Flight 93 crash fantasy

[roomy]

Some of you half wits wouldn't know the truth if it kicked you in the balls, the rest of you will only know the truth as the last thing someone told you.

 

[MandyInTN]

just because the recorder has the parameter for it, does not mean that it was ACTIVE

It does when it is custom made by American Airlines for specific type and tail number.

Again, compare American to United.

American monitors their Cockpit doors, United does not.

since that FDR showed the door being closed for over 20 hours

It does? The NTSB makes no such claim nor do they provide readable data for the previous flights.

You got that information from some guy in Australia and it has never been confirmed by anyone, let alone the NTSB.

Those who blindly support the govt story, of course take him at his word and never bother to verify the data.

The only flight that has been confirmed is the flight on Sept 11, 2001. It shows the cockpit door closed. Therefore, it is impossible for a hijack to take place.

Please let us know when you get some data which shows the cockpit door open, or any evidence which points to a hijacking taking place.

 

[DiveCon]

just because the recorder has the parameter for it, does not mean that it was ACTIVE

It does when it is custom made by American Airlines for specific type and tail number.

Again, compare American to United.

American monitors their Cockpit doors, United does not.

since that FDR showed the door being closed for over 20 hours

It does? The NTSB makes no such claim nor do they provide readable data for the previous flights.

You got that information from some guy in Australia and it has never been confirmed by anyone, let alone the NTSB.

Those who blindly support the govt story, of course take him at his word and never bother to verify the data.

The only flight that has been confirmed is the flight on Sept 11, 2001. It shows the cockpit door closed. Therefore, it is impossible for a hijack to take place.

Please let us know when you get some data which shows the cockpit door open, or any evidence which points to a hijacking taking place.

again, it was shown as closed for the entire loop of recording
and never shown as open
you are a complete fucking LOON if you think that is material or pertinent to anything
it clearly shows that the door sensor was either not installed or wasnt working

 

[MandyInTN]

again, it was shown as closed for the entire loop of recording
and never shown as open

Please show us this data. As it has never been verified by anyone. Again, the only flight that was verified is the Sept 11 flight. The cockpit door was closed, It is impossible for a hijack to take place.

you are a complete fucking LOON

Careful Divecon, your frustration is showing.

if you think that is material or pertinent to anything

It is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. It does not support the govt story in many significant ways. That is why so many experts are raising their BS flags on the govt story.

Captain Russ Wittenberg (ret)
30,000+ Total Flight Time
707, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, DC-8, L-1049, Learjet 24/25, L-188
Ground Instructor, Advanced Ground Instructor, Instrument Instructor, Flight Engineer Turbojet
Aircraft Dispatcher
Pan Am, United
United States Air Force (ret)
Over 100 Combat Missions Flown
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)

Captain Ross Aimer
UAL Ret.
CEO, Aviation Experts LLC
40 years and 30,000 hrs.
BS Aero
A&P Mech.
B-777/767/757/747/737/727/720/707, DC-10/-9/-8 Type ratings
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)


Commander Ralph “Rotten” Kolstad
23,000 hours
27 years in the airlines
B757/767 for 13 years mostly international Captain with American Airlines.
20 years US Navy flying fighters off aircraft carriers, TopGun twice
civilian pilot flying gliders, light airplanes and warbirds
Command time in:
- N644AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 77)
- N334AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 11)

John Lear
Son of Bill Lear
(Founder, creator of the Lear Jet Corporation)
More than 40 years of Flying
19,000+ TT
23 Type ratings
Flight experience includes 707, DC-8, 727, L10-11

Jeff Latas
-Over 20 years in the USAF
--USAF Accident investigation Board President
--Flew the F-111, T38, and F-15E
--Combat experience in the F-15E includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch
--Weapons Requirements Officer, USAF HQ, Pentagon
--Standard and Evaluations Flight Examiner, Command level
-Currently Captain for JetBlue Airways

Guy S. Razer, LtCol, USAF (Ret)
3,500+ Hours Total Flight Time
F-15E/C, F-111A/D/E/F/EF, F-16, F-18, B-1, Mig-29, SU-22, T-37/38, Various Cvilian Prop
Combat Time: Operation Northern Watch
USAF Fighter Weapons School Instructor
NATO Tactical Leadership Program Instructor/Mission Coordinator
USAF Material Command Weapons Development Test Pilot
Combat Support Coordination Team 2 Airpower Coordinator, South Korea
All Service Combat Identification Evaluation Team Operations Officer
Boeing F-22 Pilot Instructor
MS Aeronautical Studies, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Dwain Deets
MS Physics, MS Eng
Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
Served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden
Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award
Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988)
Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics
Associate Fellow - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000
Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems
- Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers
Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology
37 year NASA career

Lt. Colonel Shelton F. Lankford
United States Marine Corps (ret)
A-4 Skyhawk, KC-130 (10,000+ Hours)
S-2, T-1, F9F, F-11, OV-10, T-2J
303 Combat Missions

goto pilotsfor911truth.org/core for many more and watch the list grow.

How much experience do you have in aviation Divecon?

it clearly shows that the door sensor was either not installed or wasnt working

I agree, for United 93, as they do not monitor the Flight Deck Door, nor list it in their custom made Data Frame Layout.

But American does.

 

[DiveCon]

Careful Divecon, your frustration is showing.

dont confuse disgust with frustration
you loons are a dime a fuckin dozen

 

[MandyInTN]

dont confuse disgust with frustration
you loons are a dime a fuckin dozen

So I take it you didn't verify any data as well. Not surprised.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth cover almost every Major Airline, most Regionals, Charter, fractionals and corporate.

They cover every branch of the Military.

Looks like it's the train for you. lol....

You may not want to step into some buildings in America either as there is a list of over 1300 Architect And Engineers who question 9/11, along with Senior Military, and Family Members and Survivors.

patriotsquestion911.com

Go there and watch the lists grow.

There was a point in time where people who thought the earth was flat also called those who claimed it was round as loons.

I guess you think the earth is flat as well?

 

[DiveCon]

dont confuse disgust with frustration
you loons are a dime a fuckin dozen

Pilots For 9/11 Truth cover almost every Major Airline, most Regionals, Charter, fractionals and corporate.

They cover every branch of the Military.

Looks like it's the train for you. lol....

You may not want to step into some buildings in America either as there is a list of over 1300 Architect And Engineers who question 9/11, along with Senior Military, and Family Members and Survivors.

patriotsquestion911.com

Go there and watch the lists grow.

There was a point in time where people who thought the earth was flat also called those who claimed it was round as loons.

I guess you think the earth is flat as well?

wrong again loon
you are like the flat earthers
you deny fact and logic

 

[MandyInTN]

wrong again loon
you are like the flat earthers
you deny fact and logic

Actually, Flat Earther's didn't have any data. They had a belief based on what they were told.

When people came back with data saying, "You're wrong, the earth is round, look at the data!", they were called loons by Flat Earther's. Some who provided data were even killed due to the the strong belief of Flat Earther's and their clear frustration with their inability to discuss the data.

Just as you are calling me a loon and visibly becoming enraged because you cannot present any data for your argument, nor discuss the data presented.

Let us know when you get some data or evidence for your argument.

Your decision to sling mud, ad hom's and personal attacks instead of discussing the data and facts, speaks volumes.

In the meantime - watch these lists grow with "loons". Eventually, you'll be afraid to come out of your house because you'll be surrounded by so many "loons".

lol

patriotsquestion911.com

 

[DiveCon]

wrong again loon
you are like the flat earthers
you deny fact and logic

Actually, Flat Earther's didn't have any data. They had a belief based on what they were told.

When people came back with data saying, "You're wrong, the earth is round, look at the data!", they were called loons by Flat Earther's. Some who provided data were even killed due to the the strong belief of Flat Earther's and their clear frustration with their inability to discuss the data.

Just as you are calling me a loon and visibly becoming enraged because you cannot present any data for your argument, nor discuss the data presented.

Let us know when you get some data or evidence for your argument.

Your decision to sling mud, ad hom's and personal attacks instead of discussing the data and facts, speaks volumes.

In the meantime - watch these lists grow with "loons". Eventually, you'll be afraid to come out of your house because you'll be surrounded by so many "loons".

lol

patriotsquestion911.com

i "sling" because thats all you fucking morons are worth

 

[Fizz]

Now learn about Data Frame Layouts -

Claim - P4T... are not using the proper Data Frame Layout when showing the port location in his diagram. They are using 757-3, they should be using 757-2 which doesn't show a FLT DECK DOOR parameter. AA77 was a 757-2 airplane.

A- Those who make this claim are confusing the Data Frame Layout (DFL) number with Aircraft Type. 757-3b is the proper Data Frame Layout required for N644AA as listed here in the NTSB pdf for N644AA.

ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf
(bottom of page 2)

United 93 was also a 757-200 aircraft, but used 757-4 Data Frame Layout.

ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf
(also bottom of page 2)

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded.
​

i've already read that. thanks for posting it and proving your flight deck door was not monitored. (let me guess. you have no idea what you just posted).

I do, do you?

I'll bold the parts you missed.

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded.

In other words Fizz,

The data provided by the NTSB for Flight 77 shows the cockpit door closed. It was listed and recorded. It is impossible for a hijack to take place.

Flight 93 did not list the Flight Deck Door, and is not recorded on United aircraft. It is impossible to determine if the aircraft was hijacked.

In further words Fizz -

DFL number has absolutely nothing to do with aircraft type. DFL 757-3b_1.txt is the custom data frame layout made by American Airlines for N644AA (AA77).

DFL 757-4 is the custom data frame layout made for N591UA (UA93) by United Airlines.

UA93 and AA77 are both 757-200's (not "757-2's"), they use different DFL's because they are not the same exact aircraft nor record the same exact parameters.

In case you're still confused -

AA77 records the Flight Deck Door.

UA93 does not.

Hope this clears it up for you.

thanks for proving you have no clue. you dont have the slightest idea what you are talking about.

N644AA (flight 77) was a 757-2 aircraft. the data frame layout can not change that. the data frame layout from a 757-3 is backwards compatible to a 757-2.

do you follow this so far? (probably not but let's continue anyway).

the cockpit door sensor is monitored and recorded in new B757-3 FDR models but not in the old B757-2 series, so this parameter will always show a meaningless '0' in decoding old B757-2 FDR data using new B757-3 FDR data frame format parameter layouts.

 

[DiveCon]

i've already read that. thanks for posting it and proving your flight deck door was not monitored. (let me guess. you have no idea what you just posted).

I do, do you?

I'll bold the parts you missed.

DFL 757-3b (AA77) has the FLT DECK DOOR parameter which is why you see it listed under the parameters in the NTSB pdf and recorded in the data.

DFL 757-4 (UA93) does not list a FLT DECK DOOR parameter, which is why it is not listed in the NTSB pdf nor recorded.

In other words Fizz,

The data provided by the NTSB for Flight 77 shows the cockpit door closed. It was listed and recorded. It is impossible for a hijack to take place.

Flight 93 did not list the Flight Deck Door, and is not recorded on United aircraft. It is impossible to determine if the aircraft was hijacked.

In further words Fizz -

DFL number has absolutely nothing to do with aircraft type. DFL 757-3b_1.txt is the custom data frame layout made by American Airlines for N644AA (AA77).

DFL 757-4 is the custom data frame layout made for N591UA (UA93) by United Airlines.

UA93 and AA77 are both 757-200's (not "757-2's"), they use different DFL's because they are not the same exact aircraft nor record the same exact parameters.

In case you're still confused -

AA77 records the Flight Deck Door.

UA93 does not.

Hope this clears it up for you.

thanks for proving you have no clue. you dont have the slightest idea what you are talking about.

N644AA (flight 77) was a 757-2 aircraft. the data frame layout can not change that. the data frame layout from a 757-3 is backwards compatible to a 757-2.

do you follow this so far? (probably not but let's continue anyway).

the cockpit door sensor is monitored and recorded in new B757-3 FDR models but not in the old B757-2 series, so this parameter will always show a meaningless '0' in decoding old B757-2 FDR data using new B757-3 FDR data frame format parameter layouts.

shes an IDIOT that will never get it

 

[MandyInTN]

N644AA (flight 77) was a 757-2 aircraft.

Wrong.

N644AA is a 757-200 series aircraft. Not a "757-2".

Same with N591UA (Flight 93). Yet N591UA uses 757-4 Data Frame Layout.

Again, Data Frame Layout number designation has nothing to do with aircraft type number.

the data frame layout can not change that. the data frame layout from a 757-3 is backwards compatible to a 757-2.

Wrong. They are two separate Data Frame Layouts designation numbers which have nothing to do with aircraft type designation.

Again, N591UA (a 757-200 series aircraft) uses 757-4 Data Frame Layout. Does that mean there is a "757-4" type aircraft that uses "757-4 DFL" which is "backwards compatible" to a "757-2"?? No. Because no such "757-4" aircraft exists.

I'll say it for the 10th time since it doesn't seem to be sinking it.

Data Frame Layout number designation has nothing to do with aircraft type number.

757-3 is a generic Data Frame Layout made by Boeing.

757-3b_1.txt is the custom made data frame layout made by American Airlines tailored for N644AA based on Airline policy and needs, from the generic Boeing DFL 757-3. Read bottom of page 2. ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf


757-4 is a generic DFL made by Boeing. United then custom made their own DFL from 757-4 into 757UALmap.xls tailored for their aircraft and airline policy/needs. Read bottom of page 2. ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf

N644AA records the condition of the cockpit door. United does not.

do you follow this so far? (probably not but let's continue anyway).

I do. Apparently you don't.

the cockpit door sensor is monitored and recorded in new B757-3 FDR models but not in the old B757-2 series, so this parameter will always show a meaningless '0' in decoding old B757-2 FDR data using new B757-3 FDR data frame format parameter layouts.

Again, you are confusing aircraft type designation with DFL number. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other as proven above.

 

[Fizz]

N644AA (flight 77) was a 757-2 aircraft.

Wrong.

N644AA is a 757-200 series aircraft. Not a "757-2".

Same with N591UA (Flight 93). Yet N591UA uses 757-4 Data Frame Layout.

Again, Data Frame Layout number designation has nothing to do with aircraft type number.

the data frame layout can not change that. the data frame layout from a 757-3 is backwards compatible to a 757-2.

Wrong. They are two separate Data Frame Layouts designation numbers which have nothing to do with aircraft type designation.

Again, N591UA (a 757-200 series aircraft) uses 757-4 Data Frame Layout. Does that mean there is a "757-4" type aircraft that uses "757-4 DFL" which is "backwards compatible" to a "757-2"?? No. Because no such "757-4" aircraft exists.

I'll say it for the 10th time since it doesn't seem to be sinking it.

Data Frame Layout number designation has nothing to do with aircraft type number.

757-3 is a generic Data Frame Layout made by Boeing.

757-3b_1.txt is the custom made data frame layout made by American Airlines tailored for N644AA based on Airline policy and needs, from the generic Boeing DFL 757-3. Read bottom of page 2. ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf


757-4 is a generic DFL made by Boeing. United then custom made their own DFL from 757-4 into 757UALmap.xls tailored for their aircraft and airline policy/needs. Read bottom of page 2. ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf

N644AA records the condition of the cockpit door. United does not.

do you follow this so far? (probably not but let's continue anyway).

I do. Apparently you don't.

the cockpit door sensor is monitored and recorded in new B757-3 FDR models but not in the old B757-2 series, so this parameter will always show a meaningless '0' in decoding old B757-2 FDR data using new B757-3 FDR data frame format parameter layouts.

Again, you are confusing aircraft type designation with DFL number. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other as proven above.

ok.... let's take this one step at a time until you realize you are an idiot.

when did N644AA, a 757-200, become a 757-300.

 

[MandyInTN]

ok.... let's take this one step at a time until you realize you are an idiot.

when did N644AA, a 757-200, become a 757-300.

Never -

When did N591UA become a 757-400?

Answer. Never. Because such an aircraft doesn't exist.

For perhaps the 15th time - DFL number designation has nothing to do with aircraft type number.

Let me see if I can make this as simple as possible for you to understand.

Here are the various Data Frame Layouts offered by Boeing and the corresponding aircraft type depending on DFDAU and the parameters airlines wish to record, and/or based on regulation.

i51.tinypic.com/5pjw54.jpg
(copy/paste this to your browser as I cannot post url's yet.)

From there, the Airline picks the Data Frame Layout which corresponds to their DFDAU.

American picked 757-3b, United picked 757-4.

Both are made for a 757-200, both record slightly different sets of parameters based on Airline needs and DFDAU.

The Airline then modifies the Data Frame layout to their specific needs.

American Airlines monitors their Cockpit door status, United does not.

If American did not monitor their Cockpit Doors, they would have chosen DFL 757-4 and modified it from there according to their needs as 757-4 does not list "FLT DECK DOOR" as one of the parameters.

Is it sinking in yet?

Let us know when you have data which proves a hijack took place, as all data currently conflicts with your theory.

 

[saiweril]

Have you chastised your fellow skeptic friends here for posting that gif, or are you a hypocrite?

YOU are the only one that has posted it, moron

Why do you lie?...

no evidence of what?

you are the one claiming there was treason.

PROVE IT!!!!

Your skeptic friend Fizz almost always posts that "cuckoo" gif. He even posted that gif in his last post in this thread!!! Talk about being a moron.

and the only fantasy story about flight 93 is what you fucking troofer morons post

I just posted the official story, so I guess you are agreeing along with me that it's pure fantasy.

 

[saiweril]

so you are claiming everything but the cockpit was buried underground?

I'm not claiming it, the government is claiming it (your side)! (see my OP)

, isn't it?

Bump for Fizz.

 

[DiveCon]

Have you chastised your fellow skeptic friends here for posting that gif, or are you a hypocrite?

YOU are the only one that has posted it, moron

Why do you lie?...

no evidence of what?

you are the one claiming there was treason.

PROVE IT!!!!

Your skeptic friend Fizz almost always posts that "cuckoo" gif. He even posted that gif in his last post in this thread!!! Talk about being a moron.

and the only fantasy story about flight 93 is what you fucking troofer morons post

I just posted the official story, so I guess you are agreeing along with me that it's pure fantasy.

thats an emote in the "smiles" for the site moron
you are only proving you are a fucking idiot

 

[saiweril]

thats an emote in the "smiles" for the site moron
you are only proving you are a fucking idiot

Ha ha, this is what you were talking about?!

OK then, why do you say it doesn't have any credibility towards the official story -- as I assume you meant?

 

[DiveCon]

thats an emote in the "smiles" for the site moron
you are only proving you are a fucking idiot

Ha ha, this is what you were talking about?!

OK then, why do you say it doesn't have any credibility towards the official story -- as I assume you meant?

the reasons are numerous
and clearly you are too fucking stupid to understand

 

[saiweril]

thats an emote in the "smiles" for the site moron
you are only proving you are a fucking idiot

Ha ha, this is what you were talking about?!

OK then, why do you say it doesn't have any credibility towards the official story -- as I assume you meant?

the reasons are numerous
and clearly you are too fucking stupid to understand

Try me. Any attempt to avoid posting your assertions that there are numerous reasons that crash gif is not credible towards the official story will just show you really don't have any good reasons.