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.

 

77 = No Hijack, Flight Deck Door Closed for Entire Flight

page: 12
98
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
I would like to thank you'all for the inofrmative posts particularly as regards P4T and thier capacity for allowing themselves to be duped - pulled in, so to speak, by the dis-information specialists who work for various governmental agencies. This is preciesely what I waswarning them about. I feel somewhat vinidcated in that there are others who also are aware of some problems over there at P4T.

Please see my posts and responses on page 5...---> www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks again - PD




posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   
R_Mackey is a "distinguished" member of P4T and probably got wind of my posts here and so decided to continue the attacks that P4T are so well known for. He just joined ATS a few hours ago in order to follow up on the unkind smear tactics against people such as myself who are on to them. I assume he's one of the government shills that I referred to earlier..............



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
...so the door failed along with the sensor. I believe anything else is speculation either way.


So what other sensors failed or were inaccurate that day? Altitude? Location? Opens up a pandora's box on other information people have relied on all this time...

Rewey



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
de_Genova,

After reading through Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum of why you were put into the Guest category (read: not "banned" as you falsely claimed here at ATS), It appears you are a rabid No-Planer attempting to derail the topic at P4T regarding the Flight Deck door. You are doing the same thing here on this topic by attacking P4T without sticking to the topic.

You did NOT edit your posts for simple typos at P4T as you claimed here on this thread. You edited your posts with "PS" after people already replied at P4T.

That is what the good members here at ATS will find in the P4T link I provided in the previous page on this thread.

One will never get flak until over the target, and Truth always wins in the end. Never forget that de_Genova.

The amount of attacks on P4T alone almost validate their argument without ever having to look at the details.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey
de_Genova,

You did NOT edit your posts for simple typos at P4T as you claimed here on this thread. You edited your posts with "PS" after people already replied at P4T.


R_Mackey ..........Just for the record - you stand corrected - de_Genova DID say the following on Pg 5 of this thread - Quote --> "But the editing was merely a spell check and an added PS as a clarification."



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Friendly Reminder

Please stick to the topic of the thread... which is..

77 = No Hijack, Flight Deck Door Closed for Entire Flight



Further off-topic and personal jabs are not welcomed.

Thank you.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 09:09 PM
link   
I have a few questions regarding the fact that, according to the data presented by NTSB, the flight deck door would have been closed for the entire duration of the flight. Does this mean that the data indicates that the door was, in point of fact, never opened at all? This hardly seems likely, so given that obvious conclusion, how is it even possible that such a data reading would have any legitimacy whatsoever? Is it really believable that the door could have remained closed throughout the flight? Hostesses and stewards routinely communicate with their pilots, and pilots need to eat and use the facilities at some time during the flight. So it seems impossible for the data to be correct by any measure - hence the data stream - in its entirety - is a red herring: a planted piece of disinformation whose specific intention was to deceive and confound anyone who read it. In other words, the data sheet itself hasn't merely been falsified, its a complete and total fabrication the purpose of which was to draw people even farther into the notion that there really was a commercial airliner pursuing a certain flight path whose ultimate destination was the Pentagon building, and that it really did, in fact, crash into the Pentagon.
I recently drew an analogy between the point of this topic and the Mineta testimony insofar as his remarks about Cheney's whereabouts and Rumsfeld's stand down order served as a cleverly designed piece of disinformation - completely deceptive in every way. Its effect was to plant in the mind of the public that a commercial airliner really was on a steady destructive course towards the Pentagon, which is as preposterous as the scenario recently outlined in the NTSB report. .



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


The door sensor did not fail, it was a proximity switch (inductive type)
as shown in the documentation for the B757-200

I will be writing a detailed follow up along with Boeing manual reference
with respect to the myths: "sensor failure" and "door kicked in".



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by mikelee
 


The door sensor did not fail, it was a proximity switch (inductive type)
as shown in the documentation for the B757-200

I will be writing a detailed follow up along with Boeing manual reference
with respect to the myths: "sensor failure" and "door kicked in".


instead of doing that, why not get the FDR reading from a similar plane in AA's fleet and compare the data.

Of course, we know that wont.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 03:52 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 04:00 AM
link   
this proves absolutely nothing.~

It's well known that Muslim terrorists possess the ability to walk through walls.~



about freaking time!



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 04:04 AM
link   
reply to post by RipCurl
 


I don;t know if that's even possible. From what I've heard, FOIA requests
are not directed toward corporations. I believe you can only use FOIA to
receive information from government agencies?

In any case, we have certification records for N644AA showing that the
FDR was updated prior to 9/11 to include flight deck door monitoring.
There is also an FAA requirement for this update. See here:

www.boeing.com...

and

registry.faa.gov...



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by turbofan

In any case, we have certification records for N644AA showing that the
FDR was updated prior to 9/11 to include flight deck door monitoring.
There is also an FAA requirement for this update. See here:

www.boeing.com...

and

registry.faa.gov...

Having read through your links rather haphazardly, I came across the following statement:

"Airplanes manufactured prior to October 11, 1991, with a FDAU or DFDAU installed as of July 16, 1996. The new rule requires that by four years from date of rule at least 22 parameter groups be recorded by the FDR. In this group are Boeing models 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, DC-10, and MD-80. Most of these airplanes record almost all the 22 parameter groups, some of which operators may ask Boeing to remove to save weight or to avoid maintenance costs if a parameter group is not required by a particular country's regulatory agency. The additional parameter groups required to be recorded include the addition of flight control surface positions and flight control inputs for all three axes, lateral acceleration, and autopilot engagement status."

Additionally, I looked at the list of 22 mandatory recorded parameter groups applicable by regulation for AA77 and must admit that it was not immediately obvious which of the 22 parameter groups contained the FLIGHT DECK DOOR parameter. In fact, it would appear that all of the mandatory parameters relate to the position of the aircraft and the condition of control inputs/surfaces, engine thrust, etc, and have nothing whatsoever to do with the FLIGHT DECK DOOR.

Maybe you could tell me which one it is?

(1) Time;
(2) Pressure altitude;
(3) Indicated airspeed;
(4) Heading--primary flight crew reference (if selectable, record discrete, true or magnetic);
(5) Normal acceleration (Vertical);
(6) Pitch attitude;
(7) Roll attitude;
(8) Manual radio transmitter keying, or CVR/DFDR synchronization reference;
(9) Thrust/power of each engine--primary flight crew reference;
(10) Autopilot engagement status;
(11) Longitudinal acceleration;
(12) Pitch control input;
(13) Lateral control input;
(14) Rudder pedal input;
(15) Primary pitch control surface position;
(16) Primary lateral control surface position;
(17) Primary yaw control surface position;
(18) Lateral acceleration;
(19) Pitch trim surface position or parameters of paragraph (a)(82) of this section if currently recorded;
(20) Trailing edge flap or cockpit flap control selection (except when parameters of paragraph (a)(85) of this section apply);
(21) Leading edge flap or cockpit flap control selection (except when parameters of paragraph (a)(86) of this section apply);
(22) Each Thrust reverser position (or equivalent for propeller airplane)

rgl.faa.gov...

I don't think it would be a revelation to suggest that the FDR has the capability to record the FLIGHT DECK DOOR parameter, but despite your claims to the contrary nothing you have produced confirms that the FDR on AA77 was indeed recording the true condition of the FLIGHT DECK DOOR parameter, nor was it required to by regulation.

[edit on 1-12-2009 by discombobulator]



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 07:18 AM
link   
turbofan is referring to the Data Frame Layout which was updated due to 1997 Rule Change, which included FLT DECK DOOR as a parameter.

The NTSB lists 757-3b as the proper Data Frame Layout to use for N644AA

From P4T


NTSB American Airlines Flight 77 FDR Report
www.ntsb.gov...
[bottom of page 2]

NTSB 757-3b Data Frame Layout as specified in above pdf, and noted in D226A101-3 rev G, [can be downloaded here at Warren's site.]

www.warrenstutt.com...

Both show FLT DECK DOOR parameter.


As explained repeatedly in the New FDR Decode thread. FLT DECK DOOR is not a required parameter. 22 Parameters are required by the FAA. American Airlines record and the NTSB show 360 Validated in the NTSB pdf with even more under "not working or unconfirmed". FLT DECK DOOR is one of them, Radar Altitude another.

Pressure Altitude is listed under Validated parameters by the NTSB, is a required parameter by the FAA, and shows too high to hit the Pentagon.

End of story.

[edit on 1-12-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by JPhish
this proves absolutely nothing.~

It's well known that Muslim terrorists possess the ability to walk through walls.~



about freaking time!


No need to walk through walls. They went through the door. Like all the supposed smoking guns I heve ever seen truther's bring up this is spluttering out in record time. :-

(a) No evidence that recording the Flt Deck Door parameter was required by FAA.

(b) No evidence that N644AA was ever capable of recording that parameter. ( no signal in 42 hours of recording is pretty conclusive that it wasn't. )



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
(a) No evidence that recording the Flt Deck Door parameter was required by FAA.


No one said it was.


(b) No evidence that N644AA was ever capable of recording that parameter.


NTSB pdf, the data frame layout for the SSFDR and the decoded file physically showing a parameter being recorded prove you wrong. Did you also know FDR's are used as evidence in a court of law all the time?

You on the other hand have provided ZERO evidence of the cockpit door being open, positive ID that N644AA is responsible for the damage at the Pentagon, the list goes on.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by JPhish
this proves absolutely nothing.~

It's well known that Muslim terrorists possess the ability to walk through walls.~



about freaking time!


No need to walk through walls. They went through the door. Like all the supposed smoking guns I heve ever seen truther's bring up this is spluttering out in record time. :-

(a) No evidence that recording the Flt Deck Door parameter was required by FAA.

(b) No evidence that N644AA was ever capable of recording that parameter. ( no signal in 42 hours of recording is pretty conclusive that it wasn't. )


Cite your source for "42 hours of recording time". Because according to the link from the OP, there was about 1.5 hours recorded. Where are you pulling this "42 hours" number. Hopefull you won't completely ignore me like the guy who claimed there was "25 hours worth of recorded data".



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthquest

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by JPhish
this proves absolutely nothing.~

It's well known that Muslim terrorists possess the ability to walk through walls.~



about freaking time!


No need to walk through walls. They went through the door. Like all the supposed smoking guns I heve ever seen truther's bring up this is spluttering out in record time. :-

(a) No evidence that recording the Flt Deck Door parameter was required by FAA.

(b) No evidence that N644AA was ever capable of recording that parameter. ( no signal in 42 hours of recording is pretty conclusive that it wasn't. )


Cite your source for "42 hours of recording time". Because according to the link from the OP, there was about 1.5 hours recorded. Where are you pulling this "42 hours" number. Hopefull you won't completely ignore me like the guy who claimed there was "25 hours worth of recorded data".


Even Pilots for 9/11 Truth accept it. Have a look at their website. 25 hours is the minimum an FDR must record but, typically, it is a good deal more.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

No need to walk through walls. They went through the door. Like all the supposed smoking guns I heve ever seen truther's bring up this is spluttering out in record time. :-

(a) No evidence that recording the Flt Deck Door parameter was required by FAA.

(b) No evidence that N644AA was ever capable of recording that parameter. ( no signal in 42 hours of recording is pretty conclusive that it wasn't. )


Here's the evidence that the FDD parameter was being recorded, whether FAA required it or not.

In addition, you would need to provide support for your claim that an unrecorded or dysfunctional FDD sensor would result in 0's in the log.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by scraze

Originally posted by Alfie1

No need to walk through walls. They went through the door. Like all the supposed smoking guns I heve ever seen truther's bring up this is spluttering out in record time. :-

(a) No evidence that recording the Flt Deck Door parameter was required by FAA.

(b) No evidence that N644AA was ever capable of recording that parameter. ( no signal in 42 hours of recording is pretty conclusive that it wasn't. )


Here's the evidence that the FDD parameter was being recorded, whether FAA required it or not.

In addition, you would need to provide support for your claim that an unrecorded or dysfunctional FDD sensor would result in 0's in the log.




A link to turbofan doesn't quite do it for me. Does it not give you any pause for thought that in 42 hrs recording the parameter only showed 0 ?

Are you being reasonable or are you in denial ?



new topics

top topics



 
98
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join