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 )

10 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Closed TopicStart new topic
Duhbunkers try to explain ACARS and fail

rob balsamo
post Dec 6 2011, 08:12 AM
Post #41



Group Icon

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



QUOTE
he even said that -you- should call ARINC.


Who says I haven't?

Unlike everyone else, we've quoted an ACARS/FDR/Radar Expert, and used his real name, while corroborating his statements with documents from ARINC.

As usual, we have real and verified experts backed with documents, those who make excuse for the govt story hide behind a fake name offering opinion and speculation.

QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 6 2011, 02:19 AM) *
Cz responded to this and asked me to quote him or link his response to this point. I remember you saying you didn't want any links to that forum on your board, so I've sent you the link in a PM.



lol.... It's ok to post a link every so often when you find something interesting which needs to be sourced Scott, just dont spam the board. Put the questions in your own words if you truly have a question yourself based on something which may have been raised on another board. Extra-forum conversations with you as a go-between is for kids. If Cz wants to discuss this issues, invite him on over. For someone who claims to ignore us, he sure spends a lot of time reading our words and responding.

I didnt bother to read his post. Tell him he is more than welcome to come here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 6 2011, 08:58 AM
Post #42





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 6 2011, 07:12 AM) *
Who says I haven't?

Unlike everyone else, we've quoted an ACARS/FDR/Radar Expert, and used his real name, while corroborating his statements with documents from ARINC.

As usual, we have real and verified experts backed with documents, those who make excuse for the govt story hide behind a fake name offering opinion and speculation.


I know, I'm just saying that to me, calling ARINC is a bit 'for kids', if you will. I'd rather talk to experts that -know- the implications and are willing to admit them. Like you guys :-p. That being said, the email I sent ARINC has now gotten to a second stage; someone emailed customer service and me, asking if they could answer my question (bureaucracy, gotta love it ;-p).

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 6 2011, 07:12 AM) *
lol.... It's ok to post a link every so often when you find something interesting which needs to be sourced Scott, just dont spam the board.


Alright.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 6 2011, 07:12 AM) *
Put the questions in your own words if you truly have a question yourself based on something which may have been raised on another board.


Will do.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 6 2011, 07:12 AM) *
Extra-forum conversations with you as a go-between is for kids. If Cz wants to discuss this issues, invite him on over.


I did a while back, as you'd mentioned he and booN were invited earlier. A mod didn't like it, said it was "recruiting", but she didn't delete the post. I tried to explain that I wasn't the one who had invited them, and considering the subject at hand, it seemed appropriate, but then Saru (head admin) wrote a post reinforcing her message. C'est la vie. Anyway, I don't think Czero will come over any time soon, considering what he's said about you. That being said, I don't think it matters that much; online, everything is just a click away; and I think the fact that your arguments are being heard in forums other then your own certainly doesn't hurt.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 6 2011, 07:12 AM) *
For someone who claims to ignore us, he sure spends a lot of time reading our words and responding.


I don't think he did initially, but I keep on referring to you guys, as does booN (he's the one who noticed that your article was going viral), so it appears he finally bit the bullet and came over to read some stuff.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 6 2011, 07:12 AM) *
I didnt bother to read his post.


Well, that's certainly your choice to make.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 6 2011, 09:10 AM
Post #43





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (woody @ Dec 4 2011, 11:38 AM) *
Here's some background info on Ballinger. The source is the WSJ article I linked above. No shocking news, but interesting anyway, considering his outstanding status as a witness. In later interviews, Ballinger came out with his name.


At about 8:30, air-traffic controllers and United lost contact with United Flight 93, a 757 bound from Newark to San Francisco. The dispatcher who had handled Flight 175 had been sending messages to all 13 of his assigned flights that were airborne, instructing them to land at the nearest United station. One didn't answer: Flight 93.

The dispatcher, a 42-year veteran of United still so shaken by the tragedy he asked that his name not be used, kept firing off messages, but to no effect.

The United dispatcher who handled both Flight 175 and Flight 93 stayed at his post on Sept. 11 and helped the remaining planes under his watch land.

And then?

"I went home and got drunk," he says.

It's been touch and go since.

He took three days off and availed himself of a company counselor. When the counselor said, " 'It's OK to cry,' I broke down." The dispatcher says he won't watch TV anymore. And his wife had a nightmare in which she was seated on an airplane, her wrists bound as hijackers walked down the aisle slashing throats.

Word quickly spread through the company that he was the man who handled the doomed United flights.

"Something inside me died," the man, weeping again, said.


Very interesting article Woody. Only one thing; you say that you linked to this article "above".. but I'm not sure where this "above" is. Could you simply link to it again?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 6 2011, 09:30 AM
Post #44



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 6 2011, 07:58 AM) *
I don't think Czero will come over any time soon, considering what he's said about you.



lol... i get attacked, misquoted, claims that we have never made pinned to us, libeled and slandered daily from those who are either too afraid to confront us/me directly, or too insecure about their own claims.

I'm used to it, I have thick skin, it comes with the territory. See my signature for the appropriate quote.

Czero is more than welcome to email me as well if he doesn't want to register here.


Now let's please stick to topic. This gossip between forums is for Facebook drama. If you have questions with regards to our article which have been brought up by "duhbunkers", feel free to ask and we will respond.

So far, the closest attempt to a debunk (albeit, far reaching) has come from someone who claims to work with ACARS, unfortunately, it is not the same format, airline or Datalink Service Provider. To top it off, the guy admits he isn't an expert, and refuses to place his name to his claims.

next....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
woody
post Dec 6 2011, 09:35 AM
Post #45


Woody Box


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28-August 06
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 6 2011, 01:10 PM) *
Very interesting article Woody. Only one thing; you say that you linked to this article "above".. but I'm not sure where this "above" is. Could you simply link to it again?



Here you go....

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/549497/posts
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
9/11 Justice Now
post Dec 6 2011, 11:23 AM
Post #46





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 119
Joined: 6-May 08
Member No.: 3,289



Does anybody know what these numbers mean 12031625/12031625? Does anybody know whether this means it was sent or received
by the plane in question?

And also just out of curiosity i wonder what the ACARS messages for the other three aircraft would say? Somebody did try taking the FBI
to court and lost unfortunatly, that somebody who goes by the name Aiden Monoghan of the much hated 911blogger group even though
they are a bunch of trouble making fools, atleast they have a few useful idiots, even though we dont really like them we can still use the
information gained by them through FOIA, i dont know Rob doesnt like them and i understand why, and i dont agree with what they have
done, however they still do post some useful information, they have posted information which has contained a few small nuggets, but
however putting them aside and forgetting about them, if Mr Aiden Monoghan had of one the FOIA battle in court we would have the
cockpit voice recorder from united 93 and all the ACARS messages from all the planes that where used on 911 aswell as a few other
things, but it seems as though the FBI has something to hide and is very reluctant in handing over the goods unfortunatly, they are
nothing but a pack of bastards dogs, and want to prevent people from finding out the truth about what really happened on 911.

Keep up the great work Rob, hopefully sooner or later the dam will break.

This post has been edited by 9/11 Justice Now: Dec 6 2011, 11:25 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 6 2011, 01:28 PM
Post #47



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (9/11 Justice Now @ Dec 6 2011, 10:23 AM) *
Does anybody know what these numbers mean 12031625/12031625? Does anybody know whether this means it was sent or received
by the plane in question?


Those numbers nor the format of those numbers, are not in any of the ACARS messages provided by United Airlines. Those numbers and format were provided on some forum by some anonymous guy who allegedly works for an airline in Europe, using a different service provider other than ARINC, speculating that "printer" means the printer in his office.

In other words.... those numbers mean absolutely nothing in relation to the UAL ACARS. See our article for proper interpretation of the ACARS messages used by United Airlines based on statements made by United Airlines Dispatchers.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONFIRM...FTER-CRASH.html

QUOTE
And also just out of curiosity i wonder what the ACARS messages for the other three aircraft would say?


Keep your pants on.. it's coming... wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 6 2011, 04:17 PM
Post #48



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 6 2011, 12:28 PM) *
Keep your pants on.. it's coming... wink.gif



And now it is here....

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/MORE-ACARS-CONFIRMATION.html

Spread it everywhere.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 6 2011, 08:05 PM
Post #49





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 6 2011, 03:17 PM) *
And now it is here....

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/MORE-ACARS-CONFIRMATION.html

Spread it everywhere.


Good stuff :-). Posted it at UM (Unexplained Mysteries). bubs (a member of UM) was recently saying that UA 93 was another case where the ACARS messages make it clear that it didn't crash where the official story says it did; nice to have a PFT article to back him up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
9/11 Justice Now
post Dec 7 2011, 10:14 AM
Post #50





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 119
Joined: 6-May 08
Member No.: 3,289



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 7 2011, 03:28 AM) *
Those numbers nor the format of those numbers, are not in any of the ACARS messages provided by United Airlines. Those numbers and format were provided on some forum by some anonymous guy who allegedly works for an airline in Europe, using a different service provider other than ARINC, speculating that "printer" means the printer in his office.

In other words.... those numbers mean absolutely nothing in relation to the UAL ACARS. See our article for proper interpretation of the ACARS messages used by United Airlines based on statements made by United Airlines Dispatchers.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONFIRM...FTER-CRASH.html



Keep your pants on.. it's coming... wink.gif


Thanks for clearing this up Rob its too easy to become confused, i would really like to know what the ACARS says for A.A flight 11 & 77 this is why
is was hoping useful idiot Aiden Monoghan from 911blogger.com would win the lawsuit against the FBI so we could use the information he gets to
help uncover the truth. I do not support them or their idiotic rantings and their attacks on this organisation which are completely out of order.

Great work as always Rob.

THIS LOOKS LIKE IT IS THE FINAL NAIL IN THE COFFIN FOR THE OCT AND EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS IT, WELL DONE ROB KNOW WE KNOW
THAT THEY DID IT AND CAN BACK UP THE CLAIM WITH HARD EVIDENCE THAT THEY DID IT.

I have been waiting for this moment to come for a very long long time and i am so relieved it is here but the battle has not quiet been won yet.

party.gif party.gif party.gif

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mvb
post Dec 7 2011, 02:05 PM
Post #51





Group: Newbie
Posts: 9
Joined: 26-April 08
Member No.: 3,230



"Debunkers" referd me to the Wikipedia article concerning ACARS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Comm...eporting_System

QUOTE
(Each airline must tell its service provider(s) what messages and message labels their ACARS systems will send, and for each message, where they want the service provider to route the message. The service provider then updates their routing tables from this information.)


It sounds totaly ridiculous, that the Airline would "call" before EVERY msg where they want to route the message...
But anybody knows something about this?

cheers

btw thx Rob for the pix!!

But now that we are updated as well with UA93 it would be super cool to have the video of NTSB radar overlad with the RGS
than pause the moment at when the ACARS where send and see which Radar dots could be linked to that smile.gif

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 7 2011, 02:29 PM
Post #52



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (mvb @ Dec 7 2011, 01:05 PM) *
"Debunkers" referd me to the Wikipedia article concerning ACARS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Comm...eporting_System



It sounds totaly ridiculous, that the Airline would "call" before EVERY msg where they want to route the message...
But anybody knows something about this?


From your same source (wiki rolleyes.gif)

"This table is maintained by the DSP and identifies each aircraft (by tail number), and the types of messages that it can process."

They are talking about routing based on tail number through downlinks to various departments within the airline itself, such as maintenance, dispatch, crew scheduling.. etc, not how the CPS routes uplinks through RGS based on flight tracking.

Now tell your duhbunker to read footnote 5 here for a real source.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONFIRM...FTER-CRASH.html

Then ask your "duhbunker" how an aircraft can receive a message from Champaign, IL activating an audible signal on board the airplane, if the aircraft crashed in Shanksville 7 mins prior to the message being sent.

Now you know why they are dubbed "duh"bunkers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 7 2011, 08:54 PM
Post #53





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



Balsamo, I'm fairly sure that Valkyrie told me that if a message from Ground Control to an aircraft is rejected, then ACARS will continue trying to send messages from the last RGS station that was successful. Is this correct? If so, are you aware of any documentation that this is the case?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 7 2011, 09:02 PM
Post #54



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 7 2011, 07:54 PM) *
Balsamo, I'm fairly sure that Valkyrie told me that if a message from Ground Control to an aircraft is rejected, then ACARS will continue trying to send messages from the last RGS station that was successful. Is this correct? If so, are you aware of any documentation that this is the case?


Yes, I think I recall Dennis saying the same thing. It attempts 3 tries, then tells the originator the message was rejected. Not sure where the documentation is as we already have all the documentation we need, including statements made by UAL Dispatch.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott75
post Dec 7 2011, 09:22 PM
Post #55





Group: Troll
Posts: 271
Joined: 6-November 08
Member No.: 3,971



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 7 2011, 08:02 PM) *
Yes, I think I recall Dennis saying the same thing. It attempts 3 tries, then tells the originator the message was rejected.


Ok, thanks.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Dec 7 2011, 08:02 PM) *
Not sure where the documentation is as we already have all the documentation we need, including statements made by UAL Dispatch.


You're 100% right that it's overkill.. why should it matter what happens if the messages were rejected for UA 175 and UA 93, if both received messages after they allegedly crashed. But you know how it is, people doubt and doubt and before you know it, you're giving more evidence for a case when you already had enough to begin with -.-

This post has been edited by scott75: Dec 7 2011, 09:22 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 7 2011, 09:31 PM
Post #56



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (scott75 @ Dec 7 2011, 08:22 PM) *
Ok, thanks.



You're 100% right that it's overkill.. why should it matter what happens if the messages were rejected for UA 175 and UA 93, if both received messages after they allegedly crashed. But you know how it is, people doubt and doubt and before you know it, you're giving more evidence for a case when you already had enough to begin with -.-


You can hold a blue card in front of the face of some of these people, and if they don't like the color blue, they will try to convince you it is orange.

By the way, I took a stroll over at UM... you may want to tell the old timer skyeagle that there was no such thing as "American 93" on 9/11. It was United 93.

"duhbunkers" truly live up to their name... lol
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
9/11 Justice Now
post Dec 8 2011, 02:48 PM
Post #57





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 119
Joined: 6-May 08
Member No.: 3,289



Rob over at the govt loyalist site reheat is trying to claim that message that proves that united 93 was still airborne seven minutes after the alledged
crash is just a timestamp of when the message finished printing after it was received at the station.

And also some are trying to claim that the ACARS system has a radius of more than 200 miles.

showthread.php?t=224926

And i see that old goofhead beachnut is claiming that RADAR debunks the ACARS messages, really one does
not need to explain why he is so full of shit, it should be self evident to anyone why he is so dumb, looks like
that stroke of his really caused some long lasting brain damage. Beachnut is really the stupidest one of the
whole lot, it amazing how fucking brain dead he really is lol.

laughing1.gif laughing1.gif laughing1.gif

This post has been edited by 9/11 Justice Now: Dec 8 2011, 02:50 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sergio
post Dec 8 2011, 03:10 PM
Post #58





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 46
Joined: 15-February 11
Member No.: 5,658



QUOTE (9/11 Justice Now @ Dec 8 2011, 03:48 PM) *
Rob over at the govt loyalist site reheat is trying to claim that message that proves that united 93 was still airborne seven minutes after the alledged
crash is just a timestamp of when the message finished printing after it was received at the station.

And also some are trying to claim that the ACARS system has a radius of more than 200 miles.

showthread.php?t=224926

And i see that old goofhead beachnut is claiming that RADAR debunks the ACARS messages, really one does
not need to explain why he is so full of shit, it should be self evident to anyone why he is so dumb, looks like
that stroke of his really caused some long lasting brain damage. Beachnut is really the stupidest one of the
whole lot, it amazing how fucking brain dead he really is lol.

laughing1.gif laughing1.gif laughing1.gif


Just tell Reheat and beachnut that it is not P4T who claims that those ACARS were received by United 93. The claim comes from Michael J Winter and David Knerr, both Manager Flight Dispatcher at UAL in September 2001, both interviewed by the FBI, both corroborating themselves.

There is no speculation in the article. Every assertion is backed by official documents.
Period.

This post has been edited by Sergio: Dec 8 2011, 03:11 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
9/11 Justice Now
post Dec 8 2011, 03:45 PM
Post #59





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 119
Joined: 6-May 08
Member No.: 3,289



Can anyone tell me when the FOIA request was filed? And who was it that filed it? I am a bit confused here as i dont know
the exact details of the FOIA request and exactly what documents where requested.

Cheers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 8 2011, 04:29 PM
Post #60



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (9/11 Justice Now @ Dec 8 2011, 01:48 PM) *
Rob over at the govt loyalist site reheat is trying to claim that message that proves that united 93 was still airborne seven minutes after the alledged
crash is just a timestamp of when the message finished printing after it was received at the station.


Does the "printer" in the dispatchers office also ring an audible signal on the aircraft when the message is received as described by United Airlines Manager of Flight Dispatch?

Again, those numbers offered at ATS were already discussed here....

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10802821

The printer gman was describing is the printer on the flight deck, not in his office.

Retreat and his cohorts are looking for any excuse possible. They will tell you the second time stamp was when the Chief pilot takes a crap if they read it on some forum... anything to avoid the facts.... Retreat lives up to his moniker, "Duhbunker extraordinaire".


QUOTE
And also some are trying to claim that the ACARS system has a radius of more than 200 miles.


Let me guess, they fail to provide source?

Yet if you google "acars 200 miles", you'll find plenty of sources. Including a source from the 9/11 Commission themselves.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/acars/Miles_Kara_MFR.pdf

QUOTE
And i see that old goofhead beachnut is claiming that RADAR debunks the ACARS messages,


beachnut is still kicking? God bless him.... now readers can go here and see the radar in action.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21411
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

10 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Closed TopicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st October 2014 - 03:54 PM