New FDR Decode

Originally posted by JFrickenK

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Okay. Let's assume that you establish that the NTSB data is fake. Where does that get you?

Seriously I can not believe that you are unable to comprehend the consequences of such a proof as they would be far too many to list here.

So you would immediately trust the set of data coming from the other sources. Which would lead to the conclusion that AA77 probably...

Originally posted by ImAPepper

Wow, your parents must be so proud that you are so sought after to moderate mentally ill people on the LCF and now the idiots at the PFFT forum.

Did I hack PFT? I tell you what; ask Bob if I did. We all have a strong feeling as to who and why it was allegedly hacked.

My parents were likely buried long before you were born.

Your "strong feelings" are null and void as you have shown you know nothing about it.

Edit to add - you may now join Farmer and the other idiot in my ignore list.

[edit on 9-12-2009 by JFrickenK]

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


Of course not. It would be scrutinized for any other possible fraud before making any judgement.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

Of course not. It would be scrutinized for any other possible fraud before making any judgement.

Hang on. You said that

----- "If there is no datapath from the surge tanks to the EICAS, FDAU, OR FDR then the data released ( AAL77_tabular.csv, column 106 ) by the NTSB is fake. PERIOD."


But that's not true is it? Because if the first set of data that you mention could be fraudulent then it wouldn't prove that. You would have no way of proving either was definitively false.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by JFrickenK
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

Of course not. It would be scrutinized for any other possible fraud before making any judgement.

Hang on. You said that

----- "If there is no datapath from the surge tanks to the EICAS, FDAU, OR FDR then the data released ( AAL77_tabular.csv, column 106 ) by the NTSB is fake. PERIOD."


But that's not true is it? Because if the first set of data that you mention could be fraudulent then it wouldn't prove that. You would have no way of proving either was definitively false.

With the manuals which I possess for reference that is a correct statement.
These were written specifically for a fleet of 757's, the newest of which predates flight 77's serial number by roughly 400.

Case in point is 767 doctors proclaimation of port 29. Nowhere within any of my 757 manuals is a port 29 mentioned.

Was there even a port 29 on flight 77 ?

Thus far 767 doctor has given me absolutely no reason to trust that anything he has stated is true.

Can I ask a couple of questions?

The FDR and recovered data found at the site matched the official story flight route correct?

A few witnesses supposedly viewed a different flight route which disagrees with the data produced from the FDR found at the site.

My question is this. When was the fake FDR data supposedly created?

If the FDR data was created before the flight actually took place to be planted later after the attack, wouldn't it be difficult to fly a plane to exactly match flight data that was generated in advance? I mean, wouldn't there be possible "variables" during a flight that would throw it off it's predetermined course? Wouldn't the "fakers" be taking a huge chance doing this type of thing and being found out?

Obviously that happened right? The plane veered off it's course, a course which was predetermined ahead of time by the faked FDR data, to go North of the Citgo station.

How did this screw-up happen?

This is what I don't get about the faked FDR data claim. Why plant data at the scene when it was WRONG? Why not take all possible variables out of the equation and actually fly a real plane into the Pentagon? Problem solved. No chance for error.

You mean to tell me that the powers that be decided, out of the two following choices...

1. Create FDR data ahead of time, run the risk of the plane running into problems and NOT matching the faked data, flying said jet OVER the Pentagon, running the risk of thousands of people seeing this flyover (in the morning mind you when it's light outside), screwing up the flight path by flying North of the Citgo, and STILL plant the wrong FDR data.

2. Fly an actual jet into the Pentagon

...they picked #1?!?!?

reply to post by Gamolon


Gamolon... You are pointing out what we have been showing them for years. The no planers at the Pentagon are clueless.

Originally posted by ImAPepper
reply to post by Gamolon

 

Gamolon... You are pointing out what we have been showing them for years. The no planers at the Pentagon are clueless.

I know.

I'd like someone with the perception that the FDR data is fake or possibly fake to answer.

The question I want answered the most is WHEN they think the fake FDR data was created. Before or after the supposed plane crash/flyover?

If it was created AFTER, why would they STILL plant a faked FDR at the scene even though they KNEW the plane flew off course at the very end?

reply to post by Gamolon


The final lat/long in the final subframe decoded by Warren Stutt is north of the downed lightpoles.

So no, it doesn't.

As far as when the data was created, that is asking for speculation and you will recieve answers from all timeframes.

Now, how about getting back on topic for a change ?



[edit on 9-12-2009 by JFrickenK]

Originally posted by JFrickenK
reply to post by Gamolon

 

The final lat/long in the final subframe decoded by Warren Stutt is north of the downed lightpoles.

So no, it doesn't.

As far as when the data was created, that is asking for speculation and you will recieve answers from all timeframes.

Now, how about getting back on topic for a change ?

Does the FDR decode show it being North of the Citgo?

Originally posted by Gamolon

Originally posted by JFrickenK
reply to post by Gamolon

 

The final lat/long in the final subframe decoded by Warren Stutt is north of the downed lightpoles.

So no, it doesn't.

As far as when the data was created, that is asking for speculation and you will recieve answers from all timeframes.

Now, how about getting back on topic for a change ?

Does the FDR decode show it being North of the Citgo?

No it does not.
However the NTSB animation ( which is supposed to be based upon the data from the FDR ) puts it too high and north of the poles, and the FAA animation shows it fully supporting the eyewitnesses who saw it north of the Citgo.

Originally posted by JFrickenK



As far as Admin duties I only recall one suspension ( I think ) which Rob turned into a ban...

And that person happened to be a "truther".

Convenient amnesia?

Regardless of the state of your memory, the sentiment in your statement is utter BS.

I can get for you 20 people (including me) who have been suspended and then banned for no reason except that we disagreed with Robby.

On EVERY SINGLE other 9/11 blog site, there is furious debate, with people arguing passionately from BOTH sides.

On ONE site (PfffT), there is only one side of the issue portrayed. Or allowed.

Geee, I wonder why that is...

TomK


PS. "I am not PFT".

Wow, does that ever sound just like one of Cap'n Robby's deceitful sentence parsings.

"I am an individual. PfffT is an organization. Therefore I can not BE PfffT.
And I never said I wasn't "A MEMBER of PfffT". So the sentence is technically correct."

Originally posted by JFrickenK
reply to post by Gamolon

 

The final lat/long in the final subframe decoded by Warren Stutt is north of the downed lightpoles.

So no, it doesn't.

As far as when the data was created, that is asking for speculation and you will recieve answers from all timeframes.

Now, how about getting back on topic for a change ?



[edit on 9-12-2009 by JFrickenK]

Another question.

How was the official flight path through the light poles derived? What was it based on?

Originally posted by JFrickenK

Originally posted by Gamolon

Originally posted by JFrickenK
reply to post by Gamolon

 

The final lat/long in the final subframe decoded by Warren Stutt is north of the downed lightpoles.

So no, it doesn't.

As far as when the data was created, that is asking for speculation and you will recieve answers from all timeframes.

Now, how about getting back on topic for a change ?

Does the FDR decode show it being North of the Citgo?

No it does not.
However the NTSB animation ( which is supposed to be based upon the data from the FDR ) puts it too high and north of the poles, and the FAA animation shows it fully supporting the eyewitnesses who saw it north of the Citgo.

Was the FAA animation based on the FDR?

Originally posted by JFrickenK
Your "strong feelings" are null and void as you have shown you know nothing about it.

Pretty arrogant for a guy who, just a few posts earlier, said this:

Originally posted by JFrickenKWhat I do know is that there is no way Hanni Hanjour could have brought that plane not only around the 270 degree spiral, but over either the antenna mast or over the Navy annex and had it fly so low and near level as was depected by the security cameras.

So someone else's opinion are "null and void" but you, in your infinite wisdom and superior intellect "know" exactly what did not happen, even though you were not inside that cockpit that day.

That is why you and Cap't Bob and LC and PFT and CIT and all those other moronic places and people are nothing but piles of steaming dog crap - and that is doing dog crap a favor.

reply to post by JFrickenK


Oh, here we go again...and yes, this is the topic, since it relates to the FDR.

The final lat/long in the final subframe decoded by Warren Stutt is north of the downed lightpoles.

For about the umpteenth time, the Lat/Long accuracy of the IRS is not that precise. THAT is the only thing the FDR has to use...why not look into WHICH IRS data it records, too. Left? Center? Right?

Or, does the FDR record the "mix" position, as calculated by the FMC?

(No, it doesn't. So, I'll not send you off on a wild chase).

In case you don't understand what I'm getting at here, you might want to look at the positional data for the takeoff protion of the flight at KIAD, too.

THAT will also show an error, in the IRS Lat/Long calculated position.

The position data derived from the IRS platforms was never intended to be as accurate as claimed by certain disengenuous folks who try to use anything they can to sow seeds of doubt in impressionable laymen's minds.

Of course, if any of the self-claimed "pilots" at the other sites had any idea what they were talking about, it would be rare indeed.

reply to post by thomk

Off topic but what I said is true.

I am not Rob.

Do I need to provide you with my Admin logs from there ?

You are very close to joining Farmer and the other idiots in my ignore list here.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
However the NTSB animation ( which is supposed to be based upon the data from the FDR ) puts it too high and north of the poles, and the FAA animation shows it fully supporting the eyewitnesses who saw it north of the Citgo.

Since you people like to point to and use the NTSB animation so much (and you like to stay on topic so much), can you tell us when the NTSB formally released that animation/simulation as an official explanation of what the bureau believes occurred that day? I'd like a reference to a press release or a press statement indicating such.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by JFrickenK

 

Oh, here we go again...and yes, this is the topic, since it relates to the FDR.

The final lat/long in the final subframe decoded by Warren Stutt is north of the downed lightpoles.

For about the umpteenth time, the Lat/Long accuracy of the IRS is not that precise. THAT is the only thing the FDR has to use...why not look into WHICH IRS data it records, too. Left? Center? Right?

Or, does the FDR record the "mix" position, as calculated by the FMC?

(No, it doesn't. So, I'll not send you off on a wild chase).

In case you don't understand what I'm getting at here, you might want to look at the positional data for the takeoff protion of the flight at KIAD, too.

THAT will also show an error, in the IRS Lat/Long calculated position.

The position data derived from the IRS platforms was never intended to be as accurate as claimed by certain disengenuous folks who try to use anything they can to sow seeds of doubt in impressionable laymen's minds.

Of course, if any of the self-claimed "pilots" at the other sites had any idea what they were talking about, it would be rare indeed.

weedwhacker,

Is there other flight information out there that people can look at to see similar inaccuracies for comparison?

It sounds like this would be a common thing yes?

Originally posted by Gamolon

Was the FAA animation based on the FDR?

I can only assume that it was as I don't believe I have downloaded that FOIA release.

< checks >

Nope, not in the slot I have assigned for it.