9/11 Pentagon Flight Recorder Fraud Revealed

page: 6
48
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by IceRoadTrucker
 


So then the OP is willfully misleading us by continuing to post the paragraph that speaks of the flight number. Backing up claims with false info, nice.




posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by IceRoadTrucker
 


And no, I haven't contradicted anything, you are attempting to read things into my statement that aren't there. Nice try though.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by IceRoadTrucker
 


Because at the time, didn't really feel it was necessary to point out that FDR downloads are missing header info a quarter of the time. Aircraft serial number isn't readable or the recorder serial isn't readable, its a fact of life. FDRs aren't any more reliable than most other avionics. They work the majority of the time, function reasonably well some of the rest of the time and totally crap out once in a while.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


CSFDR systems function the same way from aircraft to aircraft and in many cases the same type of boxes are used. They do not completely redesign avionic systems when they design a new aircraft.


Disclaimer....because of the way IRT is quote mining my posts, no, the F-16 does not have the same exact system. Doesn't change the fact that ALL FDR systems use memory devices, pickups, accelerometers, sig.aquistion units etc.....



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by IceRoadTrucker
 


Evel, get yourself a better ramp before you try to make a jump. The reports from the FDRs that were recovered after 9/11, have had the serial numbers attached. One quarter of the downloads we do on our F-16s have serial numbers that are unreadable and show up as zeros in the files.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
FDRs aren't any more reliable than most other avionics. They work the majority of the time, function reasonably well some of the rest of the time and totally crap out once in a while.


Yeah, well to me it is damn suspicious that "once in a while" happened to repeat itself several times that day. What are the odds that "no FDR serial numbers in the headers" would repeat across all FDR's recovered? But WORSE, what are the odds that out of ALL those aircraft serial numbers possible including the vast majority of individual parts on those airplanes, which have part serial numbers themselves, that not a single one of all those gazillion parts have ever been conclusively identified as coming from ANY of the alleged planes?

The hijackers were hijacked. By remote control. CIA assets lured into a sinister plot to board the planes and hijack them, and then taken over by ground control, which included control over the Mode S transponders, and full control of the aircraft, locking out the pilots, the hijackers and everyone. Even the circuit breakers had no effect. The fact that luggage from the hijackers was found shows that they were expecting to live.

Imagine the confusion in the cockpits. Must have been surreal. Problem is, it was REAL. No way out for anyone on board those planes- which were by additional coincidence (ha), no where near full capacity.

It explains how they had the names and photos of all the 19 hijackers so fast. It explains why the huge administration resistance into an investigation. It explains why even after they DID have an investigation, they had to have it monitored at every step of the way by overseers. Sad when even the 9/11 Omission felt duped. In the case of 93, explains the shootdown. One of the pilots likely figured out a way to defeat the remote, before it could impact the White House. Once it was seen that it would not make the target, they shot it down. Explains the stand down order. Explains the put options. And it explains so much more.

Yeah, we're onto you, Mr. Q Group.
edit on Mon Jul 30th 2012 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 
What a spot on analysis, True. The hijackers were hijacked, plain and simple. Those that continue to attack you makes me shake my head in wonder. You've shown that there's ample reason for investigation of a cover-up, and therefore those that continue to back the OS should be considered suspect.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 


vipertech, you stated ""I wouldnt argue that there isn't a section in the header that lists the serial number of the airplane and the serial number of the recorder."

You when on to state in the same-exact-post,

"Each of the reports I have seen, list the serial numbers. " - Source

Now you are arguing that 'such data' is sometimes missing, contradicting your statement above that you wouldn't argue that it isn't there.

And now you claim your second statement really meant - "The reports from the FDRs that were recovered after 9/11, have had the serial numbers attached."

Can you please show us these 911 reports with the serial numbers of the FDR's attached? Maybe this will help you in your search.

Now you also claim "[FDR's] work the majority of the time, function reasonably well some of the rest of the time and totally crap out once in a while.",

Does the USAF allow the F-16 to fly with a partially functioning or "crapped out" FDR?

Do you think United Airlines, American Airlines and the FAA would let the same thing happen on a flight containing revenue passengers? Perhaps you think the pilots on both planes from different airlines violated their Op's Specs and FAA regs on the same day?

Dennis Cimino's main argument against the FDR data provided is that the raw data is missing the header, the Fleet ID and Aircraft ID. He has never seen raw data in which this information is missing, except from a bench test unit.

You contend that headers also contain the serial numbers and you first stated you wouldn't argue against it. Now you changed your tone and claim it can be missing 1/4 of the time.

Here are Dennis Cimino's qualifications -

Electrical Engineer
Commercial Pilot Rating, since 1981
Navy Combat Systems Specialist: RADAR, ECM, cryptographic communications
Flight Data Recorder Engineer Smiths Aerospace
BA-609, IDARS, Military and Commercial
Millimeter wave RADAR and countermeasures expert since 1973
Two patents held for Doppler RADAR ( Kavouras ):
long pulsewidth RADAR droop compensation network,
and wave guide arc detection for high powered RADAR

Here are your qualifications -

"vipertech0596"
Some anonymous guy on ATS who claims to work with FDR's


Why should anyone listen to you vipertech?
edit on 30-7-2012 by IceRoadTrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 



But WORSE, what are the odds that out of ALL those aircraft serial numbers possible including the vast majority of individual parts on those airplanes, which have part serial numbers themselves, that not a single one of all those gazillion parts have ever been conclusively identified as coming from ANY of the alleged planes?

Says who? Have you ever asked anyone for this information? Not all parts have serial numbers. But you know what does have unique identifiers? Human beings. The remains of the last known occupants of those planes were found at the crash sites. The remains were identified by DNA examination.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


LOL. That kind of paranoia warrants professional help.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 



The hijackers were hijacked. By remote control. CIA assets lured into a sinister plot to board the planes and hijack them, and then taken over by ground control, which included control over the Mode S transponders, and full control of the aircraft, locking out the pilots, the hijackers and everyone. Even the circuit breakers had no effect. The fact that luggage from the hijackers was found shows that they were expecting to live.

So, how did the CIA know which of the thousands and thousands of planes in the fleets of dozens of airlines that fly in the US to install remote systems? Or do you think the CIA install those systems in every plane? Or do you believe that there is technology available that allows the CIA to simply remotely control any plane of its choosing at any time?



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by IceRoadTrucker
 


Try rereading the posts I have made. Just because the serial numbers cannot be read, does not mean that section of the header is no longer there. It's a memory location and it is always there whether or not the serial number can be read.

And yes, the US Air Force (and most agencies/airlines) will allow aircraft to fly with recorder systems screwed up. You generally don't know there is a problem till you do a download.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
Try rereading the posts I have made. Just because the serial numbers cannot be read, does not mean that section of the header is no longer there. It's a memory location and it is always there whether or not the serial number can be read.


I read it several times. It seems you are changing the meaning as you learn what the information contains (or lack of). Readers can judge for themselves as they read the dialogue/discussion in context.

Can you please show us the 9/11 reports which you claim to contain the FDR serial numbers? Second time asked.



And yes, the US Air Force (and most agencies/airlines) will allow aircraft to fly with recorder systems screwed up. You generally don't know there is a problem till you do a download.


Sec. 121.343 — Flight data recorders.
(a) .... no person may operate a large airplane that is certificated for operations above 25,000 feet altitude or is turbine-engine powered unless it is equipped with one or more approved flight recorders that record data...- Federal Aviation Regulations Part 121

Are you aware of which part United and American Airlines operated under on 911/2001?

Flight recorder systems have self test diagnostics during power-up. If the recorder is malfunctioning, it will ping a CAS (Crew Alert) message -- "FDR FAIL" -- and the airplane is grounded until the FDR is fixed.. .as expressed here by Dennis Cimino.



Let's make something perfectly clear about this 'lie' being perpetrated by Warren Stutts about the missing data in the header. First, he has never worked on a real FDR in any capacity in his entire life. Second, he knows nothing about what these files are supposed to look like in the file header, and the fact that BIT checks these two parameters for validity and if the whole all up checksum fails, this is a BIT FAIL and the plane cannot fly with that.

A bench unit does not have A/C ID and FLEET ID data and still can pass BIT. Why? There is a special section of the firmware that controls BIT FAILURE MASKING for BENCH UNITS and in essence, makes the checksum computation 'ignore' the missing data that is not there because it has not been loaded yet. A unit to be shipped to an airplane maker HAS THIS DATA LOADED INTO IT AT THE FACTORY, by the manufacturer of the unit!!! This data is passed to the manufacturer by the aircraft manufacturer, who gets it from the F.A.A. This data is absolutely CRUCIAL to the positive linkage of the FDR to the actual airframe it is mounted in.
- Source

Again vipertech, why should anyone listen to you, a claimed tech on military equipment, over Dennis Cimino, an Electrical Engineer and expert on civilian FDR systems? You won't even put your name to your claims (as does Dennis) and yet you call TrueAmerican paranoid.

Please answer my question above regarding your claim of FDR serial numbers attached to the 911 reports. Thanks.

Lastly, can you please show us the Serial number section in the headers of the FDR Raw data from the alleged 9/11 aircraft in which you now claim should contain at least all zero's?
edit on 30-7-2012 by IceRoadTrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by IceRoadTrucker
 


And a serial number is not going to cause a self test failure. Avionic systems can have self test failures and still work just fine. They can pass their self tests and not work worth a damn. An FDR can still be full of useable data even though you cannot read the airplanes serial number. Mr Cimino has sold you a bill of goods and is not giving you the full story. Whether you believe me or not, I really don't care. I could give you my list of credentials, but, unlike Mr Cimino, I have nothing to prove or gain. On second thought, what the hell....

25 + years as an avionic tecnician working on SH-60B, F/A-18, S-3, P-3C, EA-6B, C-9, C-130, F-16C/D
CSFDR program manager
Accident investigation board member

Ehh, that's enough.....








Can't wait till someone figures out I crossed services....



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 


And yet none of it related to civilian FDR systems.

How many civilian FDR systems have you worked with? Does Military F-16 FDR headers contain a Fleet ID and Aircraft ID field? Do you expect military FDR systems to have the same firmware and data frame layouts as does a civilian 757?

Can you please show us the 9/11 reports which you claim to contain the FDR serial numbers?
Third time asked.

Can you please show us the Serial number section in the headers of the FDR Raw data from the alleged 9/11 aircraft in which you now claim should contain at least all zero's?
Second time asked.
edit on 30-7-2012 by IceRoadTrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by IceRoadTrucker
 


I honestly don't remember how many civilian systems I've worked with. As for your questions, im not going to dance to your tune. You have shown a propensity to ignore reality in favor of conspiracy based on someone's supposed credentials. Try doing some research on your own.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Or do you believe that there is technology available that allows the CIA to simply remotely control any plane of its choosing at any time?


Glad you asked the question. Because frankly, you hoping that I am not prepared for such a question is going to prove to be a grave mistake. And it is going to cause me to expose further evidence that not only is it possible, but is probable.

Whistleblower Reveals "Backdoor" 757 Remote Control And Flight Crew "Lockout" Technology Available Prior To 9/11

Readers, have a listen to that interview Rob Balsamo did with Wayne Anderson. The gist of this interview, while it is packed with eye-popping information about this very subject, is that Wayne actually helped with just such a test, and it was so frightening to the pilots involved, they were all extremely upset and it caused some pretty serious controversy among them.

This technology has been around for decades. Of course you already knew that. But it is always a pleasure to school the Q Group.


I don't know jack compared to someone like Rob when it comes to avionics, but I'll be damned if some NSA mouthpiece is going to make me look like a fool.

And I suppose I should inform Rob that that particular thread has been getting an inordinate amount of hits at P4T lately. And why is it that somehow I seriously doubt those are either bots or typical 9/11 researchers looking at that thread? Well I don't know. Maybe I will ask Rob to start looking at some of the IP's hitting that thread. Haha, stew in your own juices, Q Group. You're going DOWN.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by IceRoadTrucker
 


I honestly don't remember how many civilian systems I've worked with. As for your questions, im not going to dance to your tune. You have shown a propensity to ignore reality in favor of conspiracy based on someone's supposed credentials. Try doing some research on your own.


So you make claims without the ability to source such claims. And instead sling insults.

Got it. Thanks for playing.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


You keep linking P4T crap on here, and then are surprised when people start clicking on the links??? Seriously????



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


You keep linking P4T crap on here, and then are surprised when people start clicking on the links??? Seriously????


That thread was posted May 17th, 2010.


Wasn't me pal. I just linked it for the first time RIGHT NOW. I happened to be looking at something else, an index at P4T, when I noticed all these "guests" viewing that thread. I thought "WTF?" So I dove in, loaded the audio interview, and listened to it last night. I was like
Holy CRAP!!!

But considering the vastly damning evidence that thread, and interview presents that the technology was in place, and likely concealed on may more commercial aircraft as well, maybe readers might understand why. They're worried folks. And they damn well should be.





new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join