Final NTSB Flightpath Animation?

[DC]

we all know the Working copy of the NTSB flightpath animation for Flight 77.

we all know the animation is wrong.

so i wonder where the final version is, the corrected one. or did NTSB and FBI etc work with that faulty copy?

most conspiracy-deniers cry about P4T using the data and Animation the got from NTSB. but i dont see those deniers cry about NTSB and FBI using that faulty copy.

where is the final and correct animation?

is there one?

and still, the dieniers dont even rise an eyebrow.....

[MikeW]

where is the final and correct animation?

is there one?
Ask the NTSB. If you're genuinely interested in the answer, that is, as opposed to attempting to score rhetorical debating points.

[DC]

Ask the NTSB. If you're genuinely interested in the answer, that is, as opposed to attempting to score rhetorical debating points.

in other words, you never asked yourself if there is a final version, a correct version.

figures :)

thx for the answer

[MikeW]

in other words, you never asked yourself if there is a final version, a correct version.

figures :)

thx for the answer
That's not what I said. But then I'm used to being misrepresented by truthers, so "figures" right back at you.

No, I'm just curious why you're asking people who won't know the answer. Unless of course you're asking because you KNOW you won't get an answer, which means you can drag this out forever and make it look like you're doing something useful. Instead of actually doing something useful, which would be to make an FOIA app to the NTSB.

Hey, I'll even post the URL for you - http://www.ntsb.gov/pubmail/pubmail.asp . Go request any and all animations made of the Flight 77 flight path. It won't cost you a penny, and you'll get an answer to your question, then you can come back and let us know.

[DC]

That's not what I said. But then I'm used to being misrepresented by truthers, so "figures" right back at you.

No, I'm just curious why you're asking people who won't know the answer. Unless of course you're asking because you KNOW you won't get an answer, which means you can drag this out forever and make it look like you're doing something useful. Instead of actually doing something useful, which would be to make an FOIA app to the NTSB.

Hey, I'll even post the URL for you - http://www.ntsb.gov/pubmail/pubmail.asp . Go request any and all animations made of the Flight 77 flight path. It won't cost you a penny, and you'll get an answer to your question, then you can come back and let us know.

i thaught i would have to pay if it cost more than 14 dollars or something like that.

i thaught one of those ppl that "researched" about the FDR data would know.
so many ppl here that know everything, like beachnut the superengineer topgun pilot.

[MikeW]

i thaught i would have to pay if it cost more than 14 dollars or something like that.
You have to pay if your request takes an age to complete, or involves more than x pages. I forget the exact number, but that doesn't matter, you only need a CD or 2 and others have got that for free. I suppose if there have been loads of animations we don't know about then they might charge you, but in that case it would be worth it - you'd have a major scoop, and still only have to pay a few dollars.

[Cuddles]

Stop the derails and personal attacks or the remainder of the thread will join the rest in AAH.

[beachnut]

There is nothing wrong with the animation working copy if you understand the animation and what it is for, and how it is derived. Please list all that is wrong? The ground representation is added for effect, it can't be placed with FDR information for 77 due to accuracy problems. Altimeter setting and adjustments are made to show what the pilot would see, but if adjustments are not made, the RAW values are clearly seen. But that takes understanding.

The Pentagon ground photo is place in a position and rotated the wrong direction by ~2X magnetic deviation. That is the only thing wrong, but it is not wrong based on the FDR, the FDR does not give you information to place 77 better than 2000 to 4000 feet accuracy!

The OP is in error, the data from the FDR is presented correctly, the ground has to be manually place, the FDR data does not have photos of the ground. The accuracy of 77 can only get you 2000-4000 feet to where you really are! 77 had no GPS.

We all flew (before GPS) in planes with navigation good to thousands of feet but landed within 10 feet of centerline on every flight! I would think the truthers would jump on the thousands of feet accuracy, but they have no clue what is going on in the real world.

The animation is used to display aircraft parameters. The animation does not use 77 the navigation information to place the vehicle, flight parameter are used to build a path. The aircraft was placed on the Runway manually by placing a ground section under the animated aircraft. All the parameters shown are from the FDR, there are some things done to help the realism of the presentation, it was not finished because the animation was a …

Working Copy!

This is a useless thread…

Unless someone can prove it is wrong! But to be wrong it has to present the aircraft flight parameters wrong. It does not if you understand how it is made.

As you can see the aircraft does all the parameters perfectly as listed in the FDR! I have checked frames for errors, there are ZERO ERRORS.

My definition of a working copy preclude there being errors, it is not finished.

Since all reality on 9/11 is an error for 9/11 truth, there is no point to this thread.

Point out some errors you think mean something to 9/11. With 77 is at 400 feet MSL when the DATA STOPPED, and 4722 feet away from the Pentagon when the DATA STOPPED; the fact the working copy has the Pentagon in the wrong position is not even an issues since the placement of 77 by FDR information is not accurate, it can be 2000-4000 feet off in any direction. Good luck trying to call the placement of the ground photo an ERROR when accuracy is 2000-4000 feet in any direction. Good luck truthers.

Which part of, "I saw it hit the Pentagon", or "I saw it hit the lamppost", by independent witnesses does the truth movement not understand. What dumb ideas people come up with, 6 years of pure ignorance on 9/11, 9/11 truth.

only one version, 9/11 was solved, you missed it – NTSB animation are used to see how the plane is flying, it was not used to show you were the Plane WAS, the FDR can only give you accuracy to 2000-4000 feet. It is sad 9/11 truth lacks understanding as if they fail to read and study before making up junk ideas in the from of questions.

Why does the meaning of, "working copy", "I saw it hit the Pentagon", and "I saw it hit the lampposts" go over the heads of truth movement members?

List of errors - 0 (due to it being a working copy)
List of parameters stored in the FDR not represented properly – 0 (have to use logic, knowledge and sound judgment to figure out)
Working copy ground registration for take off – completed good job
Working copy ground registration for crash - not finished, position not known, data is missing, or 77 is still in the air at 400 feet above the impact zone at 4722 feet to go on a heading close to 70 degrees magnetic, lined up with the impact path.

What is it, fantasy ideas of 9/11 truth or rational ideas based on the facts?

[T.A.M.]

in other words, you never asked yourself if there is a final version, a correct version.

figures :)

thx for the answer

For me to even consider, let alone want a "final corrected version" it would have to have some impact on the final account of 9/11. To me it does not. If to you it does, then you go ask them.

TAM:)

[Caustic Logic]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4196580169348087802

Watch this video - 7:10 mark - you'll see a John Farmer of the NTSB (not the Truther John Farmer) presenting a finished animation to the 9/11 Commission in the NTSB ballroom, as shown on C-Span. Is it available stand-alone? I dunno. I asked for this along with the other animation ("any and all animations" were my words) with a FOIA request and got a empty envelope. I'm not complaining about it or using it to foster mystery, they just screwed up. They might not the next time.

“this working copy was never used for an official purpose.” is what the letter I got said. ("this" being a hypothetical pronoun).

The flight path matches the FDR and radar. Why the errors on ground representation that makes it look otherwise, who knows.

Odd things: It's a result of a 7 deg CCW rotation off a magnetic-oriented (10 deg CCW) grid, so 17 deg CCWW total rotation, or so, gives us an app. NoC path. Why that rotation?
video explanation (http://www.veoh.com/videos/v14941428336hFj9K)

Was the error intentional? Was it rendered in 2003 to match Lagasse's story? Or was he - or anyone else (like Turcios) coached with it?

Why was it released to Snowygrouch - unannounced - when he never knew of or asked for it? Was it being seeded?

Or is it all a coincidence as I guess most here would conclude?

Explanations for my points can be found here:
http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2007/02/flight-data-recorder.html

[DGM]

Why would the NTSB spend time putting out an animation to prove that the plane that they found in the building hit said building.

This has to be a joke thread. (please reassure my faith in humanity by saying your not serious)

[DC]

Why would the NTSB spend time putting out an animation to prove that the plane that they found in the building hit said building.

This has to be a joke thread. (please reassure my faith in humanity by saying your not serious)

your joking?
think about it again lol.
why did they make the "working" edition then anyway?

[DGM]

your joking?
think about it again lol.
why did they make the "working" edition then anyway?

Now I really know why I don't read your post (normally, you are on ignore).

They had the data (raw as it was) and someone requested it.

Look at the big picture (where the plane was found) and you might (doubtful) understand my original post.

Our just come out and accuse the hundreds of volunteers of being in on mass murder.

[beachnut]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4196580169348087802

Watch this video - 7:10 mark - you'll see a John Farmer of the NTSB (not the Truther John Farmer) presenting a finished animation to the 9/11 Commission in the NTSB ballroom, as shown on C-Span. Is it available stand-alone? I dunno. I asked for this along with the other animation ("any and all animations" were my words) with a FOIA request and got a empty envelope. I'm not complaining about it or using it to foster mystery, they just screwed up. They might not the next time.

“this working copy was never used for an official purpose.” is what the letter I got said. ("this" being a hypothetical pronoun).

The flight path matches the FDR and radar. Why the errors on ground representation that makes it look otherwise, who knows.

Odd things: It's a result of a 7 deg CCW rotation off a magnetic-oriented (10 deg CCW) grid, so 17 deg CCWW total rotation, or so, gives us an app. NoC path. Why that rotation?
video explanation (http://www.veoh.com/videos/v14941428336hFj9K)

Was the error intentional? Was it rendered in 2003 to match Lagasse's story? Or was he - or anyone else (like Turcios) coached with it?

Why was it released to Snowygrouch - unannounced - when he never knew of or asked for it? Was it being seeded?

Or is it all a coincidence as I guess most here would conclude?

Explanations for my points can be found here:
http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2007/02/flight-data-recorder.html
The video is not the NTSB stuff! Farmer presents another video, the working copy is not even in that video, no plane, no instruments. Did you catch CIT making up more BS? Their video is pure junk.

The ground has to be placed by hand, there is no data in the FDR to tell you were you are better than 2000-4000 feet.

Why do people think the ground lines up with anything? There is no data to accurately place 77 with the ground in the FDR.

Take off is perfectly matched with a runway, we know the pilot took the centerline of the runway, not 2000 feet to the south, so we move the runway section under the animation. 77 tells us in the FDR it is to the south over 2000 feet! The NTSB had to place the runway by hand under the animation! The animation is the aircraft. The ground is not depicted with accuracy in the FDR, you have to move the ground to match the best location. Takeoff is 100 percent known, down to 50 feet or so.

Magnetic Variation is 9W degree. 9 + 9 is 18 degrees. If you place the Pentagon ground image (not found in the FDR) under the animation formed by the FDR, and you rotate it the wrong direction for magnetic variation, you get an 18 degree error, a match to your 17 degrees. If you plot a true north oriented object, you must use variation to align it to the other system, magnetic orientation, or visa versa. If you do it right, it lines up. You do it wrong, it is 2x off! This is why the Pentagon is rotated wrong, no other reason. The NTSB does not take bs as inputs. This is why crews get lost.

Your work is excellent and proves the variation was in error. As for distance to the Pentagon, it can not be verified better than 2000-4000 feet. The best you can do, since you know 77 is in the pentagon and the impact path, is line up the true track heading to the Pentagon, and use RADES to align the distance.

Using RADES, speed and other information, you can estimate 77 was 4722 feet to go with 400 feet to descend into the Pentagon heading 61.2 degrees true track. The terrorist pilot misses the VOT Tower, looks like laterally, and makes his final PIO into the Pentagon.

Anyone can try to place object on charts and come up with the error like the Pentagon under the animation. Just take a mag or true object, place it on a true or mag setting, and mess up the variation. What do you get?

What is cool, it is a working copy, the NTSB said so. Looks like there are other animations based on other data. There is other data to look at.

Your work clearly shows how much of a fraud CIT and p4t are. Good job.

[DC]

Now I really know why I don't read your post (normally, you are on ignore).

They had the data (raw as it was) and someone requested it.

Look at the big picture (where the plane was found) and you might (doubtful) understand my original post.

Our just come out and accuse the hundreds of volunteers of being in on mass murder.

lol

so the NTSB did not creat the animation?

[funk de fino]

your joking?
think about it again lol.
why did they make the "working" edition then anyway?

Ask the loose change guys, they made plenty "working" editions

[funk de fino]

lol

so the NTSB did not creat the animation?

Thats not what anyone has said. Try again.

[Tweeter]

To bad beach wasnt near a plane that day, he woulda gottem!!!

[Caustic Logic]

The video is not the NTSB stuff! Farmer presents another video, the working copy is not even in that video, no plane, no instruments. Did you catch CIT making up more BS? Their video is pure junk.
Ah, so it's not a direct translation - two different types of animation? No dials or anything... But it has the ground right under the track.

If this is not the final version of that erred animation, then SDC's question remains valid - I haven't seen the end product yet.

But an NTSB guy presents it, so I'd guess it's an NTSB product from the black box? I love how it's shown at a 9/11 commission hearing, so it's a "9/11 comm." animation, which is different from the "official NTSB animation." Which would you believe? The official cover-up people or the ones with the actual data? (See this technique here, at 39:05) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8672066571196607580&q=pandora%27s+black+box+&ei=JBqQSKnVCYqIrgOx5rmlCA
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/chainsawmoth/PBB_911comm_vs_NTSB.jpg
Now that's a cheesy move, right?

Why do people think the ground lines up with anything? There is no data to accurately place 77 with the ground in the FDR.

Well, there is the part at the begining where it drives straight for a while at 300 feet MSL before taking off. That's an anchor point where they drew the ground right. :)

Magnetic Variation is 9W degree. 9 + 9 is 18 degrees. If you place the Pentagon ground image (not found in the FDR) under the animation formed by the FDR, and you rotate it the wrong direction for magnetic variation, you get an 18 degree error, a match to your 17 degrees.

I always went off 10.08, which I found was the declination for that day and place. Was that wrong? Actually the part I was more sure of was the 7 deg rotation between map and grid. Grid actually SEEMED more like 9 deg off, but I figured magnetic and bumped it to 10.1. So maybe 9 there, but Is the final map 9 deg off from the grid? I'd like to see how I got that wrong if so. Is there any good, honest reason to turn it 7 instead of 9 or 10? I'll have to come back to this point.

Your work clearly shows how much of a fraud CIT and p4t are. Good job.
Thanks, that means a lot. Too bad pfft "always felt" it was rotation anyway, huh?! And might I say I find your posts alternately informative and entertaining.

[Caustic Logic]

lol

so the NTSB did not creat the animation?

lol

so now you are saying short sentences with big implications that make no sense? I SAID that at first, but was apparently wrong.

And what is your point here? You ask a question and are given answers. Are you learning anything, or what?

Beachnut: I checked here:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomagmodels/struts/calcDeclination
I entered Latitude: 38 52 15 N Long 77 03 30 W, for 9/11/2001, and it says
Declination = 10° 35' W changing by 0° 1' W/year
Isn't 35 out of 60? So this means I was wrong with 10.08, it's more like 10.6! That's even further from 9 as you say. And still the map is set only app 7 deg skewed from the grid. Are we just quibbling here?

[DC]

lol

so now you are saying short sentences with big implications that make no sense? I SAID that at first, but was apparently wrong.

And what is your point here? You ask a question and are given answers. Are you learning anything, or what?

Beachnut: I checked here:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomagmodels/struts/calcDeclination
I entered Latitude: 38 52 15 N Long 77 03 30 W, for 9/11/2001, and it says
Declination = 10° 35' W changing by 0° 1' W/year
Isn't 35 out of 60? So this means I was wrong with 10.08, it's more like 10.6! That's even further from 9 as you say. And still the map is set only app 7 deg skewed from the grid. Are we just quibbling here?

my post was actually not directed at you.

afaik did NTSB creat that animation.

[DC]

Thats not what anyone has said. Try again.

i wasnt talking to you....

[Caustic Logic]

my post was actually not directed at you.

afaik did NTSB creat that animation.

Did i says it wa?

[DC]

Did i says it wa?

well i thought so lol.

whatever.

[Caustic Logic]

Man I have a lot to learn stll. I first thought the animation grid had a curve to it, varying to like 6 or 7 deg at the west end of flight (turnaround), and like 9 or so at the east end (start/terminus).

So now I'm confused about how I got 10.08 last year and it looks like 10.58 declination as I look now, on the east end. THEN there's the declination at the other end, which is more different than I thought - link above for NOAA gives me for 38 35 30 N 82 45 00 W
Declination = 6° 5' W changing by 0° 4' W/year

So if the grid is rendered magnetic, it WOULD curve noticeably from reality lines (geo north) on about the same scale I first saw but later rejected. Huh!

So a declination of 9 degrees would come into play somewhere along that path, perhaps at takeoff?
38 56 40 77 30 11
Declination = 10° 17' W changing by 0° 1' W/year
Okay, it's in there somewhere, but not at the final map, which is offset by app 7 deg.
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/chainsawmoth/FrustratingFraud/animation_tackon_mapped.jpg

[beachnut]

lol

so now you are saying short sentences with big implications that make no sense? I SAID that at first, but was apparently wrong.

And what is your point here? You ask a question and are given answers. Are you learning anything, or what?

Beachnut: I checked here:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomagmodels/struts/calcDeclination
I entered Latitude: 38 52 15 N Long 77 03 30 W, for 9/11/2001, and it says
Declination = 10° 35' W changing by 0° 1' W/year
Isn't 35 out of 60? So this means I was wrong with 10.08, it's more like 10.6! That's even further from 9 as you say. And still the map is set only app 7 deg skewed from the grid. Are we just quibbling here?
Yes sir; You are right, the variation is 10.7 W. Your photo shows the two paths, NOC and real path, off by 21.4 degree so they applied variation wrong. Did I miss something? Your photo is good work.

We don't know if they just started to place the Pentagon image or not. What if they just slapped it down, looked at it and stopped working, as in money/time done; or FBI said fine! Remember!, the FBI does not need the FDR to understand anything about 9/11, it does confirm the terrorist was flying

Just as you are doing work to check the alignment, they would have to align it, mag vs. true. They would have to expend the same time as you are to do the alignment and then the best they can do is use RADES and heading to estimate the distance offset.

It was easy setting the runway image, using takeoff heading on top of the runway heading; done!

Harder alignment is the Pentagon, you have to line it up with the impact point and get a heading correct, twice the work or more than the runway alignment. If they had the variation (or the right orientation, true vs. mag, what ever the final track was compared to the Pentagon alignment, whatever) of the image on the Pentagon correct it would line up. So line up the true track (true track is the path over the ground, mag heading is were the nose is pointed, two different things).

I find nothing to the alignment that means anything, knowing it is a working copy not used for anything. The animation presented to congress by the 9/11 committee; you are saying it was by the NTSB. Sure does not look like it. Looks like a flight path study done by someone else, or with different data.

If your paths on your posted photo at 5:14 today, then, I got 21.4 degree difference between the NoC and real path, variation times two.

I guess we are quibbling, the fact is the animation is a working copy, the data is presented correctly, the images are added, not really related at all the FDR! It is worse when you know 77 did hit the Pentagon and p4t and CIT are making up paranoid false ideas to sell DVDs. With a few minutes of typing we expose those selling lies about 9/11.

If this had GPS and it was stored on the FDR, we would have 10 to 50 foot resolution from the FDR, alas we have 2000-4000 foot resolution.

[Caustic Logic]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]If your paths on your posted photo at 5:14 today, then, I got 21.4 degree difference between the NoC and real path, variation times two.

Don't take the red and blue lines there too literal. I messed them up a bit, was not precise. Real difference is animation rel to ground map objects (Southgate Road, etc) looks to be 79 deg. You know the FDR track. If grid is mag-oriented, that leaves?
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/chainsawmoth/FrustratingFraud/Balsamo_right.jpg

I guess we are quibbling, the fact is the animation is a working copy, the data is presented correctly, the images are added, not really related at all the FDR! It is worse when you know 77 did hit the Pentagon and p4t and CIT are making up paranoid false ideas to sell DVDs. With a few minutes of typing we expose those selling lies about 9/11.

Word. But No, this is something, but I'll leave it for now. I was actually typing a big message and messed it up. I'll do a post at FF when I have more time to work it oout. Thanks for the inspiration!

[rwguinn]

Don't take the red and blue lines there too literal. I messed them up a bit, was not precise. Real difference is animation rel to ground map objects (Southgate Road, etc) looks to be 79 deg. You know the FDR track. If grid is mag-oriented, that leaves?
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/chainsawmoth/FrustratingFraud/Balsamo_right.jpg


There were goalposts here a minute ago! Where did that damn net come from??
And how did we get to a baseball diamand from a gridiron?


Word. But No, this is something, but I'll leave it for now. I was actually typing a big message and messed it up. I'll do a post at FF when I have more time to work it oout. Thanks for the inspiration!

[Panoply_Prefect]

i thaught i would have to pay if it cost more than 14 dollars or something like that.

i thaught one of those ppl that "researched" about the FDR data would know.
so many ppl here that know everything, like beachnut the superengineer topgun pilot.

I recieved the animation, along with two or three more cd's via regular mail here in Sweden - free of charge. They even called me one evening to say they were sorry for the delay, so no, it didn't cost anything. If you fear for costs, you can make it clear when you file the FOIA that you want to be consulted prior.

/PP

[Turbofan]

I guess we are quibbling, the fact is the animation is a working copy, the data is presented correctly, the images are added, not really related at all the FDR! It is worse when you know 77 did hit the Pentagon and p4t and CIT are making up paranoid false ideas to sell DVDs. With a few minutes of typing we expose those selling lies about 9/11.
FONT][/COLOR]

Yeah, I guess the plane was able to take off straight from the runway
even though the terrain image was rotated 21 degrees! LMAO!

:rolleyes:

Try another theory.

[DC]

I recieved the animation, along with two or three more cd's via regular mail here in Sweden - free of charge. They even called me one evening to say they were sorry for the delay, so no, it didn't cost anything. If you fear for costs, you can make it clear when you file the FOIA that you want to be consulted prior.

/PP

thx :)

[funk de fino]

Yeah, I guess the plane was able to take off straight from the runway
even though the terrain image was rotated 21 degrees! LMAO!

:rolleyes:

Try another theory.

The pentagon and the take off runway are not in the same place. Think about it.

[Turbofan]

The pentagon and the take off runway are not in the same place. Think about it.

Sure...so the Pentagon is out of place, and rotated, but nothing else is?

Smart people who made those terrain profiles to purposely neglect the
proper co-oridinate for the Pentacon. My..my, what a coincidence!

[funk de fino]

Sure...so the Pentagon is out of place, and rotated, but nothing else is?

Smart people who made those terrain profiles to purposely neglect the
proper co-oridinate for the Pentacon. My..my, what a coincidence!

Try asking the people who made the profiles. Perhaps the fact it was a working copy would explain the discrepancies.

I mean its not like the creators have claimed it is the finished and accurate article is it? Maybe if they had you could have asked them to correct it.

[Turbofan]

Try asking the people who made the profiles. Perhaps the fact it was a working copy would explain the discrepancies.

I mean its not like the creators have claimed it is the finished and accurate article is it? Maybe if they had you could have asked them to correct it.

Ohhhh, now you're telling me the NTSB created these terrain profiles just for 9/11?

Are you sure nothing like this existed before 9/11 to study other flights?

[beachnut]

Don't take the red and blue lines there too literal. I messed them up a bit, was not precise. Real difference is animation rel to ground map objects (Southgate Road, etc) looks to be 79 deg. You know the FDR track. If grid is mag-oriented, that leaves?
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/chainsawmoth/FrustratingFraud/Balsamo_right.jpg



Word. But No, this is something, but I'll leave it for now. I was actually typing a big message and messed it up. I'll do a post at FF when I have more time to work it oout. Thanks for the inspiration!
I understand there is no data to place images accurately under the animation from the FDR. Data from the FDR would get no closer than 2000 to 4000 feet.

There fore;
The ground section of runway was place exactly on the runway, because we know 77 took off from that exact point, the data does to the degree support the takeoff track!

One of few or more reasons the Pentagon is not places properly in space and rotation;
1. Variation or difference in true or mag messed up while placing image of Pentagon.
2. They put the image on roughly and started to figure out how to aligned but stopped (ie working copy).
3. The key is working copy, and as you are working to figure out why, without knowing why, the amount of work you are doing to align 77 is similar to what they would have to do, and it takes more time then the runways placement. No more time, no more hours to put on animation, that is usually used to see the aircraft actions only; they stop. Working copy.
4. I thought the best reason, was applying variation in error. As you struggle lining up angles and stuff, that is the same as they would have to do! These guys are use to FDR missing, but that complicates the ground placement too. With a quick sloppy variation error, what would happen when works stop, on the working copy?

[uk_dave]

Are you sure nothing like this existed before 9/11 to study other flights?

Are you?

[uk_dave]

Question: Was the NTSB animation issued to 'the american public' at any time prior to the FOIA request?

I ask because Rob does like to stress that the NTSB wouldn't have released inaccurate information to 'the american public', but if they only released it because it was asked for by the FOIA request, then the NTSB only supplied 'to the american public' the animation which already existed and might not have been intended for general release.

[beachnut]

Ohhhh, now you're telling me the NTSB created these terrain profiles just for 9/11?

Are you sure nothing like this existed before 9/11 to study other flights?
I see you know as much about this as you do physics. Zero. You can not form a rational question? Please get on topic and try to contribute, stop making up lies and junk ideas about 9/11.

The FDR has no terrain in it! The animation is plotting FDR parameter related to the flight of 77. The real world outside of the animated aircraft is supplied by images essentially placed by "hand". Then the accuracy of the FDR information could only tell you within 2000 to 4000 feet where the plane was. This is a problem if you want an image lined up. For takeoff there is no real problem. Place the animation based on aircraft parameters on the runway.

By the end of the flight the accuracy from the FDR is still off and is not off the same amount as it was at the beginning of flight, it has drifted. So even if you align the Pentagon with the takeoff runway, the animation is not going to be over the real spot it was on 9/11. The animation is made from the FDR, it has no real reference to the ground.

So please explain what you are trying to mess up and lie about this time?

Yeah, I guess the plane was able to take off straight from the runway
even though the terrain image was rotated 21 degrees! LMAO!

:rolleyes:

Try another theory.
Very intelligent post, you are lacking complete knowledge on this subject, acting like a fool, or are posting an idiot comment by Balsamo.

[beachnut]

Question: Was the NTSB animation issued to 'the american public' at any time prior to the FOIA request?

I ask because Rob does like to stress that the NTSB wouldn't have released inaccurate information to 'the american public', but if they only released it because it was asked for by the FOIA request, then the NTSB only supplied 'to the american public' the animation which already existed and might not have been intended for general release.
As a pilot and an aircraft accident investigator I look at the animation as what the plane was doing! There are zero errors! The FDR data is used to show what the plane was doing, not the ground. The ground placement is only accurate to 2000 to 4000 feet with the FDR information for 77. The image placement of the Pentagon has to be done "manually" as was the airport runway image.

I see no errors in the aircraft animation, the image placement/alignment is not done. Working copy, Balsamo is a moron on this topic.

[Turbofan]

I see you know as much about this as you do physics. Zero. You can not form a rational question? Please get on topic and try to contribute, stop making up lies and junk ideas about 9/11.

The FDR has no terrain in it! The animation is plotting FDR parameter related to the flight of 77. The real world outside of the animated aircraft is supplied by images essentially placed by "hand". Then the accuracy of the FDR information could only tell you within 2000 to 4000 feet where the plane was. This is a problem if you want an image lined up. For takeoff there is no real problem. Place the animation based on aircraft parameters on the runway.

By the end of the flight the accuracy from the FDR is still off and is not off the same amount as it was at the beginning of flight, it has drifted. So even if you align the Pentagon with the takeoff runway, the animation is not going to be over the real spot it was on 9/11. The animation is made from the FDR, it has no real reference to the ground.

So please explain what you are trying to mess up and lie about this time?

I NEVER once said the terrain data was part of the FDR file! LMAO!

I typed (if you can read?), why is the runway correctly oriented, and the Pentagon off?

I then asked if this terrain data was specially drawn up just for 9/11, or
if the NTSB had this same profile in the past to study other flights.

Learn the difference. Answer the questions.

I guess you believe someone just by chance drew in the wrong location
of the Pentagon to make things interesting? :rolleyes:

[WildCat]

I see Turbofan has run away completely from the FDR thread, and so has the head dolt at PfffT.

Is this an admission you and the hacks at PffffT have no idea as to how to interpret the FDR data TF?

[beachnut]

I NEVER once said the terrain data was part of the FDR file! LMAO!

I typed (if you can read?), why is the runway correctly oriented, and the Pentagon off?

I then asked if this terrain data was specially drawn up just for 9/11, or
if the NTSB had this same profile in the past to study other flights.

Learn the difference. Answer the questions.

I guess you believe someone just by chance drew in the wrong location
of the Pentagon to make things interesting? :rolleyes:
Quick and dirty I am working too much, we can correct errors in this working copy on the fly~!!!!!

Bye
There is no terrain data. There are images of runway, and the Pentagon.

The runway was placed under the 77 animation. How? By putting it under the 77 animation. Do you need that again? The aircraft takes off on a known track, it is accurate. Line up plane with runway, image of runway lines up with animation because we know plane took off from that runway.

The animation are used to show aircraft parameters like roll, yaw, pitch, heading, track, altimeter, speed, VVI, and more. The ground placement is relative and the data in 77 could not place the aircraft position better than 2000 feet. That is different now, with GPS.

The Pentagon was image was placed manually, and is not correctly orientated to where 77 FDR says it was or reality. This is a working copy.

Whereas the RUNWAY IMAGE placement is easy, 77 took off from the runway. There is data missing in the FDR, and the placement of the Pentagon image is harder to do, since it has to be aligned with heading and impact point. But again there is no data in the FDR to make this accurate better than 2000 feet in all directions etc.

There are no real errors in the animation since the ground images are not tied to the darn FDR anyway. Understand this. Please stop spewing the lies of Balsamo on this topic his is clueless on this and can't even correct his math errors. He has harassed the NTSB! He has idiot ideas on this and is paranoid, the FAA must of grounded him for being stupid.

see you later,

[Turbofan]

I see Turbofan has run away completely from the FDR thread, and so has the head dolt at PfffT.

Is this an admission you and the hacks at PffffT have no idea as to how to interpret the FDR data TF?

Naaa, this is more like watching you dodge the questions again.

Don't worry, we're working on something to backup the six links of proof you
all keep dodging.

[WildCat]

Naaa, this is more like watching you dodge the questions again.

Don't worry, we're working on something to backup the six links of proof you
all keep dodging.
No problem, I'll bump it for you. :rolleyes:

[DC]

a good point by beachnut, the accuracy, where can i read more about the accuracy of the system used for positioning?

but a problem remains, the whithnesses, North of Citgo. question rises, what nocked down the lightpoles? those on the south of citgo path?......

[T.A.M.]

So Dick, your a CIT/PFT guy? Can't say I'm impressed.

TAM:)

[Caustic Logic]

There are no real errors in the animation since the ground images are not tied to the darn FDR anyway. Understand this. Why can't people acknowledge this evident fact? They cannot show any errors in the actual yellow line flight path, only in its relation to the obviously placed map? If they had accidentally put it over a map of Disneyland, would these dolts be harping how it flew on the wrong side of Epcot Center to hit the Pentagon?

[AZCat]

Why can't people acknowledge this evident fact? They cannot show any errors in the actual yellow line flight path, only in its relation to the obviously placed map? If they had accidentally put it over a map of Disneyland, would these dolts be harping how it flew on the wrong side of Epcot Center to hit the Pentagon?

<nitpick>
Epcot Center is at Disney World, not Disneyland.
</nitpick>

[uruk]

in other words, you never asked yourself if there is a final version, a correct version.

figures :)

thx for the answer

What about a corrected version of CIT's video. It mistakenly shows the plane flying over the Pentagon? Every single one of the 13 CIT witnesses say they saw the plane crash into the "Pentagon. Why does CIT keep ignoring thier own witnesses?

[Jonnyclueless]

I haven't read through the thread yet, but the fact that the OP thinks the working copy animation is what was used to determine the flight path of 77 pretty much sums up the entire 9/11 cult movement.

[beachnut]

<nitpick>
Epcot Center is at Disney World, not Disneyland.
</nitpick>
No, he ~means Epcot center, and you are right! But they would say Epcot... It makes more sense for CIT and p4t to say Epcot...

[eeyore1954]

so i wonder where the final version is, the corrected one. or did NTSB and FBI etc work with that faulty copy?

most conspiracy-deniers cry about P4T using the data and Animation the got from NTSB. but i dont see those deniers cry about NTSB and FBI using that faulty copy.



What did the FBI and NTSB use the animation for?

[beachnut]

What did the FBI and NTSB use the animation for?
Not, sure, but it clearly shows when the terrorist took over. Is the FBI interested in that. The NTSB does no care much about 77, it was on purpose, they take action to investigate accident to help prevent them. They have the expertise to help the FBI.
What the animation shows.
When the terrorist took control of 77
The animation confirms what ATC saw when 77 approached DC
Verifies the speed was high for impact

The animation makes comment like Charlie Sheen's, pure stupid.

There are zero anomalies in the animation when you understand the ground place under the animation is added based not on the FDR readout of position, but knowing where 77 was. 77 was on the runway, FDR said it was 2000 feet south. NTSB says we know it is on the runway and they put the runway under the animation. At the end they have to do some alignment, because if the runway and Pentagon are connected on the image world under the animation, the navigation readout on 77 recorded on the FDR is now off in a different direction. So you can't line up 77 on the runway and fix the offset, the offset drifts could drift up to ¼ mile an hour. Now there is GPS, it could be used to line up the ground very quickly.