|
Post by Data Cable on Jan 22, 2010 2:07:09 GMT -4
Autopilot cannot wrest control of an aircraft from its pilot(s). It can if the pilots are uncounscious. Present evidence that the pilots were unconscious.
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jan 22, 2010 2:16:45 GMT -4
Proving that PFT are idiots yet again! If you are serious about learning some of the aviation aspects about that day, I am more than happy to spend the time answering your questions. Thanks for the offer. My question It would be interesting to know if the auto pilot datas correspond to the original flight path ?
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Jan 22, 2010 4:12:42 GMT -4
Well, whilst perusing around the web, I stumbled on a point I wonder if you can clarify. I have not checked this myself but the data shows the door closed for several flights. Or rather the data is recorded in such a way that gives door closed on the data. So, to have several flights with no door opening is rather hard. Pilots get fed, pilots get relief breaks. Also I believe I saw comment where an engine showed a brief test. No door open in the data. Tests are done on the ground by engineers. Can you throw any light on this? The reason is: The FDR begins recording once the pilots are in their seats and readying for takeoff, and the plane cannot take off unless the FDR is working. Not really what I was asking but this is. You are right ,
After verification
The FDR parameter for the FLT DECK DOOR was not active and recorded on this model B757. Flight 77 was a B757-2 with "N" numbers, " of N644AA" indicating that it was built in late 1991, when this model was manufactured at Boeing. On this model the FDR did not record the state of this parameter in the FDR data, even though they left room for it and recorded this data later in the newer B757-3.
There is no indication that this model had ever been upgraded to a B757-3
The last 42 hours on the FDR data shows in fact no record of this function becoming active, meaning the door switch parameter had never been recorded as open on any of these flights even though this data covered 12 separate flights, again confirming that this FDR parameter was inoperative on this model of B757-2.So, what I was asking, you have now answered more the last 42 hours bit. Many hours of recording and no door opened. Where do you stand now? I have now looked at a file or two from Mr Stutt's site (not PFT). To be honest it would have been one the of the first questions asked. If a bit of kit where I work needs verifying, whilst setting up to check I will chat with my colleagues, "who used this last? Did it work OK, get any errors?" etc. Still does not answer what others are asking re passengers.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jan 22, 2010 4:31:14 GMT -4
QFE. While the DFDR on 77 was capable of recording the Flight Door position, the Airframe of 77 was an older one that didn't have the set up for it to be recorded. A 30 sec check of the NTSB report would have shown PFT that the status of the sensor they were looking at was listed among those labeled as "Not Working". I checked the pdf paper and the "FLT DECK DOOR" parameter is labeled as "closed" Link to PDF paper pilotsfor911truth.org/p4t/FinalFlightComplete.zipTry reading this report: www.911myths.com/AAL77_fdr.pdfNote the "Not Working or Unconfirmed" list starts on Page I-5 (10 of the PDF). You'll find the Flight Deck Door Parameter assigned to the EICAR L/R-A-1 port, listed on Page 13 of the PDF. The Boeing Document you can download from here (http://www.orbitfiles.com/download/id4067718242.html) shows that the 757-1 and 757-2 airframes don't use this parameter. This isn't implemented until the 757-3 frame. Flight 77, tail number N644AA was a 757-200, so having the 757-2 airframe, would not have had the parameter active. As such it would have been set to ground, thus would have a "0" reading to the single bit. This is why the entire 40 hours of flight recorded have a 0 in this place, because it wasn't being monitored. If you did more than just swallow PFT's rubbish, you'd have learned this back last November when it first came up. ETA: Oh pish, that's what I get for not reading the rest of the thread before posting, I see you figured it out on page 2 Feelfree. So here's some questions for you... 1) Why didn't you do the checking BEFORE posting PFT's garbage here? 2) If you as a layman can learn the real facts with a quick check on the net in a few days, what does it say about those that claim to be professionals in the industry that still don't have a clue?
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 22, 2010 5:51:24 GMT -4
The datas were not analysed by a layman. The organisation you point to consists of pilots and machanics. In terms of analysis of FDR data they are laymen, as their simple failure to understand the idea of putting the data in context of the system that recorded it shows. Being a pilot does not make one an expert at FDR data analysis any more than being an Apollo astronauts makes one an expert on the construction of the Apollo guidance computer, or being a camera-maker makes on an expert at photogrammetric analysis. That's why aircraft accidents are investigated by the trained NTSB investigators, and not the other pilots in the fleet.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jan 22, 2010 9:10:14 GMT -4
No, you are a troll. I won't bother to educate you because you want to believe whatever PFT or other truther groups tell you. You have demonstrated you don't want to investigate and learn.
I have no time for you. Professional aircrew - who fly most days rather than pretend to be current whilst disassociating themselves from all of their "supporters" - laugh at the PFT claims.
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jan 22, 2010 16:36:36 GMT -4
If you did more than just swallow PFT's rubbish, you'd have learned this back last November when it first came up. Because I came about this gem only few days ago. ETA: Oh pish, that's what I get for not reading the rest of the thread before posting, I see you figured it out on page 2 Feelfree. So here's some questions for you... 1) Why didn't you do the checking BEFORE posting PFT's garbage here? Because I wanted some hints for doing more researchs. 2) If you as a layman can learn the real facts with a quick check on the net in a few days, what does it say about those that claim to be professionals in the industry that still don't have a clue? That tells a lot.
|
|
|
Post by archer17 on Jan 22, 2010 16:49:24 GMT -4
Autopilot cannot wrest control of an aircraft from its pilot(s). It can if the pilots are unconscious. Did the autopilot turn off the transponder?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jan 22, 2010 16:51:13 GMT -4
No, you are a troll. I won't bother to educate you because you want to believe whatever PFT or other truther groups tell you. You have demonstrated you don't want to investigate and learn. I am not a troll. So, you dont find my question legetimate ? Or you dont have a clue if this was investigated? Remaining question. It would be interesting to know if the auto pilot datas correspond to the original flight path ?
|
|
|
Post by archer17 on Jan 22, 2010 16:54:44 GMT -4
yes
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jan 22, 2010 16:58:34 GMT -4
Was it turned off in flight 77Ok . Can it be turned off with a modification to the computer program ?
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jan 22, 2010 18:45:08 GMT -4
Welcome to ignoreland, freeby.
|
|
|
Post by archer17 on Jan 22, 2010 20:40:06 GMT -4
Was it turned off in flight 77Ok . Can it be turned off with a modification to the computer program ? I don't know but if this was the case you'll need to explain how, with the cockpit door shut the whole time of course, the pilots were rendered unconscious between their last radio transmission and the transponder being turned off 5-some minutes later. Wait, it gets even better - the plane changed course about 3 minutes after the last radio contact, 2 minutes prior to the loss of the transponder signal. So now you have 2 things to explain: how the pilots were rendered unconscious, and why your hypothetical computer "modification" would wait 2 minutes after a course change to turn off the transponder.
|
|
|
Post by Tanalia on Jan 22, 2010 23:09:26 GMT -4
Can it be turned off with a modification to the computer program ? No.
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Jan 23, 2010 0:07:26 GMT -4
Can it be turned off with a modification to the computer program ? No. Short and sweet reply thanks!
|
|