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

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

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
The Two Baro Corrections

wstutt
post Jun 19 2008, 04:05 AM
Post #1





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



Since I am not a pilot and have never flown a plane, I have a question.

I see there are two Barometer Correction columns in the NTSB's CSV file for AAL77 named "BARO COR NO. 1 (IN) (inHg)" and "BARO COR NO. 2 (IN) (inHg)" and that they appear to be independent of each other. Does that mean that the captain and first officer each have their own pressure altitude gauge and that these columns are showing the corrections for true altitude set by the captain and first officer on their own gauges independently of each other?

This post has been edited by wstutt: Jun 19 2008, 04:32 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jun 19 2008, 08:31 AM
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,830
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



yes
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
wstutt
post Jun 20 2008, 12:18 AM
Post #3





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



Thanks Rob,

I notice that in the NTSB CSV files, at about 9:24:16 EDT, both Baro Corrections are increased from about 29.92 to about 30.24. According to the government's story, Hani Hanjour was flying the plane at that time.

I would have thought that Hani Hanjour would have been operating one set of controls, either the captain's or the first officer's. So why would have both Baro Corrections have been changed at that time (unless of course the government's story is wrong)?

Warren.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hiram
post Jul 25 2008, 02:13 PM
Post #4





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 20
Joined: 4-May 08
Member No.: 3,273



On the existence of FRD

I have read of fair quantity of posts on PFT, some of them most interesting, I also have looked trought videos in particular that one on the flight path of AA77.
My native language beeing french, I am afraid I did'nt fully understand all the explanations given by competent professionals.

Of what I have gathered, it seems that AA77 flew to low by datas given by the FAA due to a bad calibration of its altimeter.

We arrive at a "Alice in Wonderland" situation where a plane seems to hit the pentagon but instead just flies over it and disappears into oblivion in the same time as it drops its flight recorders at a convenient place for the authorities to find.

If AA77 really flew the "corrected" way it must have landed somewhere (or beeing shot down in the best national interest), once the FDRs recovered, the encased datas duly edited could be released to the public.

If AA77 flew directly to another place, one had to "invent" datas ab nihilo. Same if AA77 did'nt exist at all.


The sole rational conclusion to which I am now able to reach is that the datas provided by the FAA are false.
It is then illusory to find in them a usefull information regarding AA77.

If explanations on this theme exists, I would be interested to learn of them.


One of your recent posts examine the fact that AA77 could have cut light poles after an skillfull and risqué manœuvre. As I am not an aviation professionnal I would know at what ultimate low altitude an aircraft such as AA77 can fly at ± 460 mph without incurring major damages due to ground effect.

Thanks in advance.



Hiram
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Jul 25 2008, 05:10 PM
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 1-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



As an aside, highly relevant to this thread,

if anyone really wants to delve into the technical/scientific aspects of pressure measurement and gauge response (times), one must discuss conductance:

http://www.tau.ac.il/~phchlab/experiments/...ime_vacuum.html

http://www.lesker.com/newweb/Technical_Inf...ctance_Calc.cfm

Of course, I don't remember any of our MSM/OGCT loyalist "debunkers" ever using this word before. Hmmm....

We'd need some verifiable Boeing or barometer manufacturer specific data to continue here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
simba
post Jul 28 2008, 04:21 PM
Post #6





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 39
Joined: 3-June 08
From: The Netherlands
Member No.: 3,495



QUOTE (hiram @ Jul 25 2008, 09:13 PM) *
On the existence of FRD

I have read of fair quantity of posts on PFT, some of them most interesting, I also have looked trought videos in particular that one on the flight path of AA77.
My native language beeing french, I am afraid I did'nt fully understand all the explanations given by competent professionals.

Of what I have gathered, it seems that AA77 flew to low by datas given by the FAA due to a bad calibration of its altimeter.

We arrive at a "Alice in Wonderland" situation where a plane seems to hit the pentagon but instead just flies over it and disappears into oblivion in the same time as it drops its flight recorders at a convenient place for the authorities to find.

If AA77 really flew the "corrected" way it must have landed somewhere (or beeing shot down in the best national interest), once the FDRs recovered, the encased datas duly edited could be released to the public.

If AA77 flew directly to another place, one had to "invent" datas ab nihilo. Same if AA77 did'nt exist at all.


The sole rational conclusion to which I am now able to reach is that the datas provided by the FAA are false.
It is then illusory to find in them a usefull information regarding AA77.

If explanations on this theme exists, I would be interested to learn of them.


One of your recent posts examine the fact that AA77 could have cut light poles after an skillfull and risqué manœuvre. As I am not an aviation professionnal I would know at what ultimate low altitude an aircraft such as AA77 can fly at ± 460 mph without incurring major damages due to ground effect.

Thanks in advance.



Hiram


For me it's quit simple, the radio barometer altitude was 273ft prior to impact... Is for me much more saying then the normal pressure altitude you normaly getting with the altimeter settings knob...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SPreston
post Jul 29 2008, 02:11 PM
Post #7


Patriotic American


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 518
Joined: 14-May 07
From: Where I am standing on the RUINS of the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY
Member No.: 1,045



QUOTE (simba)
For me it's quit simple, the radio barometer altitude was 273ft prior to impact... Is for me much more saying then the normal pressure altitude you normaly getting with the altimeter settings knob...

The MSL of the Helipad at the Pentagon is 39 ft, so if the FDR aircraft radio barometer altitude was 273 ft MSL, then it was 134 feet too high to hit the Pentagon 1st floor.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phaeton666
post Sep 14 2008, 01:06 PM
Post #8





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 37
Joined: 12-September 07
Member No.: 2,101



QUOTE (SPreston @ Jul 27 2008, 05:11 PM) *
The MSL of the Helipad at the Pentagon is 39 ft, so if the FDR aircraft radio barometer altitude was 273 ft MSL, then it was 134 feet too high to hit the Pentagon 1st floor.


This may be stupid questions from a simulator pilot, but to which value did the "pilots" set the baro? Was this value correct for the weather situation? Where did they know this value from? Did they tune in some ATIS?
And most importantly, why did they do it? If I want to crash into a building, I don't care for instruments, especially with near perfect visibility. Usually I would need to set the baro if I want to fly an altitude below FL180 correctly, or if I want to set up my FMS for a landing.
Don't know about real pilots, maybe this is so automatic that no one thinks about this, but somehow I don't believe it.

Very strange.
Phaeton666
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Sep 14 2008, 01:33 PM
Post #9



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,830
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



273 Ft was recorded by the FDR off the Radar Altimeter. This altitude is above ground level, not MSL or Sea Level.

And yes, the "hijackers" would have had to get the altimeter setting from somewhere eg ATIS, listening on radio... etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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: 18th November 2017 - 11:47 PM