New FDR Decode

Originally posted by R_Mackey

Originally posted by 767doctor
Now where were we going with this discussion? You're insistence that the PA cannot lag because its like...a totally digital system man!

Tom disagrees with your lag theory.

Originally posted by tomk52
It does not seem to me that the PA lags very much at all. I would have expected that.

Page 40.

"... and Suzy says you're ugly and called you, like, a TOTAL slut...!"

Cripes, Robby. Have you regressed to JUNIOR high level now?

Tell ya what, SPORT.

Why don't you assume responsibility for the trash that comes out of YOUR mouth, and allow others the same license.

You clearly do not UNDERSTAND the words that I write. You have shown zero capacity to read for comprehension, and even less inclination to provide an honest interpretation of other people's words.

If you think that my interpretation of things differs from doc's, why don't you ASK. Instead of the lame attempts at high school girl backstabbing.

Your attempt at quote snipping notwithstanding, if you had bothered to ask, I'd have replied that, "no, we do not disagree".

1. My statement above states (with uncharacteristic lack of clarity) that "I would expect to see (a lag)". To my surprise, the data didn't show that.

2. If you bothered to read doc's postings for comprehension, you'd see that his theories for the PA error does not depend on lag.

Now, you want to tell anyone that their boyfriend's have been cheating on them?

Cripes, what a bunch of little girls...


TomK

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by 911files

 

OK, thanks John, I will!

Tommy, you failed to read back and research. Another error your part!

I've already explained how the VSI works long before you came along.
It's a shame you can't read the post I made especially for you which
listed all the times I corrected your errors.

Look for it on ummm...page 39? Maybe 40?

And, after all, THAT's what this is all about, ain't it TF...??

Tallying up errors?
Swinging slide rule?

WTF don't you kids grow up?
From the very first post that I ever entered at P4t, because it disagreed with their pet theory, instant personal attack. Instant appeal to (non) authority.

No discussion of the bigger picture, of significant principles.

Just one digression into arcane semantic trivia after another.

Well, I've just about had my fill.

BTW, with regard to your door switch, here's the "cut thru the bull#" conclusion:

You guys can stroke each other all day long with irrelevant FAA regs & word parsing...

The FACT of the matter is that, when the plane took off, there were two professional pilots at the controls.

Half way thru the flight, there was someone who could NOT maintain a heading, could NOT maintain altitude, and could NOT perform a coordinated turn. In other words, there was a crappy pilot at the controls.

I don't give a flying green fig about your bogus interpretation of your manual. I don't give a flying fart about Robby's "everything on the plane ..." nonsense.

The inescapable FACT of the matter is that the pilots SWAPPED. And to do that, something had to come thru that door.

I don't CARE whether the switch was never hooked to the FDR (98% probability), whether it broke while the door was forced (1% possibility) or some other event happened.

That door WAS opened. Period. End of story.

But this little circlejerk has not been a waste.

It has PROVEN one thing beyond any doubt.

The fact that you children are waving this turd around as tho it were a tasty morsel ONE DAY after you found it, after doing precisely ZERO due diligence to see if it is real or imaginary, PROVES what insincere, incompetent & unprofessional "researchers" you really are.

Oh, did I leave out "dishonest"...? Yeah, that too.

TomK

I'm starting to see a pattern here with our good friend Tom and his rants.

I would wager he has been spanked many times by sharp young Engineer's, feeling quite old himself, which is why he constantly resorts to age related ad homs.

Tom, I'm sorry my friend, but out with the old, in with the new has been the norm since time began. You're just going to have to accept the fact you are no longer the sharp young engineer you may have once been.

Once you accept this fact, I'm sure you'll be much happier as a person and perhaps a bit less stressed to go on binges while posting. It may also save your life. Look at Beachnut's posts, the ramblings of an old incoherent stroke victim. My heart goes out to him.

Anyway..... just trying to give some sound advice.

Originally posted by R_Mackey
Certainly you can tell us the airline, type aircraft, (perhaps also date and flight number) which has this retractable "steel cable barricade contraption" so we can cross check it with IAD-MCO city pair for the specific airline and flight number?

Cap't Bob,

"Cross check" it? LMAO Sure. Go right ahead. Knock yourself out, dude. FYI it was a United 757-222, reg number N575UA.

Why don't you forget about "cross checking" something like this and simply put some of your "crack" research team on the question of whether or not United indeed has a "steel cable barricade contraption" that blocks off the passenger section of the aircraft when the cockpit door has to open?

That, of course, assumes you *do* have people who work for the Airlines and your vast membership is not made up primarily of mythical and imaginary characters. It should be easy enough for you "Aviation Experts" to verify that United uses some sort of barricade devise that I mentioned.

Or, you can keep on swimming in your ignorance stew, speculating and imagining and refusing to accept the fact that other people *do* know things aeronautical that you either don't know or you choose not to know.

Up to you.

Originally posted by R_Mackey
Wrong again Tom.

I did say it in every sentence I typed that it "can be deferred". You just ignored it.

you also missed the "gotcha!" in 91.213d

An aircraft with inoperative instruments or equipment as provided in paragraph (d) of this section is considered to be in a properly altered condition acceptable to the Administrator.

What you determine to be functional may not be what the FAA determines to be acceptable. This is why you see the FSDO, amateur.

Again, my statement holds true. If it is installed on the aircraft, it is required equipment, but can be deferred. I know your ego thinks you can determine what is acceptable, but you would be wrong, and your ticket will pay the price of your ego.

For the next lesson, I will have to start charging by the hour.

By the way, there are many reasons to use a visor at night. Matter of fact, it is more pertinent to safety of flight to have a visor at night than during the day. Something with rods and cones and bright lights perhaps? I don't expect an amateur to understand though.


[edit on 30-11-2009 by R_Mackey]

Unbelievable.

Just one crashing wave of technobabble after another after another... Inundate people with on wave of crap after another after another... Baffle with bullshyte.

I didn't say that "I could determine what was acceptable".
I said "as long as I comply with 91.213d".

And the FACT is that I do NOT have to "run it by the FSDO" before I take off. (Tough to do after 4 pm anyway.)

I have to follow the requirements if 91.312(d).

That is IT. End of story. And then I can LEGALLY fly with a non-operational piece of equipment that is on the plane.

In case YOU need a refresher on this, here's a Link.

Allow me to quote the pertinent paragraph:

1. PURPOSE. This advisory circular (AC) describes acceptable methods for the operation of aircraft under Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 91 with certain inoperative instruments and equipment which are not essential for safe flight.

a. These acceptable methods of operation are: (1) ...

(2) Operation of aircraft without an MEL under FAR 8 91.213(d).

[emphasis added]

This AC provides an example of LEGAL flying with a broken ADF.
And it is NOT necessary to get a clearance from an FSDO in order to do so.

You said that I couldn't do this. You were wrong.

Put on your waders, campers. Prepare for the next wave of irrelevant technobabble.

... all because Cap'n Bobby can't say "ooops, I was wrong..."

... again...


TomK

Speaking of "changing pilots":

TomK , can you explain why the autopilot does not disengage when
the yoke is moved abruptly during flight?

I don't agree with your 'door open' assessment and neither does the
data. The official story doesn't fit the evidence. Sorry; we'll wait for
John to find an extracted parameter in the data that was not updating.

Originally posted by R_Mackey
I'm starting to see a pattern here with our good friend Tom and his rants.

You can always tell when "Bob" Mackey is in a corner, he starts with the personal attacks and rants. I guess to turn attention away from the fact that you and turboman have claimed 100% that FLT DECK DOOR was being recorded because it was listed in the 757-3 frame and been proved wrong, you have both degraded into childish nonsense.

So, how is it going in finding that absolutely 100% got to be there GMT date data?

Originally posted by turbofan
John to find an extracted parameter in the data that was not updating.

Are you just stupid or what? I already did last night. You are supposed to be helping me find it since those of us who know a thing or two about the data can't.

reply to post by 911files


Nope, not stupid at all. Settle down John, I already explained that you
can't find it because it's not in the FDR file to begin with.

Okay, since turboman seems to have missed it.

FLT DECK DOOR - 42 hours of recorded closed

FLT DECK DOOR is stored in the 757-3 frame in WORD 251.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ebab3669ecf0.jpg[/atsimg]

GMT date data is not in the fdr file. It is stored in the 757-3 frame in WORD 256.

What do these two things have in common? The 757-1, 757-2 frames did not use WORD 251 and 256, they were added in 1997 to a plane manufactured in 1991.

How is it going finding that date data turbo? 100%, no doubt about it, it had to be hooked up, just like the deck door, right?

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by 911files

 

Nope, not stupid at all. Settle down John, I already explained that you
can't find it because it's not in the FDR file to begin with.

You are dumb as a rock. The binary bits and the WORD are in the FDR. The data ain't (a bunch of 0's). So thank you. Since it is exactly the same case as the FLT DECK DOOR, you just admitted that it was not in the FDR to begin with either.

Originally posted by turbofan
Sorry; we'll wait for
John to find an extracted parameter in the data that was not updating.

John won't find it because it wasn't recorded. That's what happens when the Airline doesn't want to record a non-required parameter. When they want to record a parameter that isn't required by the FAA, they enable that parameter to be recorded and you see it in the data.

It's just that simple.

@Tom.

Please read this statement again very carefully. I'm not going to bother going around in circles with a less than Private pilot, on this topic.. Especially one who is arrogant and belligerent.

I've bolded the most important parts you missed.

"Paragraph d exception essentially says if the equipment is not part of the type certificate for the aircraft (a sun visor is, it was built and installed by Cessna, and approved by the FAA through the type certification process), and it is placarded.

In other words, if you add a radar altimeter to a Cessna and it is inoperative, you can placard it and be on your way. If you do not placard it, you bust regs."

In further words, you cannot just placard a sun visor and blast off. It is part of the type certificated equipment on the aircraft. You have to see the FSDO, have it fixed, or deferred per MEL. Period. The FSDO may actually tell you don't fly till it's fixed. This is known as a "no-go" item. You know, what we have been taking about regarding the cockpit sensor before you twisted off into your off topic rant?

You also cannot just placard your ADF if it was installed by Cessna when coming off the assembly line. You can placard it if you installed it at a later date.

This is one of the most common mistakes made by inexperienced pilots which get them into trouble. There are many more.

Instead of me billing you for this lesson, please just donate it to P4T. 30 bucks should cover it.

@trebor,

patriotsquestion911.com...

Yup, they're all fantasy and photoshopped pictures. trebor, you really shouldn't be drinking this early.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by R_Mackey]

Originally posted by R_Mackey
John won't find it because it wasn't recorded. That's what happens when the Airline doesn't want to record a non-required parameter. When they want to record a parameter that isn't required by the FAA, they enable that parameter to be recorded and you see it in the data.

Why thank you "Bob" Mackey! That is exactly what we have been trying to tell turboman for days now. Problem of FLT DECK DOOR showing CLOSED for 42 hours solved by P4T.

I just want to say, I'm enjoying this bandying (is that a word??)

Oh, very entertaining stuff...and for good measure, lest ye think such foul thoughts, no, I did not invent a new 'sock ATS name' such as "767doctor"...that is another person, who I have no knowledge of...but who I admire immediately, based on his/her knowledge and level of experience that is presented.

I doff my hat, to you good person!

(BTW...hate the stupid hats!!!! Caps, whatever...part of the 'uniform'...(I'm sure "R_Mackey"/Rob Balsamo knows what I'm talking about....)

For those of you who are only getting your info from Hollywood movies...no, we don't wear the hats in the cockpit, with gigantic earphones (I call them head clamps).... This is the iconic image from WWII movies...bomber pilots valiantly going after their targets. Yes, they wore the headphones...because, back then, there was no modern technology as today.

I have a 'Plantronics" brand headset...with a molded earpiece. The 'boom' mic requirement is only for operations below 18,000 feet (it was added, about a decade or so ago, for better CVR recordings in post-accident investigations when the crew died...)

This is just expositional background information for this thread, because it is needed....too many "theories" and down-right falsehoods exist in the "9/11 realm"....sometimes a rational voice should enter into the context.

Experience...knowledge...and a particular view that is largely shared by MOST, in order to refute a fringe element of just a very, very small minority. Who like to use deflection, innuendo, and outright lies to further their personal agenda.....

Meanwhile, back at the Pentagon....

AA77 still hit the Pentagon. Robby and Turbofan cannot support their claim that AA77 flew over and away from the Pentagon. And Franco is still dead.

Any questions?

reply to post by turbofan


Hay, 'turbo'...

TomK , can you explain why the autopilot does not disengage when the yoke is moved abruptly during flight?

Did I miss something?? Of course the autopilot will disengage when the control wheel is manipulated. Thought everyone knew that, but I forget, sometimes...we have an audience of many, and only a few are actually experienced pilots.

Here's what happens....should you (or someone) move the control wheel sufficiently beyond the program parameters, whilst the autopilot is engaged:

The A/P will dis-engage. On just about any modern Transprot Category jet, to include the Boeing 757/767, there will be a visual AND audible alarm.

On the B-757/767 it is the 'MASTER WARN' alarm...flashing red light, and a 'siren'...widh I had the .wav file to share, but I don't...it is loud, let's leave it at that. Unmistakeable. SAME as the 'OVERSPEED' warn, BTW....anything that activates the red 'MASTER WARN' is accompanied by the sound...cabin pressure above 10,000 feet too...fire, engine or cargo...you get the idea.

There is also a 'MASTER CAUTION' (yellow) light and alert system. OK..'amber'...whatever. Accompanied with a chime. (AIRBUS might have a multiple chime sound..."ding ding ding"...it varies by manufacturer).

These are, obviously, for less important malfunctions/situations. Requiring attention, but not immediate action.....

Hope this helps to clear up any misconceptions.....

Originally posted by R_Mackey
John won't find it because it wasn't recorded. That's what happens when the Airline doesn't want to record a non-required parameter. When they want to record a parameter that isn't required by the FAA, they enable that parameter to be recorded and you see it in the data.

It's just that simple.

I just want to expand on the above a bit more as it may confuse some.

For example, Warren couldn't find the following in the data.

GMT MONTH
GMT DAY
GMT YEAR
GPS HOURS
GPS MINUTES
GPS SECONDS
DOC DEPART
DOC DEST
DOC FLT NUMBER
DOC LEG NUMBER

This is because American Airlines didn't enable it to be recorded.

You see FLT DECK DOOR in the data because American Airlines enabled to be recorded as they want to know the status of their cockpit doors in flight.

In other words, FLT DECK DOOR was recorded and showing the status of the cockpit door.

End of story.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by R_Mackey]

Originally posted by R_Mackey
I'm starting to see a pattern here with our good friend Tom and his rants.

I would wager he has been spanked many times by sharp young Engineer's, feeling quite old himself, which is why he constantly resorts to age related ad homs.

Tom, I'm sorry my friend, but out with the old, in with the new has been the norm since time began. You're just going to have to accept the fact you are no longer the sharp young engineer you may have once been.

Once you accept this fact, I'm sure you'll be much happier as a person and perhaps a bit less stressed to go on binges while posting. It may also save your life. Look at Beachnut's posts, the ramblings of an old incoherent stroke victim. My heart goes out to him.

Anyway..... just trying to give some sound advice.

Wow, Robbie,

You "would wager ...", followed by a diatribe of the little voices in your head??

I was told in a PM to expect your "psychotic melt-down". I replied, "Nah, he's just a confused, angry little boy."

I was wrong.

And I never imagined that it'd come this fast or this severely.

Rather than examining imaginary scenarios that exist nowhere but in "Little Robby World", let's examine the REALITY BASED patterns that anyone reading this thread can plainly see, right here, right now.

1. Robby makes silly, unsupported, rash & unverified assertions.

2. Other people, with more knowledge and/or experience than Robby, correct his silly, unsupported assertions.

3. Robby flies off the handle, and starts calling anyone who disagrees with him a "liar, poseur, incompetent, etc." And now, "old" (me) and "incoherent stroke victim" (Beechnut).

4. Robby gets proven wrong, time after time. His reply tactics #1 thru 50 are to throw up a wall of obfuscating technobabble, based solely on semantics, hoping everyone will simply tire of the nonsense, and he can slip away with his battered dignity more or less intact.

5. In the frequent case that the other person sticks around long enough to place undeniable, clear-to-everyone proof of Robby's nonsense at his feet, Robby's response is typically adolescent: "OK, I was wrong. But it's not important. And I still know more than you. And I admitted that I was wrong, so you can't bring it up again!!"

6. Robby returns to step #1 on the next topic, and starts the dance all over again.

[Sorry, I don't have time for some of his other, oh-so-mature tactics, such as "I saw Suzy kissing your boyfriend. And she says that your sooo stupid. And that she really doesn't like you."]

But after just a couple of days of having his ears boxed from pillar to post, he is reduced to the vindictive & pathetic posts of the last days, including:

1. Thinly veiled threats. ("we know who your are & where you work.")

2. The above fantasy, made up entirely in his own adolescent little mind, that "Tommy's pestering me, so I'll tell EVERYBODY that 'he's old'. And that 'nobody likes him'. And that 'he's stupid', too. Yeah, THAT will fix him good."

3. Referring to someone who has gone thru a life-threatening medical condition, while chortling about "the ramblings of an old incoherent stroke victim".

3a. As anyone outside of your tiny, irrelevant, cloying bunch of losers will attest, Robby, Beech's logic & clarity are infinitely more lucid than yours on your BEST days.

3b. No Robby. You're lying again. Your "heart does not go out to him". You could barely contain your undisguised glee at posting this despicable statement. And it is statements like this that trump all your other shortcomings ("pompous", "ignorant", etc.) Cavalier, off-handed casual MEANNESS like this shows the really ugly side of your character.

Do a little self-reflection on this ludicrous mission of yours, Rob. Ask yourself how many DVDs do you have to move before you've matched the price of your soul?

Go get some help, Rob. Seriously.

Anyway, I'll sign off now. ... just trying to give some sound advice.

TomK

reply to post by R_Mackey


You have presented no evidence that the FLT DECK DOOR was a recorded parameter. You and turbo have been asserting that if it is in the frame, it is recorded. Now that you have been shown wrong, you go off on a different tangent.

Not being recorded as you say means an empty WORD. Do you understand what that means? That means a bunch of 0's. What is in the FLT DECK DOOR parameter? A 0. The burden of evidence is now on you to demonstrate that it was being recorded. The only way to do that is to show an instance of 1 for that parameter in the 42 hours of data.

reply to post by R_Mackey

You see FLT DECK DOOR in the data because American Airlines enabled to be recorded as they want to know the status of their cockpit doors in flight.

???? LOL!!!

Big Brother?? AMR, the great and all powerful 'OZ'??? In the late 1990s???
Really?

Sheesh....well, I don't know about the incredible, edible American Airlines, and their technology back then (wanting to know whent he cockpit door was open, during flihgts...really???? I mean, just who was responsible for compiling that sort of information into a report for a daily or weekly meeting in the Flight Standards office?? Or, Flight Operations, or whatever AAL calls it internally. Hmmm???)

I can only say that the advent of computerized-tacking methods came into being around then, so it's plausible --- but unlikely that something as obscure as a cockpit door open or closed reading is important to a Corporation...really???

Oh...and one more thing....the SSFDR is NOT, I repeat NOT read out routinely. Jeeze!!! How many deflections and misiformations wil be 'presented' here???

Lest you try to call me a liar, I do know about the QAR...I won't define it here, in case those who do NOT know what it means can be made to hand-wave it away, and try to 'explain' what it is, whilst frantically Googling away....should be entertaining.