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: 9
98
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
So you seriously think that the parameter was being faithfully recorded and that absolutely no-one, flight crew or cabin crew, went into or out of the cockpit in 42 hours of flying ?


do you have proof that it wasnt being faithfully recorded?

do you have proof that anyone entered the cockpit during the previous flights?




posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stupidugly

Originally posted by R_Mackey

That would be speculation Alfie. I leave that up to those who make excuse for the govt story.
Aren't you speculating in regards to the pilot's bathroom habits?


Absolutely not. The door data shows the door closed.

Those who make excuse for the govt story, however, are speculating regarding pilots "habits" in direct conflict with the data. As usual.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Originally posted by Alfie1
The other night my car speedometer was registering 0 on my way home. However, as I was still patently moving I rejected that data and got the speedo fixed.


As would happen much quicker on a jet carrying paying passengers, as suggested by apathoid here...


I fix electricky stuff on big planes for a living. Trust me, there was nothing wrong with the door switch(its not a sensor). If the door switch was stuck, maintenance would have fixed it in the prior 12 flights..


Source

It's fun to watch those who make excuse for the govt story contradict their own.

Could this be the final nail in their coffin? "Viral" time will tell.

Regardless, we're all seeking the truth here, right? On both sides. Truth always comes out in the end.


I thought it had been agreed earlier on that the Flt Deck Door sensor didn't necessarily have anything to do with the FDR. You have suggested that it had been hooked up to a spare port but I haven't seen any confirmation yet.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nola213


But I'm interested in the FDR's cockpit door status of the other 3 flights on 9/11. Surely those would show alot of opening and closing of the flight deck.


No boxes found at WTC per government. 3 of 4 boxes found per NYFD firefighter Nicholas DeMasi.

Flight 77 CVR and FDR yielded no useful information per government. I guess the FDR info was not useful to the government. It took multiple FOI requests and attorney involvement, which is not cheap, to get the 77 FDR comma seperated value and flightpath data.
I looked through the NTSB released info for flight 93 (Docket DCA01MA065 for anyone who also wants to look) and could not find a port listing for the door. The NTSB did ignore 2 whole frames as invalid. So we can't tell.

By the way, as a 43 year commercial pilot (last few since mandatory retirement flying long haul charter), I can tell you folks that most of us don't drink the coffee that comes out of the galley. We bring our own in a thermos. I recommend the Bald Mountain Nissan stainless briefcase bottles with 34 ounces of Starbucks . Not enough for JFK-EDDF (Frankfurt, Germany) but plenty for my SRQ-JFK commute.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by wholetruth

Originally posted by Alfie1
So you seriously think that the parameter was being faithfully recorded and that absolutely no-one, flight crew or cabin crew, went into or out of the cockpit in 42 hours of flying ?


do you have proof that it wasnt being faithfully recorded?

do you have proof that anyone entered the cockpit during the previous flights?



Unusually, I think both those things are susceptible to proof and will be.

As no change was recorded for that parameter throughout the recorded 42 hrs, your problem is that you cannot prove that anything was being recorded at all. Nor can you prove that that aircraft was ever capable of recording that parameter.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   
@ jpvskyfreak

From 911exposed.org...

”Approximately 20 of the 58 passengers worked at classified positions in the defense sector!”

Per Wikipedia in 2004 there was around 700,000 civilians working for the DOD. That meant that around 0.00003% of the DOD was on the plane. (for those really anal ATS memebers, i know it says 2004 but if you take 20 and divide it by 600,000 you get the same number. Point is you get tons of zeros before you get a whole number) This plane was leaving from DC and was going to the 2nd largest city in America. Saying about a third of the people were DOD and thinking that is a conspiracy is like thinking that a plane crashing on its way to Vegas had a disproportional amount of guys between the ages of 25-40 is a conspiracy.

Then you made a point about saying that Charles Burlingame III was a graduate of the US Naval Academy. Per According to testimony given in 2001 by Nicholas Lacey, the Director of Flight Standards Service at the FAA: From World War II through the mid-90s, approximately 80 percent of major airline new hires were military trained.

If the flight had a low number of people that work for the government that makes it sound more like a conspiracy, or many government people canceled at the last minute (there are posts about that on this site) defiantly sounds more like a conspiracy, but saying that most of the people on a plane from DC worked for the government is just logical. Dulles airport is to the west of where the pentagon exploded, and the west side that exploded. Straight math, there is a 20% chance of hitting the west side. As Goggle maps shows, it’s almost a straight shot, so that increases that odds of where it was hit. I believe that there was some scaffolding up at the time, if the scaffolding was up and you were trying to hit something, here is a simple question. Wouldn’t the biggest part, the part that stands out get your attention and you would lock onto it.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
I thought it had been agreed earlier on that the Flt Deck Door sensor didn't necessarily have anything to do with the FDR. You have suggested that it had been hooked up to a spare port but I haven't seen any confirmation yet.


FLT DECK DOOR PARAMETER in the FDR has everything to do with the Fligh Deck Door SENSOR.

The parameter measures the condition of the sensor.

The sensor/system can be installed and functioning properly, but the parameter not "hooked up" to the DFDAU.

Think if it this way.

You push your button to open the trunk of your car. You also get a light on your gauges that the trunk is open.

If the light was not hooked up to the sensor, you wouldn't see the light (no pun intended), but the button still opens the trunk.

"FLT DECK DOOR" is your "trunk light".

You don't see the "trunk light" on UA93 because it's not "hooked up". You see it on AA77 because it is.

Hope this helps.

[edit on 29-11-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by R_Mackey
 


How would you rate this say from 1-10 in terms of "smoking gun" type evidence?

For my point of view, if this goes through (what your saying) and the interpetation of the data is sound, then this to me is pretty well "smoking gun" 10 on a scale. I just don't know enough on the subject.

I for one have issues with the Official Story and I am always sorting through my own suspicions and issues, but I want to be careful being a complete noob(actually a dummy) when it comes to aircraft equipment and sensors.

thanks.

[edit on 29-11-2009 by talisman]



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   
What a shame...nine pages, so far...and so many 'flags'...on an issue that has been, already, shown to be false.

Is this the state we're in??

I truly fear for intelligent discussion, if this sort of nonsense is allowed to continue.....

Back to the topic, just in case....an SSFDR does NOT just record the last flight, it happens to record AS MUCH AS the last 40 hours...it is only 'required', by regulation, to record the last 25 hours.

Modern SSFDRs are designed to work when the airplane's onboard systems are up and running...meaning, basically, when the engines are operating. (Otherwise, a lot of the time when the airplane was just sitting on the ground, in between flights, the recording capacity would be wasted).

Since they are "flight recorders" they tend to only record the portions of flight applicable to motion of the airplane, for the purposes of any post-accident investigation that may happen to become necessary. Of course, MOST flights don't result in a crash...at least, I hope not.

The CVR will run continuously...we know this, because even in the preflight we can test it...the FDR is not part of a pilot's test in the pre-fllight...it is there, but it isn't part of the pilot's responsibility in terms of pre-flight checks. It is a requirement, per FAA, NTSB and ICAO mandates, of course...but pilots are not responsible for the checking of the device...that is a maintenance function.

A modern Boeing WILL give an alert, IF the SSFDR (Flight Recorder) has developed a malfunction that is detectable, and thusly alertable...but, this is the sort of thing that will be seen, by the piots, and called in, to maintenance...assuming it happens prior ot dispatch.

IF this were to occur in flight...a pilot would think "So what???" It is NOT an important device.

I think that an ATS member using the current name of "R_Mackey" recently mentioned a term which bears some investigation...the term is "MEL".

'MEL' is an abbreviation for 'Minimum Equipment List'. In order to maintain a certain 'dispatch reliability' most modern airpnaes have redundant systems, so that a failure or an inoperative component won't render the airplane un-flyable...IOW, some malfunctions, if minor, can be 'deferred' for repair...depending on the device, it could be anywhere from until the next "maintenance" hub for the airline, or as long as ten days' time....again, depends on the malfunction.

Very, very minor problems can be 'carried' for days....the FAA has the guidelines. But, they also dictate the requirements for 'operators' to indicate the "INOP" equipment...there is a (usually) bright yelklow adhesive tag, stuck near the device...and ALSO there must be an entry into the aircraft's logbook...and, in the modern age, there is, in airline ops, a print-out on the 'dispatch release' that the Captain must read, and sign, and leave in the Operations area, before each flight. He also carries a copy onboard....

Hence, the old joke...a flight is never over until the paperwork is done....

It is sad, indeed, that so much disinformation exists, and is put out by those who should know better....yet, it gets eaten up anyways, because those who DON'T know any better have seen too many Hollywood movies....truly tragic....



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
A modern Boeing WILL give an alert, IF the SSFDR (Flight Recorder) has developed a malfunction that is detectable, and thusly alertable...but, this is the sort of thing that will be seen, by the piots, and called in, to maintenance...assuming it happens prior ot dispatch.

IF this were to occur in flight...a pilot would think "So what???" It is NOT an important device.


weedwhacker, would you, as a claimed professional pilot, fail to notify MX once you landed if you got an FDR CAS message enroute?

If you would have, do you think AMR pilots would fail to notify MX through 11 flights?

[edit on 29-11-2009 by R_Mackey]



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321

Airline Pilots and Flight Crew Members reading this will recognize my generic descriptions to maintain airline security.
FACT: The 2001 Cockpit doors were like hotel room doors, when closed; THEY LOCK. The doors were never left open.

If a Flight Attendant was murdered in the front of the airplane, near the cockpit door, the pilots would hear loud screams from fellow crew members and the passengers. The Pilots would be alerted by the violent noises on the other side of the cockpit door.

FACT: The 2001 Cockpit doors contained peep holes, just like hotel room doors.
One Pilot looking through the peep hole could easily observe the violence, and alert the other Pilot who has radio access to FAA Controllers.

FACT: The cockpit contains a "jump seat." The jump seat is an extra seat in the cockpit, used; 1. by the FAA to check/observe pilot performance; 2. for airline pilot training; 3. to reposition non flying pilots to their destinations. THIS ADDITIONAL PERSON IS SITTING IN THE COCKPIT; WITH ACCESS TO THE COCKPIT DOOR.

The person riding in the jump seat, may not have been recorded on the Aircraft Passenger Manifest. If this person identified himself as a Pilot; the Captain flying the airplane would check his pilot credentials. Government/FAA credentials are inconsistent and are more difficult to verify.


www.jtalon.tv...

I still find it hard to believe that 4 airlines were taking over and the pilots had no time to give a warning.

Did all 4 flights leave the door open?

Did terrorist ram all 4 doors?

Did pilots from all 4 flights walk out to see what was going on allowing terrorist to get in?

Suspicious minds.....



Try reading a thread called "Taking the cockpits..examining the logistics" that was posted some time ago by another member. I recall it had this exact same question, and has never been answered.

Not ONE pilot was able to move his thumb over an inch and activate the radio and make contact with the ATC. Not one. The official story drones will have you believe that ALL 4 planes had their cockpits attacked, with no noise, no struggle, no bodies ever reported being hauled out of the way..nothing.

The government will not even touch this subject, simply saying that' the cockpits were taken four times with 100% success"....and refuse to say anything else or answer any questions as to HOW in the hell that could be.

Odds mean ZERO to a drone...if ajn event is 1,000,000,000,000,...times unlikley to happen that is the same as even odds to them..they just totally discount likelyhoods. Intellectually dishonest, to the extreme of course, but after all, an official story drone has to cling to the margins of calculating reality or they could not say what they do with a straight face.

Of course the planes were remotely taken...thats for sure.After that, the ODDS say that there were certain events...open for discussion of course but likley the way it seems....an inside job all the way.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
How would you rate this say from 1-10 in terms of "smoking gun" type evidence?


11



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by R_Mackey
 



If you would have, do you think AMR pilots would fail to notify MX through 11 flights?


AMR???

Oh...you must be refering to the corporation AMR???

Gee, I have no idea how that relates to this discussion....but, for the beneiit of readers who may not be familiar, 'AMR' is the corpaorate code for the stock on Wall Street for 'American Airlines'...just as 'UAL' is the same as 'United Airlines' and 'CAL' is the same as 'Continental Airlines', etc...not really sure how this is pertinent....

AS TO the question posed by ATS member "R_Mackey'....

He/she appears to be asking whether the American Airlines pilots who operated the machine that has been designated as the accident aircraft, N644AA in the flights prior to the operation as Flight AAL 77, on 11 September, 2001 would have 'written up' in the "MX" (an abbreviation for 'maintainence') logbook IF the Flight Recorder had cued to the Flight Crew a 'fault'...this supposes that there would be an 'EICAS' message indicating such an occurence in the first place.

As far as I know, IF the SSFDR has a 'fault', then it has no obvious display on the EICAS. This may vary, depending on operator, but it was NOT the case at my airline.

The 'Flight Recorder OFF' light (amber) is on the accessory panel, right side of the cockpit...(this is the right side, as you enter...would be just behind the First Officer's seat, and by the optional extra jumpseat, as ordered, if installed.

Switch positons are: 'ON', 'NORM' and 'TEST' (spring loaded to the 'TEST' position).

This is a MX function, and not really dealt with in pilot's training syllabi...

It either works or not....I suppose there is probably an EICAS message if the SSFDR is in 'failure' mode, though I've never seen such a thing...I venture to say that it is most likely a Maintenance issue, primarily.

ANY 'amber' light should be cued when 'RECALL' is pressed...so the SSFDR 'INOP' light (amber) even though not on the forward instrument panel, likely mioght come up IF it is an issue...and, would be, if found prior to dispatch, a "no-go" per MEL....

However, as any real airline pilot knows, 'after dispatch' (which is defined as the first movement in intent to fly) certain MEL items can be 'deferred' if noticed at that point, just as if they had been 'deferred' by MX action prior to 'release'....as long as the item in question is not mandatory for safety of flight.....



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by habu71
reply to post by rush969
 


Sorry, you know not of what you speak....The door must be closed *by regulation) from aircraft door close to aircraft door open......On domestic operations, there is NO coffee or anyhting else delivered to the cockpit.....


Absolutely, unequivocally false.

I was just on a flight this past weekend. Flew from Miami to LAX. We hit some rough turbulence. The captain came out TWICE, to walk through the cabin to make sure the passengers were alright and to give reassurance.

I was in first class and saw the flight attendants knock and the cockpit door open so they could provide the pilots with coffee and other drinks. This happened three times during the flight. The co-pilot came out during the flight to use the first class bathroom.

You should actually FLY once in a while as you would see that you are 100% wrong.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by rush969

Originally posted by weedwhacker

It is interesting to note, also, you can check the flight information data from the U.S. Government site and see the history of American Flight 77 in the days preceding 9/11 -- and you can see the smae airplane 'N'-number, and city pairs it operated. If I recall, the accident airplane flew LAX-IAD the day prior. There is no way no one opened the door on THAT flight.


Ladies and gentlemen, as our friend WW shows in this post. There´s no way the cockpit door would stay closed ALL THE TIME on ALL THOSE FLIGHTS.
For God´s sake!!! The pilots have bladders too, you know???!!!

I don´t care if you want to believe that no coffee, or other drinks would be taken to the pilots, (which by the way is ridiculous, OF COURSE drinks are given to them.) But each one of them will have to go to the toilet even more than once on those flights.
So, I think this thread is actually a HOAX...



It only shows that those who claim otherwise has never:

1) been on a plane since 2001
2) hasn't been on a flight that was more than 2 hours (try a 14 hour one across the Atlantic on your way to Greece) - Tell me what pilot isn't going to use the bathroom in 14 hours?



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by richierich
 



Not ONE pilot was able to move his thumb over an inch and activate the radio and make contact with the ATC. Not one.


Sorry, "richierich", this is an incorrect statement.

There are ATC recordings that picked up transmissions, from at least ONE hijacked airplane, of distress in the cockpit.

Just for the reality, as well...let me tell you what really happens, day in and day out, in airliner cockpits.

We are required, per FAA regs, to wear a headset (really, only a boom mic, per the regs) below 18,000 feet. Above 18,000, the choice is up to individual taste.

Frankly, I remove the headset, and use a hand mic, and the audio speaker. Most pilots I fly with do the same.

THAT is reality. THAT is NOT what you may have seen in Hollywood movies.

In any event, IF and WHEN you are attacked, from behind, while seated in tyhe cockpit...the last people in the World you would expect to appeal for help would be the Air Trafic Controllers, on the radio, sitting in the facility on the ground.

Back then, there were certain words and phrases that could be used...'codes' if you will...but, in any event, a simple 'MAYDAY". in the clear, would get the point across...but, then what???

I mean, just what would you expect the Air Trafic Controller would do after hearing a "MAYDAY"???

He/She would ask to repeat and/or verify, firstly....and, IF the pilot, after uttering a "MAYDAY" had his/her throat slit shortly afterwards....and made no other radio calls...then what????

Think about it...............



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by richierich
 


Regarding all cockpits taken 100%, it sounds like to me that the cockpits were "taken" before the planes even took off. Or, the Pilots themselves were involved. That would explianj why the doors were never polled as open because once inside perhaps the terrorists had a strict order NOT to open the cockpit door for any reason. It would be a public relations nightmare and possibly the end of an airline if the government made it known that AA pilots were involved at some level or, the planes were overtaken immediately after boarding. Which might explain why the gov won;t touch that subject at all.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Hey 'mikelee'...

I would suggest you look deeper into the facts of that day. You may find that your assumptions are incorrect.

A simple perusal of the SSFDR data, from UAL 93 and AAL 77, would be a good place to start.

It is unfortunate (but not surprising) that the SSFDRs nor the CVRs were recovered from the wreckage of the WTC, as regards AAL 11 and UAL 175. Perhaps those info would help to belay this disinfo that keeps persisting...alas, it is not to be...



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by richierich
 


Regarding all cockpits taken 100%, it sounds like to me that the cockpits were "taken" before the planes even took off. Or, the Pilots themselves were involved.


which is not supported by any evidence.


That would explianj why the doors were never polled as open because once inside perhaps the terrorists had a strict order NOT to open the cockpit door for any reason.


which is absolutely false, because even after 9/11 pilots and attendants do OPEN that door to give pilots food and drinks , and for the pilots to use the bathroom



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Also to note, remember you cannot base your claims on today's flight securities. Back before 2001, the doors to the cockpits in planes were not the thicker ones we have today, and some cockpit doors today have a keypad in order to open it correctly.

Back then, it was a simple latch and lock (similar to the kind you find on the lavatories on flights), and were as flimsy as the bulkheads that separate the first class sections from the economy sections of a flight. To gain access, all the hijackers would need is a well placed serving cart and two guys to ram it through the door. Heck not even a cart, a well placed hard kick could have taken the doors down.



new topics

top topics



 
98
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join