BTW, the ex-TWA 757's would probably use the "custom" TWA specific DFL, wouldn't you think?



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Engines arent started till push back and cabin and flight deck are secure. Unless of course you need an air start, in which case the cabin and flight deck are still secured. This is SOP.


But what about during taxi? I see open cockpit doors all the time during taxi-out.

eta: and I won't call you a liar here because I'm sure SOP states exactly what you say. But as a frequent flier up front, in my experience, the cockpit door stays open well into taxi.



I dont think you can air start a 757 though as im not too sure they can defer the APU? Does the 757 have starter-generators for those big engines?


Don't know why you are asking this but: yes you can ground start a 757, yes you can defer a 757 APU in some circumstances, yes they have starters.



Jay, are both comparators required for flight?

4th time asked.


Why do I get the sense that this is a loaded question?



Anyone provided proof for an open door?

~100th time asked.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



Are you paying attention? We are saying that there may be no way to know on this airplane. It's up to you prove this claim positively, why aren't you?


[edit on 6-12-2009 by 767doctor]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:41 AM
link   
Ok... i just had a long pleasant conversation with one of our FDR Experts, Dennis Cimino.

He agrees with our article, he agrees with the wording "According to the data, it is impossible for the aircraft to have been hijacked".

He agrees with the work of P4T and will be helping us out in the future as he has done in the past.

With that said, I cant really waste too much more time here on ATS bickering with those who make excuse for the govt story.

If anyone has questions, please feel free to email me personally. I usually reply pretty quickly, pilotsfortruth(at)yahoo.com.

Or, feel free to stop by our forum.

Regards,
Rob

Edit:

Jay, i briefly read through your above replies.

1. The DFL from American is different from the Boeing DFL. This has been proven. The American DFL is a modified version of the Boeing DFL.

2. I no longer think if its not being used, it will be "blank". This was a question in the past. Warren cleared this up for me yesterday on our forum (but he still has yet to provide proof, but i have no reason to not believe him).

I hope everyone has a good morning.




[edit on 6-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey
Ok... i just had a long pleasant conversation with one of our FDR Experts, Dennis Cimino.


Well, we'll just have to hear that from Dennis. I suspect you did not give him all of the details. Without a case of an OPEN being recorded to verify the parameter was recorded, it is impossible for Dennis or anyone else to make that claim.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   
Almost forgot...

Dennis Cimino Experience and Qualifications.


Dennis Cimino
Electrical Engineer
Commercial Pilot Rating, since 1981
Navy Combat Systems Specialist: RADAR, ECM, cryptographic communications
Flight Data Recorder Engineer Smiths Aerospace
BA-609, IDARS, Military and Commercial
Millimeter wave RADAR and countermeasures expert since 1973
Two patents held for Doppler RADAR ( Kavouras ):
long pulsewidth RADAR droop compensation network,
and wave guide arc detection for high powered RADAR


pilotsfor911truth.org...

This is just one of our FDR Experts who have helped us out in the past. The others remain anonymous for the obvious reasons littered all over this thread.

and yes, Dennis did give me permission to post his statements regarding our article and work.

He also received a copy of my above post and replied that it was a good summary of our conversation.

Enjoy your day...

[edit on 6-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

This is just one of our FDR Experts who have helped us out in the past. The others remain anonymous for the obvious reasons littered all over this thread.


Ugh... I'm not flying again until the end of January...I'm thinking about taking the Amtrak.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by R_Mackey
 



I dont think you can air start a 757 though as im not too sure they can defer the APU? Does the 757 have starter-generators for those big engines?


Yes, you can hook up external air to start an engine. You can do it on a 757, 767...even a "big" engine like the B-747. Really, nice of you to admit you don't know something, it is a welcome respite.

As to the APU. Of course, if it is INOP it can be deferred. However, for all the ETOPS-qualified airplanes, APU reliability history is vital. For dispatch purposes, for ETOPS flights.


Does the 757 have starter-generators...


No, the starters on every large passenger jet aren't like the ones on your turboprops. They are NOT electric starters, they only operate from the pneumatic system.

BTW...a simple enough answer to your first question, about air-starts, would have been immediately obvious once you reviewed an Airline's AFM. Look for the procedure titled "BATTERY START" for inspiration.
_________________________________________________________
To add some more 'gee whiz' info:

There are three ground air connections on the B757-767. Two for the left side manifold, one on the right. Therefore -- it is prudent, for air-starts, to arrange the ground air cart on the left side of the airplane. (Also, keeps it from interferring with cargo loading). When ready, since the cart is on the left, the right (#2) engine is started first, instead of usual (#1). After #2 is stable, then air and electrics are removed (assuming you weren't forced to resort to a Battery Start) and the #1 engine is started when the area behind the airplane is clear of, as we look for about 35-40 psi for the start of the other engine, by crossbleeding...and requires a bit of N1 run-up. This is usually done after push-back, in the alley.





[edit on 6 December 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Clearly any aircraft accident investigator looking at that will readily know that its not working as the aircraft doesnt have Pratts and its clearly labeled. How will one know if the door parameter is functioning at first glance? According to your theory, they have to go digging.


As I tried to explain to Mr. Balsamo days ago, this is totally not true.

The FDR tech simply needs to look at the PROPER documentation to
see if FLT_DECK_DOOR was included in the list of recorded parameters.

If the FDR confirms that FLT_DECK_DOOR was not connected as per
documentation, he will expect to see zeros down the entire column and
will disregard that portion of the data.

No guess work whatsoever.

Ufortunately, P4T has not provided this documentation and therefore their
latest release titled, "IMPOSSIBLE Based on the data" is misleading.

It's like writing your automotive dealer to complain about an option such
as Anti-lock brakes on your car...only to find out Anti-lock braking was not
standard equipment on your car.

What the car owner should have done before writing the letter to the dealer,
is looked at the option codes stamped on the inside of the door jamb to
see if anti-lock brakes were installed, or checked the original contract to
see the options listed.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by turbofan]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   
deleted, not worth it.



[edit on 6-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey
Ok... i just had a long pleasant conversation with one of our FDR Experts, Dennis Cimino.

He agrees with our article, he agrees with the wording "According to the data, it is impossible for the aircraft to have been hijacked".

He agrees with the work of P4T and will be helping us out in the future as he has done in the past.



Like the other poster said, I wonder how much you told him. I'm sure he got the Readers Digest version of the claim.

Did you tell him you have no evidence that FLT DECK door is actually an EICAS caution message used by AA. Did you tell him that this parameter never shows a single "1" in 42 hours of data? Did you tell him that not every parameter on the DFL is used by the aircraft in question? Did you tell him such an unused parameter will show all 0's for the entirety of data?

I'm guessing the answers to the above questions is "no". That's because you a very dishonest person, Rob Balsamo.




With that said, I cant really waste too much more time here on ATS bickering with those who make excuse for the govt story.

If anyone has questions, please feel free to email me personally. I usually reply pretty quickly, pilotsfortruth(at)yahoo.com.



Translation: "I know I'm getting my butt handed to me here and I've run out of bullsh!t arguments. I have absolutely ZERO evidence for my claim, but I'm standing pat with my steaming pile of BS.

I'm taking my ball and going home. Neener."


Oh BTW Bobby.... as you know, we airline people are a close fraternity. Well I spoke with a mechanic friend at AA who informs me that there is no such "FLT DECK DOOR" warning on AA's 757 fleet.

His words?

According to our SSM 52-71-01 there is not FLT DECK DR message for EICAS. All external doors are hooked into EICAS of course.

The only difference between our 757 and your 757 door warning system is that we have a warning for the overwing slide. Looking WDM for the door all you have is the CB, the relay on the P34, the overhead panel and the door lock. Just like yours I imagine.

If I'm intrepreting this right there's a parameter for the FLT DECK DR on the DFAU/FDR. Looking at our manuals I don't see where the door is hooked up into it in anyway since it's not part of EICAS. Which would fall into line with the way AA is about options. Unless told they have to hook something up.



Balls in you court Bob.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor
Oh BTW Bobby.... as you know, we airline people are a close fraternity. Well I spoke with a mechanic friend at AA who informs me that there is no such "FLT DECK DOOR" warning on AA's 757 fleet.


Now I am really glad I do not fly anymore.



What is your "mechanic friends" job ? Tire changer ?



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey
Ok... i just had a long pleasant conversation with one of our FDR Experts, Dennis Cimino.


Ahhh....more PfT "experts".

Is he any more of an "expert" than your "surface to air missiles" at the Pentagon experts?

Is he any more of an "expert" than your "Gopher 06 was vectored up along the very edge of P-56!" experts?

Is he any more of an "expert" than your "flight mishap" experts?

Your "experts", FDR or otherwise, lack any and all credibility in these matters by no more than association with your "organization".

Who else you got, Bob?



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by R_Mackey
Ok... i just had a long pleasant conversation with one of our FDR Experts, Dennis Cimino.


Ahhh....more PfT "experts".

Is he any more of an "expert" than your "surface to air missiles" at the Pentagon experts?

Is he any more of an "expert" than your "Gopher 06 was vectored up along the very edge of P-56!" experts?

Is he any more of an "expert" than your "flight mishap" experts?

Your "experts", FDR or otherwise, lack any and all credibility in these matters by no more than association with your "organization".

Who else you got, Bob?


And your qualifications are exactly ? < shrugs >



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by JFrickenK

Originally posted by 767doctor
Oh BTW Bobby.... as you know, we airline people are a close fraternity. Well I spoke with a mechanic friend at AA who informs me that there is no such "FLT DECK DOOR" warning on AA's 757 fleet.


Now I am really glad I do not fly anymore.



What is your "mechanic friends" job ? Tire changer ?


When are you PFT "experts" going to learn to stay out of matters that you do not understand? Like your FWD ACCESS DOOR snafu, this is another glaring FAIL.

Do you even know what you posted there?

Thats the door lock/unlocked switch. Have a look at the schematic.


All the cockpit door sensor does is send a ground to a relay that dims the forward attendent area lights. That switch you attempted to play "gotcha" with, controls the door open solenoid. It sends 28 VDC to the solenoid when the switch is depressed to "LOCKED". That is it.

Where is EICAS getting the flight deck door position? Anyone? Anyone?


JFK, have you grasped anything about this, at all? How your your little gaggle of "experts" have ZERO evidence of Rob's "the door never opened" claim. He was shown his errors, and told what he needed to prove his case.



[edit on 6-12-2009 by 767doctor]

[edit on 6-12-2009 by 767doctor]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:45 PM
link   
2008... YOU have a look at the "Effective pages".



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by JFrickenK
2008... YOU have a look at the "Effective pages".


That was the pre 9/11 config, genius. The new config looks exactly like this.


It's not my fault you don't understand that as manuals are revised, old configurations remain in them.

ETA: note what the flag note says at the bottom: incorporates the flight deck door EO. Can you take a wild stab at what flight deck door EO that was? Do you even know what an EO is?



[edit on 6-12-2009 by 767doctor]

[edit on 6-12-2009 by 767doctor]




top topics



 
12
<< 60  61  62    64  65  66 >>

log in

join