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: 78
12
<< 75  76  77    79  80  81 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


Oh look, the pot calling the kettle black...

How cute.

Also off topic.




posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey
77 pages and still no proof the door was opened in flight for a hijack to occur, no proof N644AA was the aircraft responsible for the damage at the Pentagon, no proof the PA is in error, no proof of the object from which RA is measuring.


Just means your reading/math comprehension is poor. That was proved long ago. Still stuck in fairyand I see.



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey
77 pages and still no proof the door was opened in flight for a hijack to occur, no proof N644AA was the aircraft responsible for the damage at the Pentagon, no proof the PA is in error, no proof of the object from which RA is measuring. Just more and more proof that those who make excuse for the govt story have nothing better to do than bicker with people they think are nuts, from behind their screen. Sad.

Hey guys, check out the traffic at P4T today! We blew away our last record! Over 3800 reading the forum!

Also, guys, if i wrote the article to make money, i would have posted a direct link to our store on the article when i sent it out to our media contacts, instead i posted our member list and join form. Over 70+ new applicants and they're still coming in! This will be our largest update to the Core Member list ever!

Feeling allitle boxed in are ya? And some claim the Truth Movement isnt growing... right Pepper/Capt Obvious/Throat Yogurt/Mr Herbert/10 different other socks so you can satisfy your obsession with truthers....?



Rob Balsamo- you are a fraud. You are a thief. You have failed and failed miserably. The world ...that is the the rational world, the world that have listened to you knows what you are!

Do you get it, failure? Not a SOUL in the rational world cares what you say! No one but a handful of mentally unstable imbeciles listens to you.

No matter the DVD sales, the coffee mugs, the clock... nothing will change what you are.... you know what that is? You are a charlatan. You are a snake oil salesman. Very few buy it. So many more laugh at you.

Keep up your vaudeville act Rob. There is chump change to be made. There are always suckers that will be entertained by your act. But, Rob, not enough will cling onto your pathetic lies. The idiots of the world can not afford to support you! You are nothing. We that hear you, we laugh at you. Can you hear us?



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   


Originally posted by R_Mackey
77 pages and still no proof the door was opened in flight for a hijack to occur, no proof N644AA was the aircraft responsible for the damage at the Pentagon, no proof the PA is in error, no proof of the object from which RA is measuring.


How daft can a person be? Have you read anything, at all, in this thread?

FLT DECK DOOR: not a standard EICAS message, ergo - a customer option; unlikely to have been active on the AA 757 in question as there is never a change of states once in 42 hours, including ground ops and mx ops. Debunked. Next?

PA in error - Ever hear of instrument lag? Static source error? A device called an IVSI? Debunked, next?

RADALT: uber-precise measurement(down to 1' accuracy) that doesn't lag; shows 4 feet in the last frame; coupled with large scale accelerometer reading - indicates a preliminary impact. Debunked.

No evidence N644AA(AA77) was responsible for damage: you mean, no evidence other than radar tapes, 757 specific wreckage, eyewitness accounts, DNA from passengers and crew who boarded AA77, and FDR which faithfully recounts its final dozen flights, ACARS messages, one missing AA 757(not zero, not two - ONE).


Funny, you talk about theories with no evidence....ahem....flyover....ahem...



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
About the IRS derail.

Weedwhacker hit the nail on the head. It's not accurate enough for a forensic recreation of the planes exact position. Two reasons for this...lack of precision and lack of accuracy.

precision: IRS resolution is 0.1 latitude minutes and 0.1 longitude minutes. that equates to roughly 600' latitude and 500' longitude(or thereabouts, depends on where you are).

accuracy: as another user said, this system drifts over time and prior to GPS position updates, the system used navigation aid triangulation, using DME. The problem is DME resultion is limited to 0.1 miles, or about 600'

I wouldn't put much stock in IRS position plotted over a map.

[edit on 9-12-2009 by 767doctor]



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor

No evidence N644AA(AA77) was responsible for damage: you mean, no evidence other than radar tapes,

which happen to end about a mile ands a half from the Pentagon.


Originally posted by 767doctor
757 specific wreckage,

with no... oh wait, one untraceable serial number.


Originally posted by 767doctor
eyewitness accounts,

I thought you threw them under the bus.


Originally posted by 767doctor
DNA from passengers and crew who boarded AA77,

The chain of custody is ?


Originally posted by 767doctor
and FDR which faithfully recounts its final dozen flights,

The serial number of which is ?


Originally posted by 767doctor
ACARS messages,

Perhaps you should look at those again.


Originally posted by 767doctor
one missing AA 757(not zero, not two - ONE).

So what happened in Shanksville ?


Originally posted by 767doctor
Funny, you talk about theories with no evidence....ahem....flyover....ahem...

Now you throw Mr. Roberts under the bus.

Did you cry when Bush left office ?



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by JFrickenK

Originally posted by 767doctor

No evidence N644AA(AA77) was responsible for damage: you mean, no evidence other than radar tapes,

which happen to end about a mile ands a half from the Pentagon.


Originally posted by 767doctor
757 specific wreckage,

with no... oh wait, one untraceable serial number.


Originally posted by 767doctor
eyewitness accounts,

I thought you threw them under the bus.


Originally posted by 767doctor
DNA from passengers and crew who boarded AA77,

The chain of custody is ?


Originally posted by 767doctor
and FDR which faithfully recounts its final dozen flights,

The serial number of which is ?


Originally posted by 767doctor
ACARS messages,

Perhaps you should look at those again.


Originally posted by 767doctor
one missing AA 757(not zero, not two - ONE).

So what happened in Shanksville ?


Originally posted by 767doctor
Funny, you talk about theories with no evidence....ahem....flyover....ahem...

Now you throw Mr. Roberts under the bus.

Did you cry when Bush left office ?


Why would I cry when Bush left office? Ohh, that's right...your rather limited worldview tells you that I must be another standard issue government loyalist. How many posts do I have in the JREF political forum? That would be ZERO. I'm the furthest thing from a political drone, hence my JREF nick.

You realize that anyone can make the exact same arguments about any plane crash...or any event all... in history? You're arguments are bordering on solipsism. If you have evidence that the AA77 wreckage/DNA/ATC tapes/FDR were tampered with or planted - now's the time to share it.

If you have nothing other than your own personal incredulity and insanely unreasonable demands for evidence - don't expect any rational, or even reasonable person to listen to you.

PS : a United 757 crashed in Shanksville. So yes, one missing AA 757. Nice to see you're on the ball. /sarcasm

[edit on 9-12-2009 by 767doctor]



posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by 767doctor

Why would I cry when Bush left office? Ohh, that's right...your rather limited worldview tells you that I must be another standard issue government loyalist. How many posts do I have in the JREF political forum? That would be ZERO. I'm the furthest thing from a political drone, hence my JREF nick.

You realize that anyone can make the exact same arguments about any plane crash...or any event all... in history? You're arguments are bordering on solipsism. If you have evidence that the AA77 wreckage/DNA/ATC tapes/FDR were tampered with or planted - now's the time to share it.

If you have nothing other than your own personal incredulity and insanely unreasonable demands for evidence - don't expect any rational, or even reasonable person to listen to you.

PS : a United 757 crashed in Shanksville. So yes, one missing AA 757. Nice to see you're on the ball. /sarcasm

[edit on 9-12-2009 by 767doctor]


If you scroll back a few pages you will find a crash report I posted with all the details including FDR serial number.

As far as your JERF nickname, I do not know what it is nor do I care.

Also my 757 manuals show port 29 NOWHERE... although the 747 manual I have does show 3 instances of port 29 being referenced in the EFIS

And holy crap, guess what ! It also has a "list of airplanes"... 21 of them.

Are you sure you work for AA ?
( and I don't mean Alcoholics anonymous )

[edit on 9-12-2009 by JFrickenK]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by JFrickenK

If you scroll back a few pages you will find a crash report I posted with all the details including FDR serial number.



Yes, but I can ask you for the chain of custody and simply dismiss it as faked. See how stupid this line of reasoning is?
So, if you had a serial number, what exactly would you do with it? Tell me.



As far as your JERF nickname, I do not know what it is nor do I care.


Sorry, I was on one of Rob's creepy Most Wanted GL's list. Its: apathoid.



Also my 757 manuals show port 29 NOWHERE... although the 747 manual I have does show 3 instances of port 29 being referenced in the EFIS


I'm really getting tired of repeating of myself. Try to pay attention this time: your manual is different than mine. I explained at least once why this is the case.

I'll post the schematic for our DFDAU and FQIS for you. I'm only doing it as educational tool for you though. When you see how different two 757's can be in a given system of the same ATA chapter and section(ie DFDAU inputs 31-31-01 and Fuel Quantity 28-41-01), maybe some of what I've been telling you will sink in.

You see, if you were actually qualified to be rummaging through that manual which you somehow possess, you'd understand why there are little numbers under "EFFECTIVITY" at the bottom of the schematic. It means that page is only applicable to those ship numbers listed. If you had a Wiring Diagram Manual, which is 10X more explicit that the SSM(which tends to be generic but does break down larger effectivity differences), you'd see even more effectivity classes than the SSM breaks down.




And holy crap, guess what ! It also has a "list of airplanes"... 21 of them.


Right, not applicable to the whole 757 fleet. But even with 21 airplanes, there are probably some effectivity issues. Why only 21 airplanes and not the whole fleet? Because the manual at each airline is different, they are not generic....quite unlike DFL's.

This is not the first time you've mentioned the "list of airplanes". Is there a point you want to make? I sure didn't expect to see a "list of guided missile cruisers". If you want to see schematics for aircraft 644, you'll have to get them yourself and you won't find them unless you have access to the American Airlines 757 manual system. At United, you'll find manuals only for United aircraft, same goes for Continental, Delta, Us Airways, etc. THEY ARE ALL DIFFERENT.

eta: reiterated the above. Is the point home yet?



Are you sure you work for AA ?
( and I don't mean Alcoholics anonymous )


PfT is most fortunate that I don't work for either AA or UA.



[edit on 10-12-2009 by 767doctor]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by JFrickenK
Also my 757 manuals show port 29 NOWHERE...

At this point I believe a more accurate statement would be that you've been unable to locate port 29 in the manual you are referencing.

Taken in the context of your hilarious efforts over the past dozen or whatever pages, it's quite fair to say there still remains the possibility that port 29 is displayed in your manual with bright flashing neon lights underscored by a bowel rattling subwoofer.

Please leave the manual research to turbofan, will you mate? Unlike you, he seems to be fairly competent at it.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 06:25 AM
link   
I can't believe that you guys have successfully allowed the P4T troll to derail the thread and spin it into utter nonsense. Darn, the guy did not even know that Hani made a 330 turn, not a 270 one and you really expect him to understand any of this stuff he has been bantering about?



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 06:32 AM
link   
JFK,

Any insight in to which scenario it is below?


Originally posted by Gamolon
Ok.

You have three scenarios for the FDR data.

1. It was manually generated before the attack, stuffed into an FDR, and planted at the scene.
2. It was generated from a live flight, one that flew north of the light poles and south of the Citgo station, over the Pentagon, and then that data was put into the FDR and then planted at the scene.
3. The data was generated after the attack, put into the FDR, and planted at the scene.

If it was #1, how in the world did they get the debris supposedly hit by the plane incorrect? They would have had the FDR data ahead of time to plant the evidence such as the light poles in the CORRECT location to match the FDR data.

If it was #2, why did they STILL plant the FDR with the incorrect data when they knew it would not match the staged flight path?

If it was #3, why did they generate incorrect data that conflicted with the staged flight path debris?

[edit on 9-12-2009 by Gamolon]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by JFrickenK
And holy crap, guess what ! It also has a "list of airplanes"... 21 of them.


Originally posted by 767doctor
Right, not applicable to the whole 757 fleet.


Obviously you missed that I was speaking of my 747 manual.
Is your selective reading by design or natural ?


Originally posted by 767doctor
If you want to see schematics for aircraft 644, you'll have to get them yourself and you won't find them unless you have access to the American Airlines 757 manual system.


The same ones which you on multiple occasions within this thread claimed didn't exist ?


Originally posted by 767doctor
At United, you'll find manuals only for United aircraft, same goes for Continental, Delta, Us Airways, etc. THEY ARE ALL DIFFERENT.

Duh... Really ?

And who in this thread made that point first ?

Perhaps you should scroll back to when I joined here and begin reading from there.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gamolon
JFK,

Any insight in to which scenario it is below?


Originally posted by Gamolon
Ok.

You have three scenarios for the FDR data.

1. It was manually generated before the attack, stuffed into an FDR, and planted at the scene.
2. It was generated from a live flight, one that flew north of the light poles and south of the Citgo station, over the Pentagon, and then that data was put into the FDR and then planted at the scene.
3. The data was generated after the attack, put into the FDR, and planted at the scene.

If it was #1, how in the world did they get the debris supposedly hit by the plane incorrect? They would have had the FDR data ahead of time to plant the evidence such as the light poles in the CORRECT location to match the FDR data.

If it was #2, why did they STILL plant the FDR with the incorrect data when they knew it would not match the staged flight path?

If it was #3, why did they generate incorrect data that conflicted with the staged flight path debris?

[edit on 9-12-2009 by Gamolon]


I have already told you that that would require speculation and is off topic within this thread.

Do you also suffer from selective reading faults ?

I suggest you scroll to the top of the page and read the portion which clearly states :


This thread is an ATS Big-Thread with 1552 replies, and subject to more strict moderation.
Please stay focused. Stay on-topic. Minimal or off-topic posts and T&C violations are subject deletion and/or a warning.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by discombobulator

Originally posted by JFrickenK
Also my 757 manuals show port 29 NOWHERE...

At this point I believe a more accurate statement would be that you've been unable to locate port 29 in the manual you are referencing.

Taken in the context of your hilarious efforts over the past dozen or whatever pages, it's quite fair to say there still remains the possibility that port 29 is displayed in your manual with bright flashing neon lights underscored by a bowel rattling subwoofer.

Please leave the manual research to turbofan, will you mate? Unlike you, he seems to be fairly competent at it.


When my manual search on the pages 767 doctor pointed me at I used the PDF search function on the chapter.
When that failed I used the PDF search function on the entire AMM and SSM.
When that failed I used the PDF search function on the 747 AMM and SSM, Guess what ! there were 3 hits in those manuals... Relating to EFIS.

I am sure Farmer and the other idiots will enjoy your company in my ignore list you useless little troll.

[edit on 10-12-2009 by JFrickenK]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by JFrickenK
I have already told you that that would require speculation and is off topic within this thread.

Do you also suffer from selective reading faults ?

I suggest you scroll to the top of the page and read the portion which clearly states :


This thread is an ATS Big-Thread with 1552 replies, and subject to more strict moderation.
Please stay focused. Stay on-topic. Minimal or off-topic posts and T&C violations are subject deletion and/or a warning.


I suggest that you read the topic name. Here. I'll help you. It says:

"New FDR Decode"

I am asking you about that information and how you think it was generated. I gave you the only three possible scenarios I can think.

You have two options. The FDR data is real or it was fake. That's it.

If it was real, then the only way it could be real is that the data collected came from a real flight. If this is the case, why would someone behind the conspiracy stage a flight path complete with physical evidence and planted shills a day or two before, and then fly the plane in such a way that it would NOT MATCH the staged flight path?

If it was faked, then you have only two options.

1. The FDR data was created before the attack and planted at the scene. If this was the case, why did they create the staged flight path through the light poles, complete with shills prepared with rehearsed eyewitness accounts, that DID NOT AGREE WITH the faked FDR data that?
2. The FDR data was created after the attack and planted at the scene. If this was the case, why did they create FDR data that went against the staged flight path complete with downed light poles and planted shills?

This is NOT off topic and deals directly with the FDR data. The point being is that the reasons above invalidate both the faked data scenarios and the "plane flew over the Pentagon" scenario.

When the FDR data is proven true, what happens to all the witnesses testimony that the plane was "North of the Citgo"? You clearly stated that the FDR data shows it was NOT "North of the Citgo"? What then? How will the eyewitnesses testimony be explained then?

My questions concern the FDR data and are clearly on topic.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey
77 pages and still no proof the door was opened in flight..


Do not attempt to shift the burden of proof. YOU claimed that the door was never opened and you have not provided any proof of that.

The single parameter you reference proves nothing until you can explain why the parameter never changed once in all of the FDR data.

Perhaps if you didn't ban everyone from your forum who disagrees with you then you wouldn't have to have people on other forums explain your errors.


Edit: Correct typo

[edit on 10-12-2009 by adam_zapple]

[edit on 10-12-2009 by adam_zapple]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Gamolon
 


Gamolon, the answer to your question requires speculation on my part.

I was not there so HTF would I know how it was planned.

Also remember who the dimwitted commander in chief was at that point in time...
So even if I were to speculate you would not be helping your side in the least.

Oh yeah, don't forget his second in command....
www.youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by JFrickenK
reply to post by Gamolon
 


Gamolon, the answer to your question requires speculation on my part.

I was not there so HTF would I know how it was planned.

Also remember who the dimwitted commander in chief was at that point in time...
So even if I were to speculate you would not be helping your side in the least.

Oh yeah, don't forget his second in command....
www.youtube.com...



So your answer to the scenarios above is that because the person/s involved in the planning is/are stupid, they obviously made the ridiculous mistakes mentioned above? Mistakes so stupid that it is going to expose the people behind it?

Wow.

So you would rather except the above explanation than admit there was a margin of error when the decode was used in conjunction with real world coordinates?

How wonderful.

[edit on 10-12-2009 by Gamolon]



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   
If you prove the decode is true, what then?

What happens to the "North of the Citgo" eyewitness testimonies? Since the decode puts the jet south of the Citgo, doesn't that invalidate what they and PFT have been spouting all these years?

Also, what criteria are you using to prove the FDR data is true or not? It doesn't match the official flight path exactly and it doesn't match the "North of the Citgo" eyewitness testimony either.

How are you expecting validate the authenticity of the data?



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 75  76  77    79  80  81 >>

log in

join