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
Disputes From The Cesspit, split from latest news

robot
post Mar 4 2011, 12:46 AM
Post #1





Group: Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: 11-July 07
Member No.: 1,405



Just thought you might like to know that the the govt loyalist site forum has spotted your post. Summary - this is old news. Threads were created long ago that discussed these issues.

You guys run out of new evidence and now dressing up old evidence as new?

govtloyalistsite.org/showthread.php?t=66047

Edit. Seems like this software has a sense of humour. It changed the URL.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 4 2011, 12:58 AM
Post #2



Group Icon

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



Sorry troll, we dont link to clear and obvious libel, personal attacks and ad hom when the cowards refuse a face to face debate recorded using their own name.

Nice try though.

When you come back with your next sock, be sure to answer these questions first.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=13214

Maybe you will then learn to be an individual and not a "robot".

By the way, this is "Capt Bob and friends".

http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots

This is the idiot who posted the Three Stooges in a poor attempt at a personal attack.






Just the facts, since it seems your link is lacking.

But be sure to thank him for the added publicity! smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 4 2011, 05:20 AM
Post #3



Group Icon

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



So i had a bit more time tonight to read through the Cesspit tonight. Nothing really new except for the same old romper room. But this i found interesting.

The following quote is from a user named "apathoid". He claims to be an avionics tech for Delta based out of Atlanta.

As to why the lat/longs don't line up with actual aircraft position.. I've explained it many times here before. Long story short, on the first flight of the day, lat/long must be manually entered by the flight crew, as IRS can only roughly detect the latitude during alignment. This position entry is quite rough as there is only one lat/long used for any given airport....


His real name is "Jay". I wont reveal his last name as it's never been published online as far as i know, nor does Jay wish to put his name to his claims. This is just one of the reasons why.....

"Jay" claims there is only "one lat/long for a given airport".

Luckily i save and box some of my old Jepps. (Havent bothered to look at my current Jepps for this purpose as they may be different almost a decade later)

Does this look like "only one lat/long for a given airport"?





How about this? The very base "Jay" claims to work...




Does that look like "only one Lat/Long for a given airport"?

Someone might want to inform "Jay" that there is more than "only one Lat/Long for a given airport".

Given that "Jay" claims to be an avionics tech for a major carrier out of a Major hub, and doesnt know this, is extremely alarming.

Here is the "quite rough" (according to "Jay") Lat/Long position given to the pilots for gate D26, so they can align their IRS.




Jay, i dont blame you for never putting your name to your claims.

So "robot" what do you have to say about "apathoid's" comments? You can still post here, but only in this section. Sorry, I wont let you muck up the rest of the forum. Think of it as the AAH at your cesspool, but unlike the censorship there, guests can read this here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 4 2011, 10:21 AM
Post #4



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (R2D2)
Just thought you might like to know that the the govt loyalist site forum has spotted your post. Summary - this is old news. Threads were created long ago that discussed these issues.


Yes, and judging by the total annihilation of one of Randi's "expert" posts in this thread, we know that what some label "old news" is usually information that has been been crapped on from a great height watched by nodding dogs. That's not "discussion", Robot, that's J.REF.

What I'd really like explained over there is how the co-ordinates at the gate can be claimed to have been "off"? As must have been the latitudinal coordinates leading from the gate? Then the longitudinal distance to the runway?

But then somehow aligns itself to line up an alleged 125ft wingspan aircraft perfectly within a 200ft wide runway for takeoff?



Blow, smoke and ass. Fill the blanks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 4 2011, 08:59 PM
Post #5



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Mar 4 2011, 09:21 AM) *
What I'd really like explained over there is how the co-ordinates at the gate can be claimed to have been "off"? As must have been the latitudinal coordinates leading from the gate? Then the longitudinal distance to the runway?

But then somehow aligns itself to line up an alleged 125ft wingspan aircraft perfectly within a 200ft wide runway for takeoff?


Blow, smoke and ass. Fill the blanks.


The raw data is not aligned with anything, not the gate, nor the runway.



As pointed out, repeatedly, Pilots align the IRS with the gate lat/long coordinates. The above IRS was not aligned prior to flight as required by American Airlines and seemed to have auto-aligned in flight. This is impossible for the IRS installed on American Airlines aircraft.


The data did not come from an American Airlines 757.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 4 2011, 11:12 PM
Post #6



Group Icon

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



I should have stated more clearly...

...when the lat/long readings taken from the "FDR" are manually shifted to line up with the runway..

doh1.gif

No matter how they (detractors) shimmy around this, they raise more problems for themselves and their beloved OCT.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrmitosis
post Mar 4 2011, 11:28 PM
Post #7





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 228
Joined: 11-February 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 4,909



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 4 2011, 07:59 PM) *
Pilots align the IRS with the gate lat/long coordinates. The above IRS was not aligned prior to flight as required by American Airlines and seemed to have auto-aligned in flight. This is impossible for the IRS installed on American Airlines aircraft.


I'm sure this has been addressed many times...but if the IRS was not aligned before taking off, and then auto-aligned during flight, what implications does this have for the impact analyses done by Legge/Stutt and P4T? Is there general agreement at least on the issue of how the data needs to be calibrated to correct any initial errors in the co-ordinates? (Or does the raw data relating to the impact phase come from a different source? We're still talking about FDR data, right?)

And out of curiosity, what is it that indicates there was an auto-alignment mid-flight? I'm guessing it's a clue somewhere in the data file, but what?

Sorry for the dopey questions blink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 4 2011, 11:49 PM
Post #8



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (mrmitosis @ Mar 4 2011, 10:28 PM) *
I'm sure this has been addressed many times...but if the IRS was not aligned before taking off, and then auto-aligned during flight, what implications does this have for the impact analyses done by Legge/Stutt and P4T?


No real impact on the Legge/Stutt paper as it was garbage before and it remains garbage.

Not much impact on our analysis either. The data still does not support an impact, but now it also does not support a push from Gate D26, nor does it support the govt claims that the data came from an American Airlines 757.


QUOTE
Is there general agreement at least on the issue of how the data needs to be calibrated to correct any initial errors in the co-ordinates?


Legge/Stutt dont have a clue of anything related to aviation. They basically have very limited knowledge from what they have been told by others, then speculate the rest and spin it to their bias. An old saying in aviation, a little knowledge is more dangerous than none. Thank goodness neither of them fly an airplane. I dont think they will ever agree with the work we have done until they perhaps have decades of experience in aviation and understand the work.

QUOTE
And out of curiosity, what is it that indicates there was an auto-alignment mid-flight? I'm guessing it's a clue somewhere in the data file, but what?


Footnote 9
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21149
(sorry, i know the above pic is a mess, it was done by Farmer. but you can see the white Lat/Long merge with Radar plots in flight. This is impossible for American Airlines 757's if it werent aligned at the gate.)

@OSS

This is the only thing they can do to fit their square peg into a round hole.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10795507

That is why most if not all of their "retorts" to our latest analysis are all personal attacks, ad homs and libel. They have nothing left in their arsenal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrmitosis
post Mar 5 2011, 12:32 AM
Post #9





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 228
Joined: 11-February 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 4,909



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 4 2011, 11:49 PM) *
No real impact on the Legge/Stutt paper as it was garbage before and it remains garbage.

Not much impact on our analysis either. The data still does not support an impact, but now it also does not support a push from Gate D26, nor does it support the govt claims that the data came from an American Airlines 757.

Legge/Stutt dont have a clue of anything related to aviation. They basically have very limited knowledge from what they have been told by others, then speculate the rest and spin it to their bias. An old saying in aviation, a little knowledge is more dangerous than none. Thank goodness neither of them fly an airplane. I dont think they will ever agree with the work we have done until they perhaps have decades of experience in aviation and understand the work.


Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I was under the impression that your analysis supported impact. I didn't fall asleep in class for THAT long whistle.gif

My question was related more to the way the co-ordinates needed to be adjusted to account for the 3000 foot offset, and whether P4T and Stutt/Legge had calculated for this in the same way. But I'm starting to realise this is a redundant question, if the GPS system made the adjustments automatically mid-flight....?

Just ignore me, I'm just thinking out loud whistle.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 5 2011, 01:38 AM
Post #10



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (mrmitosis @ Mar 4 2011, 11:32 PM) *
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I was under the impression that your analysis supported impact. I didn't fall asleep in class for THAT long whistle.gif

My question was related more to the way the co-ordinates needed to be adjusted to account for the 3000 foot offset, and whether P4T and Stutt/Legge had calculated for this in the same way. But I'm starting to realise this is a redundant question, if the GPS system made the adjustments automatically mid-flight....?

Just ignore me, I'm just thinking out loud whistle.gif


You're fine my friend... :-)

They are all good questions as others probably have the same questions and can read the answers here (although they are elsewhere, but kinda spread out).

There are many different possibilities. Many of which were explored in the "911gate" thread started by tume, with respect to how the error in data would impact the end of data near the Pentagon.

If the aircraft were aligned at the gate with such a large error (in other words, inputting a "Present Position" that was not actually your Present Position), the same error needs to be applied at the end of data because the IRS in the aircraft claimed (N644AA) does not have auto-align ability to adjust for the error made. If the same error is applied at the end of data as was seen at the gate, it will take the aircraft North Of Citgo. Drift is also an issue.

The aircraft does have an update ability, But "update" is different than an alignment. The initial alignment needs to be accurate in order for the rest of the data to be accurate. It is impossible to get an accurate position in flight if the initial alignment was in error (or not aligned), and the aircraft does not have in flight auto-align capability.

Since the data shows an auto-align after departure, merging with Radar plots, if all the data is authentic, it did not come from an American Airlines 757, as such aircraft do not have this capability.
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: 25th October 2014 - 07:11 AM