It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by gamesmaster63
All of the veterans identified the craft as KC-135's, not Boeing 767 passenger jets.
As or the second time stamp, all we can go by is the people who work at the airline. Their ACARS system may be tailored to their needs, which is why we haven't seen a standard technical acknowledgement from United, instead Ed Ballinger describes,
Mr. Ballinger stated that the ACARS messages have two times listed: the time sent and the time received. He stated that once he sends the message it is delivered to the addressed aircraft through AIRINC immediately. He is not aware of any delay in the aircraft receiving the message after he sends it.
Clearly Ed is referencing the aircraft and not a "printer". I tried to explain this to the people over at ATS, but their mods deleted it, and I was banned.
Now, it's quite possible that "gman" (appropriate name for sure), could have two time stamps on his ACARS messages at his airline, in which the second time stamp refers to a printer.
But for United Airlines, the second time stamp refers to when the airplane received the message, as stated by United Airlines Dispatcher Ed Ballinger.
Messages #18 and #19 were sent to the aircraft from CHIDD using the RGS near Champaign, IL CMI as designated in the line "AN N591UA/GL CMI...". Both messages were sent to the printer and Message #19 also activated an audible signal in the aircraft.
These references also identify that a ACARS message has been received by its sender, either ground communications or the aircraft. In the final moments, at 10:12 AM EST, of UA FLIGHT 93's flight, ACARS messages were being sent from ground communications but were not being received. This was causing the ACARS messages to be rejected. KNERR advised that FLIGHT 93's low altitude may have
caused this dilemma or the fact that FLIGHT 93 had already crashed at the time the messages were sent.
KNERR further advised that AERONAUTICAL' RADIO INCORPORATED ARINC serves as the network administrator for the communication data. According to KNERR, this is important to remember when reviewing data messages because uplink and downlink times may show a time delay when compared. This is caused by the/processing of multiple ACARS messages through the ARINC network at the same time.
Messages #20 to #24 were sent to the aircraft from CHIDD. However, all of the messages were rejected indicating the aircraft did not receive them.
Originally posted by ProudBird
Perhaps it was missed, one page back. Here, the reprise and abridged version:
Source for some real ACARS messages
edit on Sat 3 December 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Insolubrious
This video was posted some years ago which also stated 175 was still in the air, not sure if it's been posted already but here it is
Originally posted by spoor
Originally posted by Insolubrious
This video was posted some years ago which also stated 175 was still in the air, not sure if it's been posted already but here it is
If you had read the comments you would have seen
""Flight trackers" only track flights that have filed an IFR flight plan. This screen you see is just a pictorial representation of all the flight plans in the area, with real time position updates. Since there were no updated radar returns or subsequent transponder squawks from the plane after the impact, the flight tracker program just showed its last known position. And since the flight plan was not yet complete, the icon wasn't removed like it would have been if it had landed at the airport
chester8420 2 months ago"
I could send this to an aircraft that doesn't exist and I will get the same copy as above, but a few minutes later I will receive a reply such as "no such aircraft is currently flying" or something like that. I have done that in the past when I have mistyped the registration.
If that were the case then shouldn't we see flight 11 on there as well, and It's last report was at 30,000ft?
Originally posted by gman1972
So to explain, the top part is my copy, which is simply a receipt of what I sent. I was a bit careless with the paint at the top, but you can see the last two numbers 25, the full is of course the same as the bottom 1625. At the bottom of that message is the date/time it was printed, the printer it was printed on xleo and the number of the telex 000276. As you can see with the exception of the details at the bottom and the words in the body of the message, it's the identical format to the quoted acars messages in this thread. I would say that this shows that the messages quoted here are the same as what mine is, a printer copy of a sent message and nothing to do with the message being received.
KNERR further advised that AERONAUTICAL' RADIO INCORPORATED ARINC serves as the network administrator for the communication data. According to KNERR, this is important to remember when reviewing data messages because uplink and downlink times may show a time delay when compared. This is caused by the/processing of multiple ACARS messages through the ARINC network at the same time.
I could send this to an aircraft that doesn't exist and I will get the same copy as above, but a few minutes later I will receive a reply such as "no such aircraft is currently flying" or something like that. I have done that in the past when I have mistyped the registration.