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.

 

Overwhelming Evidence Pentagon Aircraft Data Is Not From An American Airlines 757

page: 10
83
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by ROBthaBANK
 



It's simply impossible.


Another lie, this time (apparently) passed on directly from the "head honcho" of PfffT himself.

I wrote up a step-by-step explanation in THIS post.

See, "ROB", (or, "RtB"...or, just "RB")....I could sit you down and teach you how in just a little bit of time...in a classroom, with the proper illustrations, pictures....better yet, with an FTD, or even in the simulator (though, rather expensive to chew up the rental time just sitting there)....heck, I bet I could even teach Rob Balsamo!! I hear he's not totally incapable of understanding....only when it comes to some things......


...adding a "Reply to" for nexus:

reply to post by nexusferox
 


So YOU, nexus, can LEARN instead of mocking, and embarrassing yourself.....
edit on 5 March 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by rjh01a
I have a feeling if elements within the US Govt are tried and convicted of crimes related to 9/11,


With all the "evidence" you claim to have, just when are these trials going to start.... You have had over 9 years to show everyone your "evidence", but no trials, no trials even planned, in fact you have nothing at all to show!



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by rjh01a
 


?????

Up to your old tactics, eh???


Weedwhacker evaded it as well when asked.


Lie. Utter lie....but, of course, you seem to "represent" the PfffT crowd....


www.abovetopsecret.com...




The "question" was some crappy marked-up (looks like) Google Maps image? Some blue squiggly lines, and other colors. Wanna describe exactly what it is supposed to convey?? Because, although I have a pretty good idea, I smell a bait and switch coming up, here....and only because it is SUCH a common M.O. of the PfffT, and have seen it so many times before....


They are not "squiggly lines". They are squares based on Lat/Long plots derived from the data provided by the NTSB. You would know this if you have researched the OP.

If you are having trouble reading the "blue squiggly lines", perhaps this image is better for your eyes?




I ask again, If the IRS is aligned prior to engine start, why is it more than 3000 feet in error when the FDR starts to record?



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by rjh01a
I have a feeling if elements within the US Govt are tried and convicted of crimes related to 9/11,


With all the "evidence" you claim to have, just when are these trials going to start.... You have had over 9 years to show everyone your "evidence", but no trials, no trials even planned, in fact you have nothing at all to show!


Feel free to provide your full name and you will be one of the first to know.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   

A Report of The Project for the New American Century September 2000



At no time in history has the international security order been as conducive to American interests and ideals.



The challenge for the coming century is to preserve and enhance this “American peace.” Yet unless the United States maintains sufficient military strength, this opportunity will be lost.



This report attempts to define those requirements. In particular, we need to:



ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:



• defend the American homeland;


fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;


• perform the “constabulary” duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions;


• transform U.S. forces to exploit the “revolution in military affairs;”


www.newamericancentury.org...


Rumsfeld Admits to Unaccounted, Missing 2.3 Trillion Dollars September 10 2001



Most Americans are not aware that on September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld declared that there was 2.3 Trillion Dollars unaccounted for in the Pentagons book keeping records. 2.3 Trillion dollars is equal to and even a little greater than the entire Federal Budget for an entire year in America, and is an awful lot of money. Roughly 8,000 dollars for every man, woman and child in America.


video.google.com...#

Well we all know what happened the next day. So here we are, engaged in multiple wars with increased spending for our military. The homeland has its own security division with its own budget and surveillance of the public has become commonplace. Quite a trick.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by rjh01a
 


First.....do you have the ACTUAL Jeppesen 10-9/9A pages for the proper effective date range?? So we can AT LEAST get an idea of what the crew inputted when they (the FO, most likely) aligned the IRS's.


I ask again, If the IRS is aligned prior to engine start, why is it more than 3000 feet in error when the FDR starts to record?



That will begin to tell us a lot. Second point: And, I am sure as heck that the PfffT crowd already know this, but wish to trumpet and exaggerate the "errors" as much as possible, in this futile attempt at white-washing and confusing, again. This is a tired old tactic, and I've sen it for years, now, coming from "them".

I say "them", and really only mean a tiny handful, by now. For, I see that RB is getting active "help" from RK, rather than just a figurehead appeal to authority on the membership roster.

(Say, how's the relationship between John Lear, and PfffT, by the way?? I see that PfffT keep distancing themselves from the "hologram" claims...yet good ole' JL is still pumpin' that one out!! AND, he's still on that "membership roster"? Very curious.....).


Back to those 10-9 pages....of COURSE there won't be any, since we throw them away with each revision process.....perhaps there is old archived data that can be obtained form Jeppesen?? Or, easier than that, build a time machine....

Anyway, the Lat/Longs for the gates are never "exact"....and THIS, ladies and gentlemen of the audience, is the teeny, weeny little fib from PfffT....a fib of "omission". Or, a false appeal to "exactitude" (you know what I mean)....innuendo-dropping, and implying a MUCH more "accurate" scenario, for day-to-day aviation activities than actually exists. Because, folks.....the IRS navigation units were never designed for "precision" navigation!! Think of them as adequate for "gross" navigation....and other references would provide better tolerances of precision, WHEN REQUIRED!!

But, simply operating in a normal terminal, or en-route environment, the IRS accuracy...as long as it didn't get REALLY, REALLY off, would vary up to two miles, and still be "acceptable".

Of course....the PfffT don't want you to understand this....do they mention it, anywhere?? NO!


Now....let's talk about "triple mix".....oh? Was that addressed in the screed from the PfffT, or not? So, tell me.....(scrolling up to see which sock I'm addressing.....) "rjh01a"....those IRS Lat/Long plots, on the Google Maps image....did they represent IRS unit #1, unit #2, unit #3...or the Triple Mix position?? (I have a good idea of the answer).

In case the rest of you haven't figured it out, yet...."triple mix" is an average of all three IRS units....the software takes a "look" at the three, and "blends" them to represent what it has calculated as the "aircraft's position". THAT is used as the basis and refernce for the displays, auto flight, etc.

Now.....each individual unit has a defined "Maximum" tolerance before it is considered too far out. I don't recall the exact numbers (and, they change often, depending on the software version which happens to be uploaded into the database....and this gets changes once or twice a year, IIRC). The computer "looks" at all three, as I said...and if one goes too "whacko", it will be biased out, and the crew alerted via an EICAS message. There are various menus you can pull up, on the IRS control units interface heads, and access the exact info...to see EACH unit's calculated Lat/Longs (where it "thinks" it is).


SO....we have three independent, but "mixed" readings....which is the one used on that Google Map image. We have a situation were a MINOR ERROR in position can be input at initiation....oh, I didn't get to that, yet, did I? (This is why we need, but will never get, the old 10-9/9A pages). I have OFTEN seen, especially back then, on the end of a terminal "pier", that several of the gates will have the SAME Lat/Longs as a reference. A few hundred feet apart, that difference, it isn't important. For a NON_precision device!

Also.....in aviation, the Lat/Longs are approximations in another way: In degrees, minutes and TENTHS of minutes.

Like this:

N 38 56.8 W077 27.6

(Those are the ARP coordinates (Airport Reference Point) for KIAD, rounding the nearest tenth of a minute).

THAT is the format used to input into the IRS units. No spaces when you type it into the CDU scratch-pad, and then "line select" to the appropriate input boxes.

Compared to what "AirNav current shows, which is far more exact (and represents what's available, with TODAY's GPS accuracy):


Lat/Long: 38-56-50.8000N / 077-27-35.8000W

www.airnav.com...

Can everyone see, there? In case you didn't know, ONE minute of latitude is just about equal to ONE nautical mile....about 6,076 feet. The IRS coordinates are just "roughly" to rounded tenths of a minute. Every tenth of a minute, is about 600-610 feet.

See the picture, yet??? NOW....IRS alignment when on the gate...minor movement, and jostling during push-back, then taxi out....the IRS is NOT that accurate (pre-GPS updating) and especially prone to accumulated errors at slow speeds...ike, push-back and taxi.....


Finally....depending on the version they had, at AAL .... it was not always the case, but like I said, this can be checked....the units will "update" the triple mixed position when the TOGA button is pushed, at the start of takeoff roll. THIS assumes, of course, that the runway used for takeoff is the SAME runway you pre-programmed into the CDU, at the gate....(OR, if there was a runway assignment change after leaving the gate, during the taxi-out).


The Lat/Longs of all the runways are in the database, just for that quick "update"....BUT, it doesn't immediately "re-set" the displayed/recorded POS info!!! The computer "keeps" that in its memory, and uses it to gradually refine the POS data....along with the normal "radio updating" that goes on, transparent to the crew, whenever the EHSI switches are NOT in VOR or ILS selections:



I hope this clears up a thing or two......



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Irrelevant.

There is no forensic evidence to match the alleged murder weapon to the crime scene.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by rjh01a
 


First.....do you have the ACTUAL Jeppesen 10-9/9A pages for the proper effective date range?? So we can AT LEAST get an idea of what the crew inputted when they (the FO, most likely) aligned the IRS's.


Actually, it is 20-9C.

Read more here.

Do you have anything to dispute the above?

since the rest of your post is based on your initial inaccurate argument.. I'll just reply with this...

You have failed to answer my questions for the second time, I'll ask one more time, and then it three strikes and you're out.

If the IRS is aligned prior to engine start, why is it more than 3000 feet in error when the FDR starts to record?

I'll follow that up by asking, do you feel these "blue squiggly lines" were achieve through a full IRS/IRU aligned prior to taxi?

A simple yes or no will do. Thanks.








edit on 5-3-2011 by rjh01a because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



But, simply operating in a normal terminal, or en-route environment, the IRS accuracy...as long as it didn't get REALLY, REALLY off, would vary up to two miles, and still be "acceptable".


And yet in another thread were you not arguing that this same FDR data was so accurate as to show the PRECISE position of flight 77 prior to impacting the Pentagon.?
It was SO accurate that it clearly showed how the planes impacted the light poles..
It was SO accurate that it disproved the other flight path stated by many witnesses..

Flight 77 did not have a GPS system so what suddenly gave the data that accuracy you now say may be off by up to two miles.????



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by Lynda101 I still puzzle over why the hell in the USA instead of flying into buildings, they simply didn't drop bombs from the planes.


Eh? You're suggesting that the terrorists should or would have captured the aircraft, modified them so that they could drop bombs, and then used them as military aeroplanes until they got shot down? An odd stance.

And government may occasionally be pretty awful, but what do you think funded the pre 1970 school system? Not to mention street lighting, rubbish collection, the police, the army and a million other things?
edit on 5-3-2011 byiTrickoftheShade because: (no reason given)


Hi Trickofthetrade

You seem to have misunderstood the points I was making.

These aircraft seem to be causing a lot of controversy. Not everybody accepts they were the planes we are told they were or that a plane was the culprit for the Pentagon, from the pictures it looks to be more like a train! When we were shown the Pentagon damage on tv I was immediately struck by the lack of plane debris. Further, I have never heard of a building with explosives planted in it whilst people were working there. Seems to disregard Health and Safety and also the conditions the insurers would have required, especially when insuring the tower for such a high valuation.
I will never forget watching the scarf being waved from a window and when the tower collapsed I can honestly say it was one of the worst things I have ever seen.

With the terrorists having the ability to carry out such an audacious plan I am surprised they didn't do even more destruction. Had one of those planes carried larger bombs or even the possibility of a nuclear bomb that attack could have been far. far worse. What also bothers me with the planes coming in, surely when approaching an airport one has to fly at a certain height etc how come the tower didn't get suspicious and get security planes up in the air.

You ask who I thought funded the pre 1970 schooling and other services - well, the tax payer of course, we actually fund government that then manages our country's money.

When London was hit by the terrorists there was much on the net informing people that the terrorists had been taken around the House of Commons a few days earlier and thought they were taking part in a police and essential services training exercise. It was even suggested that we were honoured with the presence at Scotland Yard of a certain Prime Minister from a Middle Eastern country whom conducted our exercise which unfortunately turned into a disaster. He was notified of the attack 10 minutes before it happened. No one would confirm or deny this when it happened as there is no way of checking because of security reasons, but I just thought I would mention it.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Flight 77 did not have a GPS system so what suddenly gave the data that accuracy you now say may be off by up to two miles.????


Well I am no pilot, but from reading around the answer to that may be that it's because once in air, the data is modified gradually by ground stations. The data is somewhat inaccurate when it's on the ground, and may not be the best basis by which to judge exact position of the aircraft. That is a very simplistic version though of what's being said around the vast internet, but I defer to those that know... See? This is why it's just best to shut mouth, and open ears when one doesn't know. Watch, I bet I just made a fool of myself!



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


But weed states this.

But, simply operating in a normal terminal, or en-route environment, the IRS accuracy...as long as it didn't get REALLY, REALLY off, would vary up to two miles, and still be "acceptable".


Note the "en-route", that's in the air...
BTW, I did read up and the data is subject to constant drift while in flight..
It is NEVER that accurate...As many state, It doesn't need to be...

Edit: I'm pretty sure flight 77 received NO updates from ground stations..
WW can talk about that but I thought the flight was using INS which needs no outside inputs..
edit on 5-3-2011 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by eliade
 


The holograph theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. To ensure success, this operation would need to make use of tried and true conventional means. There has been exhaustive research on the subject of what was accomplished on 911. I can dig up a link if anyone wants to hold my feet to the fire, but the objectives appear include, but were not limited to:

Demolish the WTC complex...all of it.
Recharge the political viability of a curiously homogeneous middle eastern country.
Silence the Office of Naval Intelligence who were on the verge of exposing massive corruption within the military.
Silence the SEC investigations whose records were lost with the WTC
Steal a bunch of gold as payoff for the "wet workers"
"Disappear" the inside men at the FDNY, NYPD, OEM, etc. as payoff for their roles in the scam.
Gain a pretext for long-planned wars and further erosion of freedom.


There's more of course, but the obvious beneficiaries aren't "we the people".

Because there was so much on the line, they couldn't rely on a stooge pilot who might lose his nerve. They couldn't rely on a remote controlled aircraft in case it missed its target. They couldn't use actual jets because they can be and ARE identified at crash sites. They needed precise destruction of the evidence, so that no one would be able to recover it if it survived the collapse of the buildings. Only pre-positioned explosives could accomplish that; even guided missiles couldn't guarantee a precise hit as well as pre-positioned charges, but that doesn't mean they weren't thrown in for good measure.

There is plenty of evidence they didn't use holographs for their hijacked jets; that they simply used bad graphics on almost live video, transmitted to the major media outfits from a central military command center. As a military operation, standard operating procedure is to jam the enemy's communications and electronic devices, as was reported by the fire and police departments, citizens and local TV stations. In this case, "we the people" were the enemy. Once effectively blacked out, they could transmit any message they wanted over the world's largest megaphone (ABC, CBS, FOX, etc).

With perfectly blue skies, it was a simple thing to use existing "green screen" chroma key technology and layering techniques to superimpose transparently fake images of jets over delayed live video.

Folks have a hard time stomaching this argument because it lays bare the fact that all our major media are complicit, as is anyone who is still prosecuting a war on terrorism and not prosecuting BushCheney, but when scrutinized, it appears to be the only way to answer all the questions.

It will be ridiculed and ignored as much as possible, but watch both halves of the september clues video for more details.

septemberclues.info...
edit on 5-3-2011 by Yankee451 because: typo

edit on 5-3-2011 by Yankee451 because: added "be"


The truth in all its beauty/ugliness.
Brilliant summation yankee451.
Let us hope these truths can spread like wildfire.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by backinblack
Flight 77 did not have a GPS system so what suddenly gave the data that accuracy you now say may be off by up to two miles.????


Well I am no pilot, but from reading around the answer to that may be that it's because once in air, the data is modified gradually by ground stations. The data is somewhat inaccurate when it's on the ground, and may not be the best basis by which to judge exact position of the aircraft. That is a very simplistic version though of what's being said around the vast internet, but I defer to those that know... See? This is why it's just best to shut mouth, and open ears when one doesn't know. Watch, I bet I just made a fool of myself!


From pilots on Pprune with no affiliation to P4T.


"There is a big difference between updating a position.. ok..., which is not a problem at all, and Re-Aligning an IRS in flight which is not possible :=."




"If the Present Position is incorrect when the INS is initialized, it will NOT "re-align" itself! It should be shut down and re-initialized with the correct Present Position."



"No IRS realign in flight, ... alignement realign requires the platform to be stable. no acceleration, no movement, sometimes the movement created by loading container is enough to screw up the align process, on a modern Airliner."



"When you start in the morning, you tell it where it is. Either by telling it the gate position or by giving it the GPS position."



Source - www.pprune.org...


From American Airlines Captains who have actual flight time in N644AA.


....on cursory examination something is screwy those things are so accurate in the 75, 76, 73, and FK100, that we always, always put in the exact gate coordinates on each gate at each airport when preparing to go, so that -may- indicate some trickery of some kind that "they" forgot to delete....

....

Ralph has also explained that he has never seen an error of more than 1/4 mile, which is usually when flying over the pond to Europe because he couldnt get an update.

Usual drift is a few hundred feet, then corrected with an update (if the IRS was properly aligned at the gate of course, which is SOP at AAL prior to each flight).

But again, there shouldnt be any error at the gate when aligned. Any error shown to the pilot prior to taxi, and the aircraft is grounded. Ralph explained that if he saw such an error even develop during taxi, he would have returned to the gate.

Just more corroboration demonstrating that the data did not come from an American Airlines aircraft.


Source - pilotsfor911truth.org...



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by rjh01a
 



"No IRS realign in flight, ... alignement realign requires the platform to be stable. no acceleration, no movement, sometimes the movement created by loading container is enough to screw up the align process, on a modern Airliner."


Apparently military aircraft can realign in flight BTW...



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by rjh01a
 


Like I said... I'll stick to reading for the rest of this thread, but you guys please, continue. I enjoy the debate.
Thanks.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by rjh01a
 


Like I said... I'll stick to reading for the rest of this thread, but you guys please, continue. I enjoy the debate.
Thanks.


Don't you find it odd that this same FDR data was used by WW and the rest of them to place flight 77 in a precise flight path to hit exactly where the OS described, to within mere feet of accuracy,
but now they are arguing that the same FDR data is still relevant even though it's been shown to be out by 3000'..??

Note, not one of them is disputing the inaccuracy of the data..

I find it odd..They are defeating their past arguments..



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by rjh01a
 



"No IRS realign in flight, ... alignement realign requires the platform to be stable. no acceleration, no movement, sometimes the movement created by loading container is enough to screw up the align process, on a modern Airliner."


Apparently military aircraft can realign in flight BTW...


Correct.

But if you click the source, you will see it was a question based on the very lat/long plots and argument based in this thread, but presented back in 2008 on pprune.

eg. Can a Commercial aircraft align lat/long in flight if it were in error prior to push-back from the Gate?

The answer is a resounding No! Even from Weedwacker and C46Driver, right here in this thread.

They (C46, weedy et al) initially thought P4T fabricated the data. Now that they figured out the data actually came from the NTSB, weedwhacker seems to be in full spin mode, the rest are silent.

Regardless, "weedwhacker" will be called to the stand I'm sure when the trials commence, for his obstruction of Justice, as will be the others.

edit on 5-3-2011 by rjh01a because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by rjh01a
 

So what's your opinion as to what this says about the FDR data showing the final few seconds before impact?
If this data is out by so much, would that data not be out also?



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by rjh01a
 

So what's your opinion as to what this says about the FDR data showing the final few seconds before impact?
If this data is out by so much, would that data not be out also?





If the aircraft were aligned at the gate with such a large error (in other words, inputting a "Present Position" that was not actually your Present Position), the same error needs to be applied at the end of data because the IRS in the aircraft claimed (N644AA) does not have auto-align ability to adjust for the error made. If the same error is applied at the end of data as was seen at the gate, it will take the aircraft North Of Citgo. Drift is also an issue.

The aircraft does have an update ability, But "update" is different than an alignment. The initial alignment needs to be accurate in order for the rest of the data to be accurate. It is impossible to get an accurate position in flight if the initial alignment was in error (or not aligned), and the aircraft does not have in flight auto-align capability.

Since the data shows an auto-align after departure, merging with Radar plots, if all the data is authentic, it did not come from an American Airlines 757, as such aircraft do not have this capability.

Source



new topics

top topics



 
83
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join