9/11 Pentagon: The Mystery of the Moved Taxi

Once again you are wrong.

The aircraft told the command module it was over Champaign, IL

originally posted by: MaircasOflanahbra
Once again you are wrong.

The aircraft told the command module it was over Champaign, IL

How. It’s a wireless system that is not in constant contact with the ground system. The only way it could tell the ground system it was over Champaign, IL in your fantasy after it crashed (with the jet being tacked to the crash site by radar) is if it made an active transmission.

From the logs. List the time stamp and the syntax that shows the jet made a transmission after it crashed.

This is a true statement

The last DLBLK message from UA93 was received at 10:01:57/59ET by ground stations Pittsburgh (ca. 80 miles from Shanksville) and Washington-Dulles (ca. 150 miles from Shanksville).

After the crash time, there are no more DLBLK messages, only uplinks.

sade050.blogspot.com...

The only “evidence” you have is a confused system trying to send a message to a destroyed receiver / transmitter. With no proof of any transmission after the jet crashed. There is no transmission of acknowledgment from the jet after it crashed. There is no active transmission after the crash of the jet to point to its location.


A confused ground system trying to send a message to a destroyed receiver / transmitter on a jet is not evidence the jet wasn’t crashed.

a reply to: MaircasOflanahbra

You really don’t get the truth movement is full of charlatans that one way or another use lies?

originally posted by: neutronflux

How. It’s a wireless system that is not in constant contact with the ground system. The only way it could tell the ground system it was over Champaign, IL in your fantasy after it crashed (with the jet being tacked to the crash site by radar) is if it made an active transmission.

And this is exactly how ACARS works

A communications management unit (CMU) is used to route ACARS traffic between the various avionics systems and these physical links … This CMU has access to lots of important avionics including the display unit that pilots interact with, the flight management computer (both for reporting location, and for setting height or heading as we’ll see later),

ACARS in operation – cruise

The aircraft will continually be sending quite a lot of data back to the airline’s maintenance teams
—-
It’s pretty funny how the merry band of government sycophants dear leader Douchestein go from claiming that ACARS messages are POSSIBLY sent based on flight plan to being a certainty in the space of just a couple of weeks.

“It seems that the ground station is usually determined from flight plans” on page one 1 DEC

to

“ULMSG - sent from airline to ARINC network. It contains a "target station", which is close to expected location of plane, according to flight plan” on 15 Dec

No “seems” anymore and no actual evidence to back it up. It doesn’t make any sense anyway.

Why would an airline send a message to an educated guess of they expected it to be when the plane is telling them constantly where it is, and no guesswork is needed?



www.pentestpartners.com...

a reply to: MaircasOflanahbra

You

The aircraft will continually be sending quite a lot of data back to the airline’s maintenance teams
—-

Doesn’t answer the question.


The only “evidence” you have is a confused system trying to send a message to a destroyed receiver / transmitter. With no proof of any transmission after the jet crashed. There is no transmission of acknowledgment from the jet after it crashed. There is no active transmission after the crash of the jet to point to its location.


A confused ground system trying to send a message to a destroyed receiver / transmitter on a jet is not evidence the jet wasn’t crashed.

a reply to: MaircasOflanahbra

Stop gaslighting.

What line of the log shows there was a transmission after the jet crashed and what is the syntax for the ACARS system that it was a transmission from the aircraft.

What time mark on the log did the above occur.
Is you cannot list a specify time stamp from the log. You any got Sh!t

a reply to: MaircasOflanahbra

Continually sending data doesn’t mean ACARS abandons it’s protocol format.


Or how it sends messages.

www.pentestpartners.com...

ACARS message format

OK, so we know what ACARS is used for in broad terms, let’s take a closer look at how the messages are formatted.

In plain old ACARS all messages are broadcast to all devices (that are in range of the same transmitter at least) so there is a header that lists the destination aircraft registration. The receiver on an aircraft will discard any messages that are not destined for it.

In the header, there is a two character label field which indicates the type of data that the whole message contains. There’s no specific standard but there are some common ones like C1 which is a message for an onboard printer, and indeed some airlines will use different labels to indicate the same data.

The bulk of the transmission is taken up by the message text itself up to a maximum of 220 characters.

The character set is basic ASCII alpha numerics and some special characters only.

These could just be standard free text type messages, or they could be engineering and maintenance data.

Is there anything in the logs that show with the needed header for an ACARS message from a jet that the jet transmitted after it crashed.

Keep ignoring the ground station it came from I couldn’t give one shot let alone two.

Explain why it came from CMI and UA175 had the same issue. Calling the system confused is so damn amateur. Why the guck would it be “confused”? Since when do OS get confused.

Truly done here unless you decide to address that.

and you say I’m gaslighting lol

I can’t point to that time stamp right now.

a reply to: neutronflux

You

Keep ignoring the ground station it came from I couldn’t give one shot let alone two.

Has nothing to do with the fact ACARS uses multiple ground stations and aircraft on specific bands of radio frequencies and limited bandwidth who’s communications only could be effective in packet format with header informational that indicated where ever transmission originated from. Where the transmission was meant for. Part of the communication is an end, and check to ensure each transmission is whole concerning data.


You

Explain why it came from CMI and UA175 had the same issue.

What issues? That ACARS ground stations tried to send messages along the jet’s original planned flight path?

9/11 acars

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Post 2

www.internationalskeptics.com...

By Oystein


ACARS messages get transmitted via VHF radio antennae on the ground near the plane - for planes at cruising altitude, "near" can be up to 200 miles away. Sender must include the ground station in the message. It seems that the ground station is usually determined from flight plans, not from live information about the plane's actual location. It seems Harrisburg (and 20 minutes later: Pittsburgh) was near the expected location of UA175 according to flight plan, had it not been hijacked, re-routed, and later crashed. If senders were not informed, or not sure, about the hijack, then sending via flight plan location was a reasonable thing to do. Message content assumed (or hoped) pilots were still in control.

If you missed it “ It seems that the ground station is usually determined from flight plans,”

You

Calling the system confused is so damn amateur.

You never seen a corrupted control system wreck thousands in production raw material. Or a control system crash a machining head for a CNC machine from damaged hardware. Or a three phase AC plant try to run on only two phases of AC?

What else do you call a system trying to repeatedly send the same message to a destroyed receiver/transmitter when the target jet never sends an acknowledgment.

9/11 acars

www.internationalskeptics.com...


Post 13

www.internationalskeptics.com...

By sheeplesnshills

I would like to know if and how ACARS transmissions are acknowledged by the aircraft supposted to receive them......Balsammos claim of 200 mile range seems dubious, as googling ACARS range shows that amateurs can easily track at least 200 mile with cheap ground station setup which is unlikely to be as good as the equipment on the aircraft or the official ground stations

The fact that the message was repeated seems to indicate that there is no automatic acknowledgement or otherwise why bother repeating what is already acknowledged?

You

Why the guck would it be “confused”?

Because the ground system never received an acknowledgment from the crashed jet from the message/ messages the ground system tried to transmit to the specific destroyed receiver/transmitter.

You

Since when do OS get confused.

Operating systems? Whenever there is bad data, unexpected information retuned, meaninglessness data returned, damaged / bad sensor sending meaningless data. Anything that caused a short. Damaged hardware. Memory overflow. Etc…

I guess instead of “confused”, substitute meaningless data. Or errors.

You

and you say I’m gaslighting lol

Do you have any proof the jet sent a transmission or acknowledgement transmission after it crashed. A transmission / acknowledgment that would conform to the required ACARS protocol header of having a time stamp, what aircraft sent the message, and the data was a downlink from the crashed jet?


All you have is the ACARS ground system sending repeated messages to a crashed jet that would not return an acknowledgment.

a reply to: MaircasOflanahbra

To sum up.

You have provided zero evidence any of the 9/11 crashed jet’s were transmitting on ACARS after their crash times.

a reply to: MaircasOflanahbra

You

will do this shortly...in the meantime, if you'd like go on to Scribd and start reading Hijacking America's mind.

Empty and hollow words by you. Backed by truth movement misconceptions and lies.

a reply to: MaircasOflanahbra

If I'm not mistaken, the FBI interview with Winter of UAL was part of the pre-trial depositions in the Moussaoui trial.

After that embarrassment for the feds, it's no wonder there were no more trials associated with 911. Discovery can be very embarrassing for a concocted case.

a reply to: Salander

You

If I'm not mistaken,

You are in the regards there are zero ACARS transmissions from flight 77 after it crashed. All you have is the ground system trying to send a message to the jet that was destroyed at the pentagon crash site.

a reply to: neutronflux

Among other things in life, you do not understand how ACARS works.

Winter's testimony explained it all. You don't want to understand it because that would destroy the official narrative.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

Among other things in life, you do not understand how ACARS works.

Winter's testimony explained it all. You don't want to understand it because that would destroy the official narrative.

That ACARS in 2001 was a radio based communication/messaging system that used packets to transmit data. A system used generically by numerous ground stations and aircraft on designated radio bands with limited bandwidth. And that the protocol for the transmission was a header with where the transmission originated from, the message, an end character/sequence and a way the system could check if the whole packet transmission was received.

And from the ACARS logs from 9/11. There is zero evidence from the logs and ACARS protocol flight 77 transmitted after it crashed. And there is zero evidence flight 77 emitted any transmission after it crashed that would tell a ground station where it was in your fantasy.

a reply to: Salander

Let’s see what I dug up today…

Tracking flight MH370: ACARS and transponder

mobile.abc.net.au...

The missing Boeing 777-200ER, a model that is about 20 years old, had two main communication systems on board that can be used to help with tracking, the ACARS and a transponder.

The head of aviation at the University of News South Wales, Professor Jason Middleton, helps explain just how these systems work and why there is no exact location for the plane

Professor Middleton says the ACARS in the missing Malaysia Airlines plane would not have "pinged out" its location in its messages.

But there is no constant line of communication between the ACARS and the satellites which makes it difficult to refine an even tighter location.

"It's sent in packages so that the line to the Inmarsat isn't always open," Professor Middleton said.

"You don't open a telephone conversation to your friend in London and leave it open hour after hour. You have your message and then you cut it off."

ACARS messages can be manually initiated by the pilot or ground base, but the system will also send out timed "handshakes" automatically to the satellites, Professor Middleton says.

He says the ACARS sends a handshake to the satellite, which can be every hour, where they ping each other and ask if there is any data to be sent.

This is why investigators know when the last ACARS ping occurred from flight MH370 but not the exact time when it was switched off or disabled afterwards.

In this post I will show:

1) evidence that ACARS shows reception time as stated in official 9/11 CR documents, as well as 40 year United Airlines veteran Ed Ballinger

2) evidence that the plane flew over 300 miles west of it's furthest claimed point from four different official sources

-ACARS logs
-Colonel Marr's testimony
-Team 7's report
-Michael Winter's Testimony

3) reposting the refutation of the claim that ACARS "guesses" where the plane is going to be, which is absurd anyway and that ACARS determines the strongest signal and sends it there.


As for this Malaysia Airlines ACARS info,.... and? A professor who says something different doesn't now mean that the thing posted earlier was false. It means that we now have two conflicting sources. But this also contradicts what Michael Winter the United Airlines official explained, and reposted below.

Claim:

That ACARS ground stations tried to send messages along the jet’s original planned flight path?

This has already been addressed and ignored, of course. There is absolutely no confirmation that this is how the ACARS ground stations are chosen, and makes absolutely no sense. As in if four jets went off course one day, how would they know where to send the messages?

Posted already:

It’s pretty funny how the merry band of government sycophants dear leader Douchestein go from claiming that ACARS messages are POSSIBLY sent based on flight plan to being a certainty in the space of just a couple of weeks.

“It seems that the ground station is usually determined from flight plans” on page one 1 DEC

to

“ULMSG - sent from airline to ARINC network. It contains a "target station", which is close to expected location of plane, according to flight plan” on 15 Dec

No “seems” anymore and no actual evidence to back it up. That is the key piece of information that the syncophants just decided was true.

This (as well as the MH370 reference) is also contradicted by the testimony of Michael Winter in 2002: (already posted, but will repost)

Michael Winter, an official of United Airlines, was interviewed by the FBI on January 28, 2002. He explained that:

ACARS uses radio ground stations (RGS) at various locations throughout the United States for communication The messages from the aircraft utilize the RGS in a downlink operating system. A central router determines the strongest signal received from the aircraft and routes the signal/message to UAL flight dispatch.

www.scribd.com...

Additionally, Robert Marr who was the actual base commander working at NEADS and who told the 9/11 commission that UA93 was circling over Chicago.

catalog.archives.gov...

There is also this document which states:

"two calls occurred when [Flight 93] was in the central time zone"

that is over 500 miles from Shanksville, which is over 300 miles west of the furthest that the plane was said to have travelled.

catalog.archives.gov...

---
Ed Ballinger also states that the last time on the ACARS transmission log is the "received" time, which also makes sense or else why would the transmission time be printed twice? And why would there be two different times on some of the ACARS messages? For example on page 23 of this document: www.scribd.com...

DDLXCXA CHIAK CHI683
.CHIKUA 111332/ED (SENT 11 SEP AT 9:32 EASTERN)
- QUCHIAKUA 10A93 EWRSFO
- MESSAGE FROM CHIDD -
HIGH SECURITY ALERT. SECURE COCKPIT
CHIDD - ED BALLINGER

;09111333 108575 0610 (clearly it is not message sent at 9:33 as well, so it must mean the reception time as Ballinger stated.

Further in the interview with Ed Ballinger, the FBI states that the beware of cockpit intrusion message "was received by flight 93 at 9:24 a.m." When you look at that ACARS message you see two different times as well.

DDLXCXA CHIAK CHI68R
.CHIKUA 111324/ED
CMD
AN N591UA/GL
- QUCHIAKUA 1UA93 EWRSFO
- MESSAGE FROM CHIDD -
/BEWARE ANY COCKPIT INTRUSION. . TWO AIRCRAFT IN NY . HIT TRADE C
NTER BUILDS...
CHIDD - ED BALLINGER
:09111324108575 0585
----
While you may believe that Ballinger may be mistaken, or Winter, or Marr the fact is this gives us four different sources which show that the plane was either still flying, or flying where it wasn't supposed to have been, and supports the idea that the way ACARS works is indeed how PTP explained.

That is called corroborating evidence.

You would be the first person in 20 years.

Empty and hollow words by you. Backed by truth movement misconceptions and lies.

Of course, these are not lies and while I'd love to be the first person to have done this in 20 years, THAT is just debungholers lying.

These are directly sourced pieces of evidence from

• a 40 year veteran of United Airlines
• a high-ranking United Airlines official
• a Colonel and base commander at NEADS
• the report of Team of the Official 9/11 Commission.

a reply to: MaircasOflanahbra

Sorry.

You showed nothing from the logs with this, “DLBLK message”. To show it originated from the aircraft.

Remember…


From the logs. List the time stamp and the syntax that shows the jet made a transmission after it crashed.

This is a true statement

The last DLBLK message from UA93 was received at 10:01:57/59ET by ground stations Pittsburgh (ca. 80 miles from Shanksville) and Washington-Dulles (ca. 150 miles from Shanksville).

After the crash time, there are no more DLBLK messages, only uplinks.

sade050.blogspot.com...

For there to be an acknowledgment you must meet the protocol rules.


I suggest you again read the cited material.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Let’s see what I dug up today…

Tracking flight MH370: ACARS and transponder

mobile.abc.net.au...

The missing Boeing 777-200ER, a model that is about 20 years old, had two main communication systems on board that can be used to help with tracking, the ACARS and a transponder.

The head of aviation at the University of News South Wales, Professor Jason Middleton, helps explain just how these systems work and why there is no exact location for the plane

Professor Middleton says the ACARS in the missing Malaysia Airlines plane would not have "pinged out" its location in its messages.

But there is no constant line of communication between the ACARS and the satellites which makes it difficult to refine an even tighter location.

"It's sent in packages so that the line to the Inmarsat isn't always open," Professor Middleton said.

"You don't open a telephone conversation to your friend in London and leave it open hour after hour. You have your message and then you cut it off."

ACARS messages can be manually initiated by the pilot or ground base, but the system will also send out timed "handshakes" automatically to the satellites, Professor Middleton says.

He says the ACARS sends a handshake to the satellite, which can be every hour, where they ping each other and ask if there is any data to be sent.

This is why investigators know when the last ACARS ping occurred from flight MH370 but not the exact time when it was switched off or disabled afterwards.

Sorry. All you have is truth movement lies concerning ground stations trying to send messages to a destroyed jet. Where there are no ACARS transmission from after it crashed.

a reply to: MaircasOflanahbra

You

DDLXCXA CHIAK CHI68R
.CHIKUA 111324/ED
CMD
AN N591UA/GL
- QUCHIAKUA 1UA93 EWRSFO
- MESSAGE FROM CHIDD -
/BEWARE ANY COCKPIT INTRUSION. . TWO AIRCRAFT IN NY . HIT TRADE C
NTER BUILDS...
CHIDD - ED BALLINGER
:09111324108575 0585
----

That one of the sent messages? How can an acknowledging be placed in ACARS message before it is even done transmitting from the ground stations.

Again.

That ACARS in 2001 was a radio based communication/messaging system that used packets to transmit data. A system used generically by numerous ground stations and aircraft on designated radio bands with limited bandwidth. And that the protocol for the transmission was a header with where the transmission originated from, the message, an end character/sequence and a way the system could check if the whole packet transmission was received.

And from the ACARS logs from 9/11. There is zero evidence from the logs and ACARS protocol flight 77 transmitted after it crashed. And there is zero evidence flight 77 emitted any transmission after it crashed that would tell a ground station where it was in your fantasy.