Flight Data Expert Confirmation: No Evidence Linking Fdr Data To American 77, FDR Data Exceeds Capabilities Of A 757, Does Not Support Impact
Flight Data Expert Confirmation: No Evidence Linking Fdr Data To American 77, FDR Data Exceeds Capabilities Of A 757, Does Not Support Impact
Jan 20 2011, 04:55 PM
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1
Flight Data Expert Confirmation: No Evidence Linking FDR Data to American 77
FDR Data Exceeds Capabilities Of A 757, Does Not Support Impact With Pentagon
(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Flight Data Recorder Expert Dennis Cimino has confirmed that the data being provided through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is missing crucial information, which according to Dennis, should be present and link the data to a specific aircraft and fleet. The NTSB provided three sets of data through the FOIA for what they claim is from American 77, N644AA. A csv file, an animation reconstruction and a raw data file. Rob Balsamo of Pilots For 9/11 Truth along with numerous other aviation experts, including trained Aircraft Accident Investigators have analyzed these files and determined they do not support an impact with the Pentagon. The data also exceeds the design limitations and capabilities of a standard 757 by a wide margin. This is based on data, precedent and numerous verified experts, including those who have actual flight time in the aircraft reportedly used for the 9/11 attacks (See - "Flight Of American 77", "9/11: Attack On The Pentagon" and "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" at Pilotsfor911Truth.org for full detailed analysis and interviews).
One file in particular, the compressed binary raw file alleged to be a direct data dump from the Flight Data Recorder, was recently analyzed by an alleged computer expert. He has claimed to decode 4 more seconds worth of data, above and beyond the NTSB decode, although the "additional" data has not been verified by anyone. The claim was made that the reason the NTSB did not decode this "additional" data is because the software used by the NTSB, along with the software used by the manufacturer of the FDR (L3 Communications), has an alleged "bug". If correct, this has grave consequences for Flight Safety as Flight Data is used in the promotion of safe flight through changes in regulation and procedure. The NTSB and L3 have been contacted, along with an Aviation Safety Report being filed with NASA. There hasn't been any reply confirming such a "bug".
A paper was recently published by the mentioned computer "expert" along with an alleged Chemist as the authors. They claim the extra 4 seconds support an impact with the Pentagon. They base this claim on a Radio Altimeter parameter in which the NTSB has listed as "Not Working or Unconfirmed" in the NTSB FDR Report(1). When cross-checked with the "Working and Confirmed" Primary Altimeter True Altitude data, the aircraft is still too high to hit the Pentagon(2). This can only mean that the Radio Altimeter was measuring from an object above ground level.
Radio Altimeters do not guarantee measurement from the ground. The device measures whatever object you are flying over within a certain range (a building, trees... etc). The tracking capability of the Radio altimeter is 330 feet per second, or a little under 200 knots(3). According to the data, the aircraft was traveling at a speed of 460-480 knots. Well outside the limits of the Radio Altimeter tracking capability, not to mention well outside the capabilities of a standard 757.
It is interesting that the authors, editors and Journal in which the above mentioned paper is published is highly critical and skeptical of the National Institute Of Standards And Technology (NIST) data and reports with respect to the collapse of the World Trade Center, yet is now attempting to use unverified data from another government agency to support the government story regarding a Pentagon impact. Motives are even more puzzling especially when the NTSB data in fact does not support an impact while exceeding the performance limitations and capabilities of a standard 757 as set by the manufacturer based on wind tunnel and flight testing, by a wide margin. This is also corroborated by precedent. It is also clear the paper was not reviewed by any aviation expert prior to publish, as it is littered with speculation and gross errors. For more information regarding this paper and the numerous errors it contains, please see the discussion at the Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum(4).
FDR Expert Dennis Cimino further goes on to state:
Dennis Cimino experience and qualifications:
Further confirmation that there isn't any evidence linking the FDR data to "American 77", tail number N644AA is discussed here:
Can The Govt Get Their Story Straight? - Location Of Flight Data Recorder
Lies, Conflicting Reports, Cover-Up's - Location of American 77 Flight Data Recorder - Part II
9/11 Aircraft 'black Box' Serial Numbers Mysteriously Absent
Interview With Flight Data Recorder Expert
So, if the data is not from N644AA, does not support an impact at the Pentagon, and in fact exceeds the capabilities and performance of a standard 757, what caused the damage at the Pentagon? That is exactly what Pilots For 9/11 Truth are trying figure out and the reason there needs to be a new and truly independent investigation. Some wish to ignore this data, some without expertise attempt to analyze it while attempting to say, "nothing to see here folks, move along..". Please write your Congressional Representatives and Senators. Call into talk shows, tell them there is a growing list of aviation professionals who question the government version of events on 9/11. Tell them the data being provided through the FOIA does not support the government story.
Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack, the events in Shanksville, PA and the World Trade Center Attack. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html for full member list.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/join to join.
Jan 20 2011, 07:54 PM
Group: Active Forum Pilot
Joined: 19-November 07
Member No.: 2,496
first, I have a lot of stuff, as it's been a long time since I posted in the forum, about FLT-77 and the incongruencies between the N.T.S.B. *ahem* re-creation, allegedly based on the
FDR data from the aircraft registered in the F.A.A. registry as N644AA, which was an earlier model B-757 with '2' Rolls Royce RB-211 engines, and no in flight seat back phones. (per David Ray Griffin's excellent and extensive research that goes to the fact that the F.B.I. now won't substantiate any phone calls allegedly from this airplane, not even the infamous Babs Olson one., due to hard work and research done by Dr. Griffin.)
In any case, I've watched the N.T.S.B. recreation in Pandora's Black Box perhaps thousands of times in the years since Pilots For Truth put that out. Like most of the pilots in here, we don't just sit at the computer and watch Pandora's Black Box, but we do on occasion probably watch it again just for posterity sake.
And I came away with a couple things, from a 'pilot's viewpoint, that don't work for me...and I want you to hear me out and listen to me before you jump in with the typical ad-hominem attacks on me versus my information I am putting here.
First, during the approximate time of the alleged highjacking, there is no aircraft upset of even the slightest kind, not in altitude, not in pitch, not in yaw, not in roll, airspeed, or any other control parameter. Now I want you to ask yourself this question: You've just had a couple of middle eastern Saudi hijackers get into the cockpit (the FDR record shows no toggle for the door switch thru the DFDAU) and then commence to murder or wrestle with the captain and first officer. Now we know that Capt. Chuck Burlingame was far from a 98 pound boy with a nasal cannula and a walker parked behind his seat in the cockpit. I don't know what he could bench press, or what his first officer could bench press, but I have a real hard time with either of these men cooly sitting in their seats, while they are having their heads sawed off by a box cutter wielding, screaming maniac...without either hitting the yoke or kicking their rudder pedals. Because, as you might imagine, those two men are in a de-facto, bona-fide struggle for not just their lives, but their passengers lives, as well. I don't think they would have had narcolepsy in their final moments alive, in other words. The A/P would have, by design, disengaged, and at the very least, there would have been for a short period of time, an 'upset' of the aircraft, due to the disengagement of the autopilot. Anyone familiar with 'coffin corner' and what that infers, knows that any upset of this nature of any aircraft of this type, at high altitude, could lead to the incipient and sudden loss of control of the plane, if not corrected very rapidly and fast. It's not fathomable that one of the hijackers would be hovering over the A/P button on the panel to re-engage it repeatedly while they killed the crew. Un uh.
Then we get to the FL-180 'reset' that happens on the climb, for vertical separation and safety reasons. The flight crew does that, just like any flight crew who operates airplanes in the Positive Control Airspace above FL-180 is mandated to do. This happens, as you would expect it would, in the FDR record. On the descent, there is a disparity between the N.T.S.B. recreation, and the reality in the .CSV file, as the crew would have now been 'hijackers' and not experienced line pilots...and certainly would have no cognition, nor safety reasons, to do a Dulles local altimeter set as they barrelled on down to hit the Pentagon that morning. So why is it present in one N.T.S.B. product, and 'absent' in the other product, one might ask? Allegedly these things were derivatives of the other, and the data should have been in total agreement. But it's not.
Then we get to the rudder movements on this plane. And I have had discussions about this with other pilots, and they either are amputee's or they fly flat footed all day long and never use rudders ever. I think Boeing and Airbus might go the 'aercoupe' route and get rid of the rudder pedals altogether, it's about forty pounds of weight they could be garnering revenue from, and not paying fuel to haul around...because in this flight, that set of rudder pedals on AA-77, or N644AA, are mighty dead. They don't even really twitch, let alone show any pilot imputs on them. Now, granted, inexperienced pilots with zero flight experience might ignore rudders for a bit, but to do coordinated flight with the black ball in the bars indicating no skid or slip is going on, they had to use them when the A/P and rudder trim weren't taking care of it. Not the case on this plane. Matter of fact, on the final dive to the building, at 460 plus knots, nary a twitch of rudder. Hmmmm??
Between these things I cite, the control issues in pulling out of a 4,400 foot per minute dive, in an 80 ton inertial mass with wings, going downhill at great speed...and then rounding out in that dive for a lawn height, pole clipping venture and skittle across the pristine Pentagon lawn (post crash), without a pitch oscillation and loss of control in the pitch axis, known as PHUGOIDING or PORPOISING, this flight is an impossibility. It's an impossibility from any number of flight limitations standpoints, but more importantly, the hijacker would have actually had to use rudder to execute the nice 270 degree turn and stay in coordinated flight, and he would have had to do some rudder dance on the final end of the dive to stay lined up. And he did not. It's evident in the FDR recreation that this was not the case.
So in lieu of screaming at Mr. Stutts and Mr. Legge for decoding 'bullshit' as I called it, which is in fact their prerogative, I do have to admonish them for believing an 80 ton airliner flown by neophytes could round out in the bottom of a very steep dive, with a lot of downward inertia, and then slide into the CATCHERS MIT like that.
and now I want to call your attention to photos taken of the Pentagon wall within the first five or so minutes of impact.
Yep, a frenchman published a piece about this utter absurdity, and had those unretouched pics in his presentation. In them, you can clearly see vertical steel studs or parts of the wall, behind the entry hole that an 80 ton, 460 knot airliner just entered.
Was this plane made out of silly putty?
No engine entry points, no wing slots, meaning wings would have been outside the building, as there was such a paucity of wreckage, for them to be converted to pure energy release at impact, the resultant force would have obliterated that quarter of the buuilding. No empennage wreckage, no engine penetration holes, no vertical stabilzer. No luggage, no bodies, no seats. No nothing.
Now, later on, there are pics of what are presumably F.B.I. guys strewing wreckage around, and in one photo, the rivet holes have obvious corrosion marks from them. Am I to believe that piece corroded in an hour or two? From what? Why is it that the moderately pristine and amost immaculate lawn, suddenly starts to sprout parts?
I can't tell you how parts sprout up except that NO F.B.I. would put their badges in their pockets while strewing wreckage you are not supposed to move, under any circumstances. They had no license to touch that stuff. It's an aircraft CRASH SITE, for christs sake. Why the badges in pockets? Why?
April Gallop mentioned she crawled thru this 'inferno hole' just after it was created, with her son on her back. She sustained no major burns. Her hair wasn't on fire. She didn't suffer significant smoke inhalation. How can this be.
How can an 80 ton aircraft vaporize it's wings, vertical and horizontal stabilizers, and one engine that never was recovered? How could the one engine get into the building without an entry hole?
Mr. Legge, Mr Stutts, I'm not going to scream at you for decoding and then writing this paper you wrote, but clearly, neither of you has taken the time to study this event like some of us have. There are so many 'from an experienced pilot' standpoint holes, that it doesn't compute even a little bit.
and the icing on this entire 'merde' cake, is the no ACFT ID and no FLEET ID in the FDR data preamble.
and I'll go one step further. The N.T.S.B., the F.B.I., and the F.A.A., had no constructive reason to hide from all of us, particularly Aidan Monaghan, who submitted the F.O.I.A., that just wanted these parts of this plane to be identified by serial number.
Because, Mr. Legge, and Mr. Stutts, these planes create a huge paper trail when they are built. Those documents would have reinforced the government's assertion that N644AA hit the building and was destroyed that day. The on the spot, almost premeditatedly confiscated video tapes the F.B.I. grabbed that would show the plane, are not available fo rus to look at.
and for god's sake, why did it take the F.A.A. more than THREE YEARS to strike these involved aircraft from the F.A.A. registries?
I'll tell you why. Because these planes weren't involved. We know '2' were at the WTC, but we have no constructive proof that the plane the F.A.A. lost track of over the W. Virginia 'radar hole' where the FPS-117 long range, 3-d airsearch radar is located, by the way, is now said to have hit the Pentagon. Because without meeting certain criteria, per Robin Hordon's excellent outcry over this fact, that flight could never be positively known to be FLT-77.
Because, per Gerard Holmgren's excellent work, we know that FLT-77 wasn't even a scheduled carrier flight on Sept. 11th. 2001.
So I clearly have many many many problems with this from any number of standpoints, the most significant one is the bogus FDR data that is non-reality, which you so faithfully, painstakingly decoded the 4 seconds that the N.T.S.B. swears on a stack of bibles more or less, that it was unable to decode. Something is seriously wrong with this entire picture, and I am not accusing either of you of being putzes, but I think that you miss a whole lot of valid, very real reasons your assertions cannot stand in a reality based world of real aeronautics, real physics, and real airplane flight limits, when 'incompetent' pilots were allegedly performing these feats of magic you show in your paper. It's just not real, guys!
Jan 21 2011, 11:31 AM
Group: Valued Member
Joined: 29-September 07
From: Hampshire, UK.
Member No.: 2,274
Because, Mr. Legge, and Mr. Stutts, these planes create a huge paper trail when they are built. Those documents would have reinforced the government's assertion that N644AA hit the building and was destroyed that day.
And probably an even bigger paper trail during maintenance over their lives where every part changed is logged. Every part has a life based on calendar, flying hours, running hours (for engines sometimes split into various modes of operation) or landings.
Don't novice pilots often bang the rudder pedals about being unsure of which way they should be operated?
Now, those 'FBI' agents spreading parts across a crime scene should be readily identifiable short of meeting an untimely end or having reconstructive surgery - always a big possibility with such schemes.
Nice work Dennis which shows also the value of historic pictures with provenance.
|Lo-Fi Version||Time is now: 19th June 2013 - 03:47 PM|