It is only common to the aircraft reportedly used on 9/11, which have never been positively identified and outperformed their standard counterparts by a wide margin in both aerodynamics and navigation.
In the rest of the world, Pilots load the Present Position from the Gate Coordinates chart prior to push, as was described here....
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...government-story-w-7-a-16.html#post1062806352
Again, the only way you can possibly reconcile such a large offset prior to departure is if you feel the pilots didn't do their job, and/or the data is from an aircraft which had more capability than N644AA as the data aligns itself in flight. Military aircraft had such capability in 2001. N644AA did not. (Nor did N591UA, "UA93")
Till then your opinion is noted.
The following screenshots are from the Boeing 757 Flight Crew Operating Manual. It used to be published here, but has since been taken down for copyright reasons.
Here is what the IRS unit looks like....
Here is the procedure for aligning the IRS (my highlight added in red underline)
Here is the Gate Coordinate Chart which pilots use to enter Present Position when aligning the IRS Unit at the gate prior to flight.
Here is the American Airlines 757/767 Pre-Flight Checklist noting that a FULL alignment is required prior to ALL flights.
Here is the location of Gate D26 when inputting the lat/long into GE from the Gate Coordinates chart above, as it compares to the lat/long data from the "aircraft".
And here are various quotes from pilots at pprune, American Airlines Captains and other sources found around the net...
"On the ground, the FMC position is based on the IRS position.
Since inertial systems accumulate position errors as a function of time, the position information being used by the FMC is slowly accumulating errors. These position errors can be detected by observing the position of the airplane on the HSI map. If ... a significant map error is noticed the IRS should be realigned and present position re-entered."
"E. When ALIGN is selected, power is applied to the IRU's and the IRU's normally progress through an alignment period of approximately 10 minutes before the navigational mode is armed. When the switches are maintained in ALIGN, however, the IRU's remain in the align mode. Normal alignment requires the entry of present position into the IRU's."
"There is a big difference between updating a position.. ok..., which is not a problem at all, and Re-Aligning an IRS in flight which is not possible :=."
"If the Present Position is incorrect when the INS is initialized, it will NOT "re-align" itself! It should be shut down and re-initialized with the correct Present Position."
"No IRS realign in flight, ... alignement[sic] realign requires the platform to be stable. no acceleration, no movement, sometimes the movement created by loading container is enough to screw up the align process, on a modern Airliner."
"When you start in the morning, you tell it where it is. Either by telling it the gate position or by giving it the GPS position."
"An error in position input during initial alignment, apart from obvious bias, will give the wrong "G" initial value and induce wrong vertical acceleration (delta between the sensed real one and the erroneous one)"
From American Airlines Captains who actually viewed the data...
"...on cursory examination something is screwy, those things are so accurate in the 75, 76, 73, and FK100, that we always, always put in the exact gate coordinates on each gate at each airport when preparing to go...."
"....when pilots align the IRS, the Present Position from the Jeppesen Gate Coordinates chart is input by the FO and it is double checked by the Captain. Pilots especially pay close attention to this procedure on a long flight (such as it was reported IAD-LAX)..... there is no possible way, even if the FO and Captain input the wrong Lat/Long with aligned IRU's, that an American Airlines 757 could align an error/offset in flight for such a large error in such a short time as is depicted in the data. Garbage in = Garbage out...... the Capt and FO would have also noticed such a large error if not at the gate, but during taxi to the runway, and if such a large error could not be corrected prior to departure, they would have had to return to the gate."
(my emphasis added)
No mike, all you have is opinion.. from a person who admits he doesn't have any experience in aviation...
I have this...
OK, you don't like my experience.
What you fail to understand is you don't need to be an aviation "expert" to review, read, comprehend, understand what is posted.
By your standards CIT should be ignored. There not aviation experts.
Of course you will not change your stance from what anyone has posted.
This, "Again, the only way you can possibly reconcile such a large offset prior to departure is if you feel the pilots didn't do their job, and/or the data is from an aircraft... " remains an opinion of yours.
You have yet to disprove that no other same nav units in same type aircraft never experience the same error.
Did the nav unit match up with radar after airborne or not? Seem that it did. Explain that if the unit cannot adjust in the air.
The issue may be with the difference between "calibration" and "updating" the nav unit.
It is only common to the aircraft reportedly used on 9/11, which have never been positively identified and outperformed their standard counterparts by a wide margin in both aerodynamics and navigation.
Got a pilot for truth. Can we now have a fire-fighter for truth?
FLIGHT DECK DOOR
Pilots For 9/11 Truth also found, according to the data, there is no evidence suggesting a "Hijack" had occurred. A Flight Deck Door parameter shows the door closed for the entire flight. No evidence has been provided thus far which shows the Flight Deck Door open in order to facilitate a "Hijack".(4)
They do exist, and I think some have organized in some way.
What do pilots for truth say about the FDR? First they say it can't be decoded... properly, or some lie about it. Then ironically, it is decoded and gee, they say -
Wow, the door closed on 24 hours of flight. Big hint, this is not a parameter used, the door is not connected to anything, the FDR parameter for this is not used. The claim, the Hijacking never took place is, another lie from pilots for truth.
The pilots for truth make up this stuff for no reason. They could offer the theory the door is not connected, but instead make up lies about 911. Hijacker never opened the door, now an "offer no theory" scam, fraud. Why is a cockpit door required as a data point? It is not. Cargo doors are important, but cockpit door?
No evidence of a "Hijack", is a theory, don't tell yourself you broke the "offer no theory" rule. Your "offer no theory" rule was broken each time so one starts a thread about pilot for truth theories, where the big headline is a theory, or a claim.
The closed door, is another in a long line of silly theories you do offer; can you explain the "offer no theory" nonsense again?
Did you ever do any flight instructing, military or civilian?
Back to topic...
Uh oh....
(more to come... but probably not here... :mrgreen
Have you?Did you ever do any flight instructing, military or civilian?
what does a persons background have to do with discussing the topic?
Have you?
I was the Chief Instructor of training flight for more than 200 crewmembers. We had more than 70 students in upgrade training when I was Chief. I trained copilots to become aircraft commanders - equal to first officer becoming Captains.
Made 100 percent of my FAA instructors test.
I have an ATP, passed the ATP check ride with 4.5 hours in type, and one landing, the check ride landing. Where is Balsamo's ATP?
Did you look up the accuracy of INS? Can pilots for truth do any instructing? How did pilots for truth fail to understand the cockpit door was not hooked up? Is that the same problem pilots for truth have with explaining INS accuracy? Why don't pilots for truth know the Navigation system is updated with DME/DME, and VOR/DME? Don't they have any pilots out of the less than 0.2 percent of all pilots who signed up who understand the navigation system? Any engineers who worked with INSs, or was taught Kalman filters in engineering school? Any practical knowledge on how the system works?
Cool.
Yes, I'm an instructor too, just civilian. Airplanes and helicopters, just renewed last month. About 3000 hours of dual given. And I'm here to say that the average 350 hour pilot would be rather intimidated by being plopped down in the seat of a Boeing. Much less fly it like Hani had to fly it.
Average guy could not do that. I could not do that in a Boeing even if I had one. But I could fly that maneuver in my old long gone T-6.
The Myth Of Hani is too much for me to believe.
Did you miss "The Right Stuff"? Hello. You tell me you are a pilot, an instructor pilot, and characterize pilots as "rather intimidated"? Instructor?... I'm an instructor. ... And I'm here to say that the average 350 hour pilot would be rather intimidated by being plopped down in the seat of a Boeing. .
Crashing? His flying was weak. Poor heading control, poor bank angle control, very bad altitude control, a very poor pilot who was perfect for crashing. The chief instructor pilot said he could take a 757 underway and crash it into the Pentagon. Looks like you and the less than 0.2 percent of all pilots are the only ones with fantasy Hani can't crash a 757 into the 900 foot wide target.... Much less fly it like Hani had to fly it. ...
I have put kids in a simulator who flew better than Hani. My first landing in a heavy jet was exactly on centerline, on speed, at the correct attitude. First time, and the only planes I had flown before were C-150, C-172, T-37, T-38. First time less than 250 hours, on centerline. It is harder to land on speed, then to drive down the runway at 350 KIAS. I can hit a center line size target at 350 KIAS, or over Vmo.... Average guy could not do that. .
I might say you might be right if it was a 707, or KC-135. The 135 had a dutch roll that could eat up a new pilot if they failed to study how do damp it out; a simple task to learn.... I could not do that in a Boeing even if I had one. ...
The 757/767 are much easier than your T-6 to fly. Is it only me? Am I the only pilot who thinks flying jets is easier? Do all the gages and junk, "rather intimidate" you?... But I could fly that maneuver in my old long gone T-6. ...
So you believe the OP lie? And you are an instructor who can't do radar, or fly as good as Hani. And you are "rather intimidated" by flying.... The Myth Of Hani is too much for me to believe.
It provides me with insight.
Neither he nor I are competent critics of surgeons, cardiac or otherwise. So if a person is not a surgeon his opinion about matters surgical don't carry much weight.
So too, regarding matters aeronautical.
And I'm here to say that the average 350 hour pilot would be rather intimidated by being plopped down in the seat of a Boeing. Much less fly it like Hani had to fly it.
Did you miss "The Right Stuff"? Hello. You tell me you are a pilot, an instructor pilot, and characterize pilots as "rather intimidated"? Instructor?
Did you miss an "Officer and A Gentleman"? Did you see the Altitude Chamber scene? In our UPT (Undergraduate Pilot Training, now called something else) class Altitude Chamber ride, Lt Blair when asked to "put on his oxygen mask" was famous at 25,000 feet pressure altitude for saying, "oxygen, I'm a jock, I don't need no oxygen". What, "rather intimidated", pilots are not "rather intimidated", we are the intimidators.
Wrong Instructor, you need to get back to me on that false statement. The average pilot with any time would be all over being plopped down in the seat of a 757/767 to fly it. I was plopped down in the seat of a Boeing and flew it perfect with less than 250 hours. Pilots are "first born sons", Type A, skillful, self-confident, adventurous, competent, courageous, and master of complex tasks. And you bring up "rather intimidated"? What do you instruct? How to fail? If you believe the OP, you have taught yourself well; the OP is failure.
Crashing? His flying was weak. Poor heading control, poor bank angle control, very bad altitude control, a very poor pilot who was perfect for crashing. The chief instructor pilot said he could take a 757 underway and crash it into the Pentagon. Looks like you and the less than 0.2 percent of all pilots are the only ones with fantasy Hani can't crash a 757 into the 900 foot wide target.
I have put kids in a simulator who flew better than Hani. My first landing in a heavy jet was exactly on centerline, on speed, at the correct attitude. First time, and the only planes I had flown before were C-150, C-172, T-37, T-38. First time less than 250 hours, on centerline. It is harder to land on speed, then to drive down the runway at 350 KIAS. I can hit a center line size target at 350 KIAS, or over Vmo.
When I accidentally flew a KC-135 above Vmo at 500 feet, the aircraft handled better, more control, less bumps from the rough air, like using one ski on water.
I might say you might be right if it was a 707, or KC-135. The 135 had a dutch roll that could eat up a new pilot if they failed to study how do damp it out; a simple task to learn.
The 757/767 are much easier than your T-6 to fly. Is it only me? Am I the only pilot who thinks flying jets is easier? Do all the gages and junk, "rather intimidate" you?
You are saying you can't hit a 900 foot wide target, and you are an instructor. All my grandkids could hit it, first time. It is a piece of cake.
You are saying you can't hit a 207 foot wide target sticking up 1300 feet? How do you manage to land on a 40 foot wide runway? And you are an instructor?
I can land on brick one, and I can't see it - albeit we don't do that, coming up short gets the Runway manager upset with marks in the overrun, and the tires get damaged.
Flying jets is easier than props, and if you are an instructor you should be able to come up with reasons why that is true. And if you lack the knowledge, an instructor would get back to us, with the right information. If not, you are not an instructor.
If you can't do what Hani did using a 757, then you are not a pilot, you should not be flying. In fact, you are bragging how you can't fly as good as a novice pilot. It is simple to do what Hani did, I have flown with non-pilots and they could fly a jet better. My crews were two pilots, a navigator and a boom; guess who the non-pilots with no experience flying jets were?
I have studied the Flight of 77 from the FDR, I know the bank angle, pitch angle, etc for the entire flight. Ironically the OP author has made videos which have the same data, yet the OP is a big lie debunked by evidence, like radar, and the FDR.
So you believe the OP lie? And you are an instructor who can't do radar, or fly as good as Hani. And you are "rather intimidated" by flying.
Ironically the ground controller debunks the OP lie.
Radar debunks the OP lie.
Can you instruct radar? Are you VFR only? Don't you use ground control? Can you explain how 77 did not taxi out, when the ground controller said he did? Don't do reality? And you claim to be an instructor? One who can't explain radar, has no clue what a ground controller is. Fly IFR?
What your missing HD, is even a non specialist can look at the data, look at information and know when someone is blowing hot air.
As I have stated before. When two specialists give different views, supporting evidence comes into play. Which specialist view is best supported by the evidence becomes the question.
That is true Mike, but the analysis of a specialist carries far more weight than that of a layman in any field. Or do you disagree?
Do you think Brian Williams comments about brain surgery or aviation matters carries as much weight as comments from specialists in the respective fields?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?