AA77 FDR Data, Explained

[Snowygrouch]

Very true Gravy, many people DID see a large airliner.

If you are thinking I subscribe to missile theories you are much mistaken.

My opinion is that data provided to me from the authorities noes not correllate to the physical evidence (in terms of the flightpath).

What I am trying to do now is find out why. Not by watching you-tube but by really looking at the raw data.
I was under the impression that raw data is a phrase that commanded a level of respect in this forum.

If I can re-package the data; I will consider releasing it after we have finished. No promises though; the decode isnt done yet!

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Snowygrouch

Second it took months and months because I only GOT the data frames about a week ago.

My contact ONLY gave me the files on strict condition of absolute anonymity. Her exact words were that her career in the FDR industry would be over if it became industry knowledge that her company tampered with such data. They do work for AAirlines, what do you think would happen to that contract if it became public that they are diddling with AA FDR data for members of the public.....

I`m not for a minuite suggesting its evidence of conspiracy; simply commercial reality in such a niche industry.

Fourth I`m not doing the number crunching so I cannot answer questions relating to the exac procedure followed or the surmountable difficulties we are encountering.

When I`m any the wiser about how many frames we have I`ll post it.

All the engineering units and their accuracies are included in the data frame layout files provided.

As for me "making it out to be harder than it is", well sorry thats because I`m actually trying to do it properly. If it was easy I`d have done it last week. Also if I was so inclined I could just have made up the whole thing and claimed to have done the decode months ago and post any old nonsense. I`m interested in the raw facts of what occured and discussing how easy it OUGHT to be does not accellerate proceedings!

Will I provide the files to anyone else???...

Possibly after we have finished our analysis. Certainly not before.

C.

You have already said way to much about your source (hope you are just smoking it up some or your source is going to be hot) . Hope this is not like the post to Chris from Leslie Robertson and how the core is concrete.

The more you pre announce your stuff the more fishy it seems. Good luck

[Arus808]

the fdr correllates with the flight path and the debris path....what is there to question?

[jsiv]

You'll know when you see the header that proves the FDR actually came from a cruise missile!

[Anti-sophist]

The CSV file and physical evidence are in perfect agreement. The animation has a small and easily identifiable error that is quite simple to correct. The only noteworthy conclusion, in my opinion, would be if the raw data doesn't reconcile with the CSV file. Then we'd have something with some meat on the bones.

I have a feeling, however, they are going to rely on the infalliable-super-animation-producing-machine that they believe exists, and thus by showing the animation is wrong, that means it's an inside job. If that's all they got, they have nothing. We've already established the animation has a mistake, and we've already established what it is, and shown when the simple correction is made, it is in perfect agreement. So I truly hope they have something beyond that.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Gravy

Many people already saw what happened, Snowy. On September 11, 2001, to be exact, when flight 77 hit the Pentagon, right in front of them. In the real world.

Yes.

But maybe Snowy's analysis will convince *certain* people by a method that seems important to them, and that could be valuable in its own way.

We shall see.

[TheGrunion]

Originally Posted by Snowygrouch

I was under the impression that raw data is a phrase that commanded a level of respect in this forum.

Generally speaking, it is. It needs to be relevant to the claim presented, and it needs to be obtained from a credible source.

Originally Posted by Snowygrouch

If I can re-package the data; I will consider releasing it after we have finished. No promises though; the decode isnt done yet!

Of course, once you re-package the data it is no longer raw. If your looking to gain the respect of the forum, you'd be better off releasing the raw data. It will be taken much more seriously.

[Snowygrouch]

Im not interested in debating this as it will simply degenerate into the inevitable mud slinging that always occurs.

The flightpath is several degrees off, the angle of attack is incorrect and the altitude is incorrect.

(taken purely from the animation)

If it comes up ok in the FDR file then its clearly just a fuss over nothing. If not....then.. there are only more questions!

I posted my contact all my research on this to try to "get a bite" and she looked it over and told me it was certainly worthy of further investigation. Hence why she helped me. What the outcome is....who knows! I dont and freely admit as such.

Discussion is pointless at this stage as until the decode is done I have no futher information at hand than that currently available on the net.

The repackaging refers to the data frames NOT the fdr file. So does not effect the outcome; no numerical values would be changed.

Once the decode is done we can chat.

[HyJinX]

Originally Posted by Snowygrouch

Im not interested in debating this as it will simply degenerate into the inevitable mud slinging that always occurs.

The flightpath is several degrees off, the angle of attack is incorrect and the altitude is incorrect.

(taken purely from the animation)

If it comes up ok in the FDR file then its clearly just a fuss over nothing. If not....then.. there are only more questions!

Discussion is pointless at this stage as until the decode is done I have no futher information at hand than that currently available on the net.

The repackaging refers to the data frames NOT the fdr file. So does not effect the outcome; no numerical values would be changed.

Once the decode is done we can chat.

Let me know if you need to borrow my secret decoder ring (issued by the NWO itself).

CRAP...that was supposed to be a secret.

I mean...what decoder ring.

[T.A.M.]

Originally Posted by Anti-sophist

Yes, the person who gave you those data frames career is at stake. That is unquestioned. I have no problems with keeping your source secret.

That being said, the experiment must be repeatable for it to have any value. That means you will need to release all the data you have. We will dismiss as nonsense any extraordinary findings that we cannot repeat. In order to repeat them, we will need the full data. I urge you to repackage it as best as possible to obfuscate the source.

I also promise that I will repeat any extraordinary findings you happen to come across to verify them. I don't know if you consider that a good or a bad thing.

I've been promised "reports" from "you guys" (pilotsfor911truth, et al.) before and been dissapointed every time. I tend to get the same repackaged nonsense on youtube with newer spookier music. If you plan on actually bringing something new to the table, I'll be excited. Hopefully you can deliver where UnderTow and JDX have failed.

As he said, if you do not, after your examination/analysis, and interpretation of the data, provide all of the same data for a second independent examination/analysis/interpretation, then what ever you find will be unreproducable garbage...EOS.

If, however, after you have had your time with the data, you submit ALL OF IT, UNALTERED, to a 3rd party to corroborate your results, than it will infact have tremendously strong merit and power. Failure to do so, not only makes your findings useless, but will sully your reputation in any scientific community as someone of suspect integrity.

Originally Posted by Snowygrouch

Very true Gravy, many people DID see a large airliner.

If you are thinking I subscribe to missile theories you are much mistaken.

My opinion is that data provided to me from the authorities noes not correllate to the physical evidence (in terms of the flightpath).

What I am trying to do now is find out why. Not by watching you-tube but by really looking at the raw data.
I was under the impression that raw data is a phrase that commanded a level of respect in this forum.

If I can re-package the data; I will consider releasing it after we have finished. No promises though; the decode isnt done yet!

If you provide the COMPLETE, UNALTERED DATA after you are finished, than I will have a great deal of respect for you and your approach. If you do not, I will consider your findings meaningless, and with an obvious agenda...that I CAN PROMISE.

TAM

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Snowygrouch

Im not interested in debating this as it will simply degenerate into the inevitable mud slinging that always occurs.

The flightpath is several degrees off, the angle of attack is incorrect and the altitude is incorrect.

(taken purely from the animation)

If it comes up ok in the FDR file then its clearly just a fuss over nothing. If not....then.. there are only more questions!

I posted my contact all my research on this to try to "get a bite" and she looked it over and told me it was certainly worthy of further investigation. Hence why she helped me. What the outcome is....who knows! I dont and freely admit as such.

Discussion is pointless at this stage as until the decode is done I have no futher information at hand than that currently available on the net.

The repackaging refers to the data frames NOT the fdr file. So does not effect the outcome; no numerical values would be changed.
Once the decode is done we can chat.

No there is no angle of attack AOA problems, there is no heading problem; the raw data lines up with real life.

The animation does not line up with the fake ground. Wow. Why does animation of real data not like up with a fake world of graphics?

There is data not recorded; if you have no information on why up to 2 to 5 seconds are missing; they you are just a CT guy wasting a lot of time.

Do not take this wrong, go do the work, I would love to see the RADAR ALT data if you have that part. The RADAR DATA and the heading can possible line up the flight path to ground elevations to help see how a 4 second frame was never recorded to the chip.

But if you are just doing this to prove a CT theory you are messed up and have ignored physical evidence.

The only thing the FDR data can do is prove CT dolts wrong or supply doubt for their feeble minds of mush.

[Gravy]

Fact: flight 77, carrying real passengers, crew, and hijackers, hit the Pentagon. In the real world. There are many threads providing evidence of that in this forum if you're interested, Snowy. The remains of all but one passenger were recovered at the scene and positively identified.

If the FDR data contain errors about the plane's position, isn't it the job of professionals to try to determine the source of those errors? That sounds like devilishly difficult work that would require a great deal of expertise. Are you competent to do that type of analysis, or is it your goal to simply get the data out there and hope that professionals investigate any anomalies (which would require them having access to all data)?

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Snowygrouch

Very true Gravy, many people DID see a large airliner.

If you are thinking I subscribe to missile theories you are much mistaken.

My opinion is that data provided to me from the authorities noes not correllate to the physical evidence (in terms of the flightpath).

What I am trying to do now is find out why. Not by watching you-tube but by really looking at the raw data.
I was under the impression that raw data is a phrase that commanded a level of respect in this forum.

If I can re-package the data; I will consider releasing it after we have finished. No promises though; the decode isnt done yet!

You are right about youtube. There is a real idiot, johndoeXLC who thinks the plane never hit the Pentagon. He sounds just like you.

johndoeXLC, puts comments showing how dumb he is. Have you seen his junk. There are few idiots with the same junk out there.

Quote:

"The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist "President Eisenhower 1961

Ironic you quote the very thing that JDX is. The disastrous rise of what he thinks is power! He is a "censor NAZI". You work with the censor NAZI. Like I said if you can not figure out if a data frame was not recorded you are wasting your time.

So you have an insider in Boeing? Can they tell you the if a 4 second frame is missing; which would leave about 5 seconds of data not recorded due to impact.

Funny when you go to get your Pulitzer Prize with your BBC reporters, who gets the money. You did not really want people to buy DVDs from JDX? Do you? His stuff is junk. Ask any pilot.

But good luck; you are not the first to try and make claims that never come true.

Pigs could fly; can they?

[Dog Town]

Quote:

Will I provide the files to anyone else???...

Possibly after we have finished our analysis. Certainly not before.

Very scientific of you Lyte, or is that One Doodoo?

[R.Mackey]

Originally Posted by Snowygrouch

My contact ONLY gave me the files on strict condition of absolute anonymity. Her exact words were that her career in the FDR industry would be over if it became industry knowledge that her company tampered with such data. They do work for AAirlines, what do you think would happen to that contract if it became public that they are diddling with AA FDR data for members of the public.....

Hello Snowygrouch, I've looked at the Flight 77 FDR data as well, and I also have some background in aircraft air data sensor analysis.

I don't mean to imply that there's something amiss, but you can understand that we get a little nervous when we see remarks like the bolded bit above, even before data is produced. Perhaps it was merely a figure of speech?

If it turns out there is something weird in your data, you do understand that the next step will be to eliminate mistakes as a possible source of the anomaly? We would want to understand the complete chain of custody, and be able to reproduce the entire process of data analysis. This would probably involve some serious professionals and a bit of real money, but if it turns out to be that important, I think it could be done. But regardless, your anonymous source, who understandably doesn't want to be viewed as misusing company resources, is only good enough for a preliminary assessment. Real names and real references are a necessary part of the due diligence required for a rigorous analysis.

In any case, I'll be interested to see what you can find. Having looked at the processed FDR data as well as the sensor limitations, comparing to the Pentagon BPR, I'm personally well satisfied with the official story, and it will take a considerable revelation -- one that is inconsistent with the processed FDR results we've already seen -- to change my mind. Either it's there, or it isn't.

[stateofgrace]

Snowygrouch.

You will have to excuse me if this post comes across as rather abrasive but maybe you will do me the honour of explaining exactly what you are playing at.

See I am not a software engineer nor am I able to decode data, raw or in any other form from FDR’s. Basically I am Joe Public, you know the people you are trying to convince you are onto the scoop of the century and herein lays the problem.

See the story you have come up with is that you apparently have a secret contact who is feeding you and you fellow "investigators" information. This information is so secret that you and only you can process it and if you pass it on to a third party it will give the game away and exposes your source. Am I correct so far?

So what you are now doing, for the good of mankind of course, is working feverishly to decode it all and then you will release it all to the general Public (us). If I am also to follow your BS ,opps story,once the original files have been massaged , opps sorry again, decoded to fit your preconceived ides of what you believe has happened you will presumably make a DVD and flog it.

Forgive me for not believing a word you say pal, I'm sure you are quiet a decent chap, but, your story so far, if I am correct is one of make believe and absolute nonsense but hey who am I ? just the guy you are trying to convince.

Equally so, have you actually been in touch with anybody that was involved in the dreadful event. You know,Flight 77 being hijacked and slammed into the side of the Pentagon and told them? Don't you think you have a responsibility to inform the families of all those involved? Or is it better to get it all on DVD first?

[uk_dave]

It also begs the question that if the source for the raw data wishes to remain anonymous, how is this supposed to happen once the 'smoking gun' of the decoded raw data is made public? People are going to want to know the provenance of the raw data and the intrepid investigators are going to have to include this if they have any hope of convincing anyone that their decoded data came from the real source material.

If we follow the implications of this possible expose still further we are also left to wonder:

1. If the FDR did come from flight 77 and was recovered from the pentagon, then that means flight 77 did hit the pentagon.

2. If the decoded data shows that flight 77 took a different path to that stated in the official account then the physical evidence for the official path must have been planted.

3. But if the evidence was planted then the conspirators must have known that flight 77 wouldn't be taking the path they have claimed for it, otherwise there would be no reason to fake the evidence, just let it happen.

4. So if the fdr from flight 77 shows the plane crashing into the building via a different path to that which the faked evidence was intended to show it took, why not fake the fdr to show the fake path to match with the fake evidence?

[CurtC]

Originally Posted by Anti-sophist

The CSV file and physical evidence are in perfect agreement. The animation has a small and easily identifiable error that is quite simple to correct.

That's the fact that someone overlooked the magnetic deviation when they made the animation. But the other question about the FDR data is the altitude, which reads higher than you would expect in the final moments, and, wasn't the latitude-longitude data off quite a bit, like 20 miles?

Sounds like Snowy is expecting to find discrepancies between the raw data and the released CSV file. I doubt that will happen, but if he can find that the radar altimeter data exists and (importantly) can properly decode it, that should give everyone an important data set.

And I agree with what everyone else has told you, Snowy. If you find that your first-pass decoding of the data doesn't match the released info in some way, the next step is to release your data for more eyes to look for what you might have missed. There are a multitude of calibrations and corrections that I can imagine properly interpreting the data would require.

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by Gravy

Many people already saw what happened, Snowy. On September 11, 2001, to be exact, when flight 77 hit the Pentagon, right in front of them. In the real world.

Maybe Snowygrouch needs to read a thing or two from our good USAF LTC friend, who so kindly posted here in the fall about his own experiences.

I can't seem to find the link.

DR

[DavidJames]

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Maybe Snowygrouch needs to read a thing or two from our good USAF LTC friend, who so kindly posted here in the fall about his own experiences.

I can't seem to find the link.

DR

Here is one post by Hal:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...8&postcount=46

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by DavidJames

Here is one post by Hal:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...8&postcount=46

Thanks DJ.

Hey, Snowygrouch:

Read this very carefully, and slowly, it is from the link DJ provided. This is from a man who was in the building when it was hit.

Originally Posted by Hal

I am a Pentagon survivor, I held airplane parts in my hand that day as I did my small bit of service. I talked to people *at the time* who spoke of reading the airline name from the side of the aircraft as it crashed into our building. I am a just-retired AF Lt Colonel, with 25 years of service at retirement. I have served at the Pentagon, the White House, the State Department, and the US Air Force Academy, in addition to being an ICBM commander. I held, at my retirement, a TS/SCI clearance. I say there was an airplane, I saw it.

Am I a liar?

Lt Col Hal Bidlack, Ph.D.
USAF Retired

note: I do not, as a rule, post on this forum any more, but I can not allow this assault on the honor of the people we lost that day to go unchallenged.

What is the value, other than for the fun of decoding an FDR, of putting the career of a woman at risk over nitpicking details when, quite simply, AA 77 hit the pentagon?

DR

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Snowygrouch

Im not interested in debating this as it will simply degenerate into the inevitable mud slinging that always occurs.

The flightpath is several degrees off, the angle of attack is incorrect and the altitude is incorrect.

(taken purely from the animation)

If it comes up ok in the FDR file then its clearly just a fuss over nothing. If not....then.. there are only more questions!

I posted my contact all my research on this to try to "get a bite" and she looked it over and told me it was certainly worthy of further investigation. Hence why she helped me. What the outcome is....who knows! I dont and freely admit as such.

Discussion is pointless at this stage as until the decode is done I have no futher information at hand than that currently available on the net.

The repackaging refers to the data frames NOT the fdr file. So does not effect the outcome; no numerical values would be changed.

Once the decode is done we can chat.

Is it done yet? I want to see the radio altimeter data.

[beachnut]

If the data is stored as 4 seconds frames; was the last data frame stored part of a 4 second frame that did not make it. I think 9:37:44 was the first second of a 4 second frame. Data already compressed was not recorded.

I wonder if even Boeing knows what the maximum amount of data lost is when the plane is in a .2 second complete smashup at 500 mph.

There has to be some data lost at the time of impact; I doubt Boeing knows the minumum to maximum amount of time not recoreded.

I think there are up to 6 seconds missing based on the last data recored and the fact the FDR was found in the Pentagon. I believe that a 4 second frame had been compressed and was being stored as the plane struck the Pentagon. That means 3 seconds already compressed but being written as the plane crashed were missing. Plus 4 seconds of new data was being collected and ready for compression as the plane crashed.

[david carmichael]

Originally Posted by T.A.M.

Has JDX ever shown anything but cowardice when it come to debating with JREFers. Look, he has his pool boy deliver his messages.

TAM

Alot of posters here TAM showed cowardice when I offered my free $500 USS Liberty challenge.

I'd like to know about how the NTSB could offer their own simulation if the JDX simulation is flawed due to a corrupted "retrieval process"/"whatever it was'

[Arus808]

Originally Posted by david carmichael

Alot of posters here TAM showed cowardice when I offered my free $500 USS Liberty challenge.

proof?

[Thunder]

I have two simply questions about the FDR.

1. Does it indeed show the plane flying at a different trajectory then the official story suggests?
2. Does it indeed show the plane at an altitude of several hundred feet just prior to impact?

These are the main contentions of the conspiracy willys and I assume there are simple answers.

[apathoid]

Originally Posted by parky76

I have two simply questions about the FDR.

1. Does it indeed show the plane flying at a different trajectory then the official story suggests?
2. Does it indeed show the plane at an altitude of several hundred feet just prior to impact?

These are the main contentions of the conspiracy willys and I assume there are simple answers.

1. Do you mean heading? The FDR heading(70.0 degress magnetic, 59.5 true) lines up perfectly with the mechanical damage path in the Pentagon as well as the lightpoles.
2. The last recorded pressure altitude was 173', which when you account for local pressure deviation from "standard day", roughly equals 470 ft above sea level, or 440 ft above ground level.

[Anti-sophist]

Originally Posted by parky76

I have two simply questions about the FDR.
1. Does it indeed show the plane flying at a different trajectory then the official story suggests?

No, it doesn't. In fact, it shows the exact opposite.

Quote:

2. Does it indeed show the plane at an altitude of several hundred feet just prior to impact?

It shows neither, in fact. It doesn't give a reliable (enough) altitude reading, and it's not certainly conclusive when this reading was taken in relation to impact.

The CTers have claimed they have decoded additional data and it proves their case. They haven't provided this data, so we can't check it. Essentially, they are claiming they have proof and asking us to take their word for it.

As best as I can tell, the additional data they claim to have supports the official story more than their own paranoid fantasies.

[uk_dave]

I'm still waiting for Undertow to apologise to AS on this thread.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Anti-sophist

No, it doesn't. In fact, it shows the exact opposite.

It shows neither, in fact. It doesn't give a reliable (enough) altitude reading, and it's not certainly conclusive when this reading was taken in relation to impact.

The CTers have claimed they have decoded additional data and it proves their case. They haven't provided this data, so we can't check it. Essentially, they are claiming they have proof and asking us to take their word for it.

As best as I can tell, the additional data they claim to have supports the official story more than their own paranoid fantasies.

I looked at their data for hours. It is match, within feet. The DME data is posted in a random fashion ever 8 seconds or so. The last DME is 1.5 from DCA.

They have one less second than the NTSB decode! ONE less Second.

Their data ends before the 173 feet altimeter, with a 273 foot Radar Altimeter reading. Then NTSB has an extra second.

The extra decoded data includes another set of Lat and Long that starts off 3000 feet north offset from the runway at takeoff. They do not come up with why this offset would be good at the end of flight.

With the heading data and the 1.5 DME being in the next to last second, the last second the JDX idiots have. Puts the best known FDR position 2800 feet from the Pentagon on course to do the damage. Remember I have to project the heading back to pick up this point. This is a line 70 degrees magnetic from the Pentagon, and the Radar Altimeter is okay with this area of 130 MSL ground, plus 273 feet Radar gives you 403 feet MSL for the plane which is close to the 173 corrected for local QNH to be 430 MSL or so. (radar is calibrated to gear down on ground of zero)

2800 feet to go is a steep glide slope for landing, perfect for hitting the Pentagon. The altimeter is not too far off due to speed. I was speeding one day and my altimeter was right on. I know they were going faster but the plane is still in the ball park for hitting the Pentagon.

I believe at least 4 seconds of data never made it to the chip.

I think the FDR matches what was seen on 9/11 and is missing part of the last recored frame and an entire frame or more of 4 seconds.

[david carmichael]

Is weedwhacker the poster known as JDX?

Originally Posted by weedwacker

If the csv file is off, the animation produced by the NTSB must be off as well.

Why would the NTSB provide an animation of the flight in error?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzR-q0ijbV0

The above is just the final portion of the flight. The entire animation is available from taxi out of Dulles to take off to end of data. It matches perfectly with the CSV file time stamps, engine parameters, headings, airspeeds, ATC instructions for altitudes, headings, navigation, etc.

I guess the NTSB went through all the trouble to make an animation in error along with the csv?

Also, JDX has provided these questions for anyone willing to answer.

1. What is the True Altitude at end of data recording :44. How did you come to your conclusion.
2. What is the vertical speed at end of data recording :44. How did you come to your conclusion.
3. What is the Absolute Altitude and end of data recording? How did you come to your conclusion.
4. Why does the csv file show the altimeter being set in the baro cor column on the descent through FL180, but the animation altimeter does not show it being set?
5. Why do the current G Forces for the last minute of data correspond to the changes in vertical speed, yet at end of data :44-:45 it shows an increase in vertical speed never accounting for any type of level off to be level with the lawn as shown in the DoD video?
6. Do you have any video showing a clear impact and/or of the plane on its approach to impact?
7. Why does your animation show a flight path north of the reported flight path?
8. Why are there no system indication of any impact with any object up to and after :44?
9. Why does the csv file and animation show a right bank when the official report requires a left bank to be consistent with physical damage to the generator?
10. How did you come to the conclusion of 09:37:45 as the official impact time?
11. What is the exact chain of custody of the FDR? What date/time was it found? Where exactly was it found? Please provide documentation and names.
12. Why does the hijack timeline show a 3 min interval for hijacking to take place? Why did Capt Burlingame not follow protocol for the Common Strategy prior to 9/11?


Good day!

[david carmichael]

Originally Posted by Anti-sophist

Heh, this is great.

I don't know who Parmenides is, but he's using my graphs in an argument with JDX. JDX's response to my analysis:


http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Ch...pic=12995&st=0


And yet here is how all this started:

http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_Fo...p?showtopic=92


I guess you challenge JREFers, and once you get a response, claim you don't care what they have to say. That's one tactic.

Then do they have the "frame descriptor"?

and is...

"273 foot radar altitude.. a hard number above the ground?"

[david carmichael]

Originally Posted by Anti-sophist

....Many of the parameters were "not working or unconfirmed". I should probably add up how many samples, total, occur during each frame in the CSV file and see how that total compares with the total bitrate, to see how much data got thrown out.

The RADALT data wasn't included in the CSV file. This is because the government knows it will bust the case wide open if they release it! (oh wait.. that's JDX's line).

From where did JDX extract the Radar Altimeter data?

I believe he said .fdr file..

[david carmichael]

Originally Posted by jessicarabbit

The point of the call was that James Meigs had pretended Chertoff was a junior researcher on the 911 project. During the call he admitted he was in fact a senior researcher.

The call did its job beautifully.

Is this true? Did Meigs really maintain Chertoff was a "junior researcher"?

[david carmichael]

Originally Posted by Arus808

proof?

Triapse over to the USS Liberty thread. It's all there.

[boloboffin]

Radio altimeter data, from here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...93755&hl=en-GB

Quote:

COUNTER ALT ALTrad
151754 1158 1244
151755 1048 1074
151756 954 975
151757 868 876
151758 786 829
151759 684 709
151760 592 621
151761 496 492
151762 398 416
151763 306 352
151764 238 273
151765 #ERROR #ERROR
#ERROR #ERROR #ERROR

[apathoid]

Originally Posted by boloboffin

Radio altimeter data, from here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...93755&hl=en-GB

The last radalt plot is paired with the second to last pressure altitude plot(238 ft) which means it is at least 2 seconds old, maybe 3 or 4. If the pressure altitude of 238(510' msl)' is accurate, the radalt should read around 480' or so, but since it reads 273', that would indeed back up our contention that the pressure altitude was lagging.

[boloboffin]

Originally Posted by apathoid

The last radalt plot is paired with the second to last pressure altitude plot(238 ft) which means it is at least 2 seconds old, maybe 3 or 4. If the pressure altitude of 238(510' msl)' is accurate, the radalt should read around 480' or so, but since it reads 273', that would indeed back up our contention that the pressure altitude was lagging.

I'm not following this. There are no other numbers under the 238 reading for pressure altitude. Wouldn't that be last paired with last?

In the film, Carl (Snowygrouch) is not even concerned with pressure alt. He only quotes radio alt.

Bonus: The roll and pitch angle (sorry, no correlation with counter that I can see, but this is the last bit of recorded data) from the "decoded" FDR raw data.

Quote:

Roll Angle Pitch Angle
-0.07 -6.2
-0.04 -5.8
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.1 -5.3
1.8 -4.9
2.5 -4.6
2.8 -4.4
ND
ND
ND
ND
3.5 -4.2
4.6 -4.4
5.6 -4.6
6.3 -4.7
ND
ND
ND
ND
6.3 -4.9
6.3 -5.1
6.0 -5.1
5.3 -5.6

Avr Pitch -4.985714286

The ND stands for blank fields in both of these columns. By my guess that means that data wasn't in the buffer to be recorded - and there's no telling if that last data bit is the same frame as the last alt readings.

But look at that roll. That's consistent with the right wing rising to avoid the transformer, right?

[SidDithers]

Heya bolo!
Finally found my way over. This place is huge
Sid

[apathoid]

Originally Posted by boloboffin

I'm not following this. There are no other numbers under the 238 reading for pressure altitude. Wouldn't that be last paired with last?

In the film, Carl (Snowygrouch) is not even concerned with pressure alt. He only quotes radio alt.

The NTSB squeezed another second out of the raw data that D'oh and Co. didn't manage to get. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

ETA: The final pressure altitude reading was 173'