Newsgroups: *rec.music.classical.guitar* From: *Rob Balsamo Michael Thames wrote: > > You obviously are loosing control here Clinger. The industry standard > > for the manufacture of the FDR must meet is 0.05 seconds. As you and > > the other loonies, are suggesting that there is absolutely no way to > > know the trend of a 100 ton object traveling 535 mph one second later, > > half a second is an eternity. While Rob acknowledges this 0.05 lag, > > for the benefit of the doubt, he adds another 0.05 into his > > calculations, and rounds it off at 1.00 seconds quite generous of > > him! > With one sample per second, as in the F-2100 [1], > the worst-case recording latency cannot be less > than one second. That is just a mathematical > fact. Email exchange with Ed Sanata of L3 Communications. (i also have personally recorded a conversation with Ed confirming the below. It can be found on our front page in the Calum Douglas presentation in London). Do you know what signal "generated" to "being recorded" means? If not... i'll help you. It means the buffer cannot exceed 0.5 seconds. As per DME (in the video below), the NTSB plot and NTSB data, it is clear the FDR did not exceed that standard. "4: What would be a typical time lag between the sensor signal being generated (for example aileron angle) and the data being logged to the protected memory of the recorder? L-3 Response: Per ED55, it shall not exceed 0.5 seconds, 5: Is the size of this recording delay regulated by industry or just minimized by good design? L-3 Response: Regulated per ED-55, Minimum Operational Performance Specification for Flight Data Recorder Systems. 6: In the case of a major accident like CFIT (controlled flight into terrain) how much data (in terms of seconds of flight) is typically lost? (For example signals still being processed by the DFDAU). L-3Response: With the use of the Solid State Flight Data Recorders, typically, data is only lost at the point when power to the recorder or FDAU is terminated." > I was aware that Rob Balsamo has been touting > a latency of 0.5 (not 0.05) seconds. That is > just one of many clues to his expertise. And perhaps you know more than the manufacturer of the FDR? > To the one-second minimum latency implied by > the sampling rate, we must add the latency due > to buffering, which I explained in a previous > post. Wrong, See above > Page 3 of the NTSB report does not explain whether > the F-2100 buffers at the subframe level or at the > frame level, but frame buffering is the most likely > reason for defining frames at all [1]. Wrong, See above > Completely independently of the above, John Farmer > concluded that "The FDR file positional data ends > 6+-2 seconds prior to the reported impact location." > Other investigators have reached similar conclusions. The "other investigator" is a janitor. Farmer doesnt have a clue what DME means. Nor has he consulted with pilots, L3, or Accident Investigators as we have. Farmer used to consult with me for his work, but once his ego got to be too much after i tried to explain DME to him, he kinda lost it. Please review this short video addressing Farmer's false claims. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8467167311585730947&hl=en Farmer has mnade so many mistakes in his work he deleted his whole blog. We actually used to post some of his work on our site. He thinks the csv file was manipulated to show a southern approach. Its still in our forum, but we removed the blog from our main site. Farmer is a bit strange. The only other "investigator" who claims to have FDR experince (although he is an anonymous "duh-bunker"), claims there can be no more than 2 seconds missing. Its still too high. http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=4801 > You do the math. Ditto By the way, we have the raw file decode as well. That is how we obtained radar altitude. Regards, Rob (hope this helps MT as im not gonna bother reading the other posts full of BS im sure.) Rob