New FDR Decode

reply to post by 767doctor


This thread has really built up replies within the last couple of days.

I don't recall which page any longer, however the manual which I have
confirms your conclusion. A few pages back I made a post about
the density calculations to show how the parameter updates.

It's safe to say that finding an "error" with a parameter is going to be
virtually non-existent. Depending on which camp you're coming from,
the data is either real (recorded from the aircraft's FDR), or it has been
staged using another airplane / flight sim.

It's not as though someone typed in the 1/0's for the entire .fdr file, for
every parameter. That's just not an option. Having said that, I'd like to
continue debating some stronger points but not within this thread.

If anyone is interested in a friendly discussion, I'll start up a new thread.
If nothing else, to pass time. It's not as though I'm looking to change
the world with another topic on flight data!

Rules are:

- no name calling
- no sarcasm
- no put downs
- no, "not nice" stuff

(hey, one can dream...)

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by 767doctor

 

This thread has really built up replies within the last couple of days.

It won't be going anywhere now that JFK has put virtually everyone on ignore.

It was spectacular while it lasted.

Originally posted by Pilgrum
reply to post by JFrickenK

 

Unless the increased stall speed is somewhere north of 250 knots it's not likely that the plane will stall in that turn. The calculator predicts stall speed will be 10% higher in that turn.

Just to save me looking it up, what is the rated stall speed for a 757?

I found and used 160 KTS somewhere, Probably hidden on Boeing's website.

Edit to add - or perhaps the Boeing 757/767 CBT.

[edit on 11-12-2009 by JFrickenK]

reply to post by 767doctor


Thank you for posting that page. It is totally different from my 31-31-01 page 101.1A sheet 3. Mine shows the internals of the FDR.

But that is also where yet anothe problem lies....

Without a list of "effective aircraft" from the same SSM ( in the FM chapter ) which matches flight 77's serial and tail numbers one can argue till the cows come home as to whether it is truly applicable. ( not even mentioning the effective pages from the beginning of that chapter )

IMO Boeing should release all pertinent portions of flight 77's manual relating to all the inputs which were used to generate that .FDR file so we can put an end to this... Instead of perpetuating it because of a lack of information.

Originally posted by JFrickenK

Originally posted by Pilgrum
reply to post by JFrickenK

 

Unless the increased stall speed is somewhere north of 250 knots it's not likely that the plane will stall in that turn. The calculator predicts stall speed will be 10% higher in that turn.

Just to save me looking it up, what is the rated stall speed for a 757?

I found and used 160 KTS somewhere, Probably hidden on Boeing's website.

No, you got it from me......18 months ago!

Originally posted by JFrickenK
IMO Boeing should release all pertinent portions of flight 77's manual relating to all the inputs which were used to generate that .FDR file so we can put an end to this... Instead of perpetuating it because of a lack of information.

In your opinion? Why should your opinion matter? Why should Boeing release anything just to please some Internet conspiracy lunatics who would say it was fake in any event? Why should the FBI or CIA or Boeing or American or anyone release anything just because you morons can't accept reality?

You people really think wayyyyy too much of yourselves. You *think* you are important, but in reality you are nothing. THAT is why Boeing will never release anything to you. THAT is why, 8 years later, you are *still* sitting here arguing on an Internet discussion board. Some movement.

[edit on 11-12-2009 by trebor451]

Originally posted by JFrickenK
IMO Boeing should release all pertinent portions of flight 77's manual relating to all the inputs which were used to generate that .FDR file so we can put an end to this... Instead of perpetuating it because of a lack of information.

Just to placate a group of wacky-doodles who don't know their butt from a hole in the ground? Yea, sure.......

Originally posted by trebor451
Some movement.

Come on now, be fair. It is (after all) very similar to a bowel movement. (to complete the second line) That's substantiated in this thread alone.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
IMO Boeing should release all pertinent portions of flight 77's manual relating to all the inputs which were used to generate that .FDR file so we can put an end to this... Instead of perpetuating it because of a lack of information.

Have you contacted Boeing to request it?

Boeing doesn't have any obligation to release this information and I doubt that they would get any benefit whatsoever from doing so just to satisfy your curiosity. Boeing is a $60B/year company. I guarantee you that you & your theories are the least of their concerns....they've probably never even heard of you.

reply to post by adam_zapple


Yes, All 4 aircraft which crashed that day, Years ago with no response, no acknowledgement.

You are correct, in their eyes I am even less meaningless than a gnat.

reply to post by JFrickenK


JFK.....

When you consider that when the airplanes go out the door at Renton (B-757) or Everette (B-767) and are delivered they become forever the responsibility of the owners from that point forward.

Boeing's data could be substantially different from what condition they are in once in the hands of an operator, especially years after being built.

Question is: How long are the maintenance records kept after a hull loss?

But, that wouldn't matter IF you had records of active airframes, operated by AAL and UAL, that were contemporary to the accident airplanes, and you had the records from the year 2001.

Originally posted by adam_zapple

Originally posted by JFrickenK
IMO Boeing should release all pertinent portions of flight 77's manual relating to all the inputs which were used to generate that .FDR file so we can put an end to this... Instead of perpetuating it because of a lack of information.

Boeing is a $60B/year company. I guarantee you that you & your theories are the least of their concerns....they've probably never even heard of you.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
reply to post by adam_zapple

 

Yes, All 4 aircraft which crashed that day, Years ago with no response, no acknowledgement.

You are correct, in their eyes I am even less meaningless than a gnat.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by JFrickenK

 

JFK.....

When you consider that when the airplanes go out the door at Renton (B-757) or Everette (B-767) and are delivered they become forever the responsibility of the owners from that point forward.

Boeing's data could be substantially different from what condition they are in once in the hands of an operator, especially years after being built.

The great defender of some of the most despicable elements in the Truth Movement BM again shows his ignorance of how the real world operates.

[edit on 11-12-2009 by Reheat]

reply to post by weedwhacker


None of that really matters as none of us will ever live to see those records or maintainance records.

Of course I hope I am wrong, but seriously doubt it.

Edit to add - I spent about 20 months conversing with that A&P mechanic in Argentina to aquire what I currently have... And a few months later he dropped off the face of the earth, or at least the net.

Late last year I began conversing with another out of Seattle and as soon as we began comparing notes he was threatened with the loss of his employment by his employers and the FBI.
He has also dropped off the net. ( This one has worked on AF2 on several occasions ).




[edit on 11-12-2009 by JFrickenK]

reply to post by JFrickenK

Late last year I began conversing with another out of Seattle and as soon as we began comparing notes he was threatened with the loss of his employment by his employers and the FBI.

And thus, a 'conspiracy' is born!

If "Big Brother" is that all-powerful, then it's amazing how they missed those 20 men of Arabic descent, right under their noses, in terrorist "cells" here on our own soil.

Oh...maybe it's that embarassing aspect of the whole mess that they'd rather not revisit.

There is one axiom at the Bureau, from what I've heard...."NEVER do anything to embarrass the FBI".

Originally posted by JFrickenK
Late last year I began conversing with another out of Seattle and as soon as we began comparing notes he was threatened with the loss of his employment by his employers and the FBI.
He has also dropped off the net. ( This one has worked on AF2 on several occasions ).[edit on 11-12-2009 by JFrickenK]

Looks like the Truth Movement doesn't understand the concept of "proprietary".

They believe they are due something! As if by simply questioning something, they should have access to everything.

Since this JFK dude has me on ignore, can someone ask him why the Truth Movement thinks that proprietary information should be theirs to have and to hold whenever they want?

...he was threatened with the loss of his employment by... the FBI.

The FBI is into getting people fired these days? ummmmmok. Seems to me the FBI would be more interested in the prosecution of someone providing FOUO and proprietary information to unauthorized individuals.

I swear....anyone who takes these LC/PfT/CIT people seriously needs to be committed.

[edit on 11-12-2009 by trebor451]

reply to post by weedwhacker


Yeah, we all know that there is know way they knew about it and still did nothing for a reason...

Alleged Trainer Of 9/11 Hijackers a CIA Informant

Prominent Turkish newspaper Zaman reported that Sakka was hired as a CIA informant in 2000, after receiving a large sum of money from the agency. This would explain why he was "captured" but then released on two separate occasions by the CIA during the course of 2000.

source

reply to post by Lillydale


Sorry, will have to do better than "Prison Planet" as a source!! LOL!

BTW...did ya read it? Pure bunk speculation.

BUT, it does show the source for the "impossible maneuver" nonsense being spouted so often concerning AAL 77.

None other than a link to 'Commander" Kolstad. 'Rotten" to his friends.

Erstwhile best and latest spokesman for P4T.

Joke, to most other airline pilots on Earth.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
None other than a link to 'Commander" Kolstad. 'Rotten" to his friends.

Erstwhile best and latest spokesman for P4T.

Joke, to most other airline pilots on Earth.

Exactly. Anytime I see anything along those lines like "Crack Veteran Top Gun Man-God Fighter Pilot-Wearing-Sunglasses maneuver" I blow coffee out my nose because it is yet another reference to Kolstad who is, without a doubt, the laughing stock of aviators around the globe.

He remains, though, the main man for PfT, even being promoted up to Head Interview Dude. What.an.honor.

on edit: "Media Contact Rep". In other words, still the Head Interview Dude. I guess Cap't Bob thinks the "reputation" of the aforementioned "Crack Veteran Top Gun Man-God Fighter Pilot-Wearing-Sunglasses" will awe some people. Based on who has been interviewing him thus far, it is not hard to awe them.


[edit on 11-12-2009 by trebor451]

reply to post by weedwhacker


I really don't care if you believe me or not... But that is what happened.
This same guy was posting on another forum since 2004, against the official story. As soon as it came to technical discussions ( in that case the landing gear photos found on the Federal Building roof ) and after exchanging a few documents in private, he was gone with a short explaination of why.

You appear to have more "pull" in the aviation industry than me, perhaps if you requested those from Boeing...
I know, It is too much to ask.
Especially since it *could* potentially end up damaging your stance on the subject.

Or it *could* reinforce your stance, either way I doubt it will happen.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Lillydale

 

Sorry, will have to do better than "Prison Planet" as a source!! LOL!

www.timesonline.co.uk...

Better ?