New FDR Decode

Originally posted by thomk
Now, he comes over once a week, paste's his usual... and runs back into the shelter of his own little world.

Thomk,

"Ryan_Mackey", or better known as Bobby Balsamo, has been banned under his latest sock.

We'll have to wait for his next incarnation to continue the debate. I'm sure that won't be too long. An ego the size of Balsamo's needs feeding, and the fawning, obsequious and toady followers on PfT won't be able to satisfy it.

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

Don't let me find out you're talking smack, or slandering me. Mr. Balsamo
knows the next step; I've warned him in a private message, and I will
follow through. Go on with your life, I'll go on with mine.

Too late, turbs, you're already part of the conspiracy.

I can see it now.. "Tino was actually a paid Government disinformation agent that infiltrated our organisation to obtain access to our information and methods and then pick the right moment to discredit our organisation by challenging our assertions in a very public disagreement."

Welcome aboard, you're on the payroll now, turbs. See you at the next AGM.

Edit to add - Remember Russell Pickering?

[edit on 16-12-2009 by discombobulator]

Originally posted by JFrickenK
It is because you are a nuisance for asking the same question over and over and over and over and over and over when it has been already answered the first time you asked.

Would it be fair to say that certain other people have also been banned from certain other forums for telling certain forum administrators that they are unable to correctly use a calculator over and over and over and over and over and over?

How did that one work out in the end?

reply to post by thomk

Originally posted by thomk
Just out of curiosity, what work of Balsamo's do you find deserving of respect.

A great deal of it actually. I haven't found a PFT video that I haven't been impressed with.

Originally posted by thomk
You'll have to forgive me. I'm an engineer. There's only one thing that we respect: being right.

By that criteria, I'm at a total loss to see what he's done that stands up to the slightest informed scrutiny.

I respect turbofan as well, and unlike Rob, he hasn't banned me for disagreeing with him. While I know turbo's had a falling out with him now as well and doesn't agree with something in his latest press release, I sincerely doubt that he thinks that all of Rob's previous work is no good; as a matter of fact, he's mentioned that he's worked with him in the past.

reply to post by scott3x

I haven't found a PFT video that I haven't been impressed with.

Boy, would I like to be able to sit down in front of the TV with you, with a pause button on the remote, and go over point by point what is wrong with P4T videos.

This forum isn't large enough to do it adequate justice.

BUT, of course, that is the point of their videos. They know the P.T. Barnum adage: Fool some of the people all of the time, or all of the people some of the time.

Or, even better, the song from the musical "Chicago": "Razzle Dazzle 'em"






[edit on 16 December 2009 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by scott3x


I recall something about your banning and I think we even messaged
back and forth to try and figure out what happened. I'm still not 100%
aware of the details, but as you know there's nothing we can do about it
now.

Unlike some people, I have respect for personal information and therefore
cannot elaborate on specifics. For the record (it's no secret), my decision
to remove myself from a certain thread "at the other forum" started a
downward spiral into this current situation. The guy just wont stop...you
don't see me crying about "the other forum", or wanting back. It's clear
who got the short end of the stick in this deal.

My reason for wanting to disband support of that particular discussion was
simply because the press release was based on a theory. As you know,
their current assumption cannot be proven with any documentation, nor
is there a clear understanding of the Data acq. system (or how it's recorded).

The guy still thinks I live in my parents' basement even though he knew it
was temp. until my new house was built. This is either an attempt to
'character assassinate', or a reflection of poor understanding of the facts.
In either case, it's a loss of credibility.

I will agree that there are certain presentations that are well researched
however I'm no longer going to support them, or discuss them.

Enough about that; I don't want to stray too much from the topic so
I will turn this back toward the Comparator circuit which I will post more
about this evening.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by turbofan]

reply to post by JFrickenK


JFK, are you the same JFK that's on loose change? I doubt it, but thought I'd ask.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
In all fairness Scott, I doubt you were banned because you disagree with Rob.

You start by saying you doubt it was the reason, but then you apparently -know- it to be the case:

Originally posted by JFrickenK
It is because you are a nuisance for asking the same question over and over and over and over and over and over when it has been already answered the first time you asked.

I don't agree that I did that. Rob's statement virtually immediately before my ban doesn't seem to suggest that was the reason either. If you want to see the play by play before my getting banned, you should go to this PFT thread I started, beginning with post 5 in it:
pilotsfor911truth.org...

As to where Rob jumped to conclusions, I explain that in this thread over at Unexplained Mysteries:

www.unexplained-mysteries.com...

Originally posted by JFrickenK
No disrespect intended, but that is my observation of your posts on 3 forums other than here.

Care to cite what you think of as an example?

reply to post by weedwhacker

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by scott3x

 

I haven't found a PFT video that I haven't been impressed with.

Boy, would I like to be able to sit down in front of the TV with you, with a pause button on the remote, and go over point by point what is wrong with P4T videos.

Laugh :-). These issues are clearly complicated, which is why 8 years after the event, people are still arguing over what really happened. Slowly but surely I think consensus will be reached, but I really don't know how long it will take.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
This forum isn't large enough to do it adequate justice.

Give it time :-).

Originally posted by weedwhacker
BUT, of course, that is the point of their videos. They know the P.T. Barnum adage: Fool some of the people all of the time, or all of the people some of the time.

Or, even better, the song from the musical "Chicago": "Razzle Dazzle 'em"

You razzle dazzle too weed. What us laypeople need is time to understand all this technical jargon.

Yes Scott, I am and Admin at Letsroll, Loose Change, and Pilots.

No I do not wish to go back through your posts to show you what I mean.

Like I said that is my observation relating to how you handle yourself.
Call it constructive criticism if you wish.

Regardless this is not the thread for that.

< Waits for post to vanish and be replaced with a warning in 5...4...3...2...1... >

reply to post by turbofan

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by scott3x

 

I recall something about your banning and I think we even messaged
back and forth to try and figure out what happened. I'm still not 100%
aware of the details, but as you know there's nothing we can do about it
now.

Nods.

Originally posted by turbofan
Unlike some people, I have respect for personal information and therefore
cannot elaborate on specifics. For the record (it's no secret), my decision
to remove myself from a certain thread "at the other forum" started a
downward spiral into this current situation. The guy just wont stop...you
don't see me crying about "the other forum", or wanting back. It's clear
who got the short end of the stick in this deal.

I am technically unbanned now, although I haven't posted since getting banned and I'm not sure I ever will again. Bitten once, twice shy as they say. The search engine is certainly useful though :-p. I think Rob has a hard time accepting the fact that he might be wrong sometimes, and his solution to those who disagree with him on anything substantive, I think we both know.

Originally posted by turbofan
My reason for wanting to disband support of that particular discussion was
simply because the press release was based on a theory. As you know,
their current assumption cannot be proven with any documentation, nor
is there a clear understanding of the Data acq. system (or how it's recorded).

I see. Can I get a link to this thread you're referring to?

Originally posted by turbofan
The guy still thinks I live in my parents' basement even though he knew it
was temp. until my new house was built. This is either an attempt to
'character assassinate', or a reflection of poor understanding of the facts.
In either case, it's a loss of credibility.

Mm. Well, I'm currently living at my mother's place, the idea being that I'll move out again in January. I suppose this could be used against me as well. Personally, I just wish that people would stick to the evidence instead of using anecdotes of this nature.

Originally posted by turbofan
I will agree that there are certain presentations that are well researched
however I'm no longer going to support them, or discuss them.

Alright.

Originally posted by turbofan
Enough about that; I don't want to stray too much from the topic so
I will turn this back toward the Comparator circuit which I will post more
about this evening.

Ok.

Originally posted by scott3x
JFK, are you the same JFK that's on loose change? I doubt it, but thought I'd ask.

Of course he is. Whether his boss over at PfT (who gave him the Admin hat to wear) asked him to come over to ATS to watch his back or to take over the deputy job when TF was tossed under the bus we'll never know.

This JFK character is probably next to be jettisoned as excess ballast since he, too, has voiced opposition to the current PfT claims by stating that without certain definitive data nothing can be inferred by the FDR, making the PRESS RELEASE total bogusness and yet another laughing stock to the professional communities concerned.

Once he gets the heave-ho from PfT, he'll just go back to Loose Change and his banning of people there who question the Grand Design there. He's not contributing much of worth here, that's for sure.

reply to post by JFrickenK

Originally posted by JFrickenK
Yes Scott, I am and Admin at Letsroll, Loose Change, and Pilots.

No I do not wish to go back through your posts to show you what I mean.

Alright.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
Like I said that is my observation relating to how you handle yourself.
Call it constructive criticism if you wish.

Regardless this is not the thread for that.

Alright.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
< Waits for post to vanish and be replaced with a warning in 5...4...3...2...1... >

Laugh :-).

reply to post by trebor451

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by scott3x
JFK, are you the same JFK that's on loose change? I doubt it, but thought I'd ask.

Of course he is. Whether his boss over at PfT (who gave him the Admin hat to wear) asked him to come over to ATS to watch his back or to take over the deputy job when TF was tossed under the bus we'll never know.

JFK is an admin at what I believe is a larger forum then PFT, the loose change forum. I think that if he's here, it's simply to try to put in his point of view here, which I think is fine.

Originally posted by trebor451
This JFK character is probably next to be jettisoned as excess ballast since he, too, has voiced opposition to the current PfT claims by stating that without certain definitive data nothing can be inferred by the FDR, making the PRESS RELEASE total bogusness and yet another laughing stock to the professional communities concerned.

It's good to know there is still some dissent over at PFT anyway.

Originally posted by trebor451
Once he gets the heave-ho from PfT, he'll just go back to Loose Change and his banning of people there who question the Grand Design there. He's not contributing much of worth here, that's for sure.

I haven't seen any of his contributions here, other then his responses to me, which seemed good enough. Admittedly, the subjects I brought off are only marginally on topic here so I agreed that we should just let it go here.

Scott, I have that clown on ignore for a reason... and you are not helping.

Edit to add - and for the record Letsroll is larger than both Loose Change and Pilots put together both content wise and membership wise as it has been online since 2004.

And the ONLY reason I am here is because Tino has threatened to publicly distribute some propriatary Boeing manuals he got from me in the confidence that he would NOT distribute them.

That was a grave mistake on my part and will never happen again.

In case you have not noticed the self professed "experts" here are not really willing to share their knowledge with the likes of you or I... Sure, they may throw a scrap every now and then, but they could do much more to end the debate... but choose not to.



[edit on 16-12-2009 by JFrickenK]

reply to post by Pilgrum

Someone keeps yelling for the tolerances for a pressure altimeter It's really no secret. A pitot-static system, which includes the altimeters,must be tested every 24 months. The sea level (29.921" Hg) tolerence is plus or minus 20'. It's all in FAR Part 43, Appendix E. See, www.blueangelaviation.com...



[edit on 16-12-2009 by 4nsicphd]

reply to post by JFrickenK


Let's make this clear: It was never going to happen. The reason it ever
came into discussion was because Mr. Balsamo banned me from his forum
and restored my posts from the trash folder against my will.

I said that I would release all of the private information if he did not
delete my posts. Simple.

My posts are still on his forum...and your manual is safe. Funny how that deal worked out huh?

Sorry that I had to bring you into the mess; but for the record it's not
YOUR manual (in the sense that it's YOUR private material) and you obtained it from another individual over seas.

Mr. Balsamo claims I should be responisble for my posts, however had
I known at the time his theory was based on a gut feeling instead of
solid evidence, with proper documentation then I never would have
supported the thread to begin with.

Who is to blame for responsibility? The person making the press release,
or the person that assumed the press release was based on cold, hard,
fact?
I made a donation for your manual. i told you it's not going public.
If that's the only reason you are here, there's no need to worry.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by turbofan]

Here are some quick notes for those wanting to understand how the
Comparator cicruit functions and what inputs are required to produce
a certain output.

At the moment, I don't have SMM 34-xx-xx handy, but for those that
have a manual, please look up the following:

Comparator Schematic 34-22-22

D319 / D321X PIN #13

Input NO. DD121

Logic = "NOT" DD121 + (Invalid EFIS CU DATA)

Message = Comparator Bite (status, maint, NVM)

Instrument Comparator Unit 34-35-01

"NOT" DD121 is a logic state noted with a bar across the top of DD121.
This means that the EICAS message is produced when DD121 is sending
a logic low.

"EFIS" is the Electronic Flight Instrument System. An Invalid EFIS message
is also required to produce the EICAS message.

From what I can tell without looking at the associated 34-xx-xx schematic,
the Comparator data column is simply a status message and has NO
physical connection from a hardware device to the DAU/FDR.

It also appears the CAPT, or F/O has the ability to switch off this feature,
and/or it is an option and NOT required for flight.

Please confirm. I will continue my post after viewing the SMM data.

reply to post by JFrickenK

Originally posted by JFrickenK
Scott, I have that clown on ignore for a reason... and you are not helping.

Laugh :-). I'm sorry JFK, but I haven't dealt with trebor as much as you probably have, so perhaps this is why I still respond to him.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
Edit to add - and for the record Letsroll is larger than both Loose Change and Pilots put together both content wise and membership wise as it has been online since 2004.

Good point, I missed the part where you mentioned you were an admin there as well.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
And the ONLY reason I am here is because Tino has threatened to publicly distribute some propriatary Boeing manuals he got from me in the confidence that he would NOT distribute them.

That was a grave mistake on my part and will never happen again.

Well it looks like that won't be happening anyway.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
In case you have not noticed the self professed "experts" here are not really willing to share their knowledge with the likes of you or I... Sure, they may throw a scrap every now and then, but they could do much more to end the debate... but choose not to.

Personally, I think you're too hard on them. While many of the official story supporters may malign your forum as well as CIT and PFT's, I've been quite impressed with the knowledge of some of them; weedwacker certainly knows a fair amount concerning airplanes, having been a pilo. Even though I still don't agree with him on many things, he's spent a lot of time trying to educate me on some rather technical things, just as you yourself have done at times. Others may not be so technically oriented, but they have asked questions that I've been hard pressed to answer; these are the types of questions that I usually bring over to one truther forum or another; these days, that truther forum would be your loose change forum...

Scott,

I'm sorry. We seem to have a language barrier.

You appear to speak one dialect of English. I'm not sure, but I think it's "Artsy".
I speak a completely different one: "Engineer English".

Originally posted by scott3x
reply to post by thomk

 

Originally posted by thomk
Just out of curiosity, what work of Balsamo's do you find deserving of respect.

A great deal of it actually. I haven't found a PFT video that I haven't been impressed with.

Here's that language barrier again.

Impressed with WHAT?

Pretty icons? Music? Voice over? Lots of diagrams?

There is only one thing that impresses me: correct answers.

In all of the videos of theirs that I've watched, I see approximately zero competent epistemology, zero rigor, zero maturity and zero correct conclusions.

Are you impressed with the pilots who claim that a boring, 1.1G, 3 minute sweeping turn is a "Top Gun maneuver"? A comment that NONE of them have publicly rescinded.

Are you impressed with a bozo who tells you that someone could not possibly fly a plane into a building that is wider than 99% of the runways in the US? (How do those pilots manage to land on the runways?)

Are you impressed with the due diligence and rigor of a bozo who discovers one irrelevant thing in the data (the Flight Data Door bit) one day, and two days later announces to the world that he's "proven that the hijacking was impossible"?

Are you impressed with the utter illogic, massive irony and just plain "fence post IQ" of someone who is adamantly asserting that he is using information taken off of a FDR that was pulled out of the wreckage of the Pentagon ... to prove that the plane carrying the FDR passed OVER the Pentagon??

Originally posted by scott3x

Originally posted by thomk
You'll have to forgive me. I'm an engineer. There's only one thing that we respect: being right.

By that criteria, I'm at a total loss to see what he's done that stands up to the slightest informed scrutiny.

I respect turbofan as well, and unlike Rob, he hasn't banned me for disagreeing with him.

I wasn't asking if Turbo was nice. Or if Robby was mean.

I am asking "what assertions of theirs have you concluded are correct"?

Originally posted by scott3x
While I know turbo's had a falling out with him now as well and doesn't agree with something in his latest press release, I sincerely doubt that he thinks that all of Rob's previous work is no good; as a matter of fact, he's mentioned that he's worked with him in the past.

I wasn't asking what you think that Turbo thinks of Robby's work.

I am not asking about "artistic production value", music, etc.

I am asking "which one of Robby's conclusions do you believe to be correct?"

And, believe it or not, I am not trying to simply harass you with this question. I was trying to use it as an example. Please think about it for a bit, and tell me the two or three MOST COMPELLING conclusions that he has drawn that you believe are factually correct.

Let's see if they stand up to scrutiny.

Thanks,


Tom

Originally posted by JFrickenK
Scott, I have that clown on ignore for a reason... and you are not helping.

LMAO...

No, you don't. You simply choose to not respond.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
And the ONLY reason I am here is because Tino has threatened to publicly distribute some propriatary Boeing manuals he got from me in the confidence that he would NOT distribute them.

You know, it's probably not the best idea that you've ever had to admit publicly to a crime.
Just a thought...

Although I could be 100% wrong about that.

Perhaps it is the single best idea that you've ever had...? LoL.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
That was a grave mistake on my part and will never happen again.

Yup. Now you make a whole bunch of DIFFERENT mistakes.

Originally posted by JFrickenK
In case you have not noticed the self professed "experts" here are not really willing to share their knowledge with the likes of you or I... Sure, they may throw a scrap every now and then, but they could do much more to end the debate... but choose not to.

The "debate", such as it was, was over about 20 minutes after it began. Back in 2005 or so.

Now, the DVD sales?? That's another matter entirely...

Tom