Author Topic: Flight Path And Related Issues  (Read 185234 times)

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
  • Thanked: 721 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1830 on: April 18, 2019, 03:00:18 PM »
Quote
At this point I need a lot more than some guy's word. The days of "Here's the flight path" are not going to cut it after 47 years of zilch.

Most ridiculous statement I've heard yet....once again, you think this was just a joke investigation but you trump them in a month?
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1104
  • Thanked: 152 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1831 on: April 18, 2019, 03:00:40 PM »
These two posts imply two things:

1) SAGE was involved with plotting the flight path.

2) McChord crunched the data to create the flight path.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
  • Thanked: 721 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1832 on: April 18, 2019, 03:01:39 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
These two posts imply two things:

1) SAGE was involved with plotting the flight path.

2) McChord crunched the data to create the flight path.

Yup, probably did it on the way out from his shift...that "one guy"
« Last Edit: April 18, 2019, 03:02:25 PM by Shutter »
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1104
  • Thanked: 152 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1833 on: April 18, 2019, 03:10:40 PM »
I suppose this is where I differ from a lot of people.

After 47 years, I don't care who provided the info. I don't care if it was hand-delivered by a four-star General or the President of the United States. I need some questions answered.

If others choose to take the Air Force at their word at this point, have at it. If you want to continue to believe that they're infallible, have at it.

As for me I maintain what I've said many times before: Somebody made a mistake somewhere at sometime.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
  • Thanked: 721 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1834 on: April 18, 2019, 03:12:13 PM »
You cherry pick things. one second you try and discredit the USAF and the next take a Major for his word. didn't he work with those clowns?
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1104
  • Thanked: 152 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1835 on: April 18, 2019, 03:20:04 PM »
It's not cherry picking at all. If you re-watch my Daily DB Cooper Bite I state very clearly that this is one man's testimony, he may be wrong, or it may have been reported incorrectly, but it is worth considering when other factors are brought to bare.

I brought it up because it conflicts with the official story. It conflicts with R2. And, this was the guy responsible for coordinating the chase plane effort for the Air Force. Simply ignoring the comment is cherry picking.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1594
  • Thanked: 340 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1836 on: April 18, 2019, 03:22:33 PM »
Flying the Convair F-106 Delta Dart

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login (excerpt below)

Ask any pilot who has piloted the Six and he will quite readily tell you that it was one of the best aircraft he had ever flown. In typical delta-winged control configuration (equipped with elevons' instead of horizontal stabilizer and elevators), the Six felt much the same as any conventionally designed aircraft in flight, according to Six pilots familiar with other conventionally winged aircraft. The Six handled well at low speeds as well as high ones, even when operating at or near specified minimums. General flight characteristics of the Six fitted with the supersonic rated external fuel tanks are essentially the same as in clean' configuration, except that control at lower speeds is somewhat more demanding. Advantages of the delta wing with its high surface area included excellent performance at high altitudes, and agile turning ability at intermediate and lower altitudes. Furthermore, the Six was a straightforward and "honest" aircraft when flown within the parameters of its flight envelope. As with any advanced high-performance aircraft, however, flying beyond the envelope could occasionally become a hazardous undertaking. An indication of the structural integrity of the airframe was to be found in the fact that the original fuselage airframe lifespan of about 4,000 hours had been doubled, with no indications of its exceeding its lifetime limitations ever having been reached, in extensive ongoing structural testing.

Pilots flying the Six have described the plane's commendable feather light pitch responsiveness and its approach to a stall as being straightforward with progressive light, medium, and heavy buffeting leading to well indicated lateral instability that induced nose yaw. Any increase in angle of attack beyond the critical limit at this point and adverse yaw induced by any aileron input initiated a violent roll & pitch- up condition known as post-stall. The next step beyond this was a severe oscillation about all three axes and the likelihood of an imminent flat spin. All of these responses were predictably clear, and more than enough progressive warning of exceeding the flight specifications was given. Checks on the Six were a Mach 2 restriction, a 752 KIAS "Q" limit, and a skin temperature limit (the "AM3 gray" color that the Sixes were painted was to protect the skin from effects of high temperature, and was not solely for aesthetic effect).

377
 
The following users thanked this post: andrade1812

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1104
  • Thanked: 152 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1837 on: April 18, 2019, 03:36:05 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Flying the Convair F-106 Delta Dart

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login (excerpt below)

Ask any pilot who has piloted the Six and he will quite readily tell you that it was one of the best aircraft he had ever flown. In typical delta-winged control configuration (equipped with elevons' instead of horizontal stabilizer and elevators), the Six felt much the same as any conventionally designed aircraft in flight, according to Six pilots familiar with other conventionally winged aircraft. The Six handled well at low speeds as well as high ones, even when operating at or near specified minimums. General flight characteristics of the Six fitted with the supersonic rated external fuel tanks are essentially the same as in clean' configuration, except that control at lower speeds is somewhat more demanding. Advantages of the delta wing with its high surface area included excellent performance at high altitudes, and agile turning ability at intermediate and lower altitudes. Furthermore, the Six was a straightforward and "honest" aircraft when flown within the parameters of its flight envelope. As with any advanced high-performance aircraft, however, flying beyond the envelope could occasionally become a hazardous undertaking. An indication of the structural integrity of the airframe was to be found in the fact that the original fuselage airframe lifespan of about 4,000 hours had been doubled, with no indications of its exceeding its lifetime limitations ever having been reached, in extensive ongoing structural testing.

Pilots flying the Six have described the plane's commendable feather light pitch responsiveness and its approach to a stall as being straightforward with progressive light, medium, and heavy buffeting leading to well indicated lateral instability that induced nose yaw. Any increase in angle of attack beyond the critical limit at this point and adverse yaw induced by any aileron input initiated a violent roll & pitch- up condition known as post-stall. The next step beyond this was a severe oscillation about all three axes and the likelihood of an imminent flat spin. All of these responses were predictably clear, and more than enough progressive warning of exceeding the flight specifications was given. Checks on the Six were a Mach 2 restriction, a 752 KIAS "Q" limit, and a skin temperature limit (the "AM3 gray" color that the Sixes were painted was to protect the skin from effects of high temperature, and was not solely for aesthetic effect).

377

Like you said 377, with SAGE you simply plug the data into the 106, sit back and let the fighter fly you right to the target. Did this happen with 305?
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
  • Thanked: 721 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1838 on: April 18, 2019, 03:59:55 PM »

NOBODY, takes everything as fact. at least from what I see. it's not the point of taking anyone's word. it's going by known evidence. a lot of it doesn't fit into your theory. nobody said anything was "infallible". you are speaking for others who never made that claim or imply we all did.

It can be turned onto you as well. you want us to believe a few possible error's on a map you don't trust to begin with is wrong and, only, you can tell us where it's right. only you can move the path where you see fit?

R99 has a very simple theory surrounding this. I don't believe it, but he's been working hard for years on it and I value what he says more than most on this forum. that doesn't make him right either though. I don't see him trying to reach out to the world screaming all of this.

The whole case is surrounded with mystery. that doesn't mean it's all bullshit or open to just "plug and play" with it as one desires.

Lets say the wind were just as perfect as they claim it was in direction. you base this card on certain tests done which I fully agree with. now, what characteristics will the card have torn up the way it was found. you KNOW for CERTAIN it will have no effect, correct? you know the card tumbled, correct? you know exactly what the area looks like where the card was found, how many trees were in the area. the odds of it being in that spot for 7 years. you have all of that, right? lets not forget what the wind was/is in that area on the ground, got it covered, right? you can't use the flight path, it's fake, or inaccurate so how can you use anything from it? how do you know the plane was around Toledo at all. the map some guy did 47 years ago, seriously? who were these clowns doing the weather? they were not on V23 at all, right? radar? the guy turned away from the screen once? the radar means nothing, so you can't even prove the plane was anywhere around Toledo? if you believe the radar is correct in that spot 62 NM away from Seattle. then you will have serious trouble in Portland with the radar, no?

Just because I voice out louder than others doesn't mean I read the 302's as if it was the bible!.  I'm amazed how you make it out to be thrown together but use the very same evidence you slam? one guy made the map 47 years ago, that you use to support fact?

 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
  • Thanked: 721 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1839 on: April 18, 2019, 04:26:14 PM »
"THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE:
After Flight 305 took off from Sea-Tac Airport heading south it was followed by two F-106 fighter Delta Dart jets from the nearby McChord Air Force Base. These jets were piloted by airmen of the 318th Fighter Interceptor Squadron. Their instructions were to stay well back and not spook Cooper. In addition, the Delta Darts were wholly inappropriate for the job. As high speed interceptors they struggled to fly as slowly as the Boeing and were forced to use sweeping S-shaped flight patterns. Consequentially the pilots spent far more time trying to keep their jets in the air than watching out for Cooper and his parachute. To the embarrassment of the United States Air Force neither of the pilots tailing Flight 305 saw Cooper parachute out. This failure was initially explained by the bad weather over the Ariel region but later aviation specialists acknowledged that it would have been near impossible to see Cooper leave the Boeing 727 at any point on the flight path. At the time the United States Air Force had a vested interest in supporting the ‘bad weather’ jump zone as was a plausible reason for their failure and drew attention away from the fact that the F-106 Delta Darts had been the wrong aircraft for the job."

According to records. the plane was 5 miles behind 305.

 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1104
  • Thanked: 152 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1840 on: April 18, 2019, 04:28:36 PM »
"Somebody got something wrong somewhere."

What does the above statement mean? Bare in mind it doesn't say, "The entire flight path is wrong." It doesn't say, "Everything that everyone said or did is wrong." It doesn't say, "This is one great big conspiracy."

It says, "Somebody got something wrong somewhere."

I am merely trying to figure out who, what and where.

Once again, I'm suggesting a "portion' or "segment" of the flight path is incorrect. Therefore, I am not contradicting myself by believing that the jet departed Seattle at 7:36 and flew straight away to Maylay and arrived at 7:59 per the FBI.

If something else is found--parachute, attache' case, money--I wonder how likely it is that it will be where it "should" be according to the FBI and the flight path? If I had to hazard a guess I'd say 1%.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
  • Thanked: 721 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1841 on: April 18, 2019, 04:52:53 PM »
You can't be claiming you are looking for answers while posting exactly what happened? that's what you are doing. theories are one thing. you are promoting this theory as fact and downplaying everything possible to make it float.

If I found something supporting any theory. I would gladly post it. who ever it is. why do you think I did the simulation. because I believe the path, or live by it? why would I test the placard? why would I be involved in the case. because Cooper survived? I'm looking for answers. not assumptions. how many of you guys can be right?

it's like people trying to cram 2+2 = 5 sometimes. it doesn't work.



 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
  • Thanked: 721 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1842 on: April 18, 2019, 05:02:14 PM »
Quote
If something else is found--parachute, attache' case, money--I wonder how likely it is that it will be where it "should" be according to the FBI and the flight path? If I had to hazard a guess I'd say 1%.


Based on radar data from Portland, Seattle and McChord, along with radio transcripts and flight data, chase planes, and, pilot testimony. what percentage would you give with the path being wrong in one area?

Your question surrounds assumption, as usual...
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1104
  • Thanked: 152 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1843 on: April 18, 2019, 05:08:11 PM »
I think I finally understand the conflict here.

You think I'm trying to convince people I'm right. That is simply not the case.

I am telling people what I think and giving them the reasons why. Whether it's the flight path, Tena Bar, placard, or Sheridan as DBC, I am giving my thoughts and explaining my rationale. If some are convinced by my logic, that's great. If some are not convinced, point out something, and cause me to rethink something and learn something new, that's even better.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
  • Thanked: 721 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #1844 on: April 18, 2019, 05:32:57 PM »
I think several people have told you about things that are wrong with the theory and you return with not agreeing or try and discredit the facts.

Variables of the placard.
Shift the path at Toledo.  R99 is going by a mark made on the map. you just moved it?
nothing in the 302's about parts explained.
Ignoring the amount of people involved in different parts of the case. (one guy)
Using what you believe is an old worn out map that's wrong to support a theory.

Just a few things mentioned above. the same pattern occurs with suspects. descriptions are often wrong. yes, when the crime is only seconds long. they are against the description but proudly post the suspect beside the sketch?

I can't tell you how the placard got where it was found. you can? plenty of variables have been given, and ignored. 47 year old weather data probably from one guy! see, I can do it too....