9/11: Pentagon Aircraft Hijack Impossible, FLIGHT DECK DOOR CLOSED FOR ENTIRE FLIGHT Rating Options

[wstutt]

<snip>
Maybe WStutt could verify his claims as to the the other ´eleven´(?) flights?

WStutt?

Peace.

I've added an output file to my website for all subframes (i.e. all the flights in the FDR) for the FLT DECK DOOR, PRES POSN, GMT, Words in Frame and Sync Lost parameters.

Let me know if you were wanting something else.

Warren.

[onesliceshort]

I've added an output file to my website for all subframes (i.e. all the flights in the FDR) for the FLT DECK DOOR, PRES POSN, GMT, Words in Frame and Sync Lost parameters.

Let me know if you were wanting something else.

Warren.

Thanks Warren.
Is there any way you can tell us (in laymans terms if possible) the LENGTH of time of
each flight recorded on this FDR?
I mean, were they all internal flights?

[wstutt]

Wstutt is looking at the thread now.
What´s Farmer talking about Wstutt, please?

<snip>

Perhaps you could join in whatever forum those quotes were taken from and ask him yourself.

Warren.

[onesliceshort]

Perhaps you could join in whatever forum those quotes were taken from and ask him yourself.

Warren.

Maybe because I wanted to hear from the horse´s mouth and not a proven disinfobot
and liar surrounded by hatemongers?

Edit to add:
Don´t worry, his claims were blown away within an hour by this post

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10779507

Thanks anyway.

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Dec 1 2009, 12:36 PM

[rob balsamo]

Ok all, lets lighten up on Warren.

I have no reason to believe he is anything but sincere and he has been a perfect gentleman on this forum. So please be civil towards him.

With that said, we have verified Warrens data for the last flight only, the alleged hijacking on Sept 11, it shows the door closed.

Some have made the claim that the rest of the data also shows the door closed for the entire time. We at P4T do not have the resources at this time to verify that additional data. But again, we did verify the last flight through our own decode. In the future, we may be able to verify the rest.

As we know, those who make excuse for the govt story will believe anything they're told if it supports their beliefs. None of them have verified the ADDITIONAL 40 hours of data. They just take it at face value because it MAY support their agenda.

Keep in mind, if the data all showed 1's, meaning door open, we can definitively say the data is erroneous, as there is no way the cockpit door would be open for 40 hours of passenger service at American Airlines. And if logic has any value, this would be the bit value recorded if the FLIGHT DECK DOOR parameter wasn't hooked up to the system so when a tech reviews the data, he can readily admit its not valid.

But the fact is the data shows all 0's for the last flight and verified by P4T. This means the door was closed for that flight and the hijacking impossible BASED ON THE DATA. The NTSB/FBI are the only ones who are able to, and need to, explain this alarming conflict.

All else is speculation and theory.

Again, this data not PROOF of anything as I mentioned on page one of this thread where i stated "...we can not confirm or deny the authenticity of the data as provided by the NTSB". All we know for a FACT, is that the data being provided by the NTSB to the American public through the FOIA does NOT support the govt story, once again. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment.

[wstutt]

<snip>
On the ´there was no sensor in place´ argument, or the ´40 hours of flight´
nonsense (the way it is presented in their argument) or the apparent DESPERATE
hope that the actual 1s and 0s are in fact´the other way round´ (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) .....

THAT is a question that Rob Balsamo has already answered. Wstutt told us the answer to that one.
0 = CLOSED 1 = OPEN.

WStutt is reading the thread now if he wishes to refute this.

<snip>

I agree with 0 = CLOSED, 1 = OPEN. Both the data frame layouts I received from the NTSB agree on this.

Warren.

[onesliceshort]

I agree with 0 = CLOSED, 1 = OPEN. Both the data frame layouts I received from the NTSB agree on this.

Warren.

Thanks Warren.
That was just one of the quotes I was referring to that could have been cleared up in a sec.
Sorry if I came across as abrasive or that you may have thought there was a ´tone´ in my
earlier posts you are now answering.
I saw you watching the thread. That´s all.

Peace.

[wstutt]

Thanks Warren.
Is there any way you can tell us (in laymans terms if possible) the LENGTH of time of
each flight recorded on this FDR?
I mean, were they all internal flights?

I've uploaded a file with calculated flight times. Note these times will be from when the engines were turned on until they were turned off. They won't be accurate to the second, but they should be accurate to the nearest minute.

Obviously some of the times (as short as 16 seconds) are much too short to be actual flights. Perhaps Rob or someone else could comment on why the engines would be turned on and off without the aircraft leaving the airport.

The longest flight time is 4 hours and 34 minutes. I believe the FDR shows the aircraft as having never left the USA, but I have not checked through all the data. The work I did on my partial decoder indicated that all the flights in the FDR at least started in the USA.

Warren.

[Craig Ranke CIT]

Thanks for finally chiming in Warren!

Would you please do us the courtesy of sharing your personal opinion regarding this discovery by Pilots for 9/11 Truth?

Do you agree that the data fatally contradicts the official assertion of a hijacking?

[rob balsamo]

Thanks for finally chiming in Warren!

Would you please do us the courtesy of sharing your personal opinion regarding this discovery by Pilots for 9/11 Truth?

Do you agree that the data fatally contradicts the official assertion of a hijacking?

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10779484

[Obwon]

Hi Jefferson,

Remember this about the FDR data:



The ones in bold should tell you that there is more than likely a serious problem with the doors showing closed.

Hahaha... I agree... But if we can't get a hijacker into the cockpit... Hey, wait... I've got it! He waylaid the pilot and stole his uniform then he... Then he??? Oh phooey, he didn't speakee de ingly well enough to fool anyone. Back to the drawing board. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/laughing1.gif)

[Craig Ranke CIT]

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10779484

I didn't see where he offered his opinion as to whether or not he agrees with you that the data fatally contradicts the official assertion of a hijacking.

Did I miss it?

[wstutt]

Thanks Warren.
That was just one of the quotes I was referring to that could have been cleared up in a sec.
Sorry if I came across as abrasive or that you may have thought there was a ´tone´ in my
earlier posts you are now answering.
I saw you watching the thread. That´s all.

Peace.

That's OK. I see others have noticed that I was reading this thread and not replying as well. I wanted to wait until I had read through the entire thread before replying.

Warren.

[rob balsamo]

I didn't see where he offered his opinion as to whether or not he agrees with you that the data fatally contradicts the official assertion of a hijacking.

Did I miss it?

Well, it clearly conflicts with the govt story, a 1 or 0 is pretty open and shut. A 1 needs to be in that data somewhere around 0850-0854. It's not. The question is why. Warren claims to be open to suggestions according to his post linked.

So, take it from there I suppose.

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[rob balsamo]

That's OK. I see others have noticed that I was reading this thread and not replying as well. I wanted to wait until I had read through the entire thread before replying.

Warren.

I'll expand on this. I have seen Warren signed on to the same thread for days, never making a post. Just sitting in there studying, learning.

It's a good quality to have. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Craig Ranke CIT]

Well, it clearly conflicts with the govt story, a 1 or 0 is pretty open and shut. A 1 needs to be in that data somewhere around 0850-0854. It's not. The question is why. Warren claims to be open to suggestions according to his post linked.

So, take it from there I suppose.

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I have seen no indication that Warren is willing to take a position on anything at all including whether or not 9/11 has been proven to be an inside job.

If this cockpit door issue is as "clear" as you state then there should be no reason why Warren wouldn't make a statement publicly agreeing with you.

In fact the same goes for your debunk of the "4 feet" assertion that he is responsible for even though we got him to admit that his "intrigue" regarding your claim for altitude was what inspired him to do his own decode of the data to begin with!

Stutt said:

"I was intrigued enough by Pilots for 9/11 Truth's claim that AAL77 was too high to hit the light poles, based on the FDR data decoded by the NTSB to want to do my own decode of the FDR data."
source

So frankly I feel it is his responsiblity to make a public statement acknowledging that your claims regarding altitude checked out after his independent research.

How much time should he be allowed to "study" these issues? I'd say the time has already passed regarding the altitude issue and that it's about time regarding the cockpit door issue as well.

If he refuses to address this directly at all he is not being forthright and he is effectively allowing others to use his decode as a layer of disinformation without speaking out.

That is very serious.

This post has been edited by Craig Ranke CIT: Dec 1 2009, 02:47 PM

[wstutt]

I seem to remember also the conversation (sry can´t find the link at the mo) between Rob and WStutt
where ROB was the one who brought the Flightdeck door anomaly in the FDR data to HIS attention.

I believe you are referring to this post.

Here's my story on how this came about.

I was looking through the data frame layout for a parameter when I noticed the FLT DECK DOOR parameter. I thought that it could be used to see when the hijacking took place, so I added it to the program, since I was already adding other parameters anyway. When I ran the program to check all the new parameters I had added for the final flight, I noticed that all the FLT DECK DOOR values were CLOSED, which I didn't expect. I then got the program to do a decode FLT DECK DOOR for all flights in the FDR and saw that all the values were CLOSED. I then thought that the parameter might not be recorded correctly and that I couldn't be certain one way or the other whether the door was actually closed throughout the entire final flight or not, so I didn't think much of it. On the other hand, the values were not such that it was clear that the parameter was not being recorded correctly (say like continually switching between open and closed for example) so I left it in the program, which I subsequently uploaded along with updated output files.

I list parameters in here which I can see are clearly not being recorded correctly and that I removed from the program. If it is not clear to me, then I leave the parameters in.

Now that Rob has highlighted the importance of the FLT DECK DOOR parameter, I'll be doing some more work to hopefully bring some more light on this issue. I now see that he had thought about the importance of the FLT DECK DOOR parameter before I did, when working through ReadOut2.

<snip>
After seeing the link Craig gave I believe you´ve been hanging around ´the other site´ too long.
<snip>

Peace.

I gained valuable information that enabled me to write my decoder program both from this site and 'the other site' (J.R.E.F.). Information that Pilots for 9/11 Truth member UnderTow provided including but not limited to ReadOut2 were crucial as was a particular post on J.R.E.F. When I announced my program, I announced it on both sites and let both know that I would also be discussing it on each others sites. I intend to continue considering points raised by both sites.

Warren.

[Obwon]

Thanks for finally chiming in Warren!

Would you please do us the courtesy of sharing your personal opinion regarding this discovery by Pilots for 9/11 Truth?

Do you agree that the data fatally contradicts the official assertion of a hijacking?

People have been convicted of capital crimes, using less data than we have here, against the official story. Yet, N.C.I.S. and C.S.I. still draw top tv ratings, go figure, eh? Yet we're still required to beat our heads against the wall, to come up with yet another peice of evidence to support our "claims" that the official story isn't accurate. Ha! Be that as it may. We don't lose our heads over it, we just keep going onward like the energizer bunny.

The more time we put in and the more we find to discuss, gives people something to get interested in, no matter how much of a "true believer" they are or were. That's a good thing. If it had not been for people continuing to try to cross all the t's and dot all the i's, this subject would have probably gone forgotten by all but a few.

Now the facts are piling up on our side of the ledger! We have the attack craft flying over the building. We have the attack craft, without a way to hit the light poles. We have a hijacker/pilot who could not have flown the aircraft. And now, Ladies and Gentlemen, I direct your attention to the center ring of the Big Top where -- we have no way for the hijacker to get into the cockpit.

It's now veridical that the door was monitored and the monitor was operating. There are no cautions or notices to the contrary, as there would be if they were left, or in any other way, inoperative.

So that now, the "other side" has only the matter of "door never opens" to hang their hats on, and that's falling quickly. So we've got 42hrs 59mins 59 sec, of flights, for which we need some record of the door having been opened. Or a reasonable explanation of why this condition does not get recorded.

As for the engines being turned on and off, too quickly for a flight to have occurred, maintenance/checking is the easy answer. I'd be willing to bet that there much that could not be checked without the engines being started.

Another answer I can think of is that due to environmental concerns, leaving engines running, as they used to do in the 60's and 70's probably isn't done today. If they only start the engines after the passengers and luggage/cargo is aboard, then there's plenty of time to access the cockpit as needed, to store things away, such that, at least on short flights, there's hardly a reason to open the cockpit door.

Also, let's remember that there was some reason to be concerned about aircraft security, even if none had been hijacked in nearly 20 years. Remember the Genoa G-8? Where Bellisconi created an uproar in the Italian press, that was also reported here, when he decide to put anti-aircraft missiles on the rooftops of downtown Genoa, on account of threat warnings that terrorists might be trying to hijack commercial aircraft and crash them into the building housing the G-8 meeting. This was in July of 2001. Condolezza Rice may have had short term memory problems, when she said she couldn't imagine such. She attended that meeting with Bush. Oh my!

Ob

[wstutt]

Thanks for finally chiming in Warren!

Would you please do us the courtesy of sharing your personal opinion regarding this discovery by Pilots for 9/11 Truth?

Do you agree that the data fatally contradicts the official assertion of a hijacking?

Hi Craig,

I am not certain either way at this point. I will be doing more work that may make me settle more on one side of this debate or the other. I'll post the results here when I have them. There is still much I don't know about the details of how the combined door sensor, EICAS, DFAU and FDR system worked on AAL77.

Warren.

[Craig Ranke CIT]

Hi Craig,

I am not certain either way at this point. I will be doing more work that may make me settle more on one side of this debate or the other. I'll post the results here when I have them. There is still much I don't know about the details of how the combined door sensor, EICAS, DFAU and FDR system worked on AAL77.

Warren.

Fair enough.

I am looking forward to hearing your conclusion.

However....regarding the other even more important matter of reported altitude that you have admitted inspired you to do you own decode in the first place:

Do you agree with the published conclusions by Pilots for 9/11 Truth that the last reported altitude is too high to hit the light poles?