9/11 Pentagon Flight Recorder Fraud Revealed

reply to post by IceRoadTrucker


Lol....pointing out reality is hardly slinging insults. And the point stands. Everytime someone comes up with something that they think is a smoking gun, people like you, who admit they have no idea about the workings of items in question, latch onto it like a shark on a bleeding seal. Its actually kind of funny to watch.

I could go to the P4T website, give a list of phony credentials and rattle off a fictional story about debriefing the pilot who shot down Flight 93, suiciding him, and now was overcome.with remorse, thusly telling my story.......and within an hour, someone like you would be posting a link to it here proclaiming it a smoking gun





Oh, wait....something like that has already been done there...

reply to post by vipertech0596


And someone who has eyes too see actually believes the towers vaporized themselves because of Jet Fuel ??

You guys are the biggest Fail of all TIME.

reply to post by GrinchNoMore


Hmm.....now im beginning to wonder if someone has multiple nicks on here.....

Grinch....or IRT.....or TA or PDQ or whoever you actually are... I challenge you to find ONE post where i have ever claimed that the Towers vaporized from jet fuel.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
...people like you, who admit they have no idea about the workings of items in question,

Where did I make such a claim?

You can sling insults at me all day long due to your inability to source your claims, but when you start to put words in my mouth is where I draw the line.

For the readers, the reason vipertech ignored my questions repeatedly, and now slings insults, is because he cannot answer the questions. The Serial numbers to the FDR's are not in any of the 911 reports. In fact, they are mysteriously absent. Civilian aircraft operating under part 121 do not contain FDR serial numbers in the headers of the raw data, they contain Fleet ID and Aircraft ID. They are never "missing" unless the raw data came from a bench test unit as described by Dennis Cimino.

Finally, vipertech admits he is an avionics tech. Such people are basically part changers. When a piece of equipment malfunctions on an airplane, people like vipertech come in to replace it with a new part. The part that malfunctioned is then sent out to people like Dennis Cimino for diagnosis and then to fix the part. In other words, when vipertech has questions on FDR units, he consults experts at the manufacturer, people like Dennis.

vipertech, anytime you wish to provide the 911 reports in which you claim contain the FDR serial numbers, feel free, as no one has been able to find such information anywhere, and I'm sure many of your cohorts who make excuse for the OS would love to have such information so they can shut up the rest of us who have been asking for it.

Yeah, I got to ask Rob sometime if it might be possible that the FAA realized that Dennis is SUCH a dangerous person to them, that they REMOVED the very credentials that Rob said he couldn't verify at the FAA. That would make entire sense, seeing as Dennis clearly knows wtf he is talking about when it comes directly to FDR data.

Ya think?

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Yeah, I got to ask Rob sometime if it might be possible that the FAA realized that Dennis is SUCH a dangerous person to them, that they REMOVED the very credentials that Rob said he couldn't verify at the FAA. That would make entire sense, seeing as Dennis clearly knows wtf he is talking about when it comes directly to FDR data.

Ya think?

Dennis' Commercial pilot credentials are still listed at faa.gov. However, Dennis is much more of an expert on FDR analysis than aeronautical knowledge. He should stick to what he knows best.

reply to post by IceRoadTrucker


Umm. Once again, you show just how little you know or understand. People like Mr Cimino rarely diagnose or fix squat. Either he has embellishes his credentials or, you are ascribing to him abilities he doesn't have...You want to believe he's a command pilot, an FDR engineer, a diagnostic tech, a specialist in radar, ecm and a flight attendant.


Folks, here is a shining example of PT Barnum's supposed statement about one being born every moment.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Wait.....your star witness' credentials were never verified? And yet, you believe everything he says?? And because you were never able to verify them, it means he is a threat to the gubmint?? ROTFLMAO


Ladies and gents.....i rest my case.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
People like Mr Cimino rarely diagnose or fix squat.

You're right, I should clarify that statement.

Techs like you change the part in the airplane, the broken part gets sent to the manufacturer, people like Dennis diagnose the exact problem, and then he gives the part to another tech within the FDR company with instructions on how to fix it. It then gets sent back to tech like you so you can put it back in the airplane.


Better?

(by the way, people rarely refer to FDR's as 'CSFDR' anymore, it's more commonly referred to as an SSFDR as all of them are built to be "Crash Survivable", so the "CS" is pretty much understood.. )

reply to post by IceRoadTrucker


Nope. Not better. Here is how it works...

1. Pilot, like Balsamo, Cimino, Lear et al say airplane broke.
2. People like me, go to airplane, flip switches in proper sequence and find that genius pilot not so smart.
3. Or we find that airplane is broke, we then troubleshoot airplane down to most likely problem child.
4. We change most likely problem child and take.back to shop to tear into to find problem, fix it and return it to service


We rarely consult engineers. And when we have a problem we cant fix, we send the part.to depot maintenance....more avionics techs like us.

In two years I have had to talk to an engineer twice, once last month due to an uncommanded flight maneuver and the rules required me to do so....only to have him tell me "it beats the hell out of me why the airplane did that" and once last year to explain to an engineer why I had submitted a change for the tech data on our jet. We had a problem with a jet and the items I changed to fix the jet...in the words of the engineer, "don't have a damned thing to do with the problem" to which the response was, " well, that's what fixed the jet"

Yeah....i don't have a real high opinion of engineers

Oh, and, uh , CS is commonly misunderstood. People on ATS generally think that the boxes are guaranteed to survive any crash

Originally posted by vipertech0596
Yeah....i don't have a real high opinion of engineers

Oh, I see. So this is personal for you. Makes sense now. Seems you have a stick up your butt for pilots as well.

Oh, and, uh , CS is commonly misunderstood. People on ATS generally think that the boxes are guaranteed to survive any crash

Yeah, next time you may want to refer to it as CSMU (Crash Survivable Memory Unit, aka. "The Pig"), or SSFDR (Solid State Flight Data Recorder).

"CSFDR" went out with Waynes World back in the 80's.

Oh, and just for you viperTECH...



Feel free to check it yourself.... amsrvs.registry.faa.gov...

Unlike you, Dennis can be verified, his claims are sourced, and he places him name to his claims.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Wait.....your star witness' credentials were never verified? And yet, you believe everything he says?? And because you were never able to verify them, it means he is a threat to the gubmint?? ROTFLMAO


Ladies and gents.....i rest my case.

You never had a case.

It was one specific issue, and only that issue. The rest verified just fine.

Baby. Bathwater. FAIL.

Originally posted by Ivar_Karlsen

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
My God, he says according to the FDR data, that the RUDDER PEDALS WERE NOT USED IN THE TURN!

On all the jets i've ever flown the rudder pedals are used during takeoff and landings at slow speed to compensate for crosswind/engine out scenario.

All other phases of flight in clean configuration an high speed it's feet on the floor.
As waypastvne said the yaw damper will keep turns coordinated without rudder input from the pilots.

American Airlines Flight 587 is also a good example of why the rudder pedals shouldn't be used during high speed.

en.wikipedia.org...

On the other hand i guess Capt. Rob and his crew are used to much smaller hardware where no yaw damper is fitted, or turned off during takeoff and landings.

As for the flight deck door monitoring on the FDR, since it's not mandatory it is a customer option on Boeing airplanes.

edit on 28-7-2012 by Ivar_Karlsen because: Fog

And some terrorist that never flew a commercial airliner knows all of this? Yeah ok thanks for confirming what we already knew. This whole event was BS and planned. I hope who ever participated fries in Hell.

reply to post by IceRoadTrucker

Nope, its still called a CSFDR in many places. The CSMU is just one part of the system...along with the SAU, the SDR, and numerous accelometers, and other assorted pick ups for various systems.

And, no, I don't have anything up my butt about engineers or pilots. I've just seen way too many of them so stuck on themselves that they can never admit they are wrong


Ooooh yippie Mr Cimino is a pilot.....doesnt make him an avionics expert

Originally posted by vipertech0596
Nope, its still called a CSFDR in many places. The CSMU is just one part of the system...along with the SAU, the SDR, and numerous accelometers, and other assorted pick ups for various systems.

The reason that it is rarely referred to as a CSFDR anymore is because the entire FDR is not "Crash Survivable", only the CSMU (The memory unit) is Crash survivable.

And, no, I don't have anything up my butt about engineers or pilots.

Again, readers will judge for themselves.

Ooooh yippie Mr Cimino is a pilot.....doesnt make him an avionics expert

He is clearly more of an expert than you claim to be. His claims are sourced (unlike yours) and he puts his name to his claims (unlike you).

Not to mention the fact that many of your claims are flat out false, such as your claim that the 911 reports contain the FDR serial numbers, which is why you fail to source such a claim.

Originally posted by IceRoadTrucker

He is clearly more of an expert than you claim to be. His claims are sourced (unlike yours) and he puts his name to his claims (unlike you).

Dennis Cimino

I saw that the aircraft identification number and the fleet identification number were 00000 for both of the data fields.

Could you show us the direct source for the 00000 in the FDR read out he claims in his video.

Show me the zero's.

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by IceRoadTrucker

He is clearly more of an expert than you claim to be. His claims are sourced (unlike yours) and he puts his name to his claims (unlike you).

Dennis Cimino

I saw that the aircraft identification number and the fleet identification number were 00000 for both of the data fields.

Could you show us the direct source for the 00000 in the FDR read out he claims in his video.

Show me the zero's.

Sorry, Dennis Cimino could not decompress the file himself. Warren Stutt did that, so you'll have to ask Warren to show you the actual file structure. His files and source code are available here. Any reputable work will be supported by similar disclosure.

Originally posted by GovernmentLoyalist

Sorry, Dennis Cimino could not decompress the file himself. Warren Stutt did that, so you'll have to ask Warren to show you the actual file structure. His files and source code are available here. Any reputable work will be supported by similar disclosure.

Yes I know, thats why I am asking for the zero's. Warren states the FLEET IDENT and A/C NUMBER parameters contained a 1 and 35 not 00000

Originally Posted by wstutt on the PFT forum
Hi Dennis Cimino,

I have now decoded the FLEET IDENT and A/C NUMBER parameters from the FDR data according to the generic Boeing data frame layout 757-3B. When they are interpreted as unsigned integers they have values of 1 and 35 respectively.

Without the five zero's the video the OP's video falls apart.

I think Dennis is FOS.

Dennis also claims @ 10;40 in the video that:

It was the only forensic data we had from any of these four involved airplanes ...none of the flight data recorders from the other three aircraft were recovered.

He doesn't know about Flt 93's FDR ?

Why is PFT claiming this guy is an expert ?

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Click here to learn more about this warning.