IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Questions About Flight Door, How Do I Debunk a Debunker!

wstutt
post Jan 10 2010, 07:57 PM
Post #61





Group: Troll
Posts: 255
Joined: 27-December 07
From: Brisbane, Australia
Member No.: 2,603



Hi AirmanDave,

QUOTE (AirmanDave @ Jan 15 2010, 08:09 AM) *
So far in my experience, if something fails a light comes on. If the Flight Deck Door microswitch/proximity switch (I dont care what it is) fails (aka loss of power), an annunciator will illuminate (Door Ajar/Flight Deck/whatever). It's the basis of the dark cockpit concept! If you have a door annunciator, if the door is open, or the switch has failed, the door annunciator will illuminate! I assume the same information is being sent to the FDR of course.
Unfortunately there does not appear to be an indication recorded in the FDR as to whether the door switch has failed.

Warren.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jan 10 2010, 08:56 PM
Post #62



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Turbofan @ Nov 30 2009, 06:05 PM) *
Wow, this is GOLD, Truly gold! This configuration is fool proof and knocks out any of the excuses the
GL's make about "jammed switch", "faulty switch", etc.

In the event a proximity switch fails, it will show OPEN, or a LOGIC 1!!!!

If the switch is defective it cannot complete the circuit either.


Even if the door is slightly open (not completely shut), it will show open. This is because the circuit is ONLY complete when the door is tight against the jamb.


On top of this, the wiring to the breaker panel and pilot controls would have made it SIMPLE to interface
with the FDR wiring. In other words, the retrofit to install the door switch would not require extensive
plumbing, wiring, backbending to get a voltage signal from the circuit to the FDR port input.

JFK, if I may I'd like to contact you further about this circuit and diagrams.

Thanks!
Tino
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
wstutt
post Jan 11 2010, 03:07 PM
Post #63





Group: Troll
Posts: 255
Joined: 27-December 07
From: Brisbane, Australia
Member No.: 2,603



QUOTE (wstutt @ Jan 15 2010, 11:57 PM) *
Hi AirmanDave,

QUOTE (AirmanDave @ Jan 15 2010, 08:09 AM) *

So far in my experience, if something fails a light comes on. If the Flight Deck Door microswitch/proximity switch (I dont care what it is) fails (aka loss of power), an annunciator will illuminate (Door Ajar/Flight Deck/whatever). It's the basis of the dark cockpit concept! If you have a door annunciator, if the door is open, or the switch has failed, the door annunciator will illuminate! I assume the same information is being sent to the FDR of course.

Unfortunately there does not appear to be an indication recorded in the FDR as to whether the door switch has failed.

Warren.
Sorry Rob and AirmanDave,

I meant that there did not appear to be a separate indication recorded in the FDR other than the FLT DECK DOOR parameter i.e. some sort of separate "flight deck door sensor failed" parameter. After reading AirmanDave's question again, I see a possible "flight deck door sensor failed" parameter is probably not what he meant.

Warren.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrmitosis
post Feb 12 2010, 10:38 PM
Post #64





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 232
Joined: 11-February 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 4,909



Hello, folks.

Very much a newbie to this forum, thread, topic. No relevant qualifications to declare, unfortunately, although my father has recently retired after 30 years service as an air traffic controller (Tullamarine and Essendon airports, Melbourne) and amateur pilot. I'm guessing that won't get me much more than a high 5 blink.gif

But before I go any further, let me say congratulations and thanks to everyone for all your hard work.

I've been following this discussion with interest over the last day or two, and have been able to digest most of it, apart from some of the more esoteric technical issues. I understand enough, at least, to be convinced that the flight deck door on a 757 should have been equipped with a sensor, and that the FDR data in this case revealed fairly unequivocally that the door did remain closed for the flight's duration.

This is, of course, if we may assume that the FDR in question was in fact recovered from the Pentagon plane wreckage - which, of course, we cannot.

I want to emphasise that I have read the 23 pages on the original thread, and I am not expecting Rob or anybody else to repeat themselves in terms of whether or not a properly functioning sensor was installed on flight 77.

In spite of this, I hope it is not frowned upon for me to come here seeking support from anyone qualified to help me dispell the claims of a debunker who is making some fairly bold but confident statements on a Youtube bru-ha-ha. I can appreciate that most P4Ts are reluctant to enter the sleazy YT domain, but nonetheless I feel that it is a critically important battlefield for the truth movement, so here I am.

The link, if anyone is interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsWZHKIg3Cs

In response to my arguments along the lines that AA77 could not have been hijacked....should I name him?....yes, Ill name him: Merlin5x5 said this (over the course of two separate posts):

"The Flight Deck Door sensor is a red herring, to make you look foolish. No Boeing aircraft has ever been fitted with a flight deck door sensor, globally.

Where is the sensor, or the wire for it?"

and then:

"...you are simply LYING about a flight deck door sensor. IF you have a commercial pilot who differs, post him.

The FAA has standards called FARs, Flight Aviation Regs. You can search thru them, they are online. Find one referring to the door sensor.

It's just not there. Boeing doors and doorframes are plastiboard, with sliding locks. Haven't you ever been on a plane?"

(I figure that this FAR business is a red herring in itself, so I haven't bothered to chase up that reference.)

Now, personally, I don't keep spare aeroplane parts lying around my house, so I was hoping - in the spirit of the title of this thread - someone might be able to advise the best way for a newbie to definitively put this clown in his place. After all, he did challenge me to find a commercial pilot who was prepared to dispute his claims. I feel a bit like a pathetic kid being picked on in the schoolyard, running up to his older brother for help, but.....perhaps a short quote from someone would do the trick....? whistle.gif

Anybody? salute.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Feb 12 2010, 11:27 PM
Post #65



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (mrmitosis @ Feb 12 2010, 09:38 PM) *
The FAA has standards called FARs, Flight Aviation Regs. You can search thru them, they are online. Find one referring to the door sensor.

It's just not there. Boeing doors and doorframes are plastiboard, with sliding locks. Haven't you ever been on a plane?"


The Regs required only 18 parameter groups to be recorded on the FDR in 2001.

American Airlines has 1100 parameters specified in their custom made data frame layout. Flight Deck Door is one of them.. See Attached.

Clearly Merlin doesnt understand the Regs are a MINIMUM requirement and that the airlines record many more parameters on their aircraft.

I've gone back and forth with Merlin5x5 on some of my YT videos. The guy is a complete idiot, knows hardly anything about aircraft... and blindly accepts anything the govt tells him. This is why he refuses to sign up here for debate.

Hope this helps...
Attached File(s)
Attached File  757_3b_1.TXT ( 640.98K ) Number of downloads: 11
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrmitosis
post Feb 13 2010, 08:51 PM
Post #66





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 232
Joined: 11-February 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 4,909



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Feb 12 2010, 10:27 PM) *
The Regs required only 18 parameter groups to be recorded on the FDR in 2001.

American Airlines has 1100 parameters specified in their custom made data frame layout. Flight Deck Door is one of them.. See Attached.

Clearly Merlin doesnt understand the Regs are a MINIMUM requirement and that the airlines record many more parameters on their aircraft.

I've gone back and forth with Merlin5x5 on some of my YT videos. The guy is a complete idiot, knows hardly anything about aircraft... and blindly accepts anything the govt tells him. This is why he refuses to sign up here for debate.

Hope this helps...


Yes, it was obvious (even to me) that his point about regulations proved nothing about American Airlines' own policy regarding parameter groups - it is merely a minimum requirement as stipulated by the FAR.

However I disagree that Merlin doesn't understand this - I think he does, and is simply trying to steer me off course thumbdown.gif

FYI, this is his version of events:

"I was a MEMBER of Pilots for Truth, before they kicked me out, for asking pilots questions.

Did you know Pilots for 9/11 truth ORIGINALLY had the impact on the SOUTH side of the Pentagon?

Apparently, the "pilots" there have NEVER looked at a map, or actually flown an aircraft. They didn't know how to turn an aircraft, or apply brakes on an aircraft.

I am a pilot, and I find brakes kinda useful.

SO, I looked them up, they are based in a one bedroom apt, down by the river, in Tennessee"

Looks like you've been busted, guys laughing1.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Feb 13 2010, 10:03 PM
Post #67



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



laughing1.gif

Merlin was a member? Really? Thats news to me.... where exactly was he listed on our core member list? Under what name?

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core

Does he think all of the above individuals are living in a 1 bedroom apt "down by the river" in TN?

Does he think the above Core members "never flew an airplane" or "looked at a map"?

Why does Merlin make claims which can easily be proven a lie? Tell Merlin to put down the crack-pipe...

With that said, yes, the address registered under our domain name (pilotsfor911truth.org) is in TN which is a One bedroom apt mostly filled with computers, files and research. The apt is right up the road from Mc Ghee Tyson Airport/Air National Guard Base (KTYS). Its a gorgeous area by the way... very affordable too. I guess Merlin thinks we have the resources to rent office space in a high rise on 5th Ave NYC with Hangar space at Teterboro housing our Gulfstream to fly members around the world giving presentations? Hopefully one day... but for now, our money is better spent furthering our operations and research... You should ask him to try knocking on the door. Even better if he tries to break in... wink.gif

Many of these people who blindly follow whatever the govt tells them claim we are paranoid conspiracy freaks. Yet we are the people who use real names and real addresses. Go figure...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jupiter
post Apr 24 2010, 08:48 PM
Post #68





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 36
Joined: 28-November 09
Member No.: 4,705



Hi Rob,

Debunkers nuts say it's impossible that the door staid closed for all the 12 flights.

Of course you have shown that comparator.csv indicates that the sensor was OK, but This here is something interesting I found in The Commission Report :

" We do not know exactly how the hijackers gained access to the cockpit; FAA rules required that the doors remain closed and locked during the flight. [Flight attendant Betty] Ong speculated that they had ―jammed their way‖ in. Perhaps the terrorists stabbed the flight attendants to get a cockpit key, to force one of them to open the cockpit door, or to lure the captain or first officer out of the cockpit. "
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Apr 24 2010, 10:12 PM
Post #69



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



The commissioners were just speculating.

I don't know what you mean by "all 12 flights" - what 12 flights? The FDR P4T received details the 90 flight of AA77 on the morning of 9/11 only. The cabin door sensor records the status of that door (open or closed) beginning with the start of the engines for that flight only.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jupiter
post Apr 25 2010, 06:33 AM
Post #70





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 36
Joined: 28-November 09
Member No.: 4,705



QUOTE (Sanders @ Apr 24 2010, 09:12 PM) *
The commissioners were just speculating.

I don't know what you mean by "all 12 flights" - what 12 flights? The FDR P4T received details the 90 flight of AA77 on the morning of 9/11 only. The cabin door sensor records the status of that door (open or closed) beginning with the start of the engines for that flight only.


By the 12 flights, I mean that The FDR recorded the 11 previous flights of " N644AA " or "N5BPAA " which also show "door = closed".

So the problem was that the door had never been opened during any of the previous flights, but The Commission says it seems normal because that door is supposed to be close, so this is a strong argument against the debunker community who say that such a door would have been opened at least once during a 4h flight.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Apr 25 2010, 10:15 AM
Post #71



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Jupiter @ Apr 25 2010, 06:33 AM) *
By the 12 flights, I mean that The FDR recorded the 11 previous flights of " N644AA " or "N5BPAA " which also show "door = closed".


The above data is not confirmed by anyone. Only the last flight is confirmed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jupiter
post Apr 25 2010, 12:51 PM
Post #72





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 36
Joined: 28-November 09
Member No.: 4,705



"sync lost" indicates the engines' switch off.

So you have 12 "sync lost" in the WarrenStutt's complete file, I presume you have 12 flights, with none of them exceeding 4h30.

Good luck for your great work Rob & P4T ! I hope Stutt will discover new problematic data, but the door never opened is such a hard evidence of the big lie that it's incredible that none of the american medias points to this proof of the Pentagon deception !
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Uneeque
post Sep 29 2012, 02:51 PM
Post #73





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 29
Joined: 28-September 12
Member No.: 7,036



It's been long time since the last post on this so I hope this is not tired overkill but I have two questions I have not seen answered.

1. Why can't the same model for 77 be cross referenced with in service planes? This may not prove it 100% but it would help. Rob did a solid job in post 17 of the most popular response from OCTAs by pointing out if they want to claim the door parameter was not included, they need to do better than a complete comprehension failure on the data parameters in relation to specific models. Knowing 77 had that in use means they need to prove it was malfunctioning.

2. Purpose? It seems to me the sensor is to serve as an independent "witness" in the event of a crash so exactly what would it be monitoring? Door position itself or unauthorized door position? If the purpose was to record an unauthorized open position then it would not record an "open" position if it was authorized. It would only record the door being open when it wasn't supposed to be. If it simply recorded all open/closed positions it would be useless for a crash investigation. This would explain why the previous flights had the door recorded as "closed" because there were no unauthorized openings. Including on its last flight.

I've also seen discrepancies about the recording loop timeline. Is it 42 or 25 hours?

If these have all been addressed then forgive my blind eyes but I have looked here and several other sources.

This post has been edited by Uneeque: Sep 29 2012, 02:52 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Sep 30 2012, 12:34 AM
Post #74



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Uneeque @ Sep 29 2012, 02:51 PM) *
It's been long time since the last post on this so I hope this is not tired overkill but I have two questions I have not seen answered.


Welcome to the forum. I'll be happy to help....

QUOTE
1. Why can't the same model for 77 be cross referenced with in service planes?


It can be... and in fact we tried. We tried to get the MX manual for the specific types during the time this article went viral. Of course, we then hit nothing but brick walls. We need subpoena power to obtain such information from a corporation (in this case, AMR Corp). Remember, this information does not fall under the FOIA as it is not govt affiliated.

With that said, obviously some aircraft do record the Flight Deck Door status (open or closed). Why else would such a parameter be included in a Data Frame Layout, specifically tailored by American Airlines for their fleet, as pointed out in Post #17?

QUOTE
2. Purpose?


The purpose is simple... to be able to determine when the Flight Deck Door was open or closed. FDR's are not exclusively used for accident investigation after a crash, the data dump is more often used for crew discipline when incidents happen.

For example, A Capt is accused of getting a blow job and busts altitude, heading, waypoint.. what-have-you... The FO is in the lav.... A witness/passenger comes forward and testifies that a FA went into the cockpit during that time. The Capt denies it. The FDR data is pulled and the door will either show open corroborating the witness... or closed, corroborating the Capt.

QUOTE
I've also seen discrepancies about the recording loop timeline. Is it 42 or 25 hours?


This confusion stems from a person who claims to have decoded more data than the NTSB yet also admits he doesn't have any experience in Flight Data Recorders or aircraft investigation...

Click here for details...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10798304

No one has been able to verify the claims made by the person linked in the above... not even the NTSB.

Bottom line, there is no evidence showing the flight deck door open in order for a 'hijack' to occur. In fact, data provided by the NTSB shows the flight deck door closed.

Those who make excuse for the above rely on some guy who claims to have decoded more data than the NTSB, yet also admits he has no experience whatsoever in FDR investigation, combined with the fact that they cannot provide any evidence whatsoever that the Flight Deck Door was open for a "hijack".

Remember, the burden of proof is on those who make the claims which have changed domestic and foreign policy based on such claims that 19 "hijackers" caused such destruction. So far, not only have they failed to provide evidence, but the data they have provided contradicts their claims.


Hope this helps...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Uneeque
post Sep 30 2012, 12:42 PM
Post #75





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 29
Joined: 28-September 12
Member No.: 7,036



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Sep 30 2012, 12:34 AM) *
Welcome to the forum. I'll be happy to help....



It can be... and in fact we tried. We tried to get the MX manual for the specific types during the time this article went viral. Of course, we then hit nothing but brick walls. We need subpoena power to obtain such information from a corporation (in this case, AMR Corp). Remember, this information does not fall under the FOIA as it is not govt affiliated.

With that said, obviously some aircraft do record the Flight Deck Door status (open or closed). Why else would such a parameter be included in a Data Frame Layout, specifically tailored by American Airlines for their fleet, as pointed out in Post #17?



The purpose is simple... to be able to determine when the Flight Deck Door was open or closed. FDR's are not exclusively used for accident investigation after a crash, the data dump is more often used for crew discipline when incidents happen.

For example, A Capt is accused of getting a blow job and busts altitude, heading, waypoint.. what-have-you... The FO is in the lav.... A witness/passenger comes forward and testifies that a FA went into the cockpit during that time. The Capt denies it. The FDR data is pulled and the door will either show open corroborating the witness... or closed, corroborating the Capt.



This confusion stems from a person who claims to have decoded more data than the NTSB yet also admits he doesn't have any experience in Flight Data Recorders or aircraft investigation...

Click here for details...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10798304

No one has been able to verify the claims made by the person linked in the above... not even the NTSB.

Bottom line, there is no evidence showing the flight deck door open in order for a 'hijack' to occur. In fact, data provided by the NTSB shows the flight deck door closed.

Those who make excuse for the above rely on some guy who claims to have decoded more data than the NTSB, yet also admits he has no experience whatsoever in FDR investigation, combined with the fact that they cannot provide any evidence whatsoever that the Flight Deck Door was open for a "hijack".

Remember, the burden of proof is on those who make the claims which have changed domestic and foreign policy based on such claims that 19 "hijackers" caused such destruction. So far, not only have they failed to provide evidence, but the data they have provided contradicts their claims.


Hope this helps...


Thanks as that cleared most of it up. I do understand the FDR serves purposes exceeding crash investigations. I focused in on the door because independent evidence is the most compelling for this or any other crime.

I have had discussions with people who conceded the door remained closed then proceeded with demanding an explanation for what happened with the plane. Did it hit the Pentagon? If not, where did it go? We have a responsibility to provide feasible answers if we hope to motivate interest to the point of a FOIA explosion resulting in another investigation.

I've studied 77 far more than the other flights but clearly do not know as much as others. One of the most intriguing aspects is the absence of any independent evidence for any communication between 77 and the rest of the world after 8:54 am.

Whenever I have asked OCTAs how 77 could have traveled such a distance undetected they would usually say it was because the xponder was turned off. I asked them to keep that a tight secret lest stealth technology be revealed as a useless hoax and that any enemy that wants to attack us can simply take any plane and turn it into a stealth by switching off the xponder.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Uneeque
post Sep 30 2012, 12:46 PM
Post #76





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 29
Joined: 28-September 12
Member No.: 7,036



Okay.....this is funny...my member number is my atm code, which was randomly generated by the bank. I have a habit of looking at details.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Sep 30 2012, 02:14 PM
Post #77



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Uneeque @ Sep 30 2012, 12:42 PM) *
I have had discussions with people who conceded the door remained closed then proceeded with demanding an explanation for what happened with the plane. Did it hit the Pentagon? If not, where did it go?


http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...t&p=9458664
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Uneeque
post Sep 30 2012, 03:25 PM
Post #78





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 29
Joined: 28-September 12
Member No.: 7,036



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Sep 30 2012, 02:14 PM) *


Thanks and I responded in that thread.

Regarding the door, it is pretty obvious the evidence proves it was closed leaving it hard to believe a traditional hijack occurred.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freestar
post May 19 2013, 05:16 PM
Post #79





Group: Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: 17-April 13
Member No.: 7,340



QUOTE (Uneeque @ Sep 30 2012, 02:25 PM) *
Thanks and I responded in that thread.

Regarding the door, it is pretty obvious the evidence proves it was closed leaving it hard to believe a traditional hijack occurred.



Can anyone explain to me how strong was the door and door frame and lock on a cockpit 757 door on flight 77, and how difficult was it to kick one in.
Can one hard kick force it open to give a person only armed with a box cutter the element of surprise to kill or injure the pilots?
According to Barbara Olsens phone call reports I have read the pilots were forced to the back of the plane, but I have also read that an experienced commercial pilot would never give up flight control of the plane and would have to be severely injured or killed in the cockpit for the high jacker to take control of the plane from them.
Did the Barbara Olsen story have the pilots forced to walk to the back of the plane with the rest of the crew by box cutter wielding Arabs and not have put up a life and death fight in the cockpit?

Can the door be forced open that quickly that both pilots could not have taken any evasive maneuver with the plane controls to cause the standing high jacker to be injured? I have read that the pilots best weapon is the plane itself in a drastic maneuver to injure an assailant not strapped in.

Does the FDR show any drastic changes in the flight path showing a struggle at the controls?

Did the White House issue order just before 911 not allowing pilots to be armed in the cockpit to add to the illusion of the pilots appearing defenseless?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th October 2019 - 11:02 PM