Not at all, the garbled data is consistent with the in-flight breakup and unusual antenna attitudes. Problem starts when people analyze that garbled data and start to draw conclusions from it.
Exactly my point.
first because very few viewers are capable of meaningfully interpreting flight data; the experienced, old guys and gals have a tough enough time!,
Of course.
As in 'the plane fell out of the sky', no. But trying to use the questionable data to explain why is fallacious and pointless.
Yes, yes, yes.
Pitot-static system, so you have both dynamic and static pressures.
The pilots and therfore, ground stations CANNOT read static source information. It all goes through ADCs (air data computers). By the time some data is sent via ADS-B then dealt with by a ground station it has been processed so much it is impossible to draw a conclusion about what a static port was "seeing".
From FR24 data we can say:
The aircraft went UP in a steady climb and came DOWN in an erratic uncontrolled fashion.
Which would be evident WITHOUT FR24 data as the wreckage is now sitting on the ground.
Any other "conclusion" or "theory" people try to derive from the data is purely supposition.