Author Topic: Flight Path And Related Issues  (Read 755479 times)

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9300
  • Thanked: 1024 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2670 on: August 17, 2019, 09:05:19 PM »
Don't put words in my mouth either...

Quote
The larger point is that this probably answers how the initial search area was devised--again with no Air Force flight path in hand.

I've tried for several posts to tell this story. you guys keep shooting down things because of no map...you both said no map...no search worth value.

I pointed out reasons I believe they went forward with a search. they seem to be logical reasons. map or no map. I NEVER once claimed anyone had an agenda to anything nor did I imply anything of the sort! I responded to each question with my answers. that's like implying I have an agenda for the known flight path. that's wrong too! I'm looking for answers just as anyone else is. I rely on what is on the table and what needs to be removed from the table in order to change anything in that event. certain things are hard to remove IMO. until then I can only rely on the evidence in place. attacking data or comments do not suggest an agenda in my book.

It pisses me off hearing people accuse me of them having an agenda. Robert Blevins is famous for that. the only thing you will see me do with accusations is about lying. that statement really ticked me off...

Good nite
« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 09:28:17 PM by Shutter »
 

Offline Robert99

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1711
  • Thanked: 196 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2671 on: August 17, 2019, 10:41:31 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't for see any good research in this with you guys. it's one thing after another...

Everyone is wrong and you guys are right....with that I'm out...

Shutter, I hate to say this but I don't see any research at all on your part.  Based on my personal exchanges with you, I know that you have made major efforts to educate yourself on aeronautical things and other fields that are relevant to understanding the Cooper hijacking.

But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value.  EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking.  We have then proposed alternatives to their work.

You apparently have evaluated the work that EU and I have done and found it lacking.  You found the work that is available from others to be sufficient although that work has major problems that I am assure you are aware of.  That's the way the ball bounces and that is okay with me. 

My work posted here was done with deliberation and considering all the angles.  I have been involved in aviation as a pilot or aeronautical engineer since the age of 15.  One of the aircraft involved in my flight training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing 707 prototype (the "dash 80") at the National Air and Space Museum on the east side of Dulles Airport just outside Washington, DC.  I also did a small number of parachute jumps 55+ years ago just to spice things up.

To summarize, the work I have posted here is based on personal experience and knowledge.  And I'm sticking with it.     
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9300
  • Thanked: 1024 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2672 on: August 17, 2019, 11:06:28 PM »
Evidence is what I look at vs research. I don't see valid reasons to dismiss parts of the known evidence. perhaps some can be. we have multiple levels and people surrounding the events from radar operators to the Air Force. the pilots. extremely well versed people at NWO.

If you have read my past comments you would see I don't believe much of anything without solid proof. I'm not claiming the FBI has provided solid proof but a lot of this is hard to dismiss with so many involved to all be wrong.

I see photo's of Caterpillar Island in the 70's and they are different from today along with the traffic on the island. I read reports from other radar operators that seem to be dismissed based on bad transponders or ignoring or not aware of the plane being in there airspace? the hijacking took place at Portland. why wouldn't they be in the loop even if they were alone?

You guys think I'm an idiot. that's fine too. I will no longer challenge you or anyone further in the DB Cooper case. I will continue to run this forum but without interaction. one thing I will not tolerate is being accused of telling someone they have an agenda.


Dave Brown
 

Offline Robert99

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1711
  • Thanked: 196 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2673 on: August 17, 2019, 11:25:27 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Evidence is what I look at vs research. I don't see valid reasons to dismiss parts of the known evidence. perhaps some can be. we have multiple levels and people surrounding the events from radar operators to the Air Force. the pilots. extremely well versed people at NWO.

If you have read my past comments you would see I don't believe much of anything without solid proof. I'm not claiming the FBI has provided solid proof but a lot of this is hard to dismiss with so many involved to all be wrong.

I see photo's of Caterpillar Island in the 70's and they are different from today along with the traffic on the island. I read reports from other radar operators that seem to be dismissed based on bad transponders or ignoring or not aware of the plane being in there airspace? the hijacking took place at Portland. why wouldn't they be in the loop even if they were alone?

You guys think I'm an idiot. that's fine too. I will no longer challenge you or anyone further in the DB Cooper case. I will continue to run this forum but without interaction. one thing I will not tolerate is being accused of telling someone they have an agenda.


Dave Brown

I have never said you had an agenda and I know damn well you ARE NOT an idiot.  I have always understood that this is your forum and you are free to run it any way you want.  And I have NO DISRESPECT whatsoever for you.

Robert Nicholson
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9300
  • Thanked: 1024 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2674 on: August 17, 2019, 11:32:52 PM »
I can read between the lines...the agenda statement was made by Eric. I'm not accusing you of that..I consider this matter closed.
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3182
  • Thanked: 467 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2675 on: August 17, 2019, 11:44:17 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Here is a better copy...

A few observations regarding the document.

1) This is from Thanksgiving Day, therefore the flight path had not yet been plotted. I assume it was an initial dropzone roughly crafted.

2) It appears that it is describing a section of centerline V23. This would make sense inasmuch as they would assume the jet was flying V23.

3) No wind drift was factored into a search area. Indeed, if DBC no pulled there would not be much of a drift. Moreover, they probably didn't have much in terms of wind data at that time.

You make LARGE SWEEPING assumptions knowing nothing!

If there wasnt a map perse, which there may have been!, ........... something or someone directed the FBI and LE to respond  to specific areas to look. What was that based on? ESP? 
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3182
  • Thanked: 467 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2676 on: August 17, 2019, 11:46:53 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Whatever. The document obviously doesn't mention looking to the NE or any another direction relative to the descent line.

The larger point is that this probably answers how the initial search area was devised--again with no Air Force flight path in hand.

You are asking how long it took for the Air Force to generate any map, or an opinion based on data?

I think you are creating another straw man which has no basis in fact.
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3182
  • Thanked: 467 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2677 on: August 17, 2019, 11:53:01 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Whatever. The document obviously doesn't mention looking to the NE or any another direction relative to the descent line.

The larger point is that this probably answers how the initial search area was devised--again with no Air Force flight path in hand.

Did you ask Ammerman how long it took McChord to generate any kind of map?

I didn't ask the Lt Col but I will if I can get him. The salient facts are:

The flight path coordinates were calculated from data tape recorded at the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Venter (DC).  The calculation and the plotting were almost certainly done by the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES).   It was their job to do such analyses, and the DC were just users of the system. The data was hand plotted, probably by the same people who computed the coordinates. NWA and USAF people collaborated in producing the '72 searchzone map (with benefit of the "pressure bump" signature on the flight data recorder) that he jumped at about 19 seconds before 8:11.

 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3182
  • Thanked: 467 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2678 on: August 17, 2019, 11:58:17 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Don't put words in my mouth either...

Quote
The larger point is that this probably answers how the initial search area was devised--again with no Air Force flight path in hand.

I've tried for several posts to tell this story. you guys keep shooting down things because of no map...you both said no map...no search worth value.

I pointed out reasons I believe they went forward with a search. they seem to be logical reasons. map or no map. I NEVER once claimed anyone had an agenda to anything nor did I imply anything of the sort! I responded to each question with my answers. that's like implying I have an agenda for the known flight path. that's wrong too! I'm looking for answers just as anyone else is. I rely on what is on the table and what needs to be removed from the table in order to change anything in that event. certain things are hard to remove IMO. until then I can only rely on the evidence in place. attacking data or comments do not suggest an agenda in my book.

It pisses me off hearing people accuse me of them having an agenda. Robert Blevins is famous for that. the only thing you will see me do with accusations is about lying. that statement really ticked me off...

Good nite

We dont know that there wasnt a map by the time 305 landed at Reno ......... or even by 9:00 following any suspicion Cooper had bailed over Washington circa 8:11. I mean the FBI, H, and LE were already scrambled to the Woodland area? Based on what had to be somebody's idea of a flight path and time-sensitive position on that preliminary flight path map!
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3182
  • Thanked: 467 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2679 on: August 18, 2019, 12:00:29 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't for see any good research in this with you guys. it's one thing after another...

Everyone is wrong and you guys are right....with that I'm out...

Shutter, I hate to say this but I don't see any research at all on your part.  Based on my personal exchanges with you, I know that you have made major efforts to educate yourself on aeronautical things and other fields that are relevant to understanding the Cooper hijacking.

But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value.  EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking.  We have then proposed alternatives to their work.

You apparently have evaluated the work that EU and I have done and found it lacking.  You found the work that is available from others to be sufficient although that work has major problems that I am assure you are aware of.  That's the way the ball bounces and that is okay with me. 

My work posted here was done with deliberation and considering all the angles.  I have been involved in aviation as a pilot or aeronautical engineer since the age of 15.  One of the aircraft involved in my flight training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing 707 prototype (the "dash 80") at the National Air and Space Museum on the east side of Dulles Airport just outside Washington, DC.  I also did a small number of parachute jumps 55+ years ago just to spice things up.

To summarize, the work I have posted here is based on personal experience and knowledge.  And I'm sticking with it.     

But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value.  EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking.

No you havent. There is no question about that! Especially EU who doesnt even know WHO to talk to.
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3182
  • Thanked: 467 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2680 on: August 18, 2019, 12:11:15 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I can read between the lines...the agenda statement was made by Eric. I'm not accusing you of that..I consider this matter closed.

This is not over by a country mile!

I have Air Force interviews Ive never published. 

If Ulis is 'just asking questions' he sure has a lot of answers! So many answers he can reject things he has yet to even formulate a question about ... because he is lacking and rejecting facts he doesn't even know about, in order to perpetuate his narrative. He has had a narrative since day one.

How soon did the Air Force have a map? How soon did they have a statement about what the flight path was and where to look ? With communications and time data from NWA. Very quickly. Then a longer process started. A test, FDR analysis, etc etc etc. But between the AF and NWA they had an area identified and people were looking within hours.

The AF had a pretty good record of tracking planes and sending up interceptors to find and engage them, within minutes! How quickly could they do a print out? How fast is the printer!?  How quickly could people talk between McChord and NWA? How fast is the telephone and the human voice box?

Look at the document Shutter posted -  at the top of the page it's dated 11/25 which means they probably had a map on the 24th since the document states a map...

What Shutter is saying makes complete sense and so far is backed up by the facts obtained from Lt. Colonel USAF ret. who worked with the system at McChord.

This is a tempest over personal narrative vs research!  :chr2:
 
« Last Edit: August 18, 2019, 12:44:40 AM by georger »
 

Offline Robert99

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1711
  • Thanked: 196 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2681 on: August 18, 2019, 01:08:54 AM »
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 for see any good research in this with you guys. it's one thing after another...

Everyone is wrong and you guys are right....with that I'm out...

Shutter, I hate to say this but I don't see any research at all on your part.  Based on my personal exchanges with you, I know that you have made major efforts to educate yourself on aeronautical things and other fields that are relevant to understanding the Cooper hijacking.

But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value.  EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking.  We have then proposed alternatives to their work.

You apparently have evaluated the work that EU and I have done and found it lacking.  You found the work that is available from others to be sufficient although that work has major problems that I am assure you are aware of.  That's the way the ball bounces and that is okay with me. 

My work posted here was done with deliberation and considering all the angles.  I have been involved in aviation as a pilot or aeronautical engineer since the age of 15.  One of the aircraft involved in my flight training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing 707 prototype (the "dash 80") at the National Air and Space Museum on the east side of Dulles Airport just outside Washington, DC.  I also did a small number of parachute jumps 55+ years ago just to spice things up.

To summarize, the work I have posted here is based on personal experience and knowledge.  And I'm sticking with it.     

But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value.  EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking.

No you havent. There is no question about that! Especially EU who doesnt even know WHO to talk to.

Georger, do you remember about 9 or 10 years ago you and I spent about an entire year looking at everything we could find on Tina Bar and its immediate environment?  We looked at all that data forward, backwards, right side up, upside down, sideways, inside out, and cross-eyed.

You mentioned at that time that you were doing some things that you were not telling me about.  I neglected to mention that I was also doing things that I wasn't tell you about (and am not going to do so now either).  So I am sticking with my statements above.  Sorry about that.

When can we expect to see your placard analysis posted on this site?  I genuinely look forward to going through it.

Further, I trust you understand why ALL physics textbooks make major assumptions, such as neglecting gravity or the atmosphere, when presenting problems that involve both vertical and horizontal motion.  That being the case where students don't have access to supercomputers, such as the Cray, and a team of programmers, operators, and serious big-time financial backers.
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1759
  • Thanked: 322 times
    • ERIC ULIS: From the History Channel
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2682 on: August 18, 2019, 08:41:04 AM »
I was going to let this matter go, but frankly I’m so sick of this crap I decided to have it out now and see how you navigate my ironclad argument.

1)   Let’s start with my question:

Post #2649: “Shutter, I believe you mentioned that the FBI Flight Path (Air Force) was handed to the FBI on November 26th. How did they know where to search on November 25th without a flight path?”

2)   Now let’s review your comment:

Post #2650: “when someone is missing do we need a map to start or an area?”, “You guys seem to act as if it was impossible to figure out the basic area's without a map?”

3)   Now let’s review my my next post:

Post #2652: “I'm simply asking a question. I'm looking at the fact that the jet landed in Reno at 11PM. No one knew definitively that DBC had bailed until the flight crew looked in back. Given this, how is it possible that the FBI--or anyone for that matter--started searching the next day? Also, did the search area shift over time as the first flight path came out--apparently on the 26th--and was subsequently updated? Perhaps Bruce can pipe in on this.”

4)   Now let’s review your posts:

Post #2666: “Again, you guys are shooting them in the heart for not having a map ready in less than 12 hours?”, “I don't get this at all...they were in the same area as the map and you scold them for trying prior to the map? how much more can we downplay events?”

Post #2668: “I don't for see any good research in this with you guys. it's one thing after another...Everyone is wrong and you guys are right....with that I'm out...”

5)   Now let’s review my post:

Post #2669: “Let me clear because I'm tired of being told what I'm doing. YOU. ARE. WRONG. I am not complaining about anything. I was simply asking a question. That's it. This is getting very frustrating. Am I not allowed to ask a question without being accused of having an agenda by someone?

6)   Now let’s review your post:

Post #2670: “I've tried for several posts to tell this story. you guys keep shooting down things because of no map...you both said no map...no search worth value.”

SHUTTER, do you see a pattern here? I simply asked a question, then get attacked.

Where did I criticize the FBI for searching without a map?

Where did I criticize the FBI, Air Force or law enforcement at all?

I won’t wait for your answers because I’d be waiting forever. After all, I didn’t criticize anybody for anything. Again, I simply asked a question.

Of course, this doesn’t even begin to address the mindless BS from GEORGER who apparently has nothing better to do then troll.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I rest my case.
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: 9300
  • Thanked: 1024 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2683 on: August 18, 2019, 10:34:36 AM »
Quote
“Shutter, I believe you mentioned that the FBI Flight Path (Air Force) was handed to the FBI on November 26th. How did they know where to search on November 25th without a flight path?”

Both you and R99 made similar statements. I kept replying other things could tip them off as to where the LZ possibly was vs the entire flight. it's recorded on the transcripts and noted to the company. shouldn't of taken them long to contact someone for a possible location to start. I fail to see any "attack" vs arguing the point. attacking the question, yes, I was. it's debating or challenging what I've read.

Flyjack recently posted a document I've seen and posted as well where the crew finds a possible location over Lake Merwin. why would that claim be made by the pilots who flew the path and not further west?

then I receive two separate files though email showing a date of 11-25-71 out of the two I get questioned as to where Crawford was and I-S which could be written in error. I didn't write the document. the second document makes a reference to viewing a map. was the document typed in the morning, afternoon or even. was the information from the late evening of the hijacking? the agent speaks of a phone call to NWO and after reviewing the flight log and angulating a position they appear to have an idea where to start. the area first searched is above the Lewis river and moves south as time progresses. my point the entire time was they needed to find Cooper quickly. the clock was ticking for his escape.

I had two people disagreeing with me or should I also say attacking me? I gave my thoughts and get accused of telling you that you have an agenda. then I'm told I have basically done no research on the case. did I make any statements like that? I disagreed with your statements and this is what I got in return. if you wish to continue this please go to an off topic thread. I don't feel I did anything wrong. if I'm wrong then my self removal should be enough to satisfy all involved.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2019, 10:48:05 AM by Shutter »
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1759
  • Thanked: 322 times
    • ERIC ULIS: From the History Channel
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2684 on: August 18, 2019, 11:12:16 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
“Shutter, I believe you mentioned that the FBI Flight Path (Air Force) was handed to the FBI on November 26th. How did they know where to search on November 25th without a flight path?”

Both you and R99 made similar statements. I kept replying other things could tip them off as to where the LZ possibly was vs the entire flight. it's recorded on the transcripts and noted to the company. shouldn't of taken them long to contact someone for a possible location to start. I fail to see any "attack" vs arguing the point. attacking the question, yes, I was. it's debating or challenging what I've read.

Flyjack recently posted a document I've seen and posted as well where the crew finds a possible location over Lake Merwin. why would that claim be made by the pilots who flew the path and not further west?

then I receive two separate files though email showing a date of 11-25-71 out of the two I get questioned as to where Crawford was and I-S which could be written in error. I didn't write the document. the second document makes a reference to viewing a map. was the document typed in the morning, afternoon or even. was the information from the late evening of the hijacking? the agent speaks of a phone call to NWO and after reviewing the flight log and angulating a position they appear to have an idea where to start. the area first searched is above the Lewis river and moves south as time progresses. my point the entire time was they needed to find Cooper quickly. the clock was ticking for his escape.

I had two people disagreeing with me or should I also say attacking me? I gave my thoughts and get accused of telling you that you have an agenda. then I'm told I have basically done no research on the case. did I make any statements like that? I disagreed with your statements and this is what I got in return. if you wish to continue this please go to an off topic thread. I don't feel I did anything wrong. if I'm wrong then my self removal should be enough to satisfy all involved.

It's clear to me that you are reading things into my questions. I was literally attempting to get answers to a couple of questions related to the search. It's as simple as that.

There is a very specific reason I was asking these questions. All I will say is that a little while ago I identified what I suspect is the truth behind all of the confusion with the flight path. I'm afraid proving my suspicions will be very difficult. Nonetheless, I've been working toward that end. That said, it explains a lot--even the missing plot at 20:04.

My point: I am trying to figure out what happened and why. Occasionally me asking a question about a specific topic is nothing more than me asking a question about a specific topic.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK