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: 66
12
<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


JFK, JFK....(you condescending tone has AGAIN been duly noted).

Casual readers of the thread will know what I mean.

The way designations are shown will vary between different companies, as to how they collate and relate the applicable airframes.

There are many, many different sources to refer to.

For instance, we get little shirt-pocket sizes laminated cards that, YES, DO have specific ship number ranges as a memory gouge because of minor MGTOW differences...Looking at one right now.

Happens to be for the B-737. ALL of our -300s are identical. Same with the -700, -800, and -900. The -500, however, have two varities, so there is a breakdown of the ship numbers and the differences. early models (#601-637) MAX TO weight is 129.5 Ships (#638-699)?? 133.5

That is just the shorthand, quickie reference---MORE details are in the manuals, and will have other references specific, depending on systems and parameters.

BUT, as I said...there are certain things that are SAME. Unless, of course, some AD comes out where mods are required...then it is a nightmare of revisions to constantly update manuals, which were competed and which not, etc.

Now, also...you get into airlines' where there have been mergers, and the equipment mix gets complicated. THEREFORE the company might deem it necessary to further publish those data, to make mistakes less likely to occur.

Really, armchair googling is no substitute for experience, sorry.




posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by JFrickenK
 



Then perhaps you would care top explain the heading on "767 doctor"s graphic...


IF you had read the entirety of my post, the one where you snipped the one sentence from, then you would have not needed to ask this extraneous question.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   
It really does not matter...

Until a copy of a manual which predates 9/11 AND has flight 77's serial and tail number listed is released this debate will continue... With or without me.

You say it doesn't exist, My manual casts reasonable doubt upon your statement.

The longer it takes for that document to be released the more suspicion that that release has been faked will be generated.

It is truly sad that there can not be an open disclosure of facts relating to the events of 9/11 as that would have quenched them in the beginning, but that is the way that it is today, and without straying off the topic of this thread in mind, the way it has been for over a century now.

The forefathers of this great land roll in their graves.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by JFrickenK
thomk, with the exception of the graphic you posted your entire post is speculation on your part.

Regarding the graphic, Can you share the FDAU's serial number with us ?


There is zero "speculation".

Exactly which of the statements that I made do you consider unsupported by fact.
Please explain why.
Please explain any viable way to get around any of those statements.

Tom



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


Quite frankly, the entire post was just rhetoric.

No need for any of those "needed" pages to "prove" anything. You see, this discussion has devolved straight down the rabbit hole into ONE topic, the latest "P4T du Jour" attempt to salvage what shred of dignity remained, and fan that cinder into a campfire. It is a failure. It is another wrong-headed claim that has no merit, just as NONE of the other FDR data "anomalies" that were 'discovered' have any merit.

The dishonesty and disinformation promoted by P4T is most evident, and most blatant, this time. AND, they got caught red-handed.

By prematurely shouting "Eureka", they neglected to look at the rest of the data...and Rob Balsamo, and minions, continue with a campaign of spin and convolution, to distract and deflect.

The REST of the recorded data, on the unit that had to have come ONLY from AAL 77, as discovered in the wreckage at the Pentagon, not only shows data for the last flight, but for AT LEAST the FAA-required 25 hours previous to when the unit stopped recording...in fact, since it is an SSFDR (solid state) and not an old-fashioned metal-foil tape-drive mechanical recorder, it actually had stored in excess of the 25 hours minimum.

Now...some have attempted to 'divide' those extra hours and try to come up with a number of previous flights. That is a futile errand.

Without knowing the exact scheduling that the airplane had been assigned, there is too much room for conjecture, too many city pairs. AA is a large airline.

Furthermore, an aspect not considered yet: Maintenance.

At some point during the previous recorded data, at some place, given that span of time, maintenance had control of the airplane numerous times.

What does that mean? Well, I'll tell you. It is common to re-position airplanes when they are on overnights. "MX Taxi"...yes, some mechanics are fully trained, using the same simulators pilots train in, to start and taxi the jets. They know how to use the radio, too.

Now...do you P4T folks want to claim that even when taxiing by MX, they bother to close the cockpit door???

Didn't think so.




[edit on 7 December 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor

Bobby needs to show this exact schematic from AA's manual which shows a connection from the flight deck door sensor(S10165 in this drawing) to EICAS.



I disagree.

If he wants to make his case, he has to show a connection of the door sensed signal all the way to the input of the FDR.


TomK



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:43 PM
link   
I am however curious about one thing which someone may be able to answer reasonably....


EXACTLY how does Boeing's serial number scheme work ?

No matter how I figure it, between the earliest serial number listed in my manual and flight 77's serial number there are over 2000 possibilities.
( and yes, a good portion of those 36 are in sequence )

According to Boeing's website the only built 1050 757's.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


Here's a resource for you to peruse.

maybe your answer is in there, somewhere.....

www.planespotters.net...



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


Here's a resource for you to peruse.

maybe your answer is in there, somewhere.....

www.planespotters.net...


Thank you, that is where I have been compiling pictures relating to the the aircraft listed within my manual from...

I am also using www.airframes.org... to compile additional information, but even that info is limited.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


The MSN is based on the total number of AIRCRAFT not just by type. So if 757 #22014 is built, and 4 other different types are built after, the next 757 should be 22019.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Well, the year it was built has no effect on the serial number sequence.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Thank you Zaphod58. That makes sense... almost.

It looks like in 1983 and 1984 Boeing built nothing but 757's according to that premise.

Does that sound reasonable to you ?



[edit on 7-12-2009 by JFrickenK]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


I spent so many years around military aircraft where the date DOES play a role in the tail number that I thought for sure the date of manufacture was in there somewhere, but I think Boeing assigns the MSN from date of order (not 100% on that though).

btw..."Zaphod36"?



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


LOL, didn't you use Zaphod36 at LCF ?

Anyway, this throws a "chink" into the premise....
Unless it was built in 1982 and sat around.

www.boeing.com...


Its extended-range model (767-200ER) entered service in 1984.





edit to add - "Date of order" does make more sense than date of build ( or completion ).


[edit on 7-12-2009 by JFrickenK]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


I`ve never been to LCF.

I`ve been working my poor phone overtime jumping between lists here. If you look at the 767 list, it starts in 81 (I think anyway, I`ve looked at three or four lists) with 21862. Then we go in sequence to 21880. I haven`t found 21881-22171 yet, but then we start with the 757 line at 22172, up to Feb 18, 82 where we have 757 22212 rolling off the line. Feb 19, 1982 we have a 767 with MSN 22213 rolling off.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by thomk

Originally posted by 767doctor

Bobby needs to show this exact schematic from AA's manual which shows a connection from the flight deck door sensor(S10165 in this drawing) to EICAS.



I disagree.

If he wants to make his case, he has to show a connection of the door sensed signal all the way to the input of the FDR.


TomK


I disagree with both of you. To make his case he has to show evidence that the parameter was actually being recorded. In other words, at least one instance of change in the recorded parameter in 42 hours of data. He can't, so the rest is just interesting trivia.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


OK, well you must have an admirer then, as I checked and there is indeed a "Zaphod 36" registered at LCF.


Might I ask for a link to the lists you are using as all I found thus far is year resolution for builds, and not actual dates.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


It has to be date of order. United ordered the first 767 in 1978. In 1979 there is a 747 with MSN 21922, but 767 21862 didn`t roll off until 1981.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


www.airfleets.net has a complete list of MSNs by type along with date of roll off the line.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by JFrickenK
 


www.airfleets.net has a complete list of MSNs by type along with date of roll off the line.


Perfect, just what I was looking for.

Thank you Zaphod58.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in

join