Aal77 Fdr Decoder Program, Decodes almost 4 more seconds Options

[wstutt]

I have created a new program to decode AAL77's raw FDR file.

I am making it available for download along with it's source code and some output files from the program.

You can read more about it here

It decodes almost 4 more seconds of data than what appears at the end of the NTSB CSV file.

I welcome suggestions for any more parameters you would like decoded or any other features you would like added.

I will also be discussing this on the J.R.E.F. "AA77 FDR Data, Explained" thread as well as here.

Warren.

mod edit: Although Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not have any reason to believe the above program is offered for any nefarious purpose, we felt the responsibility to add this disclaimer. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not vouch for nor is responsible for any of the data provided above by Warren. Nor can we guarantee his program is free of malicious code. Download at your own risk.

This post has been edited by rob balsamo: Oct 22 2009, 05:38 PM

[rob balsamo]

I took a stroll through Randiland during my morning coffee and as usual, loads of personal attacks with the occasional theory.

Once again they're trying to confuse their minions with technobabble.

Now Mackey claims this is what they were talking about when he made the statement about a plane turning "steeply" at an airshow at subsonic speed.

(IMG:http://gallery.photo.net/photo/8558369-md.jpg)

"If you've ever been to an airshow and seen high performance aircraft maneuvering steeply, you've probably seen this -- and it happens at subsonic speeds." - Ryan Mackey

Well no. The above Vapor cone, as you can see, is happening in straight and level flight, and it's when the aircraft is breaking the sound barrier. Mackey is so confused he doesn't even realize the difference, and his minions follow right along...

Next, which has been already pointed out... Mackey claims compressibility affected the Pressure Altimeter (of course he admits he doesn't know which way), but fails to understand (or ignores), the control issues associated with compressibility. So, not only was Hani able to get an aircraft completely into its target with a 33' margin for error at 130 knots over Vmo and zero time in type, but he also overcame the control issues associated with compressibility, yet couldn't control a 172 at 65 knots.... according to Mackey. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

Pilots will get a kick out of this as well...

"The radar altimeter is the more reliable instrument, period. If there's a conflict between it and the pressure altimeter, we should lean towards the radar altimeter." - Ryan Mackey

So basically Mackey is claiming the RadAlt is primary and the Baro Alt supporting. I think Mackey should perhaps join Reheat at the above recommended American Flyers basic Instrument Rating course.

Thank goodness Mackey doesn't fly aircraft or he would be a smoking hole on a step down approach or going on premature missed approaches all day long on approaches with buildings/rolling hills/tall trees along the approach corridor. But I'm sure Mackey is used to 'missing' prematurely... (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)


I still see he hasn't learned the definition of supercritical either and that .70 - .72 Mach is no where near Mcrit for a 757, therefore, "compressibility" is not a problem for the 757 at such Mach speed, after all Mmo is .86 on the 757. This of course assumes Mackey can convert airspeed into Mach based on temp, clearly he is unable. But as stated above and ignored by the GL's, many other factors are a problem above Vmo for control which do not effect the static port. Certainly compressibility isn't an issue at .14 - .16 Mach below the aircraft Mmo or 757's would be coming back with missing control surfaces after each flight...

"...another common problem that fits into this category is flutter. At some speeds the airflow over the control surfaces will become turbulent, and the controls will start to flutter. If the speed of the fluttering is close to a harmonic of the control's movement, the resonance could break the control off completely." - Aeronautical Dynamics Of Compressibility


They should stick to their bird strike theory, but this time, that it clogged the static port.... on both sides, at exactly 187 MSL... lol

Yes folks, they do serve their purpose over there. I personally love the fact their forum is mostly littered with personal attacks, libel and photoshopped pictures... but it's even better when they attempt tech-talk and posit theories to fit their incredulity. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)


Too funny...

[Domenick DiMaggi...]

I took a stroll through Randiland during my morning coffee and as usual, loads of personal attacks with the occasional theory.

Once again they're trying to confuse their minions with technobabble.

Now Mackey claims this is what they were talking about when he made the statement about a plane turning "steeply" at an airshow at subsonic speed.

(IMG:http://gallery.photo.net/photo/8558369-md.jpg)

"If you've ever been to an airshow and seen high performance aircraft maneuvering steeply, you've probably seen this -- and it happens at subsonic speeds." - Ryan Mackey

Well no. The above Vapor cone, as you can see, is happening in straight and level flight, and it's when the aircraft is breaking the sound barrier. Mackey is so confused he doesn't even realize the difference, and his minions follow right along...

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/laughing1.gif)

supersonic hani hanjour!!!!!

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/laughing1.gif)