Author Topic: Flight Path And Related Issues  (Read 213741 times)

Robert99

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #90 on: March 16, 2014, 02:13:38 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Within minutes after NWA 305 took off and headed south on V-23, the Seattle Tower released other aircraft for take off.  Captain Bohan states that he took off for Portland four minutes after NWA 305 took off.  However it is unlikely that Bohan was cleared down V-23.  In all probability he took V-23E, which is now known as V-495, straight to the Battleground VORTAC (formerly known as the Portland VORTAC).  Since Bohan was landing at Portland, he would be descending to a lower altitude as he approached the Battleground VORTAC.  Consequently, the people living under the V-23E airway would probably have noticed some lower flying aircraft headed into Portland from a more easterly direction.  But there is no reason to believe that she heard NWA 305.


Do you think it's possible she heard Bohan's flight the evening? she also claims the weather was horrible which doesn't match either. I notice Clyde Lewis wasn't to familiar with the flight path, or failed to note the time the plane was at 7000.

It is possible that she heard Bohan's plane if the time was about 8:10PM.  Bohan would beat NWA 305 to the Portland area and, since he has been quoted as saying that he landed on Runway 10 that evening, he would have to swing west a bit from the Battleground VORTAC to line up with that runway.  Taking magnetic variation into account, Bohan was landing basically to the east-southeast that night.

I don't know the elevation of Ariel right off, but I'll bet it is quite a bit higher than Portland International Airport which is just 30 feet above sea level.  So she could have been in a foggy area with 100 percent humidity.
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7868
  • Thanked: 757 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #91 on: March 16, 2014, 02:23:14 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Within minutes after NWA 305 took off and headed south on V-23, the Seattle Tower released other aircraft for take off.  Captain Bohan states that he took off for Portland four minutes after NWA 305 took off.  However it is unlikely that Bohan was cleared down V-23.  In all probability he took V-23E, which is now known as V-495, straight to the Battleground VORTAC (formerly known as the Portland VORTAC).  Since Bohan was landing at Portland, he would be descending to a lower altitude as he approached the Battleground VORTAC.  Consequently, the people living under the V-23E airway would probably have noticed some lower flying aircraft headed into Portland from a more easterly direction.  But there is no reason to believe that she heard NWA 305.


Do you think it's possible she heard Bohan's flight the evening? she also claims the weather was horrible which doesn't match either. I notice Clyde Lewis wasn't to familiar with the flight path, or failed to note the time the plane was at 7000.

It is possible that she heard Bohan's plane if the time was about 8:10PM.  Bohan would beat NWA 305 to the Portland area and, since he has been quoted as saying that he landed on Runway 10 that evening, he would have to swing west a bit from the Battleground VORTAC to line up with that runway.  Taking magnetic variation into account, Bohan was landing basically to the east-southeast that night.

I don't know the elevation of Ariel right off, but I'll bet it is quite a bit higher than Portland International Airport which is just 30 feet above sea level.  So she could have been in a foggy area with 100 percent humidity.


she says she lived in Amboy during 1971. sea level is 410 feet. the fog could be a factor for sure. Ariel is at 455 according to weather underground.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 02:26:34 PM by shutter »
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #92 on: March 16, 2014, 04:09:02 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I watched the video with Clyde Lewis at the Ariel Tavern. Dona Elliot says she heard a plane, but didn't see it. she also claimed you couldn't see across the street. she is claiming the plane was miles off V23 flying east of Amboy. how many other planes were in this area. could she of heard a plane flying outside of 305's area for safety?




I have no opinion yet on Elliot's story, but on the flight path -- isn't it interesting that with all of the fracas surrounding radar and satellites and the disappearance of a certain 777 in 2014 with all of our 21st century technology, why anyone would not entertain the notion that a radar flight path from 1971 might possibly, just possibly, be in error?   8)

Ive been thinking the exact same thing... so far as I can piece it together there was not one iota of thought about an east path Washougal route until the Ingram money find and the hydrologist Bradely's report, naming the Washougal River as a possible source/path for something, to the Columbia, then to Tina Bar. But so far as I know Bradley citing the Washougal was shere speculation; ie. nothing in flight path info itself to link the Washougal area to flight 305. Except for one thing! The persistent rumor from people like JT that the Washougal area already had been named and was in play before 1980! Named specifically by Scott and Rataczak in private conversions with guess who - Himmelsbach, of course. Then Rataczak saying publicly just a few years ago: "I'm the only living person who knows what the real flight path was". Surely 40 years later 'they' can't be holding back the true flight path just in case only Cooper (and Rataczak) would know! That limp excuse died years ago. The better excuse would be: 'nobody really knows'! Which could open the door to the Dawson account since if anyone was in a position to know, Dawson and his group surely knew! (Both NWA and the FBI were dependent on them, not the
other way around - that is a fact). 

Tom still sticks to the Ariel FP because I guess, "smart guys had the info and knew". Thus no conceivable way for the money to get to Tina Bar by any natural means... and the money was never "in river water" (maybe exposed to water but not "in" it!), if you can buy that weak demonstration of science and never mind 3 or 4 FBI lab reports on the money that drew a different conclusion. And the worst of it all perhaps is the fact people won’t even discuss it openly! The Long Ears won't talk to the Short Ears. People have staked out their territory and won't budge. (Corinthians 333:945). A pox on all their houses!


  :) :) :)

     
« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 04:13:22 PM by georger »
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7868
  • Thanked: 757 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #93 on: March 16, 2014, 04:12:59 PM »
I think Tom missed my comment. perhaps you have an answer. how much evidence has been erased over time, and what happened when the money was first found? I still think the money and the path are extremely related to figuring this out. if in fact evidence is lost in the bills. you would not have a conclusion of it's arrival.
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #94 on: March 16, 2014, 04:55:11 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think Tom missed my comment. perhaps you have an answer. how much evidence has been erased over time, and what happened when the money was first found? I still think the money and the path are extremely related to figuring this out. if in fact evidence is lost in the bills. you would not have a conclusion of it's arrival.

If you are asking me, Bruce's account given by Shrueder is the best account of what happened from the moment Ingram walked into the FBI with the money ... Shrueder (sp?) and other agents went out to the Faxio's almost immediately, after gathering up tools and twine (rakes, hoes, shovels etc) Dorwin threw into his car. Dorwin took charge while others posted at the road to keep people out. Bruce's account is spot-on with what Dorwin told me happened. Dorwin had the foresight due to his science background and interest in archaeology to grid the area off just as Bruce reports. All digging, raking etc commenced within those grid lines (seen on news ariel photos). Dorwin says they found-a this and-a that et cetera within the first afternoon. Bruce describes that exactly as Dorwin told me. Kaye also interviewed Dorwin and I assume Dorwin told Kaye the same story. Dorwin and his crew found exactly what Bruce reports Dorwin saying they found the first day, late into the first afternoon.

The second day the guy's and gal's from Seattle showed up and by afternoon several agents from the Portland office were pulled off due to the demands of other priorities surfacing. So by afternoon of the second day I seem to recall Dorwin was no longer at Tina Bar to personally witness anything. Dorwin was the lead 'negotiator' for the Portland office and was sent off to deal with some new situation that came up. Between Himmelsbach (Portland) and Pringle (Seattle office), the Tina Bar investigation moved very rapidly. Palmer was brought in, consultants were brought in, the Faxio's were enlisted with their tractor and backhoe at Palmer's request, and ground crews continued to dig holes and rake and explore (with hand screening of sand etc ...). With the exception of one fist-sized wad of what looked like decomposed money-matter, pulled from an area just east of the Ingram find location and lower than the Ingram closer to the water line, nothing more of a significant nature (ie actual bundles) was found. It's my understanding Seattle took charge of everything found and multiple samples were sent off for lab work (which fits with the reports Larry provided Tom and I). For some reason, Tom has never cited these lab reports - I don't know why. What Larry gave us were summary reports which include, mention, name, and give a brief summary of  a series of lab reports) - referred to by Tom on his website as the "Transcript(s)" ?. This socalled "Transcript" included the Palmer Report.

Let me post this and we can go from there ...
« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 05:00:58 PM by georger »
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7868
  • Thanked: 757 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #95 on: March 16, 2014, 09:35:24 PM »
Robert99, check this item out being testing by the guy who invented X-Plane.

VP-400

This is the VP-400 artificially-intellegent runway-seeker in test-flight.
If the engine quits, or the pilot passes out, the VP-400 chooses the airport and runway that are most likely to result in a successful power-off landing and brings the airplane in to the runway without further pilot intervention. See some of our test flying here from inside the cockpit.






 

Robert99

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #96 on: March 16, 2014, 10:52:48 PM »
I don't think it is that easy.
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #97 on: March 19, 2014, 06:16:13 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't think it is that easy.

In case you missed it: Sluggo has surfaced, is going to revamp is site, and will check in here from time to time!
 :) :)
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7868
  • Thanked: 757 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #98 on: March 19, 2014, 06:25:11 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't think it is that easy.

In case you missed it: Sluggo has surfaced, is going to revamp is site, and will check in here from time to time!
 :) :)


Thanks for the update G. I look forward to Sluggo stopping by.
 

Offline EVickiW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 294
  • Thanked: 26 times
    • NamUs:  (National Missing and Unidentified Persons System) Missing since September 1971 - Melvin Wilson
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #99 on: March 19, 2014, 08:08:58 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't think it is that easy.

In case you missed it: Sluggo has surfaced, is going to revamp is site, and will check in here from time to time!
 :) :)


Thanks for the update G. I look forward to Sluggo stopping by.

When Sluggo revamps his site,maybe he could add a link to this forum. I think he has a link to, or mentions,  the DZ.  :D
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 08:24:26 PM by EVickiW »
You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7868
  • Thanked: 757 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #100 on: March 19, 2014, 09:06:25 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't think it is that easy.

In case you missed it: Sluggo has surfaced, is going to revamp is site, and will check in here from time to time!
 :) :)


Thanks for the update G. I look forward to Sluggo stopping by.

When Sluggo revamps his site,maybe he could add a link to this forum. I think he has a link to, or mentions,  the DZ.  :D


yes, I think he does have a link section. it would be nice to be connected to his site. I have a lot of respect for the work he has done over the years. top notch.
 

Offline hom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #101 on: March 20, 2014, 02:58:18 PM »
If a person is interested in doing a real analysis of the "FBI" flightpath plot, he or she needs to analyze the actual thing from the FBI - not the "red ball, blue ball" file that totally obscures the red crosses that mark the positions on the actual FBI file.  Also, a person needs to understand about how positions are plotted on such charts by people who know how to do it.  (Another useful area of knowledge I'll address in a later post if anyone cares.)

The attached figure is a low quality copy of part of the "FBI" flightpath plot.  Forget about the positions plotted on it (and the broad felt-tip line) for now, and just think of the figure as a chart on which you will plot positions.  Refer to the actual "FBI" plot if necessary to see details referenced in the discussion.

In the figure, four scales are identified with distinctive labels.  The two latitude scales are the same.  The two longitude scales look similar but are not exactly the same.  The short marks along each scale mark full minutes of latitude or longitude.  Every fifth mark along each scale is longer than the others.  Every tenth mark is longer and extends equally on both sides of the scale line.

Note that no numbers appear by the minute marks.  When using such a chart it is wise to carefully annotate the number of minutes for at least every 10-minute mark.  Otherwise, you are likely to make mistakes such as occurred in plotting points to the west of PDX on the "FBI" flightpath plot.

This is important partly because you will find that some of the minute marks have been overprinted by some map features, and there are some map features that look much like minute marks but are not in the right places to be minute marks.

Where such a situation occurs, it's a good idea to mark a minute in the right place on the scale if you might be plotting something around missing coordinate mark.  The spacing of the ones you add can be determined by measuring the spacing between other nearby minute marks.  [On the "FBI" plot, for example, 5' of latitude equals 136 pixels.]  Take care not to use spacing from one longitude scale on another longitude scale.  The distance corresponding to a minute of longitude varies with latitude.  A minute of longitude is a smaller distance the higher you go on the map.  (For example, a minute of longitude is a distance of zero at the north and south poles.)

The marks are more readily recognized on the original flightpath plots than on this low-res copy I made, but you need to be able to magnify areas somewhat to do so.

On a complete aero chart such as the "FBI" plot chart from which I cut the figure, a few latitudes and longitudes are pre-printed.  These are the latitudes and longitudes on which the scales are drawn.  The longitude scale at the bottom of the figure is on latitude 45°30'N.  The one at the top is on latitude 46°N.  The latitude scale on the right is on longitude 122°30'W, and the one on the left is on longitude 123°W.  The values are outside the extents of the figure, but they're marked along the scale lines.

To plot a point on the chart, you need to know the latitude and longitude of the point.  You will draw a left-right line at the latitude and an up-down (away and back, N-S) line at the longitude.  These two lines will intersect to make a cross marking the point to be plotted.

You don't want these lines to extend all the way across the chart if you're going to want to also plot other points because doing so would result in an unintelligable grid rather than a group of separate plotted points.  So, when you start to draw a line for a latitude, you want it to extend only a bit each side of the longitude where you will draw the intersecting line.

Since it will sometimes be a little hard to estimate where the intersecting (second) line will be, especially if the plot cross is going to be far from a scale, the first line of a cross will typically be a bit longer than the second one.  Such crosses (one line considerably longer than the other) are an indicator that the plotting was done by someone with some experience or instruction.  Lines with mis-aligned sections are an indicator of an amateur that didn't make the initial lines long enough.

On a printed version of a chart a person can position and orient the lines using a "drafting machine," or by using just a straight edge and the scales preprinted on the chart.  If a drafting machine is used, the machine and chart must be aligned before drawing the lines.

We'll use just the straight edge.  On a digital file, the equivalent method is to use a tool that draws a thin straight line between the desired latitude on the left and right scales and another between the desired longitude on the upper and lower scales.

Drawing the lines that will intersect at the desired latitude and longitude is not as simple as you might think.  How it is done will depend upon the skill level of the plotter and upon the perceived need for precision and accuracy.

If you place that straight edge exactly on the desired coordinate and then draw a line along that straight edge, you will find that the line is offset from that exact coordinate.  This is because the drawing tool, such as a pencil, doesn't put the line exactly on the edge.  A tool with a sharp tip will help.  But the tip will have to be run close up against the edge.  With an ordinary pencil, for example, tilt the pencil so that the needle-sharp tip is right up against the edge while you draw the line.  With such a sharp tip, the drawn line will be very thin.  If the pencil has a lead soft enough to make the line dark, the tip won't remain so sharp through more than a few plotted points.

Drawing tools such as mechanical pencils require a different technique for precision and accuracy.  Place the center of the lead on the scale at the desired coordinate.  Move the straight edge up against the drawing tool tip.  Look closely at the offset between the edge and the lead center.  Hold the straight edge down tight where you have just positioned it while you slide/rotate the other end of the straight edge to place the other end on the desired coordinate while visually adding an offset equal to the one you noted at the first setting.  Then hold the straight edge at the last position and place the pencil there to ensure that the offset you added is correct.  Adjust the offset if needed.  Then hold this position while you check, and reposition if needed, the alignment on the first position.  What you have done is position and align the straight edge so that the line drawn will be closely on the desired coordinate.

Different methods can be used to locate the positions on the scales, depending upon the precision of the data and the desired precision/accuracy of the finished plot.  Take a latitude of X°30.7' for example.  You could look at the scale and visually estimate a position 7/10 of the way from the 30' mark to the 31' mark.  This is an easy way that would give results about as precise/accurate as the chart itself in the case of the aero charts used for the "FBI" flightpath plot.  Because it is easy, this method would be used by a knowledgeable plotter if the source data (latitude and longitude vs. time) has a precision of less than a minute of latitude and longitude.

Or, you could use a caliper, proportional divider, or scale and divider to accurately mark the 7/10 point with a "needle-point" hole in the paper.  This tiny hole gives a precise way of positioning the drawing tool.  The pencil lead (or whatever) sinks into the hole, so the hole centers the drawing tool tip.  The hole will also help keep the tool tip from moving when you move the straight edge up against the tool tip.

Or, you could use a scale on the straight edge of a piece of paper or plastic showing tenths of minutes.  If plotting on a digital copy of a chart, you can make digital versions of such scales.

Finally, if you're trying to plot precisely, use a thin lead or something even finer.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2014, 03:00:29 PM by hom »
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7868
  • Thanked: 757 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #102 on: March 20, 2014, 05:03:10 PM »
excellent post as usual. let me ask this. what is more crucial, flying exactly to the flight path, or is the speed, altitude and weather the key factors. what I'm saying is can you be a couple degree's off here and there and still have a good run as long as you have everything else lined up? or is it that crucial to fly the path like a carbon copy?
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7868
  • Thanked: 757 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #103 on: March 20, 2014, 05:31:05 PM »
here is an interesting post from Galen on Sluggo's forum several years ago:

"Just remember that Rataczak said he thought the "lights of Portland were coming into view." Rataczak actually told me in one interview that he thought the plane was "west" of I-5. When examining the radar plots of the flight path after the dog-leg around PDX, they "were" west of I-5."
 

Offline hom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #104 on: March 20, 2014, 08:53:51 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
excellent post as usual. let me ask this. what is more crucial, flying exactly to the flight path, or is the speed, altitude and weather the key factors. what I'm saying is can you be a couple degree's off here and there and still have a good run as long as you have everything else lined up? or is it that crucial to fly the path like a carbon copy?

Depends on what you mean by "to fly the path like a carbon copy."   You definitely should not go directly from one plotted point to the next, to the next, etc.  The flight would not have done that and the plot does not indicate that they did.  Take the plotted points.  Mark a rectangular zone one minute in longitude (.7nm) wide and one minute of latitude (1nm) high centered on each plotted point.  Then fly through the rectangular "hoops" using the largest possible turn radiuses.  This makes it possible to be a few degrees off at places without getting outside the plot limits.  Getting through all the hoops would mean your flightpath would have been plotted as in the "FBI" flightpath plot.  If you can only get close to doing this while matching the reported speeds, altitudes, weights, fuel flow, flap/gear settings, temperatures and wind directions I think it would have to be considered a pretty good validation--especially if we can verify that your model has the right lift/drag/thrust characteristics.  Simple ;)