IPB




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
Aviation Safety Reporting System - Aa77 Fdr, and Letter To NTSB

rob balsamo
post Oct 22 2009, 07:55 AM
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,697
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Considering the latest news with respect to Warren's work, I figured new letters and reports should be filed.

This time I kept a better record. smile.gif









The complete letter to Ted wouldn't fit on the above form, so here is the rest...

QUOTE
You can find the decode program here.
http://warrenstutt.com/AAL77FDRDecoder/index.html

Along with copies of the FOIA request and cover letters here.
http://warrenstutt.com/NTSBFOIARequest2-1-09/index.html

Please keep in mind, I cannot vouch for the authenticity of the executable programs designed by the above mentioned independent researcher nor if it may contain any malicious code.

If able, please advise any suggestions you may have to perhaps amend the information being provided by the NTSB to the American public if in fact the above code is authentic and conclusions accurate.

We will also be filling out a ASRS Report with respect to this information..

Regards,
Rob Balsamo
Co-Founder
pilotsfor911truth.org

cc: Core Members
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Oct 23 2010, 12:55 AM
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,697
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Just posting a follow up to this.

I received a reply from NASA. The letter was a basic generic letter stating they will be looking into it.

Will post updates as I receive them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Oct 23 2010, 07:50 AM
Post #3



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Oct 23 2010, 05:55 AM) *
Just posting a follow up to this.

I received a reply from NASA. The letter was a basic generic letter stating they will be looking into it.

Will post updates as I receive them.


Should be interesting. Nice one Rob!

thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Oct 23 2010, 10:34 AM
Post #4





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,930
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Yes, it will be interesting to see how gubmint responds. File 13, is my guess.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tnemelckram
post Oct 23 2010, 06:05 PM
Post #5





Group: Contributor
Posts: 767
Joined: 30-January 08
Member No.: 2,690



Hi Rob!

Great work! A letter acknowledging receipt and promising some further action to look into it is routine and doesn't mean much one way or another. What matters is whether their further action is in good faith. Assuming they are Simon-pure in their motives, the next step would be to send a second communication asking for particulars about your claims numbered 1 to 5, such as the data that backs up those claims and the methodology used to make them. That would be the only logical thing to do if their response is in good-faith.

If the 9-11 background is set aside, claims 1-5 suggest that there might be a problem with the accuracy or efficacy of the instruments used to provide vital flight data such as altitude to pilots, and/or the same with regard to the FDR data that the agency relies on to determine what happened in all aircraft crashes, learn lessons, and make air travel safer.

It's like the situation at the WTC's. If the "hot jet fuel fires" made the buildings collapse as the result of fires of a size that were assumed in the design of not just the WTC's but just about all skyscrapers, then there must be a previously-unknown fire safety design problem that affects just about all of the rest of them. Some type of structural corrective action would be the best course, but if that is not feasible, then people should be warned that all prior assumptions about fire safety redundancy have been proven invalid in actual practice! There are many ways to address the problem that are less expensive that structural improvements, such as retrofitting improved sprinklers and detection devices, increased emphasis on evacuation procedures, and changes in building codes for future construction. But assuming their explanations of the building fall are true, we haven't had any of these natural, probable and reasonable responses from FEMA, ASME, NIST or the Uniform Building Code governing bodies.

So at least, you have given them another opportunity to fail to respond when they naturally should and thereby tacitly admit that the PFT/CIT analysis either has considerable merit or is the truth. Using such reasoning, I'm already convinced by their prior failures to respond, but many more might be convinced by yet another such failure.

This post has been edited by tnemelckram: Oct 23 2010, 06:08 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 19 2013, 10:53 PM
Post #6



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,697
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Posting an update...

Three and a half years, neither the NTSB nor ASRS have confirmed a so called "bug" in the RAPS Software used to decode FDR's worldwide. A "bug" claimed by "Warren Stutt" in order to hold onto his theories clearly does not exist.

"Warren Stutt" refuses to address analysis and questions fatal to his theories.
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: 21st October 2014 - 03:55 PM