DB COOPER

General Category => DB Cooper => Topic started by: Shutter on November 27, 2014, 11:35:19 AM

Title: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2014, 11:35:19 AM
We have seen a lot of controversy with how the chutes came to be. does anyone have any idea how each chute arrived at the airport?

It appears that the two "front packs" came from Seattle sky sports Inc. and packed by Cossey. one was torn apart by Cooper, and the other was a training chute with the panels sewn shut. that chute is believed to have been used by Cooper.


the two "back packs" seem to have arrived from Norman Hayden. one was used by Cooper for the jump, and the other was left on the plane and returned to Hayden decades later. these chutes were also packed by Cossey.

What gets confusing is the type of parachute used. different models seem to have been born since the story began.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on November 27, 2014, 04:15:16 PM
Here's what I know about the parachute issue:

In general, for back chutes you can take your pick from the kinds listed by the FBI documents, Cossey and Norman:

Coss: 1. NB-6
          2. NB-8
          3. "Paradise"
          4. Pioneer, 26', civilian

FBI:    1. Military types (docs)
          2. Steinthal, 26' (Carr)

Norman: 1. 26' Pioneer

Regardless, here is my view of the whole shebang:

The main, “back” chutes:

Norman Hayden says he provided two identical Pioneer parachutes, both civilian types, 26-foot conicals.

Earl Cossey said that he owned and sent a military NB-8 and a Pioneer 26’foot conical, civilian, sports-type parachute.

Earl also told me that the NB-8 was an NB-6, which he told the FBI at some point because that is what the Bureau has posted in their records, as revealed by Larry Carr on the DZ. However, Larry caught the inconsistency, but it has not been resolved as far as I know.

Further, Coss cited the tight fit of a 28-foot canopy, possibly a C-9, into an NB-6 bag as one reason Cooper was a “no-pull who cratered into the wilderness.”

Coss also described the Pioneer as a “Paradise” parachute to me, which I doubled-checked with him because I initially thought the “Not-Used Chute” (NUC) was a “Paracommander,” since that’s what folks on the DZ were saying throughout the 2008-2011 period.

In a follow-up phone call with Coss, he assured me that the NUC was a Pioneer, apparently forgetting that he first told me “Paradise.”

However, Coss had confused plenty of researchers by characterizing the NUC as a “sport” chute, and superior to the NB-6/8. Coss called the NUC a “Cadillac” on multiple occasions. Because of his insistence on these points most people thought Cossey’s Pioneer/Paradise/sport rig was a “Paracommander,” which had plenty of steering capacity and was well-regarded by the skydiving community. Sluggo thought Cooper’s NUC was a Paracommander, and had posted that information on his web site for years.

The truth of the NUC is uncertain but I don’t trust Cossey, and I understand how Sluggo could have been mis-informed by both Cossey and the feds.

Further, Coss had great difficulty telling the truth and keeping his stories straight, such as telling the Oregonian that the Amboy chute was definitely Cooper’s. Coss later recanted, but why the FBI used him as their technical expert is unknown to me, and his lack of trustworthiness may have gotten himself murdered.

Additionally, Cossey told Geoffrey Gray that he never got his NUC back from the FBI. However, Norman got his NUC around 1980 after a protracted legal battle. However, Norman reportedly told Robert Blevins that the return was accomplished easily.

Nevertheless, the FBI parachute documents say that the two back chutes were two military types, one a sage green NB-8 and the other a military canopy stuffed into a civilian, luxury type container. Hence, the official federal documents on the parachutes are at variance to both Hayden and Cossey’s descriptions.

However, these documents proclaim Hayden as the owner of the two back chutes delivered to Cooper aboard Flight 305. Norman is also cited as the source of the information on the back parachutes as detailed in these documents, but Norman says that he never spoke to an FBI agent about the chutes. In fact, Norman was dismayed when I read him the FBI’s report.

Transport:
The FBI documents cite Cossey’s version of how the chutes arrived at Sea-Tac, i.e.: cab ride to Boeing Flight Services and then unknown transport to Sea-Tac, presumably by a private vehicle, but whose, why and how are unknown. Also, the documents do not reveal why the back chutes made such a circuitous trip to Sea-Tac. Further, no one I know has ever heard of Boeing Flight Services, including Boeing, so presumably the FBI documents have screwed up this tidbit.

Nevertheless, Cossey had long-claimed that he sent his back chutes to Boeing Field, which may have been misunderstood by the G-man talking notes. Regardless, it was the wrong airport.

I asked Cossey to clarify why he sent the back chutes to Boeing Field instead of Sea-Tac and he replied, “Fuck you,” and hung up. He also said something about me being the worst journalist he had ever dealt with. However, I think I was simply the first reporter to ask him this question.

Norman’s version of the chutes and their transport is corroborated by Barry Halstead, formerly of Pacific Aviation, which is the outfit George Harrison of NWO first contacted seeking the back chutes. Halstead told me he helped Hayden get the chutes to Sea-Tac, and Halstead’s role in the procurement is confirmed by the FBI documents.

Nevertheless, the Cossey/Sluggo version cites that Al Lee, the NWO flight guy who actually handed the back chutes to Tina on the runway, was the guy who got the ball rolling by calling Coss at his home in Woodinville. Lee presumably got Cossey’s phone number from Sea-Tac officials.

However, the DZ’s Georger, who has substantial personal contacts within the FBI, told me that the Bureau first attempted to get the parachutes from McChord Air Base, which Cooper nixed. A “mad scramble” resulted as the FBI struggled to find appropriate chutes from private sources, and many agents and multiple NWO officials were involved.

The front, “reserve” chutes

Everyone seems comfortable accepting the notion that the two front chutes came from the Issaquah Sky Sports stock, and arrived at Sea-Tac via a WSP cruiser. The “Common Understanding,” which seems to be widely accepted regarding the front chutes goes like this:

One was a “dummy” and marked with an “X.” Its panels were sewn shut and it was completely inoperable. It was not found on Flight 305 at Reno. Its fate and present location is unknown.

The second, a “good” reserve was cut-up and was found in Reno strung across the seats of Flight 305. It was missing at least two of its shroud lines in Reno, for a total of about 30 feet of paracord. However, Carol Abraczinskas of the Citizen Sleuths says that five lines are now missing from the chute when she inspected it in the Seattle FO evidence room in 2010. That means about 80 feel of paracord is missing. Did Cooper cut that much? If not, who did and why? And when?

Again, FBI documents fail to resolve this issue. According to Carol, one federal document states that two lines were cut, and in another document it claims three without explaining the discrepancy.



Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2014, 05:49:46 PM
I have two newspaper articles about a Linn Emrick claiming he got the front chutes for the FBI? one article December 1, 1971 claims he gave them both chutes. the next article he claims he gave out the dummy chute.


Here is the article I found it online for Dec. 1st

http://isq.stparchive.com/Archive/ISQ/ISQ12011971P01.php

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=1LAiAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KLMFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5358,3529859&dq=hijack+chest+parachute&hl=en
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 28, 2014, 08:09:59 AM
Did the training chute really have an X on it? it appears that even Emrick failed to notice the chute was for training purposes. here we have an experienced skydiver missing the dummy chute as well. If he missed it, why should Cooper figure it out, both might have been in a scramble and not really paying attention to important details! the paper claims it was unknown to him. this means someone pointed this out after the fact. Emrick has been a notable skydiver for 11 years.

At what point does Cossey come into play here? could Cossey be the one who said, "you didn't give the training chute out, did you" If he packed all the chute for Sky Sports he would be the one who knew what was what.

Emrick's stated November 26, 1971..." I didn't know it when I went over and picked it out" he didn't seemed bothered since most experienced skydiver's use the back pack first. In my opinion the dummy chute should have been in a separate area all together.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 30, 2014, 10:17:05 AM
Quote
The second, a “good” reserve was cut-up and was found in Reno strung across the seats of Flight 305. It was missing at least two of its shroud lines in Reno, for a total of about 30 feet of paracord.

Actually it's more in the line of almost 80 feet of cord...

The information below was taken from Tom Kaye's website.  http://www.citizensleuths.com/pink-parachute-gallery.html

Five cords on the pink parachute had cut lines:
Line #7 had 186 ¾ inches of cord removed
Line #11 had 169 ¾ inches of cord removed
Line #12 had 169 inches of cord removed
Line #15 had 213 inches of cord removed
Line #22 had 217 ¼ inches of cord removed

The length of an uncut cord (including the double-sewn cord used to tie into the cross-connector, the bundle of cords located between the butterfly snap-hook rings in the reserve container) is 218 inches (or 18.2 feet).
Exactly how much suspension line is currently missing from the pink parachute?
955 ¾ inches (or 79.6 feet).


If he only took 30 feet, where is the remaining 50 feet?

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on November 30, 2014, 07:42:00 PM
That's the kicker.

Did DB Cooper use 80 feet of cord and the FBI just botched the documentation?  Or did he use less and somebody else cut off a few feet as a souvenir?

Lastly, how come the FBI docs do not reconcile the discrepancies? Did anyone even realize there was a discrepancy in the documents - two lengths versus three - and then there was no reconciliation with the actual physical evidence, to wit: five lengths cut and missing.

That's a significant piece of the puzzle. WTF was going on in Seattle???
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 30, 2014, 08:03:00 PM
Guessing at this I would say it's possible they assumed how much cord was missing. perhaps they didn't really look into it that hard? I'm going to email Tom about this. you would think they would correct it and not leave it with Cooper using 30 feet when 80 is missing? it doesn't make sense.

what did you think about the story above about the front chutes, and how they missed it themselves being a dummy chute?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on November 30, 2014, 10:13:46 PM
Quote

If he only took 30 feet, where is the remaining 50 feet?

The FBI aren't scientists, and the amount of rope Cooper used wasn't going to help them identify a suspect (unless they found a bag wrapped in rope), so there was no need to be accurate in their description. Don't attribute to malice what can best be attributed to apathy. While knowing the amount of rope used might help us figure out an important detail to the jump, it was not the FBI's concern. In all probability, Cooper used that 80 feet of missing rope.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 30, 2014, 10:29:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote

If he only took 30 feet, where is the remaining 50 feet?

The FBI aren't scientists, and the amount of rope Cooper used wasn't going to help them identify a suspect (unless they found a bag wrapped in rope), so there was no need to be accurate in their description. Don't attribute to malice what can best be attributed to apathy. While knowing the amount of rope used might help us figure out an important detail to the jump, it was not the FBI's concern. In all probability, Cooper used that 80 feet of missing rope.

Agreed, today the FBI would analyze everything. that's why I mentioned they didn't look to hard at the rope. it's a lot of rope even if he used it for a lanyard below him. he could only tie so much line to his waste without getting in the way of the main chute. It's night and day on what the FBI does now vs 1971.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 01, 2014, 01:51:17 AM
It would be very interesting to see what the modern FBI would do with this case...

Switching directions...

I spent about three months trying to skim through the DZ forum (TOF: The Other Forum?) and didn't see more than 20% of the posts, did anyone ever try to recreate Cooper's money bag jerry rig? I'd like to see different interpretations of how you would attach the money bag to the parachute harness.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 01, 2014, 03:48:52 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote

If he only took 30 feet, where is the remaining 50 feet?

The FBI aren't scientists, and the amount of rope Cooper used wasn't going to help them identify a suspect (unless they found a bag wrapped in rope), so there was no need to be accurate in their description. Don't attribute to malice what can best be attributed to apathy. While knowing the amount of rope used might help us figure out an important detail to the jump, it was not the FBI's concern. In all probability, Cooper used that 80 feet of missing rope.

Why not attribute the FBI's bungling to malice? What's your proof there is no malice?

Just askin'.

Speaking of malice, apathy, or irresponsibility,  do you see any connection between the inaccuracies present with the 30-feet vs. 80-feet, the lost cigarette butts, the lost DNA documentation, the inability of anyone to find in the evidence locker at Seattle the "thousands of shards" the FBI allegedly dug up at Tina Bar? Or the four days Cooper's tie was missing in Reno before it was entered into the evidence locker in Seattle? Or the report by Salt Lake City FBI SAC Russ Calame that the fingerprint retrieval in Reno was botched. Or the fact that only one square-mile of the LZ was searched on the ground over the T-Day holiday weekend and the other 23 square-miles only got a fly-by in the rain and fog?

I eagerly await your answer, sir.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 01, 2014, 03:50:46 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It would be very interesting to see what the modern FBI would do with this case...

Switching directions...

I spent about three months trying to skim through the DZ forum (TOF: The Other Forum?) and didn't see more than 20% of the posts, did anyone ever try to recreate Cooper's money bag jerry rig? I'd like to see different interpretations of how you would attach the money bag to the parachute harness.

You're on, Andrade- How would the modern-day FBI handle Norjak differently? You raise an interesting dynamic.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 01, 2014, 09:03:58 AM
Quote
I spent about three months trying to skim through the DZ forum (TOF: The Other Forum?) and didn't see more than 20% of the posts, did anyone ever try to recreate Cooper's money bag jerry rig?

I'm not aware of anyone recreating the bag rigging since it would be speculation. Agent Carr posted a picture of a similar bag. I'm sure they have pictures of the money, the bag, and chutes. why he never posted them I'm not sure.

Dropzone is sometimes hard finding things. you have to weed through all the personal attacks and off topic rants on that forum. I'm trying to control things here. different topics, photo gallery, video & link vault etc. I'm always opening new avenues trying to sort things out making things a little easier to find. this forum is new, almost a year old, but has decades of combined experience.

Agent Larry Carr shows how he thinks the money was tied in this video if you haven't seen it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLOgfkv4alk
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 01, 2014, 12:01:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It would be very interesting to see what the modern FBI would do with this case...

Switching directions...

I spent about three months trying to skim through the DZ forum (TOF: The Other Forum?) and didn't see more than 20% of the posts, did anyone ever try to recreate Cooper's money bag jerry rig? I'd like to see different interpretations of how you would attach the money bag to the parachute harness.

The only realistic way to handle the money bag is to tie it to the harness as tightly as possible.  Cooper's chances of surviving would probably have been greater if he had discarded the chest parachute (even if it was a good one) and tied the money bag to the harness in a belly pack type arrangement.

If Cooper had tied the money bag to the side of the harness, the aerodynamics would have caused him to do a tumbling, twisting motion during the free fall part of the jump.  If he had tied the money bag to the harness on a tether, it would have created a two-body problem with even worse dynamics during the free fall.

But the last time Tina saw Cooper, the money bag was resting on the floor of the cabin and he was tying the shroud lines, that he had cut from the other reserve chute, around his own waist (not to the parachute harness) while the other end of the shroud lines were attached to the money bag.  If he jumped with that configuration, things could only get worse and fast.

The end result of all of this is that while Cooper appears to have had experience wearing emergency parachutes, he does not appear to have had any actual jumping experience.  Under the conditions existing at the time Cooper separated from the airliner, in my humble opinion his chances of surviving the jump were somewhere between very slim and zero.

Admittedly, there are jumpers on DropZone who will probably claim that they could have survived the jump even without a parachute.  To each his own.

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 01, 2014, 06:16:25 PM
I think the focus point here is that an 11 year veteran missed the dummy chute. how could we expect Cooper to see it? it brings his experience of skydiving into question again. it's hard to say if he had any experience in my opinion  :-\
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 01, 2014, 06:33:15 PM
Quote
Why not attribute the FBI's bungling to malice? What's your proof there is no malice?

Parsimony, people are far more likely to be apathetic than they are to be malicious. It's Occam's razor.

Robert99: I read through many of your posts and generally agree, in free fall, Cooper would be unstable. But if Cooper was an inexperienced jumper, military trained, then I would gather he would act like other inexperienced military jumpers. Here's an image  (http://www.303rdbg.com/u-0001.jpg) of guys bailing out of a B-17, they are pulling their ripcords literally as they are entering the slipstream. Only a skydiver would want to free fall, which is why I was skeptical of most of the skydiver analysis of the jump.


Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 01, 2014, 07:10:53 PM
Andrade, you forgot to post the pic.....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 01, 2014, 08:16:45 PM
I linked to it, no big deal...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 01, 2014, 08:39:31 PM
Andrade:
"...The FBI aren't scientists..."


Well, then what are they?

You gotta tell us what you think of the FBI, Andrade, because you paint them with a very broad brush...

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 01, 2014, 08:42:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Why not attribute the FBI's bungling to malice? What's your proof there is no malice?

Parsimony, people are far more likely to be apathetic than they are to be malicious. It's Occam's razor.


Even in felony cases where the case agents are earning 90K a year?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 01, 2014, 08:46:56 PM
Andrade:
"...It's Occam's razor.

Robert99: I read through many of your posts and generally agree, in free fall, Cooper would be unstable. But if Cooper was an inexperienced jumper, military trained, then I would gather he would act like other inexperienced military jumpers. Here's an image  (http://www.303rdbg.com/u-0001.jpg) of guys bailing out of a B-17, they are pulling their ripcords literally as they are entering the slipstream. Only a skydiver would want to free fall, which is why I was skeptical of most of the skydiver analysis of the jump."



What does Occam say about Martin McNally or Richard LaPoint? The prior made a successful getaway to his hijacking even though he had to be shown how to put on a parachute, and LaPoint jumped in January in Colorado, landing in the snow successfully despite wearing only a shirt and slacks.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: nmiwrecks on December 01, 2014, 09:48:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

What does Occam say about Martin McNally or Richard LaPoint? The prior made a successful getaway to his hijacking even though he had to be shown how to put on a parachute, and LaPoint jumped in January in Colorado, landing in the snow successfully despite wearing only a shirt and slacks.
One would think that if every jumper made it, some with no skills and in bad weather, that the survival rate of these types of jumps would be 100%, with no chance of failure.  I take anther tact, though.  Because of the difficulty of these jumps, maybe the survival rate would be 75% or 80%, meaning one of the jumpers was bound to die.  Maybe the one they can't find?    Maybe there is something to back up this idea?  Like part of the ransom money found years later near a body of water?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 01, 2014, 10:29:48 PM
Quote
One would think that if every jumper made it, some with no skills and in bad weather, that the survival rate of these types of jumps would be 100%, with no chance of failure.  I take anther tact, though.  Because of the difficulty of these jumps, maybe the survival rate would be 75% or 80%, meaning one of the jumpers was bound to die.

This is an example of the Gambler's fallacy, we can't assume one person dies just because the odds say "1 in 5 die" anymore than we can claim a coin that lands heads up three times in a row has to come up "tails" in the next flip.

Quote
Andrade:
"...The FBI aren't scientists..."


Well, then what are they?

You gotta tell us what you think of the FBI, Andrade, because you paint them with a very broad brush...

The Bureau recruits heavily from recent college graduates, focusing on accountants, CompSci/IT, Language specialists and Law degree holders. So that's what I think... they're accountants, computer guys, foreign language nerds and proto-lawyers.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 01, 2014, 10:38:08 PM
A radio program is in the link vault with Agent Carr. when he explains certain points of the DNA he says he's not a scientist....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 01, 2014, 10:54:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Why not attribute the FBI's bungling to malice? What's your proof there is no malice?

Parsimony, people are far more likely to be apathetic than they are to be malicious. It's Occam's razor.

Robert99: I read through many of your posts and generally agree, in free fall, Cooper would be unstable. But if Cooper was an inexperienced jumper, military trained, then I would gather he would act like other inexperienced military jumpers. Here's an image  (http://www.303rdbg.com/u-0001.jpg) of guys bailing out of a B-17, they are pulling their ripcords literally as they are entering the slipstream. Only a skydiver would want to free fall, which is why I was skeptical of most of the skydiver analysis of the jump.

That B-17 appears to be less than 2000 feet above the ground and probably going quite slow when the crew was bailing out and immediately opening their parachutes.  The two engines on the right wing may be shut down, but I don't see any fire or apparent structural damage to the aircraft.  But the crew is jumping for some good reason.  If the crew had bailed out at 20,000 or 30,000 feet, they would (in accordance with their training) have done a free fall down to about 10,000 feet.  That would get them down fast to an altitude where they didn't need supplemental oxygen and the temperature was usually quite a bit warmer.  And the crew members would definitely remember the bone rattling shock when they did open their parachutes after that free fall.

Cooper jumped at night and when the airliner was above an overcast and several cloud layers.  He would probably not be able to see any lights on the ground until he was below the clouds and he was probably tumbling at that point anyway.   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 01, 2014, 11:01:53 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
A radio program is in the link vault with Agent Carr. when he explains certain points of the DNA he says he's not a scientist....

I understand that the FBI recruits personnel with previous law enforcement experience as well.  They would probably be  the field agents who kick down the doors.  The "scientists" would probably be the crime scene investigators and probably have a different job title. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 02, 2014, 01:20:53 AM


Quote
That B-17 appears to be less than 2000 feet above the ground and probably going quite slow when the crew was bailing out and immediately opening their parachutes.  The two engines on the right wing may be shut down, but I don't see any fire or apparent structural damage to the aircraft.  But the crew is jumping for some good reason.  If the crew had bailed out at 20,000 or 30,000 feet, they would (in accordance with their training) have done a free fall down to about 10,000 feet.  That would get them down fast to an altitude where they didn't need supplemental oxygen and the temperature was usually quite a bit warmer.  And the crew members would definitely remember the bone rattling shock when they did open their parachutes after that free fall.

Cooper jumped at night and when the airliner was above an overcast and several cloud layers.  He would probably not be able to see any lights on the ground until he was below the clouds and he was probably tumbling at that point anyway.   

I didn't mean for a single photograph to be definitive. As someone with no jumping experience, my inclination if I was put in Cooper's shoes would be to pull that ripcord as soon as I cleared the aircraft. I wish there was an easily referenced collection of WWII bailout anecdotes to be sure, but my gut instinct is most of those guys weren't interested in freefalling. Regardless, until someone collects all those anecdotes, it's speculation.

Here is the case I would present for a Cooper "early pull" (not "squidding"):

-He wanted the stairs down on takeoff, signifying he wanted to jump soon after takeoff
-He was trying to jump before the plane had finished its ascent to 10,000ft, and was only delayed by his unfamiliarity with the airstairs and how they deployed in flight.

So, if he wanted off that aircraft as it was ascending, then he was not planning on a lot of free fall and was more likely to pull early.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 02, 2014, 01:31:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
One would think that if every jumper made it, some with no skills and in bad weather, that the survival rate of these types of jumps would be 100%, with no chance of failure.  I take anther tact, though.  Because of the difficulty of these jumps, maybe the survival rate would be 75% or 80%, meaning one of the jumpers was bound to die.

This is an example of the Gambler's fallacy, we can't assume one person dies just because the odds say "1 in 5 die" anymore than we can claim a coin that lands heads up three times in a row has to come up "tails" in the next flip.

Quote
Andrade:
"...The FBI aren't scientists..."


Well, then what are they?

You gotta tell us what you think of the FBI, Andrade, because you paint them with a very broad brush...

The Bureau recruits heavily from recent college graduates, focusing on accountants, CompSci/IT, Language specialists and Law degree holders. So that's what I think... they're accountants, computer guys, foreign language nerds and proto-lawyers.

Forensic investigations are not science? Careful, thorough police work is not science?

Solid investigative journalism is not science? 

I don't think so.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 02, 2014, 01:34:36 AM
When someone says "they're not a scientist," like Larry Carr in his video, I think it is a veiled way of saying:

 "I hope it's okay that I'm lazy and didn't do the research on this subject. I know I failed to contact the people who are experts in this field so I can't give you a substantive, valuable commentary, and I hope that's okay with you."
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 02, 2014, 01:07:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When someone says "they're not a scientist," like Larry Carr in his video, I think it is a veiled way of saying:

 "I hope it's okay that I'm lazy and didn't do the research on this subject. I know I failed to contact the people who are experts in this field so I can't give you a substantive, valuable commentary, and I hope that's okay with you."

Then again, maybe Larry Carr was saying that he was one of the FBI agents who chased down the bank robbers and that didn't leave him much time to visit Quantico and peer through a microscope or to socialize with the people who never got outside of a laboratory.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 02, 2014, 02:22:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When someone says "they're not a scientist," like Larry Carr in his video, I think it is a veiled way of saying:

 "I hope it's okay that I'm lazy and didn't do the research on this subject. I know I failed to contact the people who are experts in this field so I can't give you a substantive, valuable commentary, and I hope that's okay with you."

I think Larry Carr is more of a 'scientist' than you are! So your insult against Carr falls on deaf ears here -=

The choice is not scientist vs. layman. The real choice is 'rational' vs 'irrational'.

Open minded investigator willing to consider and looking for "facts" vs. "conspiracy gossip columnist" always jumping around looking for a conspiracy angle. There is a fundamental difference in roles and techniques and outcomes.

 
   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 02, 2014, 05:00:10 PM
Is it fair to say most of the Agents use, or apply science? even being "scientific" in there findings vs actually being a "scientist?  :-\
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 02, 2014, 09:53:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Is it fair to say most of the Agents use, or apply science? even being "scientific" is there findings vs actually being a "scientist?  :-\

Meh, semantics... but... Definitely fair, they use some scientific methods.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 03, 2014, 12:34:27 AM
So, R- Nine-Nine, what do you think Larry Carr meant when he announced on the video that we wasn't a scientist?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 03, 2014, 12:39:01 AM
So Georger, are you saying I'm a "conspiracy gossip columnist" ? You seem to only infer that, but it's a loose association.

Let's not beat around the bush here. Tell me exactly what you think I am.

Doesn't a true scientist start with a clear statement of fact?  So, what's the true nature of my writing? I know it makes you feel uncomfortable and does not reinforce your world view, but what am I exactly?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 03, 2014, 03:35:34 AM
I re-posted my interview with Ralph Hatley here because this is the parachute section, and RH-2 is so much a part of this discussion.
*****

Greetings Everyone,

Sail, his wife Michelle, and I went to see Ralph Hatley today, 12. 2. 14. Here is my report:

We traveled to see Ralph Hatley (RH-2) at his DZ in Eagle Creek, Oregon, about 45 minutes southeast of Portland.

Ralph is a robust looking 77-year old guy, with a big pot belly, a big smile, and twinkle in his eye. Yes, at times he comes across in a rough, authoritative manner that can easily be construed as that of a curmudgeon.

But I found Ralph to be a delightful man to interview over lunch, chatting about DB Cooper. However, he is a man who is cautious and reserved. When we approached controversial topics, such as the role of Earl Cossey in Norjak, he rebuffed many of my questions behind a façade of “I don’t remember,” or I don’t know.”

Hence, we had to warm up to our topics while eating a lovely lunch in bucolic Estacada, Oregon.

At first, Ralph provided some wonderful background, historical points and factoids:

He grew up in the Blue Mountains of eastern Oregon, and his great-grandmother walked the Oregon Trail as a barefoot kid and her family.

Ralph said that he joined the military in 1953 at 16, and served in the 82nd Airborne. He also claimed that he flew DB Cooper’s 727 after Northwest had sold it to a cargo company, and he flew a run to Salt Lake City with a friend who was also the pilot in command. Ralph has a commercial pilot’s license, but he is not rated for a 727, so he back-tracked during the conversation to restate his position, “I was invited to fly the plane.”

RH-2 also told us that he jumped with some of the Golden Knights in Europe in the 1950s before they were formally organized, and that he did not know Ted Braden. Ted came to Europe in the 1960s, if my memory is correct.

In his youth, Ralph went to Gresham High School, along with Ted Mayfield, whom he taught how to skydive. Ralph not only confirmed the allegation that Ted had been arrested for armed robbery, but he also gave us the details.

RH-2 told us that Ted had been a part-time delivery driver for a bottling company and knew the work schedules and cash flows of the grocery stores that he serviced. As a result he knew to rob them on Sunday nights when the till was at its fullest. Ralph said that Ted got caught, “the first time,” when he was robbing “Mr. G’s Market” in Oregon City.

As for DB Cooper, Ralph told us that “there was nothing difficult about that jump.” He also said that he had told the FBI that the skyjacker was an experienced skydiver “even before they gave him the money.”

RH-2 described many encounters with FBI agents throughout the early stages of the investigation, and joked that he told one agent that he in fact knew a skydiver named Dan Cooper in Moses Lake, but he was only 20 years old and wore glasses.

He was also interviewed by Julius Mattson, the Portland SAC, and over a lunch RH-2 delivered a photo of the “Century Skydivers of Vancouver,” an elite group of local jumpers. Later, a special investigator from the San Francisco FBI office asked for an interview with Ralph and grilled him on the photograph. Ralph toyed with the G-man, and then in pique of disgust told the guy, who was named Special Agent Bond, that he was the person responsible for giving the photo to Mattson originally.

Ralph was hard to pin down on the question of what parachutes were used and by whom, but he did say that if he was Cooper he would want to use a chute that had a rigger’s card, and one that matched the documentation on the rigging pins so that he would be sure he would have a “fresh chute” free of any electronic devices or tampering by the FBI.

RH-2 also discussed his relationship with Earl Cossey, whom he described as a good friend. However, he hadn’t seen Coss in about ten years, and has never met Coss’ kids, who are now middle-aged adults.

Nevertheless, he said that he had beaten Coss in many skydiving competitions, “But he beat me a few times, too.”

Ralph characterized their friendship as mostly surrounding skydiving. Nevertheless, he said that Coss was only an average poker player and that he, RH, had to “save Coss' ass a couple of times to make sure he didn't get the shit kicked out of him.”

Hatley also told us that the rental houses that Coss renovated had originally been embezzled by Cossey from his mother.

So, Ralph knew about the alleged shady side of Earl Cossey, and agreed that Cossey could be provocative. But he also honored his friend by recalling how beloved Coss was by his students in the middle school where he taught.

Ralph didn’t have anything to offer on the murder of Earl Cossey, though.

As for the Amboy chute, RH-2 said that Coos had indeed called him about the matter, but only spent the time bad-mouthing the FBI and ragging on their inept handling of Norjak. RH-2 shared many of the same opinions.

“The FBI only has tunnel vision.”

After a solid hour of chatting, Ralph suddenly announced: “I’m going to tell you something that’s going to blow your asses out of the water.”

He proceeded to tell us a story that occurred in the 1977-1978 time period.

Ralph said he was contacted by his attorney out of the blue. The lawyer said that he had a client that was looking for a “go-between” with the FBI, and wondered if Ralph would agree to carry the client’s requests to the Bureau. Ralph agreed.

The attorney said that his client had knowledge of the identity of DB Cooper and wanted to “come out of the cold.” The client was looking for a promise of immunity from prosecution.

Ralph contacted Ralph Himmelsbach (RH-1), whom he had become friends with through their mutual aviation activities. Himmelsbach said he was willing to hear the offer, but wanted to see a DB Cooper $20 bill before anything substantive could proceed.

RH-2 relayed the information to the attorney, who responded that his client also wanted immunity for a murder.

Again, RH-2 relayed the information.

Himmelsbach replied that he would need to involve the District Attorney in the jurisdiction where the murder had taken place. Again RH-2 and the lawyer relayed the messages.

The murder apparently took place in Washington, and Hatley told us that Himmelsbach had contacted the Washington state authorities, who turned down the murder-immunity deal.

Subsequently, the client’s offer to reveal the facts of the case was withdrawn.

However, Hatley told us that he got the full story on the attorney’s deathbed. He also said that the client is now deceased.

This is what Ralph Hatley learned at that juncture.

Hatley told us that the attorney was Jim Leubke of Portland, Oregon, and that the client was a man whom Hatley knew. In fact, Hatley knew the client’s wife as well, who was a teller at a local savings and loan bank. Even though Hatley refused to tell us the name of the client, he shared the details:

The client was part of DB Cooper’s ground team, who all conspired kill DB Cooper for the money. They buried Cooper’s body on the slopes of Mount St Helens before it blew in 1980, and the fate of the money is a bit murky. RH-2 said he was told that the wife “got rid of it when she realized it was hot.”

However, the client also told the attorney to tell Himmelsbach that he “would see some of the money before he retired.”

Since this was taking place in 1978, it appears that it predates the money find at Tina Bar in 1980 and Himmelsbach’s retirement in early April 1980.

Despite not revealing the name of the client, RH-2 said that Himmelsbach knows the name of the client, and in fact Hatley says that he told RH-1 everything about the story.

“If you ask Ralph Himmelsbach for the name of the client and he gives it to you, I will confirm it for you - but I’m not going to tell you outright.”

We all – Dwight, Michelle, and I – pushed Hatley for the name, but he wouldn’t budge. However, he did relent a bit and told us that the client was also responsible for another murder, one that occurred in the Sandy, Oregon area. Hatley said, “He got away with that one.”


(This post was edited by BruceSmith on Dec 2, 2014, 9:10 PM)
Modify message
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 03, 2014, 12:10:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So, R- Nine-Nine, what do you think Larry Carr meant when he announced on the video that we wasn't a scientist?

Bruce, I thought that I had already answered that, but here is a more detailed explanation.  And I will rely on my much used desk dictionary for some definitions.

Scientist - A person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.

Scientific - (1) Relating to or based on science.  (2) Systematic; methodical.

My understanding is that Carr was saying that he was not a "scientist" as defined above.  Nevertheless, Carr used the "scientific method" in that he was systematic and methodical and also used analytical reasoning in examining evidence and other facts that applied to the case he was working on.

So while Carr may have been correct is saying that he was not a "scientist", he was and is definitely a user of "science" in his investigations.   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 03, 2014, 02:27:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I re-posted my interview with Ralph Hatley here because this is the parachute section, and RH-2 is so much a part of this discussion.
*****

Greetings Everyone,

Sail, his wife Michelle, and I went to see Ralph Hatley today, 12. 2. 14. Here is my report:

...

As for DB Cooper, Ralph told us that “there was nothing difficult about that jump.” He also said that he had told the FBI that the skyjacker was an experienced skydiver “even before they gave him the money.”

RH-2 described many encounters with FBI agents throughout the early stages of the investigation, and joked that he told one agent that he in fact knew a skydiver named Dan Cooper in Moses Lake, but he was only 20 years old and wore glasses.

He was also interviewed by Julius Mattson, the Portland SAC, and over a lunch RH-2 delivered a photo of the “Century Skydivers of Vancouver,” an elite group of local jumpers. Later, a special investigator from the San Francisco FBI office asked for an interview with Ralph and grilled him on the photograph. Ralph toyed with the G-man, and then in pique of disgust told the guy, who was named Special Agent Bond, that he was the person responsible for giving the photo to Mattson originally.

Ralph was hard to pin down on the question of what parachutes were used and by whom, but he did say that if he was Cooper he would want to use a chute that had a rigger’s card, and one that matched the documentation on the rigging pins so that he would be sure he would have a “fresh chute” free of any electronic devices or tampering by the FBI.

RH-2 also discussed his relationship with Earl Cossey, whom he described as a good friend. However, he hadn’t seen Coss in about ten years, and has never met Coss’ kids, who are now middle-aged adults.

(This post was edited by BruceSmith on Dec 2, 2014, 9:10 PM)
Modify message

Clearing up the owner and type of parachute Cooper used would be really nice, as Cossey claimed it was a heavily modified parachute, while your interview with Hayden suggests it was more or less a typical NB6. Also, just getting a personality profile of Cossey helps understand his accounts.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 03, 2014, 02:52:52 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So, R- Nine-Nine, what do you think Larry Carr meant when he announced on the video that we wasn't a scientist?

Bruce, I thought that I had already answered that, but here is a more detailed explanation.  And I will rely on my much used desk dictionary for some definitions.

Scientist - A person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.

Scientific - (1) Relating to or based on science.  (2) Systematic; methodical.

My understanding is that Carr was saying that he was not a "scientist" as defined above.  Nevertheless, Carr used the "scientific method" in that he was systematic and methodical and also used analytical reasoning in examining evidence and other facts that applied to the case he was working on.

So while Carr may have been correct is saying that he was not a "scientist", he was and is definitely a user of "science" in his investigations.   

well put - wish I had come up with that!  :)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 03, 2014, 04:24:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So, R- Nine-Nine, what do you think Larry Carr meant when he announced on the video that we wasn't a scientist?

Bruce, I thought that I had already answered that, but here is a more detailed explanation.  And I will rely on my much used desk dictionary for some definitions.

Scientist - A person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.

Scientific - (1) Relating to or based on science.  (2) Systematic; methodical.

My understanding is that Carr was saying that he was not a "scientist" as defined above.  Nevertheless, Carr used the "scientific method" in that he was systematic and methodical and also used analytical reasoning in examining evidence and other facts that applied to the case he was working on.

So while Carr may have been correct is saying that he was not a "scientist", he was and is definitely a user of "science" in his investigations.   

I concur.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 03, 2014, 06:59:27 PM
Bruce, I understand some of the people involved with this crime get tired of it sometimes, however, it would of been good to have Mitchell on record with the main suspects, and his thoughts other than just Weber.  :(

Some won't be around much longer.....tick, tick..... 8)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 03, 2014, 11:18:22 PM
I am endeavoring to build a long-term relationship with Bill Mitchell. I trust that one day we will sit down with a stack of pix and Bill will give us the low-down on each and everyone. Big ears, no turkey gobble, not geeky enough, too fat, too skinny, etc.

I think the better we understand Bill, the better will we will able to assess his perceptions. Remember, Bill is not a livin', breathin' Face-Recognition Device. Just because he sat near a guy for twenty minutes or so, doesn't mean that he can remember exactly every detail about him 43 years later with a high degree of confidence and certainty.

It's been 43 years.  What's another six months, really?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 04, 2014, 04:12:15 PM
Back to the parachutes...

Just wondering, was there ever any resolution on the DZforum to the D-rings issue with Cooper's reserve chute? My assumption is he must have had D-rings or he borrowed D-rings from the other main chute in order to attach the reserve. He wouldn't attach the reserve chute with parachord, right?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 04, 2014, 08:26:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Back to the parachutes...

Just wondering, was there ever any resolution on the DZforum to the D-rings issue with Cooper's reserve chute? My assumption is he must have had D-rings or he borrowed D-rings from the other main chute in order to attach the reserve. He wouldn't attach the reserve chute with parachord, right?

The D-rings in question for attaching the reserve chute must be placed on the main parachute harness by a qualified rigger.  There is no way that Cooper could do that during the hijacking.  And in fact, neither main parachute had suitable D-rings in the first place.

If Cooper did attach the reserve chute to the main parachute's harness with the shroud lines from the 2nd reserve, then he would be adding to his problems.  His chances of a successful descent would probably be increased if he simply jumped with one main chute rather than adding a jury-rigged reserve to it.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 04, 2014, 08:34:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Back to the parachutes...

Just wondering, was there ever any resolution on the DZforum to the D-rings issue with Cooper's reserve chute? My assumption is he must have had D-rings or he borrowed D-rings from the other main chute in order to attach the reserve. He wouldn't attach the reserve chute with parachord, right?

The D-rings in question for attaching the reserve chute must be placed on the main parachute harness by a qualified rigger.  There is no way that Cooper could do that during the hijacking.  And in fact, neither main parachute had suitable D-rings in the first place.

If Cooper did attach the reserve chute to the main parachute's harness with the shroud lines from the 2nd reserve, then he would be adding to his problems.  His chances of a successful descent would probably be increased if he simply jumped with one main chute rather than adding a jury-rigged reserve to it.

I assumed Cooper didn't care about the reserve as a reserve, that he messed around with it in order to find a way to attach the money to himself. The fact he jumped with the reserve chute after apparently attaching the money bag to himself has always bothered me.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 04, 2014, 08:40:19 PM
Is it fair to say Cooper wasn't a scientist either  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 04, 2014, 08:46:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Is it fair to say Cooper wasn't a scientist either  ;D ;D ;D

Yes, if anyone needs evidence of Cooper failing the criminal mastermind exam, here it is.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 05, 2014, 12:29:42 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
Back to the parachutes...

Just wondering, was there ever any resolution on the DZforum to the D-rings issue with Cooper's reserve chute? My assumption is he must have had D-rings or he borrowed D-rings from the other main chute in order to attach the reserve. He wouldn't attach the reserve chute with parachord, right?

The D-rings in question for attaching the reserve chute must be placed on the main parachute harness by a qualified rigger.  There is no way that Cooper could do that during the hijacking.  And in fact, neither main parachute had suitable D-rings in the first place.

If Cooper did attach the reserve chute to the main parachute's harness with the shroud lines from the 2nd reserve, then he would be adding to his problems.  His chances of a successful descent would probably be increased if he simply jumped with one main chute rather than adding a jury-rigged reserve to it.

I assumed Cooper didn't care about the reserve as a reserve, that he messed around with it in order to find a way to attach the money to himself. The fact he jumped with the reserve chute after apparently attaching the money bag to himself has always bothered me.

It's not know for certain if Cooper had the reserve chute attached to him in any manner when he jumped.  It is just a matter of one reserve chute being unaccounted for.  If he took the canopy out of it and replaced it with some of the money, then there is a good chance that the canopy (which was not a functional canopy) would have been found somewhere.  But it never has been.

When last seen by Tina, Cooper was tying some shroud lines around his waist with the other end of the shroud lines being tied to the money bag which was resting on the floor.  And that is not a good way to tie the money bag to himself. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 05, 2014, 10:51:33 PM
Quote
It's not know for certain if Cooper had the reserve chute attached to him in any manner when he jumped.  It is just a matter of one reserve chute being unaccounted for.  If he took the canopy out of it and replaced it with some of the money, then there is a good chance that the canopy (which was not a functional canopy) would have been found somewhere.  But it never has been.

When last seen by Tina, Cooper was tying some shroud lines around his waist with the other end of the shroud lines being tied to the money bag which was resting on the floor.  And that is not a good way to tie the money bag to himself. 

The suitcase with the bomb, the non-functioning reserve and the money bag... That's a lot of stuff to hold on to jumping out of a jet.

Did a quick calculation, if that money bag weighed around ten kilos, it would have about 10,000 Joules of energy for the paracord to dissipate during a canopy deployment... I can't imagine Cooper keeping the money under those circumstances. If he did, the paracord would have broken his back.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 05, 2014, 11:32:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
It's not know for certain if Cooper had the reserve chute attached to him in any manner when he jumped.  It is just a matter of one reserve chute being unaccounted for.  If he took the canopy out of it and replaced it with some of the money, then there is a good chance that the canopy (which was not a functional canopy) would have been found somewhere.  But it never has been.

When last seen by Tina, Cooper was tying some shroud lines around his waist with the other end of the shroud lines being tied to the money bag which was resting on the floor.  And that is not a good way to tie the money bag to himself. 

The suitcase with the bomb, the non-functioning reserve and the money bag... That's a lot of stuff to hold on to jumping out of a jet.

Did a quick calculation, if that money bag weighed around ten kilos, it would have about 10,000 Joules of energy for the paracord to dissipate during a canopy deployment... I can't imagine Cooper keeping the money under those circumstances. If he did, the paracord would have broken his back.

9.52544 kg

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Moriarty on December 19, 2014, 12:47:04 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
It's not know for certain if Cooper had the reserve chute attached to him in any manner when he jumped.  It is just a matter of one reserve chute being unaccounted for.  If he took the canopy out of it and replaced it with some of the money, then there is a good chance that the canopy (which was not a functional canopy) would have been found somewhere.  But it never has been.

When last seen by Tina, Cooper was tying some shroud lines around his waist with the other end of the shroud lines being tied to the money bag which was resting on the floor.  And that is not a good way to tie the money bag to himself. 

The suitcase with the bomb, the non-functioning reserve and the money bag... That's a lot of stuff to hold on to jumping out of a jet.

Did a quick calculation, if that money bag weighed around ten kilos, it would have about 10,000 Joules of energy for the paracord to dissipate during a canopy deployment... I can't imagine Cooper keeping the money under those circumstances. If he did, the paracord would have broken his back.

9.52544 kg

The only person who would risk A) getting blown up if the bomb's real B) going to jail for your entire life if caught C) jump blindly into the night isn't an adventurer, it's someone who's desparate. It means that for Cooper death was a risk he was willing to take for that immediate $200,000. Cooper skyjacked a plane, didn't invest $20/month. Cooper is not going through all that risk to lose that money in the jump.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 19, 2014, 01:03:26 AM
Morey, what's your understanding of how you developed the preference for seeing DB Cooper as a guy like yourself, or people that you know.

It's clear from your comments that you would never hijack a plane and jump under the conditions and mind-set that you have described above. Hence, it seems you think Cooper was a guy like you.

I saw a documentary on Netflix last night called "Korengal," and it is a follow-up to "Restrepo."  "Korengal" specifically talked about how the troopers there loved combat, the "high" of shooting and hitting someone with a 50 cal. It shows me how different we can be.  I would never chose to go into the military and deploy to a place like the Korengal Valley in Afghanistan. But the guys in the documentary did.

It seems we are very different.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 19, 2014, 01:13:34 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
Quote
It's not know for certain if Cooper had the reserve chute attached to him in any manner when he jumped.  It is just a matter of one reserve chute being unaccounted for.  If he took the canopy out of it and replaced it with some of the money, then there is a good chance that the canopy (which was not a functional canopy) would have been found somewhere.  But it never has been.

When last seen by Tina, Cooper was tying some shroud lines around his waist with the other end of the shroud lines being tied to the money bag which was resting on the floor.  And that is not a good way to tie the money bag to himself. 

The suitcase with the bomb, the non-functioning reserve and the money bag... That's a lot of stuff to hold on to jumping out of a jet.

Did a quick calculation, if that money bag weighed around ten kilos, it would have about 10,000 Joules of energy for the paracord to dissipate during a canopy deployment... I can't imagine Cooper keeping the money under those circumstances. If he did, the paracord would have broken his back.

9.52544 kg

The only person who would risk A) getting blown up if the bomb's real B) going to jail for your entire life if caught C) jump blindly into the night isn't an adventurer, it's someone who's desparate. It means that for Cooper death was a risk he was willing to take for that immediate $200,000. Cooper skyjacked a plane, didn't invest $20/month. Cooper is not going through all that risk to lose that money in the jump.

I can see right now that you have never belonged to a Fraternity, the Arnold Air Society, been called into the Dean's office and told to stop all pranks, replaced the timing gear in a 1951 Chevy on the Alaskan highway with snow falling, .... and the list goes on. You must have lived a very clean life ... free of women?  Hunted coons or cougars at midnight with dogs ... or left part of your jacket or jeans on a barbed wire fence running from your girlfriend's Dad in the middle of the night ... !

Or been involved in a space mission to Mars (50% loss rate) ???

Who says he lost "all" of the money? There were roughly 100 bundles to lose.




   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 19, 2014, 01:25:28 AM
Georger, in my travels in life I have met a few people - not many - but some who would PAY 200K to jump out of a 727 over the woods with 20 pounds of bricks tied to their waist and only wearing sandals and a windbreaker.

Even Robb Heady told us he jumped out of his 727 when it was going about 350 mph, and went into a screaming tuck to get down fast and only pulled at about 1,000, using only a reserve chute.  He didn't even have a back chute.

Also, -how about all those girls from NZ that jumped naked with 377????????????
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Moriarty on December 19, 2014, 01:27:05 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Morey, what's your understanding of how you developed the preference for seeing DB Cooper as a guy like yourself, or people that you know.

It's clear from your comments that you would never hijack a plane and jump under the conditions and mind-set that you have described above. Hence, it seems you think Cooper was a guy like you.

I saw a documentary on Netflix last night called "Korengal," and it is a follow-up to "Restrepo."  "Korengal" specifically talked about how the troopers there loved combat, the "high" of shooting and hitting someone with a 50 cal. It shows me how different we can be.  I would never chose to go into the military and deploy to a place like the Korengal Valley in Afghanistan. But the guys in the documentary did.

It seems we are very different.

OMG, super great question. I use a phrase all the time, it's "I am exactly like you, only different." I don't know if you read "Kill Generation' (I think?) It makes this great comparison about how many soldiers stormed the beach in WWII and were killed never firing a shot compared to how nowadays they can't get soldiers to stop shooting. Different mindset. That's important.

I studied Zen, long sessions twice a day, every day for a couple of years. You get to know about yourself and therefore everyone else. We're not that different. We are all things. Good and evil.

I've done some high risk sports. I enjoy speed and I like to come to the edge of death. For some, people push that closeness to it's limit and find it. In the process of these I learned a lot about fear, how it works, why, overcoming etc. and one of the more important thiings to fear I learned is that it's all about comittment.

I think Cooper's bomb is fake for a list of reasons having nothing to do with the bomb. None the less, he constructed a bomb. Wore the suit. Went to the airport. Bought a ticket. Got on the plane. At this point his comittment is still zero. What Cooper did was hand the note to Flo. In that action, things changed.

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 19, 2014, 03:52:31 AM
So, do you think that Cooper could have been someone who didn't see the risks that you do, or he did and gravitated towards them because he likes that kind of action?

How do you think a trained commando would have approached the Norjak skyjacking?  Another day in the office?

What do you think Cooper's behavior tells us about the man?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 19, 2014, 02:01:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So, do you think that Cooper could have been someone who didn't see the risks that you do, or he did and gravitated towards them because he likes that kind of action?

How do you think a trained commando would have approached the Norjak skyjacking?  Another day in the office?

What do you think Cooper's behavior tells us about the man?

The problem once again Bruce, is we really don't have that many facts to judge Cooper on ... we have a few anecdotes. snippets, ... and beyond that we can't even agree on what the other alleged facts are.

The poster seems to be trying to apply a Zen model to Cooper. That may not apply at all. For one thing Cooper is in a different older generation - Cooper may have known more about the fox trot, prohibition, and Chicago gangsters than Zen! Cooper may have been a fan of Disney and Popeye and Charlie Chaplan, than the Beatles and Timothy Leery. (sp?)

Zen vs. Hitler and Churchill ? By Vietnam and JFK, half of Cooper's life has already been lived if the description is correct.

[edit] Let me articulate this further.

You have interviewed a number of agents and others involved in this case. So have I. The data I have indicates Cooper was a much more active and verbal participant in this hijacking than the Transcripts (for example) shows. The Transcripts show only a small sampling of Cooper's actual communications and participation, if the data I have is correct. 'That' does not indicate a person meditating, giving up control, and letting things simply happen - as per some Zen model. Just the opposite is indicated. Cooper was an active person trying to control the important facets of the hijacking, from beginning to end.

Would you agree, based on your interviews?

In the all-important issue of needing the door open and stairs down, for example, Cooper is insistent and persistent. Climbing to a favorable altitude and leveling and stabilizing the plane, Cooper is equally insistent, in fact we know he went out and tested the stairs, then came back and communicated with the pilots requesting the plane be slowed and stabilized further before jumping ... that is a person trying to control his environment vs. just letting things happen.

As I see Cooper, active control was central to everything Cooper wanted and did. That is not a passive person, which some seem to want to portray Cooper as being ?
 


 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 19, 2014, 05:20:06 PM
Georger, I have learned very little about Cooper per se from my interviews. Tina and Flow are incommunicado, and Billy went belly-up just after contact. Alice, I've never found, and Galen is keeping her under wraps.

As for the feds, Himms only spoke with me for 20 minutes. Calame about the same, Rhodes zilch, O'Hara for 15, and these three were mostly about McCoy. Nichols won't talk, and Detlor only spoke in general terms, confirming stuff that I had written about the case. Sid Rubin was out to lunch as we were eating lunch, and Bob Sale deferred any direct input about Cooper, so we talked mostly about how the FBI does its business.

Larry was a different story, but he didn't get into details about what Cooper did, just mostly details of the case as it referred to Barb Dayton, DNA, and the actions of the FBI, such as what happened to Jeremy Blauser.

So, what I know about Cooper is from other people's writings, especially GG and Tosaw, and the transcripts.

The point I was trying to make with Morey is that we often think of Cooper as someone we know. Hence, some posters think Cooper must have been "desperate," or some such, because they would have been desperate to do what Cooper did. I don't think that is necessarily true. It's the "cultural goggles" that Sluggo attributes to sleuthing - we see things in certain way because of how we look, not how people actually act.

Thanks for the more indepth description of Cooper's actions. I didn't realize he was so active. I never thought that Cooper was a Zen-kind-of-guy. If anything, I thought he was more of a guy doing a job that he was well-prepared to do, and was comfortable doing.

I didn't know that Cooper tested the aft stairs after deployment, came back, and then wanted the aircraft slowed.

BTW: There is a considerable time lapse between the time Cooper sent Tina to the cockpit and the pressure bump - twenty minutes or so, or more.  But Cooper had already cut the cords when he sent Tina away, so what do you think Cooper did during that time?  He was already tying the bank bag, what else did he do, you think?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 20, 2014, 02:18:52 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Georger, I have learned very little about Cooper per se from my interviews. Tina and Flow are incommunicado, and Billy went belly-up just after contact. Alice, I've never found, and Galen is keeping her under wraps.

As for the feds, Himms only spoke with me for 20 minutes. Calame about the same, Rhodes zilch, O'Hara for 15, and these three were mostly about McCoy. Nichols won't talk, and Detlor only spoke in general terms, confirming stuff that I had written about the case. Sid Rubin was out to lunch as we were eating lunch, and Bob Sale deferred any direct input about Cooper, so we talked mostly about how the FBI does its business.

Larry was a different story, but he didn't get into details about what Cooper did, just mostly details of the case as it referred to Barb Dayton, DNA, and the actions of the FBI, such as what happened to Jeremy Blauser.

So, what I know about Cooper is from other people's writings, especially GG and Tosaw, and the transcripts.

The point I was trying to make with Morey is that we often think of Cooper as someone we know. Hence, some posters think Cooper must have been "desperate," or some such, because they would have been desperate to do what Cooper did. I don't think that is necessarily true. It's the "cultural goggles" that Sluggo attributes to sleuthing - we see things in certain way because of how we look, not how people actually act.

Thanks for the more indepth description of Cooper's actions. I didn't realize he was so active. I never thought that Cooper was a Zen-kind-of-guy. If anything, I thought he was more of a guy doing a job that he was well-prepared to do, and was comfortable doing.

I didn't know that Cooper tested the aft stairs after deployment, came back, and then wanted the aircraft slowed.

BTW: There is a considerable time lapse between the time Cooper sent Tina to the cockpit and the pressure bump - twenty minutes or so, or more.  But Cooper had already cut the cords when he sent Tina away, so what do you think Cooper did during that time?  He was already tying the bank bag, what else did he do, you think?

The last twenty minutes was spent in preparation, perhaps testing his rig, testing the stairs, making several calls to ask them to slow and stabilize the plane, and perhaps waiting for some sign below, lights coming up in the distance or something, which made him decide to jump.

If you are looking for something dramatic, it's not there. It is very clear what Cooper's main concern was - acquiring a favorable altitude then slowing and stabilizing the plane to accommodate Cooper's sense of when it was proper to jump. That concern is expressed clear back at Seattle while still on the ground. It isn't a sophisticated plan or set of demands. Cooper very clearly was concerned with his survival and trying to maximise the probability of that, as much as he could given the conditions at hand (which includes his level of confidence whatever that was).

It is equally clear neither the pilots or anyone else knew Cooper was gone, until 5 or more minutes after he was gone, and everyone had to back track and estimate the actual position 305 had been when Cooper jumped - that is reflected in the first FBI search map which maps out zones of confidence in where Cooper might have landed.

Again, there is nothing dramatic in any of this. All of this is routine (for 1971 technology). The placard is found where it predictably would be. The drama arrives with the finding of Cooper money at Tina Bar. That is a complete anomaly if everything else is correct.

And we have been over this only to arrive at the same paradox, a million times.   


 
   

 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 20, 2014, 11:55:04 AM
Quote
It is equally clear neither the pilots or anyone else knew Cooper was gone, until 5 or more minutes after he was gone,

According to the transcripts it appears they believed he jumped somewhere around the Merwin Lake area, south. however the transcripts also read over an hour later trying to slow his reactions down. this is way past the 5 or so minute mark?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 20, 2014, 01:15:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
It is equally clear neither the pilots or anyone else knew Cooper was gone, until 5 or more minutes after he was gone,

According to the transcripts it appears they believed he jumped somewhere around the Merwin Lake area, south. however the transcripts also read over an hour later trying to slow his reactions down. this is way past the 5 or so minute mark?

Evidently, some "really smart guys" hadn't been informed, by other "really smart guys". 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 20, 2014, 02:37:30 PM
After his real reason for posting, claiming he has never 'gossiped' at Dropzone, Mr. Blebins does his usual switch-a-roo claiming he does 'talk about Cooper', on the Dropzone DB Cooper thread. Then he re-posts his same old script about the Amboy chute claiming this is an example of him posting "about Cooper" - all of this self-serving baloney repeated below we have already seen 1-million times. The same tired script!

Yes Mr. Blebins, we have read your script before. This was already discussed ad nauseum by countless people years ago. Nothing new to report. Except that Mr, Blebins is once again calling the FBI out and calling them liars. Just as the same Mr. Blebins is preparing a new manuscript of his latest socalled "investigation" which he is going to ask the same FBI 40 days and forty nights reading, examining, and conducting their own investigation because of!

Somebody at the FBI needs to make up a brand new "Request Form" which they can simply mail
Mr. Blevins so he can file his countless "requests for investigation" as time goes on, which they can toss into a giant metal waste basket labelled: "Blevins Depository!".


Stop lumping her comments in with me, as if I had something to do with what she says. I am not the Controller of Jo Weber, thank you.

As far as discussing the case, I do that all the time. The only thing I CAN'T do currently is discuss information that is being held confidential until the FBI gets a chance to examine it.

You want to discuss something Cooper-related? Here's one: I still don't believe the FBI is being straight about the chute found in 2008 in Amboy. When I inquired on how they determined it wasn't Cooper's (back in 2013) they told me they couldn't discuss the chute because it was 'evidence in an ongoing case'. Not 'we can't discuss ANYTHING,' but specifically could not discuss the Amboy chute because it was evidence. Really?

Funny thing to say when they allegedly dismissed it as evidence more than five years previously... Crazy

Anybody's next question on that would be: If it was dismissed as evidence in 2008, why is it suddenly evidence in an ongoing case five years later? They never gave a specific reason on how they came to that determination anyway. And when I pressed them a bit on the alleged 'experts' they consulted, they admitted it was all done over the phone. No one actually was allowed to view the chute. Cossey says he saw it for a few seconds and wrote it off. But we know now that Cossey also said he OWNED the chute...and that wasn't true, either.


(This post was edited by RobertMBlevins on Dec 20, 2014, 11:01 AM)
   

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 20, 2014, 02:46:58 PM
I don't think the Amboy chute is anything other than what has been claimed. I did give one response about it possibly being set up by the FBI to gain attention to the case. it's all speculation, and I don't have anything to back it up, or a reason to constantly bring it up. it was a thought I had that could explain why nobody has come forward about it. I could be way off base. it was just a thought.

I also believe the FBI didn't have all the facts surrounding the Wallings incident.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 20, 2014, 05:29:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't think the Amboy chute is anything other than what has been claimed. I did give one response about it possibly being set up by the FBI to gain attention to the case. it's all speculation, and I don't have anything to back it up, or a reason to constantly bring it up. it was a thought I had that could explain why nobody has come forward about it. I could be way off base. it was just a thought.

I also believe the FBI didn't have all the facts surrounding the Wallings incident.

I can assure you! (Trust me on this! - Blevins words  :))  The FBI wanted to get to the bottom of the Amboy chute a helluva lot more than Mr. Blevins did. I seriously doubt that Mr. Blevins gives a crap about the Amboy chute. All the Amboy chute is to Mr. Blevins is a convenient tool for self promotion. Then Tom Kaye raises the anti by giving Blevins credit for "being the first person to raise important questions about the Amboy chute"?  GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!  What cave was Tom Kaye living in at the time. It was and still is - RIDICULOUS! And Blevins is still pounding his pub on the Amboy chute .... as if he and Tom Kaye invented it? Christ on a crutch.

All anybody has to do is go back and read the exchanges between Sluggo and Ckret etal. when the Amboy chute was first announced. Blevins wasn't even in the discussion. Who was down at Amboy poking around and digging and behind the scenes doing actual investigation - the FBI, not Blevins or Kaye! This is just one more classic example of some crank stepping in and trying to make the whole story about him. To this very day in spite of the hundreds of posts and articles by this idiot Blevins all saying the same thing, Blevins hasn't said or done one thing new that others didn't also say and actually do, in spite of Mr. Blevins' socalled expertise on the whole matter of the chute.    Then to have Tom Kaye step in and actually give Mr. Blevins credit, is beyond the pale. CREDIT FOR WHAT!???

And Blevins has pounded this thing to death since he got involved.

Blevins has some idiotic idea (or wants people to believe) that he is some kind of clearing house for the Truth ... and the very opposite is the truth! Then for Tom Kaye to certify Blevins as being 'the first' was just as idiotic as Blevins himself! It's an idiots pot pie.

Blevins tries to criticize and humiliate the FBI on the Amboy chute then turns right around and asks the FBI to review his 85? page report in detail and launch a major investigation, based on his work? He might as well turn around and ask Marla to marry him!

This is all crazy on it's face.   What it is is more than people are willing to endure! But it just might get him a place in the Crackpot Hall of Fame.
 

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 20, 2014, 05:47:30 PM
I think we have given Blevins the stage enough for a while. he will not change his ways. they can clutter up the DZ with the gossip, but I think we are better off focusing on the subject of Cooper here. I've said my peace over there, and if nobody accepts it. I can't do much more.

Shutter
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 20, 2014, 06:33:15 PM
Do you walk down to the edge of the ocean, Shut, and gaze out at the horizon and wonder why there are so many crazy people on the planet, and ponder how we ended up here, too?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 20, 2014, 06:39:56 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Do you walk down to the edge of the ocean, Shut, and gaze out at the horizon and wonder why there are so many crazy people on the planet, and ponder how we ended up here, too?

I wonder about a lot of things....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 20, 2014, 06:53:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Do you walk down to the edge of the ocean, Shut, and gaze out at the horizon and wonder why there are so many crazy people on the planet, and ponder how we ended up here, too?

I wonder about a lot of things....

Shutter, that means you are sane. :)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 20, 2014, 06:58:02 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
Do you walk down to the edge of the ocean, Shut, and gaze out at the horizon and wonder why there are so many crazy people on the planet, and ponder how we ended up here, too?

I wonder about a lot of things....

Shutter, that means you are sane. :)


The last time I checked, I thought so too  ;D
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 20, 2014, 09:05:36 PM
I concur.  ;)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 21, 2014, 12:47:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think we have given Blevins the stage enough for a while. he will not change his ways. they can clutter up the DZ with the gossip, but I think we are better off focusing on the subject of Cooper here. I've said my peace over there, and if nobody accepts it. I can't do much more.

Shutter

It is a well-travelled zero-sum game.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: MarkBennett on December 21, 2014, 01:17:27 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't think the Amboy chute is anything other than what has been claimed. I did give one response about it possibly being set up by the FBI to gain attention to the case. it's all speculation, and I don't have anything to back it up, or a reason to constantly bring it up. it was a thought I had that could explain why nobody has come forward about it. I could be way off base. it was just a thought.

I also believe the FBI didn't have all the facts surrounding the Wallings incident.

Robert did raise an interesting question, though....and maybe this is normal.

If the parachute is not Cooper's, as the FBI believes, why is it still being held as evidence?  Is that unusual?  Or could it be they aren't 100% sure?  Or could it be evidence in a different crime?

It would seem to me "non-evidence" would be discarded.  But, then I don't know...maybe that's normal.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 21, 2014, 01:41:47 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't think the Amboy chute is anything other than what has been claimed. I did give one response about it possibly being set up by the FBI to gain attention to the case. it's all speculation, and I don't have anything to back it up, or a reason to constantly bring it up. it was a thought I had that could explain why nobody has come forward about it. I could be way off base. it was just a thought.

I also believe the FBI didn't have all the facts surrounding the Wallings incident.

Robert did raise an interesting question, though....and maybe this is normal.

If the parachute is not Cooper's, as the FBI believes, why is it still being held as evidence?  Is that unusual?  Or could it be they aren't 100% sure?  Or could it be evidence in a different crime?

It would seem to me "non-evidence" would be discarded.  But, then I don't know...maybe that's normal.



I'm not sure they ever claimed to still have the chute. if it's no longer considered evidence I would guess they disposed of it, or they possibly held on to it. can anyone verify they still have it?

I don't see them covering the whole thing up. why would Cossey claim it to be a cargo chute. he could of easily said it wasn't Cooper's chute and replied it's the wrong type of canopy. he told Bruce it was 34 feet in diameter. the chute has similar markings on it consistent with the markings of a cargo chute.

Why do they keep files on other Cooper suspects that have been looked at and dismissed over the years. some of them according to reports were easily dismissed, but I'll be they are there.

It's possible it's now considered evidence with the case based on it's original theory of being Cooper's chute?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: MarkBennett on December 21, 2014, 02:18:03 AM
It could be something as simple as a CYA.

When "classified" JFK documents were released, some of them shouldn't have ever been classified.  Some were newspaper clippings and other public information.

If the FBI is still holding the chute, maybe they aren't sure.  If they release it and it turns out to be the Cooper chute, they end up with egg on their face.  If they hold onto it, they can't be embarrassed if it turns out it's not the Cooper chute because nobody will ever know.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 21, 2014, 02:27:52 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It could be something as simple as a CYA.

When "classified" JFK documents were released, some of them shouldn't have ever been classified.  Some were newspaper clippings and other public information.

If the FBI is still holding the chute, maybe they aren't sure.  If they release it and it turns out to be the Cooper chute, they end up with egg on their face.  If they hold onto it, they can't be embarrassed if it turns out it's not the Cooper chute because nobody will ever know.

I'm pretty sure they know it's not Cooper's. it was also sent to the lab. several people other than Cossey had a hand in it's identification. the FBI isn't that stupid. another chute was found on the banks of the Columbia. nobody seems to be whining about that one?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 21, 2014, 03:25:35 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It could be something as simple as a CYA.

When "classified" JFK documents were released, some of them shouldn't have ever been classified.  Some were newspaper clippings and other public information.

If the FBI is still holding the chute, maybe they aren't sure.  If they release it and it turns out to be the Cooper chute, they end up with egg on their face.  If they hold onto it, they can't be embarrassed if it turns out it's not the Cooper chute because nobody will ever know.

They keep it because it's evidence - evidence of something if not the Cooper chute which they seem convinced it isn't.

There are several problems with Blevins quick-theory. #1: They aren't sure it is Wallings' chute.

Quote: "The date stamped on the found parachute -- Feb. 21, 1946 -- is the repacking date, not the packing date, Hanson said. Local military historian John "Cye" Laramie said last week that date was the only thing questionable about linking it to Walling's crash."

The FBI hasn't claimed it is Wallings' chute, so what is Blev upset about? Blev is saying it is Wallings' chute or it is Cooper's chute as if those are the only choices which they are not.
Opinion is split.  Several say it isn't, one says it probably is Wallings', and the FBI say's they don't know, and a whole bunch of other people who are undecided ... but it is not Cooper's chute in event because it is SILK!  and Blevins says "give us the lab report!" Who is Blevins in this! 

#2: Quote: "Walling walked about eight miles until he came near the town of Yale, about nine miles from Amboy, the following day.  "He had followed a creek for the last part and we found him near Reese's store," said Howard Hanson, who was an Army Air Force lieutenant assigned to search for Walling. "We wanted to find out exactly where he landed, but he was really confused and noncommittal after being out there." 

Where is Reese's store? Is that in Yale or outside of Yale some distance? Blevins ignores that.

So perhaps Wallings did swim a river to get to that creek? That would answer Blevins' second expert objection. Wallings himself didn't seem to know where he had landed! We don't know the route Wallings took and Wallings never identified his landing place where he walked to Reese's store from! Wallings could have landed someplace else and the Amboy chute isn't Wallings or DB Cooper's, but someone else's chute! 

Either Blevins account is true, or it is false. My bet is Blevins has jumped to conclusions again, before all of the facts are known, which is what Blevins always does. Blevins has raised a straw man again based on incomplete facts and then advertises it to the hilt as if his version was true!

If Wallings' didn't know where he had landed how in hell does Blevins know where Wallings landed!? Blevins assumes Wallings had to cross a river or Lake Merwin. The fact is, nobody knows and the FBI isn't claiming it knows either.
 
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Suspected-D-B-Cooper-parachute-may-actually-be-1268879.php

 ;)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 21, 2014, 08:36:39 AM
Ok, so it seems it was Hanson who made the claim that it could possibly be Wallings chute. I thought it was a reporter. the report doesn't give to many details about the crash. I have the report, but it's hard to read. if anyone wishes to see it, just PM, or email me. the plane "unwitnessed crash approx, a mile and a half north of Yale Wash," Wallings was given a violation for not following weather conditions and landing at the nearest airport. he bailed from 18,000 feet.

Basically, Robert is trying to go against Hanson vs the FBI. Hanson probably doesn't know where the chute was actually found other than what is reported. according to Carr it's not very close to Amboy to begin with. Hanson is trying to recall something from about 63 years ago. I don't see where he needs to hike miles to make it to the chute the FBI has. Hanson could easily be mistaken with his conclusions.

The way I read the article from the Seattle PI is the FBI heard this story, and agreed "it's definitely possible"

How long has the chute been there? it doesn't have to be Wallings chute, and it doesn't have to of been in the ground since 1945, or 1971, or even 2000. it's speculation stating when it was buried.

Below is a photo of the Amboy chute with it's markings, and another cargo chute with similar markings. these seem to differ from personal chutes with stamped markings on them.

Amboy chute is on the left.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 21, 2014, 10:34:18 AM
The second page of the report is a little easier to read. (see photo)

 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 21, 2014, 01:16:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ok, so it seems it was Hanson who made the claim that it could possibly be Wallings chute. I thought it was a reporter. the report doesn't give to many details about the crash. I have the report, but it's hard to read. if anyone wishes to see it, just PM, or email me. the plane "unwitnessed crash approx, a mile and a half north of Yale Wash," Wallings was given a violation for not following weather conditions and landing at the nearest airport. he bailed from 18,000 feet.

Basically, Robert is trying to go against Hanson vs the FBI. Hanson probably doesn't know where the chute was actually found other than what is reported. according to Carr it's not very close to Amboy to begin with. Hanson is trying to recall something from about 63 years ago. I don't see where he needs to hike miles to make it to the chute the FBI has. Hanson could easily be mistaken with his conclusions.

The way I read the article from the Seattle PI is the FBI heard this story, and agreed "it's definitely possible"

How long has the chute been there? it doesn't have to be Wallings chute, and it doesn't have to of been in the ground since 1945, or 1971, or even 2000. it's speculation stating when it was buried.

Below is a photo of the Amboy chute with it's markings, and another cargo chute with similar markings. these seem to differ from personal chutes with stamped markings on them.

Amboy chute is on the left.

I don't know how the repacking of cargo parachutes is documented, but ALL military or civilian parachutes for pilots and crew members that I have ever personally seen had a packing card in a pocket on the outside of the container or on the harness.  These parachutes had to be repacked a regular intervals and that repacking, plus any other pertinent information, was documented on that packing card.

The dates and numbers on the parachutes shown above by Shutter could be their original manufacture dates and contract numbers or they could represent dates of repairs or modifications to the canopies and the authorization for that work.  Also, I would not expect to find a "harness" on a cargo parachute.

In my opinion, the hassle over the Amboy and Walling parachutes is meaningless.  Immediately following World War 2, tens of thousands of surplus personnel and cargo parachute canopies were sold, or given, to the general public and various institutions.  Even in the early 1960s, you could buy personnel parachute canopies and other equipment that had been manufactured during WW2 and was still in its unopened shipping box from the manufacturer.  I believe 377 can confirm this.

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 21, 2014, 04:17:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ok, so it seems it was Hanson who made the claim that it could possibly be Wallings chute. I thought it was a reporter. the report doesn't give to many details about the crash. I have the report, but it's hard to read. if anyone wishes to see it, just PM, or email me. the plane "unwitnessed crash approx, a mile and a half north of Yale Wash," Wallings was given a violation for not following weather conditions and landing at the nearest airport. he bailed from 18,000 feet.

Basically, Robert is trying to go against Hanson vs the FBI. Hanson probably doesn't know where the chute was actually found other than what is reported. according to Carr it's not very close to Amboy to begin with. Hanson is trying to recall something from about 63 years ago. I don't see where he needs to hike miles to make it to the chute the FBI has. Hanson could easily be mistaken with his conclusions.

The way I read the article from the Seattle PI is the FBI heard this story, and agreed "it's definitely possible"

How long has the chute been there? it doesn't have to be Wallings chute, and it doesn't have to of been in the ground since 1945, or 1971, or even 2000. it's speculation stating when it was buried.

Below is a photo of the Amboy chute with it's markings, and another cargo chute with similar markings. these seem to differ from personal chutes with stamped markings on them.

Amboy chute is on the left.

Well, one thing is certain - it was not buried "deep" as some report. And when this first surfaced there were even several reports that people in that area already knew there was an old chute there, had encountered it before, and one guy said he thought the chute had been covered over (graded over) from a previous owner/user of the ground in question.

The current owner/user of the property did not know it was there, to the side of an entry road to a field. The current owner/user went in with a blade on his tractor to grade out ruts in this entry road to a field. He made several passes with his blade working out the ruts and backed out to make a third pass and the edge of his blade caught the chute buried just off the main part of this entry path to his field. His kids saw the blade snag something and called it his attention. There is a good photo of the tractor sitting on the freshly graded entry road with the cloth chute sticking out from freshly graded dirt at the edge of the road. From my perspective having graded out many entry roads to fields over my lifetime, that chute is just below the surface (6-8" and no more than a foot), and was easily snagged by the blade once the tractor moved over and took a pass widening the road. That is all there is to this. That photo published says it all. That "canopy" (and that is all it is) at the edge of the road looks like it had been dumped there earlier and  graded over before at the edge of the road. I didnot save those first photos I saw in articles otherwise I would present them now. Maybe somebody can find them. All of this has been said before when Blevins first posted his theory at DZ about this matter ...

The location Blevins uses in his map ... I am the one who provided photos and that location on DZ! Blevins got that from my posts. I got the Google map photos from one of the first articles on this matter - the article was taken down I think. I will post those photos when I get a chance to find them here.

On the issue of silk - Blevins says silk would be badly deteriorated. He says since the chute is pristine it is not silk! Burroughs and Carr both describe the chute as being "badly deteriorated"!


   




     
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 21, 2014, 04:36:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ok, so it seems it was Hanson who made the claim that it could possibly be Wallings chute. I thought it was a reporter. the report doesn't give to many details about the crash. I have the report, but it's hard to read. if anyone wishes to see it, just PM, or email me. the plane "unwitnessed crash approx, a mile and a half north of Yale Wash," Wallings was given a violation for not following weather conditions and landing at the nearest airport. he bailed from 18,000 feet.

Basically, Robert is trying to go against Hanson vs the FBI. Hanson probably doesn't know where the chute was actually found other than what is reported. according to Carr it's not very close to Amboy to begin with. Hanson is trying to recall something from about 63 years ago. I don't see where he needs to hike miles to make it to the chute the FBI has. Hanson could easily be mistaken with his conclusions.

The way I read the article from the Seattle PI is the FBI heard this story, and agreed "it's definitely possible"

How long has the chute been there? it doesn't have to be Wallings chute, and it doesn't have to of been in the ground since 1945, or 1971, or even 2000. it's speculation stating when it was buried.

Below is a photo of the Amboy chute with it's markings, and another cargo chute with similar markings. these seem to differ from personal chutes with stamped markings on them.

Amboy chute is on the left.

I don't know how the repacking of cargo parachutes is documented, but ALL military or civilian parachutes for pilots and crew members that I have ever personally seen had a packing card in a pocket on the outside of the container or on the harness.  These parachutes had to be repacked a regular intervals and that repacking, plus any other pertinent information, was documented on that packing card.

The dates and numbers on the parachutes shown above by Shutter could be their original manufacture dates and contract numbers or they could represent dates of repairs or modifications to the canopies and the authorization for that work.  Also, I would not expect to find a "harness" on a cargo parachute.

In my opinion, the hassle over the Amboy and Walling parachutes is meaningless.  Immediately following World War 2, tens of thousands of surplus personnel and cargo parachute canopies were sold, or given, to the general public and various institutions.  Even in the early 1960s, you could buy personnel parachute canopies and other equipment that had been manufactured during WW2 and was still in its unopened shipping box from the manufacturer.  I believe 377 can confirm this.

Your last paragraph above - very good!

This may not be the Walling chute at all. Thousands of these chutes were purchased surplus post WWII - hell we kids had three of them from the grades thru highschool playing them etc etc etc - farmers used to cover things with them - they were literally all over the place! They were very common as equipment covers, some people even covered hay with them! Most were purchased as canopies without the bag/container. ALL OF THOSE OLD WWII CHUTES WERE SILK!

Sewing clubs used to buy them and the woman made handkerchiefs and all kinds of things from them, for sale at church bizarrs etc.

Somewhere I have a photo of that road and the field beyond it and it looks like a hay field to me. That chute could have been used to cover bails of hay!

I will even go out on a limb and say the FBI photos of that chute look like silk to me - vs nylon. I posted about this at DZ years ago. 377 wasn't sure for some reason, but I based my opinion on the 'luft' (loft in English?) of the material the way is lays .. a very light weight material vs nylon.  I even posted a photo of silk on DZ and 377 even joked about how the guys at the Seattle office were probably outside with a magnifying glass now looking at the material - it's silk! And Carr etal described it as "badly deteriorated", just as Blevins requires..

This matter is not worthy of the Federal Case Blevins has tried to make out it!

 :o   

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 21, 2014, 04:38:30 PM
Quote
In my opinion, the hassle over the Amboy and Walling parachutes is meaningless.

I couldn't agree more, unfortunately we must set records straight that get skewed by others. I don't believe the chute is anything other than a chute that was found by some kids that ended up not being Cooper's. the conspiracy with it doesn't fit. I think they would have been a lot more "hush hush" about the whole incident. they came to the conclusion by several means, and don't have to answer to everyone when questioned.  :)

Did the FBI explain in detail how they dismissed the 1000 plus suspects? they don't have to tell us anything...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 21, 2014, 05:24:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
In my opinion, the hassle over the Amboy and Walling parachutes is meaningless.

I couldn't agree more, unfortunately we must set records straight that get skewed by others. I don't believe the chute is anything other than a chute that was found by some kids that ended up not being Cooper's. the conspiracy with it doesn't fit. I think they would have been a lot more "hush hush" about the whole incident. they came to the conclusion by several means, and don't have to answer to everyone when questioned.  :)

Did the FBI explain in detail how they dismissed the 1000 plus suspects? they don't have to tell us anything...

Good post especially the last part - laughing....   ;) ;) ;)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 28, 2014, 04:22:04 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
In my opinion, the hassle over the Amboy and Walling parachutes is meaningless.

I couldn't agree more, unfortunately we must set records straight that get skewed by others. I don't believe the chute is anything other than a chute that was found by some kids that ended up not being Cooper's. the conspiracy with it doesn't fit. I think they would have been a lot more "hush hush" about the whole incident. they came to the conclusion by several means, and don't have to answer to everyone when questioned.  :)

Did the FBI explain in detail how they dismissed the 1000 plus suspects? they don't have to tell us anything...

Good post especially the last part - laughing....   ;) ;) ;)

Anyone who thinks the Amboy parachute is anything but a cargo parachute needs to Goggle the "42J3968-2" number that appears on that canopy.  They will get several hits that clearly identify that the number in question applies to cargo parachutes manufactured in the WW2 era.  Thus, the January 23, 1945 date is plainly the manufacturing date.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 28, 2014, 04:41:57 PM
Actually the numbers are 307551 with a date of Feb. 21, 1946
The number 42J3968-2 was of a cargo chute I used as an example of how they were marked.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 28, 2014, 05:35:36 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Actually the numbers are 307551 with a date of Feb. 21, 1946
The number 42J3968-2 was of a cargo chute I used as an example of how they were marked.

Okay, if the above numbers apply to a personnel parachute, and that hasn't been proven to my knowledge, then this parachute would be a minimum of more than 25 years old in November 1971.  And it is highly unlikely that a canopy that old would be used on an emergency personnel parachute at that time.

The February 21, 1946 date would not be a repack date.  The repack dates appear on the parachute packing card and not on the canopy.  I have never seen an emergency parachute, either civilian or military, that had a "repack due" date.  The packing cards contain the date of the last repack and usually a printed statement about the length of the repack cycle.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 28, 2014, 05:51:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Actually the numbers are 307551 with a date of Feb. 21, 1946
The number 42J3968-2 was of a cargo chute I used as an example of how they were marked.

Okay, if the above numbers apply to a personnel parachute, and that hasn't been proven to my knowledge, then this parachute would be a minimum of more than 25 years old in November 1971.  And it is highly unlikely that a canopy that old would be used on an emergency personnel parachute at that time.

The February 21, 1946 date would not be a repack date.  The repack dates appear on the parachute packing card and not on the canopy.  I have never seen an emergency parachute, either civilian or military, that had a "repack due" date.  The packing cards contain the date of the last repack and usually a printed statement about the length of the repack cycle.


I stand corrected on the markings. I thought it was possible they didn't have packing cards for cargo chutes, and possibly marked them on the chute since no manufacture was present on the stamp.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 29, 2014, 07:07:00 AM
It is also possible the marking was not the serial number. it appears the chute would be easily identified if it did have an actual serial number on it.

Every Personnel chute I have come across has a lot more information on them. they list the manufacture, the date, and the serial number.(see photo) it's from a silk chute made in 1945. it appears they have a generic stamp for the chute, and then add the date, and serial number with another stamp.

I realize Cossey hasn't been completely honest with his story in the past, but I can't believe everyone else got the chute wrong about the material, or the type of chute it was. Bruce spoke with Cossey, Mr. Blevins did not even though he claims he has real facts to backup his statements. he did ask the FBI apparently, and was told it's an open case. he tried to claim for years that Tom Kaye was DENIED access to the chute while there viewing all the evidence. Tom told me he didn't bring the subject up since they dismissed the chute prior to him being there.

We know others looked at the chute, it went to the lab for analysis. nobody knows how long the chute was in the ground to begin with to make a statement about it's condition. I know the FBI wouldn't take the word of one. it was a totality of evidence that gave the proof needed to dismiss it as Cooper's.

The FBI made this statement at one point

"We`re still in the process of finishing up what investigative steps we think are necessary to feel certain about calling it one way or the other."
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 29, 2014, 05:06:36 PM
While others expect positive proof from the FBI on the Amboy chute I'm wondering how an 11 year veteran of the sport didn't realize he grabbed a dummy chute? how are we to expect Cooper to notice it based on limited knowledge of his experience with skydiving? if he missed obvious marking that were suppose to be on there he should of notice the difference in weight? at least that's how Carr said it.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 29, 2014, 05:41:40 PM
I've always wondered what the whole story about the dummy chute was. When was it noticed? why did they risk giving it to Cooper? Who noticed it? Who made the decision?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 29, 2014, 05:46:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I've always wondered what the whole story about the dummy chute was. When was it noticed? why did they risk giving it to Cooper? Who noticed it? Who made the decision?


Here is one article. I have others, but I just got home. I'll post more in a little while

http://fultonhistory.com/Newspapers%20Disk3/Watertown%20Times/Watertown%20NY%20Daily%20Times%20Nov%201971%20Grayscale.pdf/Watertown%20NY%20Daily%20Times%20Nov%201971%20Grayscale%20-%200103.pdf
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 29, 2014, 05:49:18 PM
Here is one where he claims he didn't know it was a training chute....

http://www.mariettatimes.com/pdf/news/567174_1.pdf

If not mistaken, I believe Cossey noticed the bad chute was given, but I'm not sure of when that occurred.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: MarkBennett on December 29, 2014, 09:48:40 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I've always wondered what the whole story about the dummy chute was. When was it noticed? why did they risk giving it to Cooper? Who noticed it? Who made the decision?


Here is one article. I have others, but I just got home. I'll post more in a little while

http://fultonhistory.com/Newspapers%20Disk3/Watertown%20Times/Watertown%20NY%20Daily%20Times%20Nov%201971%20Grayscale.pdf/Watertown%20NY%20Daily%20Times%20Nov%201971%20Grayscale%20-%200103.pdf

That is so weird!  Why is it the Watertown Daily Times?  That's in upstate New York.  That's where I lived most of the time between 1967 and 1977.  We used to get that newspaper.  Small world.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 29, 2014, 10:50:07 PM
It appears in a lot of articles from all over the Country. it was pretty big news, so I guess hundreds of newspapers ran the story.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 29, 2014, 11:58:27 PM
Put me in the Wondering Club, too.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 30, 2014, 06:26:25 AM
I like there explanation of the search area....

"The FBI said the search was being concentrated in the Cowlitzs -Clark County area in southern Washington as a result of information provided by the crew and "strictly conjecture on our part"
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 30, 2014, 07:05:52 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I've always wondered what the whole story about the dummy chute was. When was it noticed? why did they risk giving it to Cooper? Who noticed it? Who made the decision?


Here is one article. I have others, but I just got home. I'll post more in a little while

http://fultonhistory.com/Newspapers%20Disk3/Watertown%20Times/Watertown%20NY%20Daily%20Times%20Nov%201971%20Grayscale.pdf/Watertown%20NY%20Daily%20Times%20Nov%201971%20Grayscale%20-%200103.pdf

Regardless to who gave out the chute. the question remains to how an 11 year veteran failed to notice the chute was a non functioning chute. the chute was cut an sewn together, did Cossey pack it, or was it like Carr stated (squishy) Carr also states the following "Anyone with any amount of experience would have know the x's on the container meant" that statement alone doesn't seem to apply to Emrick who missed it when he grabbed the chute to begin with? 

According to Carr, he states Cossey found the mistake the next day.
Quote
Cossey did not provide the chute, he discovered the mistake the next day
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 30, 2014, 02:16:51 PM
So no one noticed it until the next day, when Cossey realized a dummy chute was missing? Might this have been more Cossey interjecting himself into the story?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 30, 2014, 03:17:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So no one noticed it until the next day, when Cossey realized a dummy chute was missing? Might this have been more Cossey interjecting himself into the story?


I believe Cossey was the rigger for that school, so it's probable that he knew the inventory that was there and would know what was missing. it still points back to a skilled jumper missing the X"s on the container. I'm wondering if anything was really on it to alert anyone? I would guess the FBI took pictures of the chutes, but with all the confusions they might not of taken any?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on December 30, 2014, 04:45:30 PM
One of the books, Himmelsbach's I think, mentions the mistake of not photographing the parachutes.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 30, 2014, 07:30:24 PM
A final note on the Amboy chute.

Some people don't really wish to hear facts. the FBI never based there conclusions on Cossey alone. the quote below was after Cossey looked at the chute.

Quote
Published: Mar 31, 2008
We haven't made a determination one way or the other yet,'' Burroughs said. ''We're still in the process of finishing up what investigative steps we think are necessary to feel certain about calling it one way or the other.'

Someone stated the lab was one day, and Cossey the next. I don't believe the statement of not allowing anyone to see the chute either. he said the same for Tom Kaye for years.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Parrotheadvol on December 31, 2014, 12:31:35 AM
Has anyone, other than Mr. Blevins questioned the FBI findings on the Amboy chute?

He is the only one I am aware of. As I told home on DZ, when someone credible questions such things, I may pay attention.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on December 31, 2014, 02:57:03 AM
Not that I am aware of.

As for Cooper's chute, there are only a few possibilities, depending on whom you choose to believe:

Cossey:
1. NB-6, with a 28-foot canopy
2. NB-8, with a 28-foot canopy
3. Pioneer sport chute, or "Paradise" or maybe a Paracommander, presumably a 26-footer.

Hayden:
1. Pioneers with 26-foot canopies.

It is my understanding that the Amboy chute is none of these.

That of course, is not to say that Cossey was reliable, Hayden totally accurate, the FBI completely truthful, and the folks in Amboy unafraid about something and happy to show off their latest tourist attraction....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 31, 2014, 06:57:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Has anyone, other than Mr. Blevins questioned the FBI findings on the Amboy chute?

He is the only one I am aware of. As I told home on DZ, when someone credible questions such things, I may pay attention.

The FBI can make mistakes just like anyone else can. I don't think they are obligated to tell us anything! they never said the reason LD Cooper was dismissed, so are they covering it up? doubtful.

It's still an open case. they will not disclose everything they have. Robert is getting upset for the same things he is doing by refusing to answer, or show anything with his suspect.

The chute doesn't seem to have the proper markings on it that a personnel chute has. If it did have them the odds would be much higher in discovering where it came from, and probably wouldn't even need to be sent to a lab at all. I seriously doubt the FBI concluded solely on one person even explaining they wanted to be sure one or the other.

Robert keeps showing the information about Hayden with his conclusions. he's basically stating Hayden's chute was from 1946. he was the one who supplied the backpacks if this story is correct. why would Hayden lie about having an old chute? if we are to believe the date on the chute being the manufacture date, isn't 25 years too old for a chute? would a rigger pack an out dated chute?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: MarkBennett on December 31, 2014, 10:36:51 AM
Interesting...Robert may have a point in asking if the chute is obviously not Cooper's, why is the FBI keeping it.  If it had been found 50 miles away, it might now be in some landfill somewhere.  If that were his point, however, it wouldn't really needed to be talked about so much on a DB Cooper forum.

Because, that's not really his point.  He thinks it might be Cooper's chute.  It is very possible based on size, color, material, etc.  that it was properly ruled out within five minutes. 

How can you argue with somebody who wants to have not only their own opinion, but their own facts?  How does he know the FBI never showed the chute to any other experts?  It's not in his news links anywhere nor in any official statement from the FBI.  Nope, "somebody from the FBI" told him, but he doesn't say who it was.    The FBI is either infallible (flight plan) or incompetent (chutes) depending on his desired result.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 31, 2014, 04:34:59 PM
The FBI is going to keep anything related to the case. I'm sure they have all the files of all the 1000+ suspects. If it's no longer considered evidence, the owner has the right to retrieve the chute back. even Hayden got his chute back, but not without a fight. that chute should have been considered evidence to this day even though he didn't use it but it was on the plane when it landed in Reno.

Skydivers only allowed to view the chute through a picture is nonsense. why would they do that? I'm guessing that more people viewed the chute than the FBI has lead us to believe. anyway you look at it the chute doesn't fit. the chute Hayden had clearly shows Cossey packed it. the reserve in evidence has Cossey's name on it, and he packed it. why would this canopy be 25 years old that could put someone else besides Cooper in danger if it wasn't taken care of properly.

I looked up how long canopies can be used. it appears than can be used for a long period of time if they are taken care of. thousands of military surplus chutes were sold or given away after the war. they can be used for dozens of things, car covers, tents, covering farm equipment, awnings etc. the military does put limits on the time frames of the canopy life, or use.

The stamp doesn't appear to be a serial number at all. it could be as Robert99 states of being repaired at that time period, and marked with the numbers of the guy who repaired it. they still have the serial numbers of the chutes according to the FBI. those numbers should of matched. you wouldn't need anyone else to look at the chute. the chute might be older than the stamp is showing for all we know?

Cossey seems to have damaged his reputation with the case, but I doubt he would flat out lie to them knowing they will have others check the chute. as mentioned above it appears they didn't stop at his word anyway.....

I'm thinking of today's time. what would the jumpers call in about? letting the FBI tell them about the chute and figure things out that way? that's ridiculous. they showed the chute on the news, so I'm sure others viewed the chute.

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 01, 2015, 01:01:27 AM
The conclusion was based "on the totality of the information," Seattle FBI spokeswoman Robbie Burroughs said, and not just the opinion of Earl Cossey, the FAA-certified parachute rigger who packed each of the four parachutes that were handed over to Cooper on Nov. 24, 1971.

"Other parachute experts were consulted," Burroughs said, including some who stepped forward to help the FBI after the parachute's discovery was announced last week.


http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2008/04/fbi_confirms_it_parachute_wasn.html


"Someone stepped forward"??? was that someone on the phone  ;D I thought nobody was allowed to view the chute?

We have no idea who everyone was involved in dismissing the chute.....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 03, 2015, 01:32:32 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The conclusion was based "on the totality of the information," Seattle FBI spokeswoman Robbie Burroughs said, and not just the opinion of Earl Cossey, the FAA-certified parachute rigger who packed each of the four parachutes that were handed over to Cooper on Nov. 24, 1971.

"Other parachute experts were consulted," Burroughs said, including some who stepped forward to help the FBI after the parachute's discovery was announced last week.


http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2008/04/fbi_confirms_it_parachute_wasn.html


"Someone stepped forward"??? was that someone on the phone  ;D I thought nobody was allowed to view the chute?

We have no idea who everyone was involved in dismissing the chute.....

I have yet to read one thing Blevins has said that is compelling or even accurate or germane on this issue.

He says it's not silk. He says he can tell it's nylon and not silk, by looking at the photos. He is even challenging the FBI by saying: 'Hey FBI - how stupid can you get!'. But, Blevins hasn't stated once in all these years of his snarky parachute diatribe oft repeated - WHAT IT IS HE CAN SEE, THAT TELLS HIM IT IS NYLON and not silk. Maybe if he told the world what is it he can SEE, then the rest of the world could SEE it too! ???   ;) My guess is this is all a game Blevins is playing to keep himself in the attention getting mode. Since he literally has nothing else to offer.

All of the other issues concerning this parachute have been answered by one means or another.

The articles I posted make it abundantly clear nobody knows where Walling landed, not even Walling himself (back in the 50s?). And if these people don't know then everything Blevins says about that issue is pure speculation too.

I guess misery loves company. That is the ON:LY reason I can come up for anyone responding to either Blevins or Jo Weber on this topic. Weber doesn't know her head from her pill bottles on any issue, on her sanest day!
     
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 03, 2015, 06:35:55 PM
I posted the crash report. it doesn't say where he was found, but he was cited for flying in bad conditions. the report was made in January of 1946. he bailed out in 1945. it does say where he bailed. it's not close to the chute area.

As I mentioned prior. I believe Mr. Hanson has a faded memory of the crash since it was 63 years ago. I think he was trying help resolve where the chute possibly could of come from and was mistaken about things from so long ago. I don't think it was anymore than that in my opinion...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 10, 2015, 02:22:03 AM
Still trying to get vindication, Blevins posts with a new approach trying to make the Amboy chute be Cooper's chute:


RobertMBlevins
Jan 9, 2015, 10:46 PM
Post #56816 of 56816
Date comparisons [In reply to]    

Saw this on another thread here. It was an answer to a question from another user. The user said: 'My chute and container are twenty years old? Should I retire them?'

Answer:

Quote:
'Nah if its in good nick i wouldnt worry about it my last skydive container and reserve were made in 1990...no dramas. Also my base canopy is dom (date of manufacture) 96...'

If Cooper jumped in 1971, (well, he did) this means perhaps he could have safely used a chute dated clear back to 1946, according to the poster, at least on the reserve he quoted, and 1954 on the main. Hayden has stated that he is pretty sure he bought the two main chutes in late 1968. Going back, it is possible the chutes were from as early as 1943 or 1950, respectively.

377 recently pointed me to an ad on Craigslist where a guy is selling a Cooper-like chute from 1952. It's a Switlik, though. 26 foor canopy. Looks like it is in excellent condition, container and all. And that one is more than sixty years old. So the idea that the Amboy chute couldn't be Cooper's because it may have been too old to be used might be inaccurate.

Hayden got those chutes from a used parachute shop, I think he said near Boeing Field. (Name of place is in my notes) Who is to say how old those things were when Hayden bought them in 1968? He told me in his telephone interview that the only reason he even bought them was because he was forced to by sport pilot rules. Goes to reason he might look for something solid...but not too expensive.

I may have to do another interview with Hayden.

My guess on the question above is THIS: All three have law degrees.


(This post was edited by RobertMBlevins on Jan 9, 2015, 10:53 PM)


I guess Blevins is now saying 'the chutes supplied to Cooper could have been, or were, 1950s chutes or older because 20 year old or even older chutes are still used (on Dropzone! and by 377!) because "Hayden got those chutes from a used parachute shop" and did not know how old they were!... which makes the Amboy chute one of the chutes given to Cooper!  8)

Blevins' ego just won't allow him to be wrong, about anything. 

Comments?  :D
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 10, 2015, 07:10:50 AM
He has a point to a certain degree. when it comes to the canopy it doesn't come down to the age as of the chute. it comes down to several things.

1) Number of jumps.
2) Sun exposure.
3) Wear.

I don't know if they have to tell the age of the chute. it basically comes down to how the chute was taken care of. I would assume who ever packed the chute would have noticed it doesn't have the proper markings needed on it. Cossey did pack the chutes Hayden had/has, would he risk his reputation (prior to Nov. 1971) and not tell the owner the problems with the chute?
It's the riggers job to insure the safety of the canopy.


The Amboy chute fails to have any type of markings on it that are stamped on a personnel chute.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on January 10, 2015, 12:24:56 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
He has a point to a certain degree. when it comes to the canopy it doesn't come down to the age as of the chute. it comes down to several things.

1) Number of jumps.
2) Sun exposure.
3) Wear.

I don't know if they have to tell the age of the chute. it basically comes down to how the chute was taken care of. I would assume who ever packed the chute would have noticed it doesn't have the proper markings needed on it. Cossey did pack the chutes Hayden had/has, would he risk his reputation (prior to Nov. 1971) and not tell the owner the problems with the chute?
It's the riggers job to insure the safety of the canopy.


The Amboy chute fails to have any type of markings on it that are stamped on a personnel chute.

Shutter, you are 100 percent correct when you write that it is the riggers job to insure the safety of the canopy.

From the late 1960s until about the first of November of 1971, I owned an NB-6 that I used when flying a sailplane with a very cramped and reclining cockpit.  My rigger told me things that I could remove from the container, such as some stiffeners and other unnecessary items, to improve the fit between the parachute, cockpit layout, and myself.  The end result was that I could stay tightly strapped in that cockpit for 6+ hour flights without going out of my mind.  Note that I didn't say those flights were comfortable, but they could be tolerated.

Basically for civilian emergency parachutes, the rigger determines when it is no longer usable.  I think the military parachute people have time limits as well as the condition of the parachute when determining if it should be retired.  Perhaps a military rigger will see this and explain the situation.

In any event, there were thousands and thousands of parachutes, canopies, and related equipment that was sold as surplus following WW2 and probably most of it was still in the original packing as received from the manufacturer and as good as new.  There was no need to take a chance with keeping a marginal piece of equipment in use for even another day.

Robert99
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 10, 2015, 01:05:12 PM
The T-10 military chute had the following guidelines.

The parachute has a combined service life of 16.5 years; service life is 12 years and shelf life is 4.5 years. The T-10D Parachute must be repacked every 120 days.

It's 35 feet in diameter with 30 suspension lines. I'll see if I can find it, but the military takes the chutes out of service regardless of condition at a certain age. the above I believe is specific to that model.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 10, 2015, 01:23:53 PM
The Butler Parachute Systems does mark there chutes if they have been tested, or repaired.

Strength Testing of Canopy Cloth:  BPS will perform a non-destructive strength test on a randomly selected section of canopy cloth biennially (once every two years).  Each test location is marked with the date and loft number.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on January 10, 2015, 01:39:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The T-10 military chute had the following guidelines.

The parachute has a combined service life of 16.5 years; service life is 12 years and shelf life is 4.5 years. The T-10D Parachute must be repacked every 120 days.

It's 35 feet in diameter with 30 suspension lines. I'll see if I can find it, but the military takes the chutes out of service regardless of condition at a certain age. the above I believe is specific to that model.

I'm not absolutely sure of the military service life of military emergency parachutes that were available at the end of WW2, but I think it was about 10 years and I think there was also a shelf life limit even if it was never in service.  After that, if it was sold to a civilian and a civilian rigger was willing to repack it, it could be used even longer.  But there was plenty of parachute equipment that had never been in service that was available on the military surplus market.

And relying on my memories of 50+ years ago, my skydiving instructor, who was also a rigger, told me that a former military canopy that had been modified for skydiving (usually a 5-TU or 7-TU type modification in the early 1960s) should be junked after about 100 skydiver type jumps regardless of its condition.  I don't know if any canopies made it that far but we thoroughly inspected all the equipment and any (canopy, harness, or other) showing even minimum wear was removed from use.  But this was on the East Coast, and the West Coast people apparently had different standards according to the horror stories that were in circulation.

Robert99 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on January 10, 2015, 01:46:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The Butler Parachute Systems does mark there chutes if they have been tested, or repaired.

Strength Testing of Canopy Cloth:  BPS will perform a non-destructive strength test on a randomly selected section of canopy cloth biennially (once every two years).  Each test location is marked with the date and loft number.

If Manly Butler of Butler Parachutes does it you can rely on it.  He worked up an emergency parachute for me when his company was located at California City and I still had it when I retired from flying.  It was the best parachute I ever owned.  It was never jumped, but I had 100 percent faith that it would get the job done if it was ever needed.

Robert99   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 10, 2015, 01:49:27 PM
Do you know wat they are talking about with "loft numbers"?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on January 10, 2015, 02:15:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Do you know wat they are talking about with "loft numbers"?

The loft number would be an FAA assigned number meaning that it was approved by them.  I have just tried to find an online source as to the numbering sequences, etc., but couldn't locate one.

Basically, the loft number would be assigned to a company that was approved by the FAA to do specified maintenance, repairs, etc., on parachutes.  This would be similar to the "repair station" numbers assigned by the FAA to facilities that they have approved to do specified repairs on aircraft.

Robert99
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 10, 2015, 02:47:35 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
He has a point to a certain degree. when it comes to the canopy it doesn't come down to the age as of the chute. it comes down to several things.

1) Number of jumps.
2) Sun exposure.
3) Wear.

I don't know if they have to tell the age of the chute. it basically comes down to how the chute was taken care of. I would assume who ever packed the chute would have noticed it doesn't have the proper markings needed on it. Cossey did pack the chutes Hayden had/has, would he risk his reputation (prior to Nov. 1971) and not tell the owner the problems with the chute?
It's the riggers job to insure the safety of the canopy.


The Amboy chute fails to have any type of markings on it that are stamped on a personnel chute.

I disagree. Blevins does not have any "points". What he has are "what ifs"! 
1. What if Hayden's chutes were purchased at a "used chute shop".
2. What if neither the shop or Hayden knew (or cared) what the age of the chutes was.
3. What if the chutes are 20+ years old, or more!
4. What if the chutes given to Cooper were 20+ years old, or more!
5, What if nobody in the chain of acquiring and supplying chutes to Cooper knew or cared how old they were.
6. etc etc etc etc etc .....

All based on some guy's post at Dropzone asking if it's safe to use old 20 year old chutes, and another post by 377 who likes and collects and is supposedly an expert on old chutes who like Blevins is saying the Amboy chute is not silk but nylon!?

All Blevins has is yet one more set of conjectures!  There are no points!  All there is is what-ifs.

... and he has done the same thing with everything else he has ever said or done.

What if Cooper was not Cooper, but Kenny Christiansen! ???

 :(

Example of this kind of reasoning:  'What if Christmas came BEFORE the Fourth of July, in the Neanderthal calender?

That would prove that the Neanderthal species actually came AFTER Homo Sapiens, not before! It would also prove that Neanderthals were smarter than Homo Sapiens .................................... all according to Mr. Blevins-377 model of reasoning.

When you realise that all of this is being done is being done not as a function of research, but as an exercise in "ego", then it becomes even worse. Let me just cut to the bottom line of what is really at stake here, and what this really IS about!

Maybe Robert M Blevins and 377 at Dropzone, really are the Master Race!  Do ya thunk?   :-\ :-*   
 :o 8)
 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 10, 2015, 03:01:12 PM
The reason I said he may have a point to a certain degree was based on the life of a chute. I've said in the past that they wouldn't use a 25 year old chute. that's now a mistake on my behalf. I've found that you can use a chute that old, but it
depends on a lot of factors behind this in which I included in my comments.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 10, 2015, 03:05:39 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The reason I said he may have a point to a certain degree was based on the life of a chute. I've said in the past that they wouldn't use a 25 year old chute. that's now a mistake on my behalf. I've found that you can use a chute that old, but it
depends on a lot of factors behind this in which I included in my comments.

By the same reasoning the 727 allegedly hijacked by Cooper was actually a Wright Flyer! TV cameras change optical physics! The FBI and everyone else are wrong! The Cooper Hijacking was an intentional  mass delusion.

Conspiracy theory reasoning is the only correct path to the actual Truth of anything! TV changed our experience of everything since its invention. Only priests like Blevins can correctly find and convey us to the truth.

What Blevins may have stumbled into here is that nobody can tell us what the dates of mfg. were on the chutes given to Cooper, and if that would turn out to be true, why then of course the chutes were made 'whenever Blevins wants them to have been made to conform with the Amboy chute find Blevins has staked his reputation on'.

Cossey is dead and can't contradict with force, anything Blevins or 377 say. Is there any other source or facts to contradict Blevins' socalled discovery?  Cossey originally said the chute Cooper used had a 28ft canopy and was nylon. The Amboy chute apparently has a 30ft canopy and is silk. 377 and Blevins say it is nylon.

It is Mr. Blevins who keeps bringing this up and nobody else endlessly!

The only way I see to settle this latest pamadjeon is to let Bevins pack 377's chute for his next drop! And see what happens. Either Blevins knows as much about parachutes as he claims, or he doesn't.

 8)

[edit] Lets just stipulate the Amboy chute is Cooper's and Cooper landed at Amboy, in zone -A1B49Z3P4, and be done with this!

This makes KC the illegitimate child of some Greek born and raised in MN!

 ;D

   


 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 10, 2015, 05:55:42 PM
Quote
Cossey is dead and can't contradict with force, anything Blevins or 377 say. Is there any other source or facts to contradict Blevins' socalled discovery?  Cossey originally said the chute Cooper used had a 28ft canopy and was nylon. The Amboy chute apparently has a 30ft canopy and is silk. 377 and Blevins say it is nylon.

Let me clarify this. If a new poster comes on this forum asking about the chute and says, "would they use a chute 25 years old"

6 months ago I might of said no, but after researching chutes I found a lot more than I previously knew about chutes. Bobby stated " it may have been too old to be used might be inaccurate. " now, depending on the condition of the chute it could very well have been functional prior to being found, but other things concluded it wasn't Cooper's chute. Bobby is also being inaccurate himself claiming the chute was the same size. that's not how the story was told by the FBI.

He is also careful about it being found in the supposed jump zone from "2008" this was when it was coming to light about "Zone A" possibly not being where he jumped anyway. there is no evidence to support the chute being functional prior to being in the ground. to many possibilities as to how it got there make it hard to pinpoint any reasoning. Cossey has come under fire over the whole thing. it's hard to take his word, but he did tell Bruce the chute was 34 feet in diameter, and was a cargo chute.

So, yes a 25 year old chute could be used if it's properly taken care of. that's my basic statement to it. I don't agree with Bobby's logic, and this shouldn't state that either.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 11:10:42 AM
"Carr hopped in his car and drove down. He dug around the property for about 45 minutes, unsuccessfully looking for a harness or other remains from the parachute, but the children weren't home, and the father wasn't sure exactly where they found it."

The statement above makes you wonder if the chute was ever in the ground in the first place!!
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: MarkBennett on January 11, 2015, 11:15:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"Carr hopped in his car and drove down. He dug around the property for about 45 minutes, unsuccessfully looking for a harness or other remains from the parachute, but the children weren't home, and the father wasn't sure exactly where they found it."

The statement above makes you wonder if the chute was ever in the ground in the first place!!

Where is that quote from, Shutter?

When I saw Tom Kaye speak at the Cooper exhibit in 2013, he strongly implied that nobody ever dug under where the chute was found and he'd like to have dug there to see if anything else was there....e.g. a body.

That strikes me as highly  unlikely. When the chute was first found and before it was determined not to be Cooper's, it seems like the FBI would have got there and begun searching the whole area and digging.  Now, if that quote was accurate, it sounds like nobody remembered exactly where the chute was found.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 11:17:17 AM
I've read a few sites with Carr digging around the site. here is the one from the quote above...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/03/26/children-find-parachute-possibly-belonging-to-famed-hijacker-db-cooper/
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 11:19:54 AM
Here is another one...

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2026&dat=20080325&id=G9IyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=P_AFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6951,3267942
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 11:42:28 AM
"The FBI doesn't want to excavate the property until it confirms, either through an expert's examination or scientific analysis of the fabric, whether the chute is the right kind."

I believe this statement means bringing in equipment to dig with. Carr took it upon himself to try and poke around the site. I find it strange the owner couldn't remember where the kids found the chute. ( on there own property) it's basically coming back to the credibility of these people who found the chute.

The FBI is on record several times asking for help. I think it's hogwash they told someone a different story.

"We've got to be pretty darn sure we're not wasting time and money here," he said.

The cost of equipment would have to be a justified expense. the FBI got burned a couple years ago with the Hoffa case. Vicki brought the story to DZ which caused an "off topic" rant by a veteran jumper, and a longtime DZ follower. I was attacked for discussing things not related to the case.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 12:32:55 PM
KSL.com

"I decided to just bring the chute back and try to make a determination of whether or not this could have been D.B. Cooper's parachute," said FBI special agent Larry Carr.

There are many cases Carr has helped solve in his time. This case would top them all. "If it is, we need to go back and do some more digging," he said

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=481&sid=2942992


UPDATE:

According the KOIN News the FBI cleaned the chute. this could be the reason the markings were not found at first.

The children of a Clark County contractor found the parachute buried in a field that their father has recently plowed for a road. The chute is white and conical shaped, dirty and deteriorated. Seattle Agent Larry Carr will clean it and search for a label, which could match the chute to a companion reserve chute left behind by Cooper in the plane.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=27932286
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on January 11, 2015, 02:14:10 PM
"Companion reserve chute"?

This statement doesn't make sense. There were no companion reserve chutes to either of the main canopies, they lacked the D-rings for reserve chutes.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 11, 2015, 02:45:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"The FBI doesn't want to excavate the property until it confirms, either through an expert's examination or scientific analysis of the fabric, whether the chute is the right kind."

I believe this statement means bringing in equipment to dig with. Carr took it upon himself to try and poke around the site. I find it strange the owner couldn't remember where the kids found the chute. ( on there own property) it's basically coming back to the credibility of these people who found the chute.

The FBI is on record several times asking for help. I think it's hogwash they told someone a different story.

"We've got to be pretty darn sure we're not wasting time and money here," he said.

The cost of equipment would have to be a justified expense. the FBI got burned a couple years ago with the Hoffa case. Vicki brought the story to DZ which caused an "off topic" rant by a veteran jumper, and a longtime DZ follower. I was attacked for discussing things not related to the case.

If you look at the link above it's an AP story being passed around almost verbatim.

Again, ... One of the early non AP articles with a photo showed the guy on his tractor with the kids below him off to the side standing and pointing to where the chute was pulled out ... at the side of the path into a field being widened.

I am astounded nobody else saw that article and saved it along with the photo. I am further astounded the whole town of Amboy doesn't know where this is and say so openly! Something doesn't add up.
 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 02:53:26 PM
I can speculate two things.

1) No chute was found in the ground as the family claims.
2) A possibility the FBI did this as a publicity stunt to gain attention.

It's not the question of it being Cooper's chute as much as it is a question of the story itself IMHO.  :-X
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 11, 2015, 03:09:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"Companion reserve chute"?

This statement doesn't make sense. There were no companion reserve chutes to either of the main canopies, they lacked the D-rings for reserve chutes.

this is really becoming tedious!

the issue of semantics!

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 11, 2015, 03:13:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
KSL.com

"I decided to just bring the chute back and try to make a determination of whether or not this could have been D.B. Cooper's parachute," said FBI special agent Larry Carr.

There are many cases Carr has helped solve in his time. This case would top them all. "If it is, we need to go back and do some more digging," he said

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=481&sid=2942992


UPDATE:

According the KOIN News the FBI cleaned the chute. this could be the reason the markings were not found at first.

The children of a Clark County contractor found the parachute buried in a field that their father has recently plowed for a road. The chute is white and conical shaped, dirty and deteriorated. Seattle Agent Larry Carr will clean it and search for a label, which could match the chute to a companion reserve chute left behind by Cooper in the plane.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=27932286

Attached is the last article for all to see and read - key words and phrases being debated are underlined.

Part of the chute is still there, or was until dug up by Carr or somebody, according to this article. Carr says he spent 45 mins+ digging when he went there.
The central issues are s this silk and the dimensions: a reserve or a larger cargo chute as Cossey said.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 11, 2015, 03:16:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I can speculate two things.

1) No chute was found in the ground as the family claims.
2) A possibility the FBI did this as a publicity stunt to gain attention.

It's not the question of it being Cooper's chute as much as it is a question of the story itself IMHO.  :-X

So you are now claiming the Amboy chute (and photos of) are fiction?  Never happened?  Made up by the FBI and the Zetans who abducted Bruce Smith? I need to know what you are saying and where you stand on this so I can adjust my Maldum Thunker Quartz Fornax, given me personally at Area-51! 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 03:19:14 PM
Carr claims while he was there that the owner stated he wasn't sure where the chute was found. the kids were not home at the time? he dugg around for 45 minutes..... :o
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 03:30:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I can speculate two things.

1) No chute was found in the ground as the family claims.
2) A possibility the FBI did this as a publicity stunt to gain attention.

It's not the question of it being Cooper's chute as much as it is a question of the story itself IMHO.  :-X

So you are now claiming the Amboy chute (and photos of) are fiction?  Never happened?  Made up by the FBI and the Zetans who abducted Bruce Smith? I need to know what you are saying and where you stand on this so I can adjust my Maldum Thunker Quartz Fornax, given me personally at Area-51!


SPECULATION ONLY



Nope, if you read it correctly I'm stating speculation. also, the family could of made the whole thing up stating it was in the ground. this was revealed shortly after a televised report about asking the public for help, and get attention with the case. both of these speculations do not require the absence of a chute.

The FBI could of orchestrated the whole event since nobody seems to know anything about the location. It's just a possibility. things roll around in ones head. this is something that has crossed my mind.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 04:15:54 PM
From reading articles about the find several things are said, and repeated through out the media. Georger, the KOIN news article you, and I both presented seems to be stated by the owner that heavy equipment is needed to pull the chute out. it's possible he did just that after reading several articles.

I put together a timeline from an article dated March 26, 2008. it seems they were aware of the find for some time prior to going to the location. that's how I'm reading it. you can decide from this point  :P
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 11, 2015, 04:46:36 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
From reading articles about the find several things are said, and repeated through out the media. Georger, the KOIN news article you, and I both presented seems to be stated by the owner that heavy equipment is needed to pull the chute out. it's possible he did just that after reading several articles.

I put together a timeline from an article dated March 26, 2008. it seems they were aware of the find for some time prior to going to the location. that's how I'm reading it. you can decide from this point  :P

The first people I would poll about that chute would be old timers in the area, who might have known about the chute all along.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 11, 2015, 04:49:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
From reading articles about the find several things are said, and repeated through out the media. Georger, the KOIN news article you, and I both presented seems to be stated by the owner that heavy equipment is needed to pull the chute out. it's possible he did just that after reading several articles.

I put together a timeline from an article dated March 26, 2008. it seems they were aware of the find for some time prior to going to the location. that's how I'm reading it. you can decide from this point  :P

The first people I would poll about that chute would be old timers in the area, who might have known about the chute all along.

True, but I just thought of something. if Carr was digging around looking for the harness etc. we know the chute was out of the ground at this point, and the owner claims he doesn't remember where the chute was found? shouldn't there be a hole in the ground? someone is not being honest with this story...... 8)

You have to ask again. was the chute ever in the ground?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 12, 2015, 12:33:28 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
From reading articles about the find several things are said, and repeated through out the media. Georger, the KOIN news article you, and I both presented seems to be stated by the owner that heavy equipment is needed to pull the chute out. it's possible he did just that after reading several articles.

I put together a timeline from an article dated March 26, 2008. it seems they were aware of the find for some time prior to going to the location. that's how I'm reading it. you can decide from this point  :P

The first people I would poll about that chute would be old timers in the area, who might have known about the chute all along.

True, but I just thought of something. if Carr was digging around looking for the harness etc. we know the chute was out of the ground at this point, and the owner claims he doesn't remember where the chute was found? shouldn't there be a hole in the ground? someone is not being honest with this story...... 8)

You have to ask again. was the chute ever in the ground?

My guess is the property owner got sick and tired of answering reporters/idiot's questions and finally resorted to "Nicht spreche die Englich!" and "Parley no Frenchie either!"... that could account for any apparent (artificial) conflicts.

I would smile deeply if that parachute turned out to have nothing to do with Walling or Cooper and was surplus chute some farmer had converted to, as we say, agricultural use. Who knows! Maybe he collected his turnip crops in it!  Use it to cover hay bails...  covered machinery ... used it as a summer screened tent to rest and sip tea under while working his land mowing ... who knows. Maybe children used it as a tent or shelter? Millions of those things were sold as surplus after WWII-Korea and converted to personal use .... boat covers ... you name it. Once done with it dig a hole nearby to where it was last used and bury it!

I just can't believe how people jump to conclusions about this! Maybe it's proof the Roman armies or the Vikings passed through the State of Washington!?   On their way to a meeting with Bruce's Zentans in the fourth dimension?

30 minutes of lab tests will confirm how long it has been buried where it was found. That is all that matters in terms of it's history.

     
 
 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 12, 2015, 06:37:25 AM
I don't think anything was made public about the location.

”From the best we could learn from the people we spoke to, it just didn’t look like it was the right kind of parachute in any way,” Robbie Burroughs, an agent, told The Associated Press.

Hours before the official announcement of the test results, he told The Columbian that he was “absolutely” convinced that investigators who thought the parachute the children found might be Mr. Cooper’s had been led astray. It was made of the wrong fabric, he said: silk, not nylon.

According to Mr. Cossey, the F.B.I. wanted to keep his opinion under wraps for the moment, but he would have none of it:

“When the guy left on Friday, he said, ‘Don’t say anything for a couple of days,’ ” Cossey said. “I said, ‘That’s ridiculous. It’s not the right parachute. It’s not even close.’ ”

If I understand this correctly the father was grading a road and exposed the chute. he never seen it, but his kids did. he explained that heavy equipment would be needed to get the chute out of the ground, but when the FBI showed up he didn't know where the location was? Carr digs around for almost an hour finding nothing.

How could the father explain to Carr that heavy equipment was needed and yet he couldn't show Carr the actual location on his own property? things don't add up here. it's not that it was Cooper's chute. I'm wondering about the credibility to the whole story itself?

I'm positive the chute didn't belong to Wallings. I feel the guy who came forward was just trying to help, but he is recalling something that happened 63 years ago. Wallings landed in Cowitz County, not Clark County.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 12, 2015, 02:35:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't think anything was made public about the location.

”From the best we could learn from the people we spoke to, it just didn’t look like it was the right kind of parachute in any way,” Robbie Burroughs, an agent, told The Associated Press.

Hours before the official announcement of the test results, he told The Columbian that he was “absolutely” convinced that investigators who thought the parachute the children found might be Mr. Cooper’s had been led astray. It was made of the wrong fabric, he said: silk, not nylon.

According to Mr. Cossey, the F.B.I. wanted to keep his opinion under wraps for the moment, but he would have none of it:

“When the guy left on Friday, he said, ‘Don’t say anything for a couple of days,’ ” Cossey said. “I said, ‘That’s ridiculous. It’s not the right parachute. It’s not even close.’ ”

If I understand this correctly the father was grading a road and exposed the chute. he never seen it, but his kids did. he explained that heavy equipment would be needed to get the chute out of the ground, but when the FBI showed up he didn't know where the location was? Carr digs around for almost an hour finding nothing.

How could the father explain to Carr that heavy equipment was needed and yet he couldn't show Carr the actual location on his own property? things don't add up here. it's not that it was Cooper's chute. I'm wondering about the credibility to the whole story itself?

I'm positive the chute didn't belong to Wallings. I feel the guy who came forward was just trying to help, but he is recalling something that happened 63 years ago. Wallings landed in Cowitz County, not Clark County.

Cossey's comment: "It’s not the right parachute. It’s not even close.’ ” may be implying several criteria don't fit - fabric, size, type, etc. The FBI and other experts  and a lab seem to concur.

But of course Cossey, the FBI, and other experts are all lying, according to Cooperland sleuths Blevins and Smith, who have their own king-sized credibility problems and yet have tried to build a whole career around the "truth of" Amboy chute! Tom Kaye even elevates Blevins to the level of some kind of genius, and the FIRST to see serious problems with the Amboy chute story. 377 even chimes in and says it's not silk!

Could it be a pair of Kenny's underwear and not a parachute at all?

 :o



   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: MarkBennett on January 12, 2015, 03:00:52 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 anything was made public about the location.

”From the best we could learn from the people we spoke to, it just didn’t look like it was the right kind of parachute in any way,” Robbie Burroughs, an agent, told The Associated Press.

Hours before the official announcement of the test results, he told The Columbian that he was “absolutely” convinced that investigators who thought the parachute the children found might be Mr. Cooper’s had been led astray. It was made of the wrong fabric, he said: silk, not nylon.

According to Mr. Cossey, the F.B.I. wanted to keep his opinion under wraps for the moment, but he would have none of it:

“When the guy left on Friday, he said, ‘Don’t say anything for a couple of days,’ ” Cossey said. “I said, ‘That’s ridiculous. It’s not the right parachute. It’s not even close.’ ”

If I understand this correctly the father was grading a road and exposed the chute. he never seen it, but his kids did. he explained that heavy equipment would be needed to get the chute out of the ground, but when the FBI showed up he didn't know where the location was? Carr digs around for almost an hour finding nothing.

How could the father explain to Carr that heavy equipment was needed and yet he couldn't show Carr the actual location on his own property? things don't add up here. it's not that it was Cooper's chute. I'm wondering about the credibility to the whole story itself?

I'm positive the chute didn't belong to Wallings. I feel the guy who came forward was just trying to help, but he is recalling something that happened 63 years ago. Wallings landed in Cowitz County, not Clark County.

Cossey's comment: "It’s not the right parachute. It’s not even close.’ ” may be implying several criteria don't fit - fabric, size, type, etc. The FBI and other experts  and a lab seem to concur.

But of course Cossey, the FBI, and other experts are all lying, according to Cooperland sleuths Blevins and Smith, who have their own king-sized credibility problems and yet have tried to build a whole career around the "truth of" Amboy chute! Tom Kaye even elevates Blevins to the level of some kind of genius, and the FIRST to see serious problems with the Amboy chute story. 377 even chimes in and says it's not silk!

Could it be a pair of Kenny's underwear and not a parachute at all?

 :o



 

I'll have to see if I can find this, but it was back in DZ in 2011.  Someone, and I can't remember who it was, commented that evil "silk" chutes from the late 1940s were probably not really silk.  They stopped using silk before that (I seem to recall in the 1930s), but used another material that was somewhat silk-like, so people still called it silk.

It was a good comment at the time, but, as I was told Farflung once said, that once the page on DZ turns everything is forgotten.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 12, 2015, 03:23:07 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 anything was made public about the location.

”From the best we could learn from the people we spoke to, it just didn’t look like it was the right kind of parachute in any way,” Robbie Burroughs, an agent, told The Associated Press.

Hours before the official announcement of the test results, he told The Columbian that he was “absolutely” convinced that investigators who thought the parachute the children found might be Mr. Cooper’s had been led astray. It was made of the wrong fabric, he said: silk, not nylon.

According to Mr. Cossey, the F.B.I. wanted to keep his opinion under wraps for the moment, but he would have none of it:

“When the guy left on Friday, he said, ‘Don’t say anything for a couple of days,’ ” Cossey said. “I said, ‘That’s ridiculous. It’s not the right parachute. It’s not even close.’ ”

If I understand this correctly the father was grading a road and exposed the chute. he never seen it, but his kids did. he explained that heavy equipment would be needed to get the chute out of the ground, but when the FBI showed up he didn't know where the location was? Carr digs around for almost an hour finding nothing.

How could the father explain to Carr that heavy equipment was needed and yet he couldn't show Carr the actual location on his own property? things don't add up here. it's not that it was Cooper's chute. I'm wondering about the credibility to the whole story itself?

I'm positive the chute didn't belong to Wallings. I feel the guy who came forward was just trying to help, but he is recalling something that happened 63 years ago. Wallings landed in Cowitz County, not Clark County.

Cossey's comment: "It’s not the right parachute. It’s not even close.’ ” may be implying several criteria don't fit - fabric, size, type, etc. The FBI and other experts  and a lab seem to concur.

But of course Cossey, the FBI, and other experts are all lying, according to Cooperland sleuths Blevins and Smith, who have their own king-sized credibility problems and yet have tried to build a whole career around the "truth of" Amboy chute! Tom Kaye even elevates Blevins to the level of some kind of genius, and the FIRST to see serious problems with the Amboy chute story. 377 even chimes in and says it's not silk!

Could it be a pair of Kenny's underwear and not a parachute at all?

 :o



 

I'll have to see if I can find this, but it was back in DZ in 2011.  Someone, and I can't remember who it was, commented that evil "silk" chutes from the late 1940s were probably not really silk.  They stopped using silk before that (I seem to recall in the 1930s), but used another material that was somewhat silk-like, so people still called it silk.

It was a good comment at the time, but, as I was told Farflung once said, that once the page on DZ turns everything is forgotten.

I remember that. It may have been 377. That may be the basis for him saying it is a 'nylon taffeta' - whatever that is. An early generation of nylon that replaced silk. ?


Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 12, 2015, 03:24:52 PM
Cossey claimed this was the third time they brought something to him. the FBI did something test wise with the chute. I think they are satisfied that the chute wasn't Cooper's. I'm not sold on the story the "family" has given. the story doesn't fit the story....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 12, 2015, 03:30:28 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Cossey claimed this was the third time they brought something to him. the FBI did something test wise with the chute. I think they are satisfied that the chute wasn't Cooper's. I'm not sold on the story the "family" has given. the story doesn't fit the story....

well there is a photo in an early article as clear day that shows the guy on a tractor and the kids off to the side pointing at the parachute still partially covered over. I cant believe I am the only one who saw that article and photo?
I must be dreaming this! I didnt save the article or the photo...
 
BTW Im having issues staying logged in ?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 12, 2015, 03:49:12 PM
I remember you stating this, but it's strange that nobody has this picture. someone would of saved it.

when you log on there is a box you can check that will keep you logged on. don't put any time frame in the box. remove the 60 prior to checking the box.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 12, 2015, 03:50:46 PM
I don't know of any reporters claiming they knew where the location was? the FBI seems to be the only ones. even Carr stated he wouldn't name any names...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 13, 2015, 12:39:06 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I remember you stating this, but it's strange that nobody has this picture. someone would of saved it.

when you log on there is a box you can check that will keep you logged on. don't put any time frame in the box. remove the 60 prior to checking the box.

No logon box pops up. Will clear my history and start over.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on January 13, 2015, 06:08:22 AM
If you log in on the upper right side of the page there won't be a log in box. If you use the menu bar log in it will give the option for staying logged in.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on January 13, 2015, 01:34:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If you log in on the upper right side of the page there won't be a log in box. If you use the menu bar log in it will give the option for staying logged in.

ok ...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on April 14, 2015, 12:15:49 AM
Remembrance Day for Earl Cossey. I believe today, April 13, is the second anniversary of his death.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on April 14, 2015, 12:26:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Remembrance Day for Earl Cossey. I believe today, April 13, is the second anniversary of his death.


Thanks for the reminder. perhaps you should run an article?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on April 14, 2015, 07:39:45 PM
Good idea!
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: EVickiW on April 15, 2015, 02:14:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Remembrance Day for Earl Cossey. I believe today, April 13, is the second anniversary of his death.

I believe it was the 23rd. I was in Seattle with my daughter over my BDay weekend. I met with you and Sailshaw at the yacht club on Friday, which was on the 19th. I left to go home in the early morning hours on Monday the 22nd. They believe he was murdered on Tuesday the 23rd.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on April 15, 2015, 04:48:14 PM
Kind of like being a day late and a dollar short. I was close.

Thanks, Vicki. How is the kid, btw.

You still kickin' serious ass at the federal level?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: nmiwrecks on April 25, 2015, 09:11:10 AM
Has the buoyancy of an undeployed NB-6/8 chute and backpack in water ever been tested?  I am curious if the rig would sink or float. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Parrotheadvol on June 17, 2015, 11:19:15 PM
Does anyone know if the military uses dummy chutes and if so, how are they labeled as such?

Could it be that Cooper had skydiving experience in the military, but not so much in the private sector? Thus, the X on the dummy chute didn't indicate to him that it was an unusable chute?

This could be a possible explanation as to why some of his actions suggested he knew about parachutes, while some of his other actions screamed novice?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 18, 2015, 12:12:20 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Does anyone know if the military uses dummy chutes and if so, how are they labeled as such?

Could it be that Cooper had skydiving experience in the military, but not so much in the private sector? Thus, the X on the dummy chute didn't indicate to him that it was an unusable chute?

This could be a possible explanation as to why some of his actions suggested he knew about parachutes, while some of his other actions screamed novice?

He opened the chutes and looked at the packing cards, supposedly ?

The dud training chute had an X on the container ?


Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on June 18, 2015, 12:58:05 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Does anyone know if the military uses dummy chutes and if so, how are they labeled as such?

Could it be that Cooper had skydiving experience in the military, but not so much in the private sector? Thus, the X on the dummy chute didn't indicate to him that it was an unusable chute?

This could be a possible explanation as to why some of his actions suggested he knew about parachutes, while some of his other actions screamed novice?

He opened the chutes and looked at the packing cards, supposedly ?

The dud training chute had an X on the container ?

The packing card is in a small pocket located somewhere on the parachute pack.  Cooper would not have "opened the chutes", in the sense of pulling the rip cords.

The military probably did use inoperative chest packs for such training as jumping from towers and sliding down a cable to practice landing falls.  But Matt or another military instructor is best qualified to answer that question.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 18, 2015, 09:19:31 AM
I remember asking Matt about dummy chutes. he told me most of them were filled with pieces of foam, but I don't remember if he was talking about military equipment.

I found this on ebay. tittle reads "RAF Dummy Parachute Pack for Training Purposes 15A/805 – Reserve Pack"

Royal Air Force?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 18, 2015, 09:29:27 AM
It's hard to say how noticeable the dummy chute really was. after all, we had an experienced jumper mistakenly give the chute to the FBI in the first place. if we were keeping score, I believe it would be a tie? Cooper failed to notice, as did the pro....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 18, 2015, 02:17:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's hard to say how noticeable the dummy chute really was. after all, we had an experienced jumper mistakenly give the chute to the FBI in the first place. if we were keeping score, I believe it would be a tie? Cooper failed to notice, as did the pro....

How do we know Cooper failed to notice? We weren't there and we are not Cooper. All we know is the chute wasn't on the plane when it landed and was inspected at Reno.  Whatever Cooper did or thought regarding that chute is a total mystery. He apparently did not make an issue of it with the crew just as he left not being given a backpack pass too -

In the previous posts about this someone claimed Cossey said all that was wrong with the chute was 'several panels were missing'. 377 and others speculated the chute still might have been useable.

Whatever Cooper noticed or did not notice, thought or did not think, did or did not do with that chute, he apparently said nothing about it ... and it was not on the plane at Reno.



     
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 18, 2015, 02:39:10 PM
It's my understanding the chute was cut in half, and then sewn shut for easy retrieval. it's also believed to have been softer than a real chute that's packed correctly.

You would think he would of brought it to there attention that the chute was no good. I'm guessing people in this sport take these measures seriously, and try not to overlook something like a defective chute. perhaps he never intended to use for it's purpose, but I would think if he would of known it was bad he would be be wondering about the remaining chutes?

If he did pull the packing cards, I doubt one was in that container, it was repacked all day long during practice?


Added: quote from Carr

Quote
The agent who originally interviewed Cossey mistakenly reported it was sewn shut. it was not sewn shut, the canopy was cut in half and the panels then sewn together. This was done so that when students practiced deploying the emergency canopy they could easily gather it and quickly stuff it back in the container for another practice throw.

Anyone with any amount of experience would have know the x's on the container meant, "you might not want to use this one when jumping out of a plane." Also, when he picked it up it would have been very obvious, if you have any amount of experience, (by that I mean how tight containers are packed) that something was wrong because it would have been "squishy" (not my word but from someone who would know what the belly reserve would have felt like). If he deployed it, it would have been like one of those guns you pull the trigger and a flag comes out of the barrel that says, "bang."

He left one chute on the plane, why throw only one away?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 18, 2015, 02:57:33 PM
                                                                DANGER.... SPECULATION


Carr again...

He jumps and the pressure bump is felt by the crew, but not at 8:11 more around 8:15 to 8:20. The bag of money Cooper tied to him is instantly ripped from his waist as he tumbles. Cooper, not expecting the forces of the jump, desperately tries to pull the handle but he can't find it, panics and no pulls.

That would have Cooper possibly jumping over the Columbia....splash? that is if he deployed around 8:17....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 18, 2015, 03:16:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's my understanding the chute was cut in half, and then sewn shut for easy retrieval. it's also believed to have been softer than a real chute that's packed correctly.

You would think he would of brought it to there attention that the chute was no good. I'm guessing people in this sport take these measures seriously, and try not to overlook something like a defective chute. perhaps he never intended to use for it's purpose, but I would think if he would of known it was bad he would be be wondering about the remaining chutes?

If he did pull the packing cards, I doubt one was in that container, it was repacked all day long during practice?


Added: quote from Carr

Quote
The agent who originally interviewed Cossey mistakenly reported it was sewn shut. it was not sewn shut, the canopy was cut in half and the panels then sewn together. This was done so that when students practiced deploying the emergency canopy they could easily gather it and quickly stuff it back in the container for another practice throw.

Anyone with any amount of experience would have know the x's on the container meant, "you might not want to use this one when jumping out of a plane." Also, when he picked it up it would have been very obvious, if you have any amount of experience, (by that I mean how tight containers are packed) that something was wrong because it would have been "squishy" (not my word but from someone who would know what the belly reserve would have felt like). If he deployed it, it would have been like one of those guns you pull the trigger and a flag comes out of the barrel that says, "bang."

He left one chute on the plane, why throw only one away?

old post reposted -


Farflung
Nov 3, 2012, 9:50 AM
Post #37520 of 58140 (48665 views)

     Time And Motion Disambiguation [In reply to]    
I wish there was an easier way to put this dry boring stuff into something action packed and boner inducing, but I’m not a creative writer and am doomed to live with as many facts as I can find.

Geroger semi-quotes:

“He then opened and examined the chutes and pulled the packing cards - yes? He tossed the packing cards on the floor but, before doing so glanced or looked at them, long enough to read them.

Its the juxtapositon of throwing the instructions
away instamtly with the remark 'I dont need them"
then not just opening to chutes to look inside, but
looking at the packing cards long enough to read
them –“

I’ve asked in the past what experience Tina had with parachutes and was surprised (not) that I got no response. I’ll assume (assume here) that this was likely the first time she had touched a parachute. With that assumption in hand, I gave a relatively light weighting to her opinion regarding Cooper’s handling of the equipment. This of course did not detract from her scorching hot physique and kitten with a whip persona.

Time to try (I will fail again) to reconstruct with some available facts.

Cossey packed both of the back pack, emergency aircrew, parachutes. The reserve chutes came from a different person who was not a rigger or jumper.

Did Cooper “check” the data cards? If he checked the data cards on the reserve chute, then he would have known it was a training dummy. Why did he take that with him? If he chucked it because he was angry it was a dummy, then he would have worn the chute he jacked in the plane. Instead he sacrificed the “good”(?) chute as a supply of some line to tie the money up. Chucking the other chute as a diversion would be weak, since it would be attached (presumably) to the primary rig. If he took the dummy reserve, it appears implausible that he checked the data card (packing card). This is just deductive reasoning and nothing more, there’s plenty of room for a herd of unicorns.

This leaves the back chutes. If (IF here, just if) the parachutes were pack at the same time, the data cards from the primary chute should be the same or very similar. So take a look at the surviving data card from Hayden’s (assuming this is the other chute) parachute.

See the date? 21 May 1971. The hijacking was on 24 November 1971. Right away any aircrew or jumper would recognize a wee problem which may induce a wee wee.

Here’s where I adjust some weightings assigned to Tina and DB. Did Tina likely observe Cooper reading data cards where he ultimately selected a dummy reserve? If Cooper read the data cards as the chutes were delivered on the plane, why did he select a dummy or accept the back chutes which were last inspected on 21 May 1971? Is this something an experienced jumper would do or fail to plan for? Heady and McCoy brought their own chutes to avoid that problem, but risked being identified via their equipment if it was found (and it was for McCoy).

I’m not seeing the effects of people reacting to what they are reported as doing. Reading data cards and being observed reading them. But I’m sure there’s a perfectly complex explanation as to why this would take place.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 18, 2015, 03:21:14 PM
another old post -


snowmman

Jul 9, 2008, 4:54 PM
Post #3504 of 58140 (53882 views)
Shortcut
   
     tosaw: examing the chute [In reply to]    
(repost: I keep overwriting by mistake)

Now I don't know about this part. Ckret has told us there were some instructions with the chutes. Maybe the "instructions" were confused with the "rigger's card".

I'm really confused about this opening of the parachute though.

Page 30

"The first thing Cooper did when he began examining the sage-green military back chute was to take the packer's card from its pocket on the inside flap. He could see the date Cossey had packed the chute and also his signature and certification number from the U.S. Parachute Association. [ed. specultion by Tosaw?]. He then opened the parachute and examined the nylon panels and suspension lines. Tina was impressed with the professional way in which he went about his examination"

Now this paragraph seems to have some speculation.
It does seem to say Tina observed this.
So I don't know what to think.

page 32
"Finally, at 7:10 p.m., almost an hour and a half after beginning, the fuel gauge on the 727 showed a full load of 51,500 pounds. Cooper was notified that the refueling was completed. "Let's get the show on the road," he replied as he closed the military backpack he had apparently chosen.

Maybe literary license in this last paragraph.


(This post was edited by snowmman on Jul 9, 2008, 5:15 PM)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 18, 2015, 03:23:22 PM
Cossey packed both of the back pack, emergency aircrew, parachutes. The reserve chutes came from a different person who was not a rigger or jumper.

Where did this come from?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 18, 2015, 03:49:25 PM
Now, if I may jump off this subject for a moment to answer Parrots question a little better...

Apparently dummy chutes were used in the military. I found a site that was talking about a T-10 parachute, and the dummy chute came into the discussion...

Quote
Yes, red paint was used to ID training or dummy chutes. Definitely a nice find-looks all matching for the period. Depending on how worn the harness is, you should find some blue stenciling on the seat portion that would have a DOM or DOS on it. Last "bang box" I used was in '87 in ABN School; all three point harnesses after that. If you are interested, check the metal hardware, most will have mfr & date codes



http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/41250-19th-sfg-t-10-rig/
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 18, 2015, 11:26:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Cossey packed both of the back pack, emergency aircrew, parachutes. The reserve chutes came from a different person who was not a rigger or jumper.

Where did this come from?

???

Where did what come from ? What are you referring to ?



Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 18, 2015, 11:43:36 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Cossey packed both of the back pack, emergency aircrew, parachutes. The reserve chutes came from a different person who was not a rigger or jumper.

Where did this come from?

???

Where did what come from ? What are you referring to ?


I thought Emerick (spelling probably wrong) was the one who gave out the reserves, he was a jumper?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 19, 2015, 03:20:13 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
Cossey packed both of the back pack, emergency aircrew, parachutes. The reserve chutes came from a different person who was not a rigger or jumper.

Where did this come from?

???

Where did what come from ? What are you referring to ?


I thought Emerick (spelling probably wrong) was the one who gave out the reserves, he was a jumper?

Is it Farflung's post above you are citing? I havent said anything about who gave chutes out....

I thought the subject at hand was ' Cooper opening and inspecting the chutes and reading the packing card(s)'?

Are you changing the subject to who gave the chutes out?

Im lost.


 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 19, 2015, 04:33:39 PM
I thought it was odd that Farf said that. a jumper did give the reserves out.....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on June 19, 2015, 05:16:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I thought it was odd that Farf said that. a jumper did give the reserves out.....

Lynn Emerick of Seattle Sky Sports is the person you have in mind in connection with the reserve chutes.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 19, 2015, 05:18:56 PM
Thanks, I see I got the spelling right.....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 20, 2015, 03:50:20 PM
Found this on DZ....

Quote
The rigger card inspection was a rumor. It was widely circulated in skydiving circles right after the skyjack. It lead many jumpers to conclude that Cooper was a skydiver.

Ckret told me ages ago that he was unaware of any witness statements about Cooper locating and reading rigger data cards on any of the rigs.

It probably didn't occur but if it did, it would be a very valuable clue.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: sailshaw on June 21, 2015, 10:10:02 AM
Georger:   You say:  "See the date? 21 May 1971. The hijacking was on 24 November 1971. Right away any aircrew or jumper would recognize a wee problem which may induce a wee wee."

I say:  Georger you must be smoking too much dope! May 1971 comes before November 1971 in my book! You are not thinking very straight is that what makes you grumpy per Bruce Smith?

Bob Sailshaw
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 21, 2015, 10:21:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Georger:   You say:  "See the date? 21 May 1971. The hijacking was on 24 November 1971. Right away any aircrew or jumper would recognize a wee problem which may induce a wee wee."

I say:  Georger you must be smoking too much dope! May 1971 comes before November 1971 in my book! You are not thinking very straight is that what makes you grumpy per Bruce Smith?

Bob Sailshaw


Sailshaw, I believe that quote is from Farflung, and not Georger.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 21, 2015, 01:15:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Georger:   You say:  "See the date? 21 May 1971. The hijacking was on 24 November 1971. Right away any aircrew or jumper would recognize a wee problem which may induce a wee wee."

I say:  Georger you must be smoking too much dope! May 1971 comes before November 1971 in my book! You are not thinking very straight is that what makes you grumpy per Bruce Smith?

Bob Sailshaw


Sailshaw, I believe that quote is from Farflung, and not Georger.

Funny! Jo used to tag me with killing JFK ... in my youth ... from my hospital bed having all fourth molars extracted under surgery. Woke up the next day in time to see Oswald shot live on black and white TV from my hospital bed. Nurse comes in and says: "Are you having a nice day?". I replied: "Where the hell am I?"
 :-\   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 21, 2015, 01:21:04 PM
So, we now have proof you are also not the "Babuska Lady"  :D ;D ;)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 21, 2015, 01:28:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So, we now have proof you are also not the "Babuska Lady"  :D ;D ;)

When people settle on one very unimportant person and try to make them special (in any regard), that should tell you right there they don't know WTF they are talking about, as a general premise. I sometimes think the whole Cooper crew falls into that category. Ordinary people caught up in someone else's nightmare - 


 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on June 21, 2015, 10:15:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Georger:   You say:  "See the date? 21 May 1971. The hijacking was on 24 November 1971. Right away any aircrew or jumper would recognize a wee problem which may induce a wee wee."

I say:  Georger you must be smoking too much dope! May 1971 comes before November 1971 in my book! You are not thinking very straight is that what makes you grumpy per Bruce Smith?

Bob Sailshaw

Ahem. I believe the May 21, 1971 reference has to do with the date that Coss signed the packing slip for the Pioneer that Norm had.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on June 22, 2015, 01:18:44 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Georger:   You say:  "See the date? 21 May 1971. The hijacking was on 24 November 1971. Right away any aircrew or jumper would recognize a wee problem which may induce a wee wee."

I say:  Georger you must be smoking too much dope! May 1971 comes before November 1971 in my book! You are not thinking very straight is that what makes you grumpy per Bruce Smith?

Bob Sailshaw

Ahem. I believe the May 21, 1971 reference has to do with the date that Coss signed the packing slip for the Pioneer that Norm had.

In 1971, that parachute was required to be packed either ever 60 days or 90 days (I forget which) in order to be "legal".  So that parachute was not legal and significantly overdue for a repacking.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 22, 2015, 10:59:19 PM
I don't think he looked at the cards...

1) Packing date overdue
2) Dummy chute container had red X's on it.
3) Should of felt different when handling.
4) Card probably missing from dummy chute.

I think if he intended to toss the chute he would of also tossed the other chute left behind.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 22, 2015, 11:46:33 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't think he looked at the cards...

1) Packing date overdue
2) Dummy chute container had red X's on it.
3) Should of felt different when handling.
4) Card probably missing from dummy chute.

I think if he intended to toss the chute he would of also tossed the other chute left behind.

Regardless of what you think he did, Tina says he did, according to Ckret ad Tosaw.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 22, 2015, 11:48:42 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 he looked at the cards...

1) Packing date overdue
2) Dummy chute container had red X's on it.
3) Should of felt different when handling.
4) Card probably missing from dummy chute.

I think if he intended to toss the chute he would of also tossed the other chute left behind.

Regardless of what you think he did, Tina says he did, according to Ckret ad Tosaw.


Maybe he did and didn't realize what he was looking at, but I doubt a card was in the dummy chute. it just seems odd he didn't catch some of this?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 23, 2015, 12:01:38 AM
377 said this years back...

"Ckret told me ages ago that he was unaware of any witness statements about Cooper locating and reading rigger data cards on any of the rigs."
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on June 23, 2015, 11:45:48 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
377 said this years back...

"Ckret told me ages ago that he was unaware of any witness statements about Cooper locating and reading rigger data cards on any of the rigs."

I think these statements originate in Tosaw's book.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 23, 2015, 01:51:32 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
377 said this years back...

"Ckret told me ages ago that he was unaware of any witness statements about Cooper locating and reading rigger data cards on any of the rigs."

I think these statements originate in Tosaw's book.

Me too. Im unaware that 377 ever read FBI files or interviewed Tina & Flo ?  ;)

In at least one case the packing card was in a pocket on the side of a chute vs opening the container from the top of the chute and inspecting the contents there also. Cooper inspected in both locations ... according to testimony. Now, if the testimony regarding Cooper's actions is wrong, that's another matter.

The only known way to 'test' a person's knowledge, intentions, and thoughts ... is by their performance. If nothing else, people's performance gives direction in forming judgements about a person's thoughts and knowledge. Cooper's actions in examining the chutes is consistent with him having demanded them in the first place, in a hijacking scenario. I doubt he was on flight 305 inspecting parachutes he had demanded 'or I'll blow the plane up', because he had a historical interest in Disney cartoons or D-Day!?    Cooper's performance is consistent with the context of the situation.

... At the heart of this debate is how do you measure or test for people's knowledge-skills etc ?  It is an issue that has been debated in standardised testing programs forever. It's an issue as old as the human race itself. The standard trait people look for is "performance" in some controlled setting. Either a person is able to perform a skill or demonstrate some piece of knowledge, or not. And there are lots of shades of gray in between. Performance issues are at the core of the debate in the Cooper case. ........  but I am preaching to the choir.     


   
 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 23, 2015, 03:51:33 PM
Quote
Me too. I'm unaware that 377 ever read FBI files or interviewed Tina & Flo

I don't think 377 would make this up? I think it's possible he did ask Carr about it. I don't recall Carr speaking about the cards what so ever on the DZ. you would think he would mention this while talking about Cooper's experience.

Snowmman wrote this..

Quote
Page 30

"The first thing Cooper did when he began examining the sage-green military back chute was to take the packer's card from its pocket on the inside flap. He could see the date Cossey had packed the chute and also his signature and certification number from the U.S. Parachute Association. [ed. specultion by Tosaw?]. He then opened the parachute and examined the nylon panels and suspension lines. Tina was impressed with the professional way in which he went about his examination"

Now this paragraph seems to have some speculation.
It does seem to say Tina observed this.
So I don't know what to think.

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 23, 2015, 04:00:30 PM
Hayden's chute is the one with the packing date of May 21. 1971. he didn't notice it was out of date? does the chute in evidence (front chute) have a packing card, Tom has no picture of one?


Added: "the chute had been inspected and repacked on September 16, 1971 by Rigger Earl J. Cossey."
From citizensleuths....

1) Possibly both back chutes had expired chutes/repacks..
2) The dummy chute probably didn't have a card.
3) The front chute/reserve/belly had a valid chute...
4) Probably no rigger seal on the dummy...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on June 23, 2015, 04:31:56 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Me too. I'm unaware that 377 ever read FBI files or interviewed Tina & Flo

I don't think 377 would make this up? I think it's possible he did ask Carr about it. I don't recall Carr speaking about the cards what so ever on the DZ. you would think he would mention this while talking about Cooper's experience.

Snowmman wrote this..

Quote
Page 30

"The first thing Cooper did when he began examining the sage-green military back chute was to take the packer's card from its pocket on the inside flap. He could see the date Cossey had packed the chute and also his signature and certification number from the U.S. Parachute Association. [ed. specultion by Tosaw?]. He then opened the parachute and examined the nylon panels and suspension lines. Tina was impressed with the professional way in which he went about his examination"

Now this paragraph seems to have some speculation.
It does seem to say Tina observed this.
So I don't know what to think.

The above quote is from page 30 of Tosaw's book.  But the US Parachute Association didn't have anything to do with packing emergency civilian parachutes.  The FAA was and is the sole authority on that subject.

After repacking the parachute, Cossey would have put a small thread through the end of the last ripcord pin and then joined the ends of that thread with a small lead seal that contained his three letter identification seal.  This would be done in such a manner that the ripcord could not be pulled without breaking that thread.  Cossey would also sign the parachute packing card and include his FAA rigger's certificate number and his signature plus the date of the repacking.

If Cooper had actually pulled the ripcord to inspect the canopy and shroud lines, he would never have gotten that thing repacked in the rear of that airliner before they got to Reno.  Cooper simply didn't have the equipment needed to do that job.

Consequently, some of the quoted information above seems to be without a valid basis.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 23, 2015, 04:37:35 PM
Makes sense. I was wondering just how much of the chute he could check without pulling the ripcord. I've seen the seals they put on the containers. I was looking at a PDF the other day about packing chutes, or riggers....


This is the seal I was looking at....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 23, 2015, 05:20:38 PM
§65.133   Seal.

Each certificated parachute rigger must have a seal with an identifying mark prescribed by the Administrator, and a seal press. After packing a parachute he shall seal the pack with his seal in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendation for that type of parachute.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on June 23, 2015, 08:48:05 PM
I have suspected for some time that Tosaw used a lot of literary license to fill in the gaps or build a better narrative.  Just as with this piece on the parachutes, he quotes Tina at length and with specificity. Yet, Galen told me that Tosaw told him that Tina was reticent to talk and answered most of his questions with some variation of "I can't remember."

In fact, Galen told me that he had the impression that Tosaw felt that Tina had lost a great deal of her cognitive capacities and was either mind-scrubbed or in deep shock-slash-PTSD.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 23, 2015, 08:53:32 PM
Quote
In fact, Galen told me that he had the impression that Tosaw felt that Tina had lost a great deal of her cognitive capacities and was either mind-scrubbed or in deep shock-slash-PTSD.


That all could of came along much later. her story and description is similar to the rest. I don't put much weight on any trauma at that point. I believe Carr points that out as well...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 24, 2015, 02:26:16 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Me too. I'm unaware that 377 ever read FBI files or interviewed Tina & Flo

I don't think 377 would make this up? I think it's possible he did ask Carr about it. I don't recall Carr speaking about the cards what so ever on the DZ. you would think he would mention this while talking about Cooper's experience.

Snowmman wrote this..

Quote
Page 30

"The first thing Cooper did when he began examining the sage-green military back chute was to take the packer's card from its pocket on the inside flap. He could see the date Cossey had packed the chute and also his signature and certification number from the U.S. Parachute Association. [ed. specultion by Tosaw?]. He then opened the parachute and examined the nylon panels and suspension lines. Tina was impressed with the professional way in which he went about his examination"

Now this paragraph seems to have some speculation.
It does seem to say Tina observed this.
So I don't know what to think.

I think its entirely possible that 377 has talked to Carr, and Cooper, and Nixon, and Ho Chi Mihn... and Obama. And Miley Cyrus. I think its entirely possible that 377 is Cooper. I think 377 is central to the DB Cooper case since he's a fisherman, engineer, and smarter than all the rest of us and knows Snowmman.

377 Uber Alles.

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 24, 2015, 02:29:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have suspected for some time that Tosaw used a lot of literary license to fill in the gaps or build a better narrative.  Just as with this piece on the parachutes, he quotes Tina at length and with specificity. Yet, Galen told me that Tosaw told him that Tina was reticent to talk and answered most of his questions with some variation of "I can't remember."

In fact, Galen told me that he had the impression that Tosaw felt that Tina had lost a great deal of her cognitive capacities and was either mind-scrubbed or in deep shock-slash-PTSD.

There is no evidence Tina has a one track mind and personality!

You are badly in need to mind reconditioning! Every time you think TINA, stop and say RUTABAGA instead. In about six years you will have changed your habit.

In the meantime say RUTABAGA in every post you make. We are tolerant and dont mind!
 
TINA IS A RUTBAGA. SMITH AND COOK SAY SO!
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 24, 2015, 04:07:40 PM
Quote
I think its entirely possible that 377 has talked to Carr, and Cooper, and Nixon, and Ho Chi Mihn... and Obama. And Miley Cyrus. I think its entirely possible that 377 is Cooper. I think 377 is central to the DB Cooper case since he's a fisherman, engineer, and smarter than all the rest of us and knows Snowmman.

377 Uber Alles.


I don't appreciate comments like these. I've given my thoughts about this subject. nothing is a written in stone, much like the Cooper case. I'm not implying 377 is anything else other than 377. I seen his comment on DZ, and posted it.

I've not seen anything evidence wise suggesting Cooper checked the cards. for a guy who spoke of "no funny stuff" sure missed a lot of things when it comes to the chutes. why would he toss the dummy chute, and leave the others on the plane? how did he miss no packing card in the dummy chute, or the X's, and a missing seal. he also missed the packing dates of the chutes as well if Hayden's chute was the one left on the plane? is this how he impressed Tina?

Sluggo's website...under Myths..."Cooper looked for, found, and removed a packing card from at least one of the rigs he was given. (An oft repeated statement on Cooper blogs but no investigative record can be found that substantiates this claim)."
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 24, 2015, 05:33:36 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
I think its entirely possible that 377 has talked to Carr, and Cooper, and Nixon, and Ho Chi Mihn... and Obama. And Miley Cyrus. I think its entirely possible that 377 is Cooper. I think 377 is central to the DB Cooper case since he's a fisherman, engineer, and smarter than all the rest of us and knows Snowmman.

377 Uber Alles.


I don't appreciate comments like these. I've given my thoughts about this subject. nothing is a written in stone, much like the Cooper case. I'm not implying 377 is anything else other than 377. I seen his comment on DZ, and posted it.

I've not seen anything evidence wise suggesting Cooper checked the cards. for a guy who spoke of "no funny stuff" sure missed a lot of things when it comes to the chutes. why would he toss the dummy chute, and leave the others on the plane? how did he miss no packing card in the dummy chute, or the X's, and a missing seal. he also missed the packing dates of the chutes as well if Hayden's chute was the one left on the plane? is this how he impressed Tina?

Sluggo's website...under Myths..."Cooper looked for, found, and removed a packing card from at least one of the rigs he was given. (An oft repeated statement on Cooper blogs but no investigative record can be found that substantiates this claim)."

We are going around in circles.

We have posted the relevant data we have.

We have noted your view(s).

You are implying yours is the better-correct view.

We have noted your view(s).

Shall we continue this dance or just accept your view as the correct view?

Sluggo's website...under Myths..."Cooper looked for, found, and removed a packing card from at least one of the rigs he was given. (An oft repeated statement on Cooper blogs but no investigative record can be found that substantiates this claim)."

We have noted Sluggo view.

What are we to do!?   

What we apparently are to do is accept Shutter's and 377's and Smith's views because: their views are not dependent on "no investigative record can be found that substantiates this claim)."

Case settled.

Dance over.

Cooper never examined the packing cards or opened the chutes and examined even one. Tosaw was wrong. Tina is a traumatised babbling nutcase! Tina is a Rutabaga!

GAME OVER!

 :-*

As for me, myself, and I - I truly don't know! And I have reached the point where I truly don;t GIVE A FUCK!
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 24, 2015, 07:22:24 PM
Georger, I never stated anything as fact! I pointed out noticeable problems with the story surround the packing cards. this is a discussion forum where people discuss things. I'm certainly not asking anyone to accept anything. I am trying to come to some sort of reasoning to what actually has taken place. to date, it appears that it's only mentioned in a book by Tosaw.

As for your last statement. you are not the only one who doesn't know Georger, and if you truly don't care, why are you here?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: nmiwrecks on June 24, 2015, 08:07:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Georger, I never stated anything as fact! I pointed out noticeable problems with the story surround the packing cards. this is a discussion forum where people discuss things. I'm certainly not asking anyone to accept anything. I am trying to come to some sort of reasoning to what actually has taken place. to date, it appears that it's only mentioned in a book by Tosaw.

As for your last statement. you are not the only one who doesn't know Georger, and if you truly don't care, why are you here?
I think georger is suffering from "analysis paralysis".  The information in this case can be overwhelming and this mystery is not for the faint at heart.  The trick is, to figure out what information is useful, and what information is meaningless. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 25, 2015, 12:14:12 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Me too. I'm unaware that 377 ever read FBI files or interviewed Tina & Flo

I don't think 377 would make this up? I think it's possible he did ask Carr about it. I don't recall Carr speaking about the cards what so ever on the DZ. you would think he would mention this while talking about Cooper's experience.

Snowmman wrote this..

Quote
Page 30

"The first thing Cooper did when he began examining the sage-green military back chute was to take the packer's card from its pocket on the inside flap. He could see the date Cossey had packed the chute and also his signature and certification number from the U.S. Parachute Association. [ed. specultion by Tosaw?]. He then opened the parachute and examined the nylon panels and suspension lines. Tina was impressed with the professional way in which he went about his examination"

Now this paragraph seems to have some speculation.
It does seem to say Tina observed this.
So I don't know what to think.

The above quote is from page 30 of Tosaw's book.  But the US Parachute Association didn't have anything to do with packing emergency civilian parachutes.  The FAA was and is the sole authority on that subject.

After repacking the parachute, Cossey would have put a small thread through the end of the last ripcord pin and then joined the ends of that thread with a small lead seal that contained his three letter identification seal.  This would be done in such a manner that the ripcord could not be pulled without breaking that thread.  Cossey would also sign the parachute packing card and include his FAA rigger's certificate number and his signature plus the date of the repacking.

If Cooper had actually pulled the ripcord to inspect the canopy and shroud lines, he would never have gotten that thing repacked in the rear of that airliner before they got to Reno.  Cooper simply didn't have the equipment needed to do that job.

Consequently, some of the quoted information above seems to be without a valid basis.

You may have a point, if what you are saying is correct. Tina of course would have no way of knowing how "professional" Cooper's inspection was - she lacked the experience to know. Tosaw's report of her report mentions three specifics: (a) found and looked at a card (the packing card?), (b) opened the chute and inspected panels and cords, (c) tossed aside "instructions" which came with one of the chutes Cossey or Emerick claims to have provided? Tosaw does not make it clear if Tina's report applies to all of the chutes, one chute, ... ?

In other words Cooper made some effort to check the chutes out and may have checked specific items re- the chutes.

That is 100 light years away from Mr. Shutter saying:

"I've not seen anything evidence wise suggesting Cooper checked the cards – because:
1.   spoke of "no funny stuff" and sure missed a lot of things when it comes to the chutes
2.   tossed the dummy chute and left the others on the plane?
3.   missed no packing card in the dummy chute and the X's, and missed a missing seal.
4.   He missed the packing dates of the chutes as well , if Hayden's chute was the one left on the plane- is this how he impressed Tina? "

How Mr. Shutter knows the above happened, God only knows! It's the same kind of speculation Sluggo was warning against.

I have a hard time seeing how Shutter's claims/speculations above even apply to Tosaw's report for Tina Mucklow re- parachutes check by Cooper! ???

Tosaw interviewed Tina at least twice. I wonder if Rataczack knows anything about this since he has spoken to Tina countless times through the years etc.? What Sluggo is objecting to is the lack of any corroborating testimony, or an FBI report, that certifies Tosaw's account (of Tina). Sluggo's comment was perfectly understandable given his desire to stress "facts vs myths", however Sluggo's comment is not  license for even further speculation based on ... remote imagination?

Otherwise we need to take a strict Amish Conservative interpretation here and say: Cooper did not inspect the parachutes at all. (which of course is bullshit!)

Again, I wonder what Rataczak's version would be - having talked directly to Tina! Hmmmm. To bad nobody has apparently ever asked him!

 :)

   

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 25, 2015, 01:37:24 AM
Quote
(c) tossed aside "instructions" which came with one of the chutes Cossey or Emerick claims to have provided?

Has anyone ever claimed this happened other than what is written by Tosaw? it's highly unlikely a packing card, or riggers seal was on the dummy chute. Hayden supposedly supplied the back/main/emergency chutes. his surviving chute has the card, so does the one in evidence. two of the four chutes had the cards. did he toss it aside, and then put it back? this really only leaves the other main chute Cooper took with him being the one with a card tossed aside. the FBI would have known which chute it was? exactly how did he inspect the chute, and chords. did he pull the ripcord? what is "instructions". packing cards don't have instructions?

A lot of people believe he tossed the chute, so I implied it doesn't make sense to only toss one chute.

The "no funny stuff" is from Cooper's statement. a dummy chute would be considered "funny stuff". one could speculate and say out dated packed chutes could also be funny stuff. we have lots of problems with the dummy chute that should have alerted Cooper rather quickly that something was wrong with that chute. lets not forget the D ring issue.

 I'm not convinced he was an experienced jumper. I'm not involved in the sport, but I do believe safety is a priority with this group. safe and functional equipment should be at the top of the list, and should have been caught rather quickly by someone experienced IMO.

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 25, 2015, 05:27:36 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
(c) tossed aside "instructions" which came with one of the chutes Cossey or Emerick claims to have provided?

Has anyone ever claimed this happened other than what is written by Tosaw? it's highly unlikely a packing card, or riggers seal was on the dummy chute. Hayden supposedly supplied the back/main/emergency chutes. his surviving chute has the card, so does the one in evidence. two of the four chutes had the cards. did he toss it aside, and then put it back? this really only leaves the other main chute Cooper took with him being the one with a card tossed aside. the FBI would have known which chute it was? exactly how did he inspect the chute, and chords. did he pull the ripcord? what is "instructions". packing cards don't have instructions?

A lot of people believe he tossed the chute, so I implied it doesn't make sense to only toss one chute.

The "no funny stuff" is from Cooper's statement. a dummy chute would be considered "funny stuff". one could speculate and say out dated packed chutes could also be funny stuff. we have lots of problems with the dummy chute that should have alerted Cooper rather quickly that something was wrong with that chute. lets not forget the D ring issue.

 I'm not convinced he was an experienced jumper. I'm not involved in the sport, but I do believe safety is a priority with this group. safe and functional equipment should be at the top of the list, and should have been caught rather quickly by someone experienced IMO.

You are confusing apples and oranges here.

Instructions not to be confused with packing cards - was brought up by Ckret, evidently in FBI files. Sluggo classifies as fact.
Packing card(s) - brought up by Tosaw. Sluggo and Ckret classified as myth due to lack of documentation. Ckret said he could find no documentation in the witness interview files for Cooper opening the chutes and examining packing cards, so Ckret said Tosaw made this up. Nobody said anything about Cooper throwing away a packing card as you now say - that applied only to the "instructions" given with one chute and handed to Cooper by Tina, according to Ckret.

There is also the issue of the money bag:
Money bag inspection brought up and described by Ckret from FBI witness interviews. Cooper inspected the money when it was brought on. Classified by Sluggo as fact. Why wouldn't he inspect the chutes also?

No funny stuff!?  ...  I dont see the issue you see. He didn't complain about not being given the backpack he demanded. He didn;t complain about no D-rings either but did take steps to solve the problem ... below.

Galen Cook supposedly inherited and has Tosaw files including some interview files. Shall we ask Galen Cook if the Tosaw-Mucklow interview files describe Cooper examining and opening the chutes, as Tosaw wrote it? I have already suggested we ask Rataczak about Cooper opening the chutes, but you ignored that. Ckret said he knew of nothing in witness testimony to verify Tosaw's claims about Coopering examining the chutes - Ckret says as far as he is concerned Tosaw made this up. Could Ckret be wrong? And yet we know Cooper opened one chute and pulled the chute completely out and cut cords from the chute ... because of missing D-rings you say he failed to notice ? If he failed to see the missing D-rings then WHY did he cut all the cord from one chute to tie around his waste (also reported by Tina) because of missing D-rings?. You have him both failing to notice missing D-rings and then him turning around and solving that problem he failed to notice???

All of this was discussed on Dropzone, in 2008.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 25, 2015, 11:29:09 AM
The D rings were missing off of the back chutes. the cord/line was supposedly used to tie the money to his waste. tearing apart the front reserve would not give any indication of missing D rings. they had clips. could this be the part Tina was talking about with checking the panels, and lines?

How many experts do we have on the plane? how would Tina know about all of this, and yet only Tosaw got this from her?

Skywhuffo posted this...April 1, 2010

Quote
as far as the rigger card, i am once again calling folklore. As 377 said why would Tina know what it was to report it. If he did look at it i think it was by mistake. Like any Whuffo would do if he opened the rig and saw the card he would pull it out to see what it was. Here is a question related to putting on the rig i have. In what order did it take place, he tied the bag to his body or did he put on the rig then tie it on? I have seen the info, but not any order. I am curious if he attached it to the webbing or his body. Anyone seen this?

377 posted this...April 1, 2010

Quote
Tina wouldnt know what a packing card was or what info it contained unless Cooper told her. I think there is a lot of "fill in" here by Tosaw.


Georger posted this....April 2, 2010

Quote
If Cooper had checked the packing CARD on the
one dummy chute he would have known it was
a dummy chute. My understanding is Tina never saw him look for or check any of the packing cards and none of the packing cards was found pulled out laying in the plane afterward. Of the two chutes left on the plane both packing cards were still in place ...

I don't believe we have any proof of Cooper using any methods to secure the reserve. it's possible he used the cord, but how did he mount the money, and the chute to the front?

My whole point in all of this is all the problems the chutes had, and Cooper not saying a word about any of it? I consider this "funny stuff" that Cooper didn't want going on.

Now, did WW2 static line jumpers even worry about rigging cards, or would they rely on the experts packing the chutes correctly? could this be a reason he overlooked the obvious if he had previous experience? would he know what the X's meant, or a missing seal?

Finding out exactly what Tina said to Tosaw would lay in the notes written prior to the release of the book IMHO. I don't know who is right or wrong (Tosaw/Carr) but we seem to have conflicting stories similar to the rest of the case.





Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on June 25, 2015, 11:37:58 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
(c) tossed aside "instructions" which came with one of the chutes Cossey or Emerick claims to have provided?

Has anyone ever claimed this happened other than what is written by Tosaw? it's highly unlikely a packing card, or riggers seal was on the dummy chute. Hayden supposedly supplied the back/main/emergency chutes. his surviving chute has the card, so does the one in evidence. two of the four chutes had the cards. did he toss it aside, and then put it back? this really only leaves the other main chute Cooper took with him being the one with a card tossed aside. the FBI would have known which chute it was? exactly how did he inspect the chute, and chords. did he pull the ripcord? what is "instructions". packing cards don't have instructions?

A lot of people believe he tossed the chute, so I implied it doesn't make sense to only toss one chute.

The "no funny stuff" is from Cooper's statement. a dummy chute would be considered "funny stuff". one could speculate and say out dated packed chutes could also be funny stuff. we have lots of problems with the dummy chute that should have alerted Cooper rather quickly that something was wrong with that chute. lets not forget the D ring issue.

 I'm not convinced he was an experienced jumper. I'm not involved in the sport, but I do believe safety is a priority with this group. safe and functional equipment should be at the top of the list, and should have been caught rather quickly by someone experienced IMO.

You are confusing apples and oranges here.

Instructions not to be confused with packing cards - was brought up by Ckret, evidently in FBI files. Sluggo classifies as fact.
Packing card(s) - brought up by Tosaw. Sluggo and Ckret classified as myth due to lack of documentation. Ckret said he could find no documentation in the witness interview files for Cooper opening the chutes and examining packing cards, so Ckret said Tosaw made this up. Nobody said anything about Cooper throwing away a packing card as you now say - that applied only to the "instructions" given with one chute and handed to Cooper by Tina, according to Ckret.

There is also the issue of the money bag:
Money bag inspection brought up and described by Ckret from FBI witness interviews. Cooper inspected the money when it was brought on. Classified by Sluggo as fact. Why wouldn't he inspect the chutes also?

No funny stuff!?  ...  I dont see the issue you see. He didn't complain about not being given the backpack he demanded. He didn;t complain about no D-rings either but did take steps to solve the problem ... below.

Galen Cook supposedly inherited and has Tosaw files including some interview files. Shall we ask Galen Cook if the Tosaw-Mucklow interview files describe Cooper examining and opening the chutes, as Tosaw wrote it? I have already suggested we ask Rataczak about Cooper opening the chutes, but you ignored that. Ckret said he knew of nothing in witness testimony to verify Tosaw's claims about Coopering examining the chutes - Ckret says as far as he is concerned Tosaw made this up. Could Ckret be wrong? And yet we know Cooper opened one chute and pulled the chute completely out and cut cords from the chute ... because of missing D-rings you say he failed to notice ? If he failed to see the missing D-rings then WHY did he cut all the cord from one chute to tie around his waste (also reported by Tina) because of missing D-rings?. You have him both failing to notice missing D-rings and then him turning around and solving that problem he failed to notice???

All of this was discussed on Dropzone, in 2008.

Cooper reportedly (presumably by Tosaw) mentioned the missing D-rings (for attaching the chest parachute) to Tina.  If Cooper jury rigged an attachment for the missing chest parachute, then he was making an extremely serious and probably fatal mistake in my opinion.  As Farflung used to point out, millions of unconscious or half-dead aircrew members made emergency jumps, with a single parachute, from thousands of feet higher than Cooper did and survived.

Cutting the shroud lines from the second chest parachute was apparently for the sole purpose of securing the money bag.  Tom Kaye measured the lengths of the missing shroud lines and, again in my opinion, those missing shroud lines would only have been sufficient for securing the money bag to Cooper's person.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 25, 2015, 03:12:21 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
Quote
(c) tossed aside "instructions" which came with one of the chutes Cossey or Emerick claims to have provided?

Has anyone ever claimed this happened other than what is written by Tosaw? it's highly unlikely a packing card, or riggers seal was on the dummy chute. Hayden supposedly supplied the back/main/emergency chutes. his surviving chute has the card, so does the one in evidence. two of the four chutes had the cards. did he toss it aside, and then put it back? this really only leaves the other main chute Cooper took with him being the one with a card tossed aside. the FBI would have known which chute it was? exactly how did he inspect the chute, and chords. did he pull the ripcord? what is "instructions". packing cards don't have instructions?

A lot of people believe he tossed the chute, so I implied it doesn't make sense to only toss one chute.

The "no funny stuff" is from Cooper's statement. a dummy chute would be considered "funny stuff". one could speculate and say out dated packed chutes could also be funny stuff. we have lots of problems with the dummy chute that should have alerted Cooper rather quickly that something was wrong with that chute. lets not forget the D ring issue.

 I'm not convinced he was an experienced jumper. I'm not involved in the sport, but I do believe safety is a priority with this group. safe and functional equipment should be at the top of the list, and should have been caught rather quickly by someone experienced IMO.

You are confusing apples and oranges here.

Instructions not to be confused with packing cards - was brought up by Ckret, evidently in FBI files. Sluggo classifies as fact.
Packing card(s) - brought up by Tosaw. Sluggo and Ckret classified as myth due to lack of documentation. Ckret said he could find no documentation in the witness interview files for Cooper opening the chutes and examining packing cards, so Ckret said Tosaw made this up. Nobody said anything about Cooper throwing away a packing card as you now say - that applied only to the "instructions" given with one chute and handed to Cooper by Tina, according to Ckret.

There is also the issue of the money bag:
Money bag inspection brought up and described by Ckret from FBI witness interviews. Cooper inspected the money when it was brought on. Classified by Sluggo as fact. Why wouldn't he inspect the chutes also?

No funny stuff!?  ...  I dont see the issue you see. He didn't complain about not being given the backpack he demanded. He didn;t complain about no D-rings either but did take steps to solve the problem ... below.

Galen Cook supposedly inherited and has Tosaw files including some interview files. Shall we ask Galen Cook if the Tosaw-Mucklow interview files describe Cooper examining and opening the chutes, as Tosaw wrote it? I have already suggested we ask Rataczak about Cooper opening the chutes, but you ignored that. Ckret said he knew of nothing in witness testimony to verify Tosaw's claims about Coopering examining the chutes - Ckret says as far as he is concerned Tosaw made this up. Could Ckret be wrong? And yet we know Cooper opened one chute and pulled the chute completely out and cut cords from the chute ... because of missing D-rings you say he failed to notice ? If he failed to see the missing D-rings then WHY did he cut all the cord from one chute to tie around his waste (also reported by Tina) because of missing D-rings?. You have him both failing to notice missing D-rings and then him turning around and solving that problem he failed to notice???

All of this was discussed on Dropzone, in 2008.

Cooper reportedly (presumably by Tosaw) mentioned the missing D-rings (for attaching the chest parachute) to Tina.  If Cooper jury rigged an attachment for the missing chest parachute, then he was making an extremely serious and probably fatal mistake in my opinion.  As Farflung used to point out, millions of unconscious or half-dead aircrew members made emergency jumps, with a single parachute, from thousands of feet higher than Cooper did and survived.

Cutting the shroud lines from the second chest parachute was apparently for the sole purpose of securing the money bag.  Tom Kaye measured the lengths of the missing shroud lines and, again in my opinion, those missing shroud lines would only have been sufficient for securing the money bag to Cooper's person.

The discussion about Tosaw's book (chute opening and related) starts here: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3263090;search_string=Ckret%20opening%20chutes;guest=177295726#3263090

Very likely, based on past performance, no single source is the last word on any of this. Documentation of things in the Cooper case is severely limited. This includes anything Ckret ever provided. An unredacted copy of the communications transcripts might shed new light on some of these matters?

We know for a fact Tosaw interviewed Tina Mucklow. It would be nice to see his interview notes.

NMI refers to analysis paralysis! I laughed reading that.  ;D  In a sense, NMI is correct due to the fact so little hard documentation exists in these matters. Analysis Paralysis thus becomes Speculations Paralysis. Everyone has opinions on all of these matters.  It would be nice if people could leave it at that and not get so 'personal' about it! ::) This whole thing has become far too political.
 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on June 25, 2015, 03:23:27 PM
The real question is, what does all of this say about who Cooper was...

I think it's universally agreed Cooper was ex-military, and what he knew about jumping he got from those experiences.

What's interesting to me is the fact he took the reserve chute at all, since it couldn't be used as a parachute. Why bring it? Paratroopers would use their reserves get themselves out of trees. Which fits what we already know about him. So no reason to over-analyze. Cooper was ex-military, he was comfortable jumping with just one chute and he knew he didn't have time to wait around on another chute with d-rings. He takes one reserve chute in case he gets stuck in a tree. Did he look at the packing card on the chute he tore up? Did he check the rigger seal on the chute he used? Either of those situations would suggest Cooper had a little skydiving knowledge, and if we ever get good sources on these things, it would be nice. But neither changes the fact Cooper was probably ex-military, which is what the FBI has thought for a long time now.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on June 25, 2015, 04:49:34 PM
My 2 cents:

John Detlor confirmed to me that the FBI investigated paratroopers from Vietnam early in the investigation. He seemed tongue-tied when he told me, too.

As for Tosaw, I get the sense that he embellished a fair amount of his writing. Galen told me that Tosaw got a lot of off-the-record stuff from his brother, Mike, who was in the Seattle FO. If we were to read Richard's field notes from the Tina interview - held by the family nowadays and not Galen - I suspect that we would find very little information attributable to Tina. Galen was clear on that - Richard had told him that Tina had said very little to Tosaw in the interviews. But that is third-hand info, so....

..which leads to our over-arching question: why can't we simply ask Tina now what she said to Tosaw, or her recollections of November 24, 1971 in general?

 What Tina said to Tosaw is interesting. But what she is not telling us is even more interesting. And that leads to another pressing question - how can we assist Tina is talking to us meaningfully. We may have a thawing in Tina World, as she talked to the Eugene Weekly a few years back. But Paul Neveel, the reporter, was clear that she didn't want to talk about Norjak at all.

Adding to that mystery, I'm still not convinced that the pix of Tina that the EW published is authentic, and I have not been able to meet or speak with Neveel directly at all, which I find suspect as well. When I call him I leave a message, and then he emails me back some time later.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 25, 2015, 05:41:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The real question is, what does all of this say about who Cooper was...

I think it's universally agreed Cooper was ex-military, and what he knew about jumping he got from those experiences.

What's interesting to me is the fact he took the reserve chute at all, since it couldn't be used as a parachute. Why bring it? Paratroopers would use their reserves get themselves out of trees. Which fits what we already know about him. So no reason to over-analyze. Cooper was ex-military, he was comfortable jumping with just one chute and he knew he didn't have time to wait around on another chute with d-rings. He takes one reserve chute in case he gets stuck in a tree. Did he look at the packing card on the chute he tore up? Did he check the rigger seal on the chute he used? Either of those situations would suggest Cooper had a little skydiving knowledge, and if we ever get good sources on these things, it would be nice. But neither changes the fact Cooper was probably ex-military, which is what the FBI has thought for a long time now.

Can you explain how having a reserve would get one out of a tree? How do you do that when your main chute is snagged in branches?

Keep in mind: his Main apparently had no D-rings to attach a Reserve chute to ?

What's the standard protocol when your reserve is not attached to you?  ??? If you cut the snagged lines on your Main what holds you in the tree to deploy the reserve lines to the ground?

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on June 25, 2015, 05:46:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
My 2 cents:

John Detlor confirmed to me that the FBI investigated paratroopers from Vietnam early in the investigation. He seemed tongue-tied when he told me, too.

As for Tosaw, I get the sense that he embellished a fair amount of his writing. Galen told me that Tosaw got a lot of off-the-record stuff from his brother, Mike, who was in the Seattle FO. If we were to read Richard's field notes from the Tina interview - held by the family nowadays and not Galen - I suspect that we would find very little information attributable to Tina. Galen was clear on that - Richard had told him that Tina had said very little to Tosaw in the interviews. But that is third-hand info, so....

..which leads to our over-arching question: why can't we simply ask Tina now what she said to Tosaw, or her recollections of November 24, 1971 in general?

 What Tina said to Tosaw is interesting. But what she is not telling us is even more interesting. And that leads to another pressing question - how can we assist Tina is talking to us meaningfully. We may have a thawing in Tina World, as she talked to the Eugene Weekly a few years back. But Paul Neveel, the reporter, was clear that she didn't want to talk about Norjak at all.

Adding to that mystery, I'm still not convinced that the pix of Tina that the EW published is authentic, and I have not been able to meet or speak with Neveel directly at all, which I find suspect as well. When I call him I leave a message, and then he emails me back some time later.

Tina may be under an oathe NOT to talk about Norjak? Be that a formal or informal agreement of some kind. The idea may not be realistic (especially at this late date), but I actually have talked to a few people in this case who say they are under a legal restriction NOT to talk about the case. I literally don't no. That is, what a few have told me.   

Tina was a Principal in this case. It wouldnt surprise me at all if she was operating under some formal or informal agreement not to talk about the hijacking. It could be nothing more than advice she has received ...
 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on June 25, 2015, 06:27:00 PM
Parachuting into trees...getting down via reserve..



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgV1nuYG800
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on June 25, 2015, 09:11:30 PM
Yup, that's how I'd do it.

But how come he ended up in the trees?  Not paying attention to his drift?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on June 25, 2015, 09:14:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Tina may be under an oathe NOT to talk about Norjak? Be that a formal or informal agreement of some kind. The idea may not be realistic (especially at this late date), but I actually have talked to a few people in this case who say they are under a legal restriction NOT to talk about the case. I literally don't no. That is, what a few have told me.   

Tina was a Principal in this case. It wouldnt surprise me at all if she was operating under some formal or informal agreement not to talk about the hijacking. It could be nothing more than advice she has received ...

An oath Not to talk?  Hmmm.  I prefer the oaths that compel one to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: nmiwrecks on June 26, 2015, 08:36:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
NMI refers to analysis paralysis! I laughed reading that.  ;D  In a sense, NMI is correct due to the fact so little hard documentation exists in these matters. Analysis Paralysis thus becomes Speculations Paralysis. Everyone has opinions on all of these matters.  It would be nice if people could leave it at that and not get so 'personal' about it! ::) This whole thing has become far too political.
I, again, find myself in agreement with georger.  I also share his frustration with the case and express myself poorly about it, sometimes.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: nmiwrecks on June 26, 2015, 08:52:32 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The real question is, what does all of this say about who Cooper was...

I think it's universally agreed Cooper was ex-military, and what he knew about jumping he got from those experiences.
I disagree with the statement above.  I see nothing that indicates a military background.  The Cooper suspect's actions indicate that he had nothing more than a couple basic skydiving lessons, or read a "manual", (IMHO).  I know enough about both sides of the argument to know that people gravitate towards the answers that describe the Cooper suspect as who they want him to be.  I am just as guilty of this, if not more, as everybody else. 

I think there are a rare few people on this website that realize that there is no clear cut answer to most these questions.  That can be frustrating and intriguing at the same time.  The Cooper suspect was an amateur who found himself in over his head, and was lucky (or maybe unlucky!) enough just to make it out the back of the plane. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on June 26, 2015, 11:52:47 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The real question is, what does all of this say about who Cooper was...

I think it's universally agreed Cooper was ex-military, and what he knew about jumping he got from those experiences.
I disagree with the statement above.  I see nothing that indicates a military background.  The Cooper suspect's actions indicate that he had nothing more than a couple basic skydiving lessons, or read a "manual", (IMHO).  I know enough about both sides of the argument to know that people gravitate towards the answers that describe the Cooper suspect as who they want him to be.  I am just as guilty of this, if not more, as everybody else. 

I think there are a rare few people on this website that realize that there is no clear cut answer to most these questions.  That can be frustrating and intriguing at the same time.  The Cooper suspect was an amateur who found himself in over his head, and was lucky (or maybe unlucky!) enough just to make it out the back of the plane.

You and Georger are right.  It appears that we need to "unlearn" just about everything that we "absolutely know" about Cooper and the hijacking.  The number of actual "facts" in this matter can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, even if the hand doesn't have four fingers to begin with.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: nmiwrecks on August 10, 2015, 10:12:57 PM
Any thoughts on why the Cooper suspect declined the first four parachutes that were brought to him?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on August 10, 2015, 10:19:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Any thoughts on why the Cooper suspect declined the first four parachutes that were brought to him?


Where did you hear that one?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on August 10, 2015, 10:44:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Any thoughts on why the Cooper suspect declined the first four parachutes that were brought to him?


Where did you hear that one?

Reportedly, Tina told Cooper that the parachutes were coming from the USAF at McChord AFB (co-located with Fort Lewis).  Cooper then demanded that the parachutes be civilian ones.  That is when Cossey and other civilian sky divers got involved.

The Vietnam War was in full force in 1971 and it was widely known that the USAF had "pingers" installed in the parachutes used by combat aircrews so that they could be easily tracked by USAF Search and Rescue if shot down.  Cooper may have feared that such a pinger would be in any parachute from the military.

This supports the idea, but is not conclusive, that Cooper had military experience or at least experience with military equipment (as in "Other Government Organizations").  It is not conclusive because the pingers had been reported in the media for some time prior to 1971. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: nmiwrecks on August 11, 2015, 12:23:03 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
Any thoughts on why the Cooper suspect declined the first four parachutes that were brought to him?


Where did you hear that one?

Reportedly, Tina told Cooper that the parachutes were coming from the USAF at McChord AFB (co-located with Fort Lewis).  Cooper then demanded that the parachutes be civilian ones.  That is when Cossey and other civilian sky divers got involved.

The Vietnam War was in full force in 1971 and it was widely known that the USAF had "pingers" installed in the parachutes used by combat aircrews so that they could be easily tracked by USAF Search and Rescue if shot down.  Cooper may have feared that such a pinger would be in any parachute from the military.

This supports the idea, but is not conclusive, that Cooper had military experience or at least experience with military equipment (as in "Other Government Organizations").  It is not conclusive because the pingers had been reported in the media for some time prior to 1971.
That does make sense.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: sailshaw on August 11, 2015, 10:20:11 AM
Robert99  You say: This supports the idea, but is not conclusive, that Cooper had military experience or at least experience with military equipment (as in "Other Government Organizations")"

I say:   The FBI when they were at my home asking about Sheridan Peterson it was because the FBI were checking out all the Smoke Jumpers and Sheridan had done that for three years. Their check with us about Sheridan was within thee first year following Norjak. They were quick to locate Sheridan but bought his alibi that he was in Nepal writing his book. They were so close but failed to check the DNA under the stamps/envelope flaps of the four letters to the newspapers following Norjak and compare with what they got from Sheridan.. A match would have shown that Sheridan was not in Nepal at the time of Norjak but in the Portland area "the scene of the crime". And telling the FBI his alibi story was a Federal Crime just by its self. That could have been used to bargin a plee deal to come clean about the Cooper Caper.

So, Sheridan was government trained as a Smoke Jumper and the FBI was right on his trail.

Bob Sailshaw
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on August 11, 2015, 12:38:40 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Robert99  You say: This supports the idea, but is not conclusive, that Cooper had military experience or at least experience with military equipment (as in "Other Government Organizations")"

I say:   The FBI when they were at my home asking about Sheridan Peterson it was because the FBI were checking out all the Smoke Jumpers and Sheridan had done that for three years. Their check with us about Sheridan was within thee first year following Norjak. They were quick to locate Sheridan but bought his alibi that he was in Nepal writing his book. They were so close but failed to check the DNA under the stamps/envelope flaps of the four letters to the newspapers following Norjak and compare with what they got from Sheridan.. A match would have shown that Sheridan was not in Nepal at the time of Norjak but in the Portland area "the scene of the crime". And telling the FBI his alibi story was a Federal Crime just by its self. That could have been used to bargin a plee deal to come clean about the Cooper Caper.

So, Sheridan was government trained as a Smoke Jumper and the FBI was right on his trail.

Bob Sailshaw

DNA didn't become useful to law enforcement until long after 1971.  Your dislike for Peterson has led to your idea that he sneaked into and out of the US from Nepal just to hijack an airliner, and the FBI apparently doesn't buy that story.  Also, there is absolutely nothing to suggest that Cooper, whoever he may have been, "beat the system" as you like to put.

In 1971, there were probably hundreds of thousands of people in the US who had parachute training and could have made that jump from NWA 305.  However, there is absolutely no evidence to prove that Cooper was one of them.  While Cooper had some parachute knowledge, nothing suggests that he had ever made an actual jump.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on August 11, 2015, 03:29:49 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
Any thoughts on why the Cooper suspect declined the first four parachutes that were brought to him?


Where did you hear that one?

Reportedly, Tina told Cooper that the parachutes were coming from the USAF at McChord AFB (co-located with Fort Lewis).  Cooper then demanded that the parachutes be civilian ones.  That is when Cossey and other civilian sky divers got involved.

The Vietnam War was in full force in 1971 and it was widely known that the USAF had "pingers" installed in the parachutes used by combat aircrews so that they could be easily tracked by USAF Search and Rescue if shot down.  Cooper may have feared that such a pinger would be in any parachute from the military.

This supports the idea, but is not conclusive, that Cooper had military experience or at least experience with military equipment (as in "Other Government Organizations").  It is not conclusive because the pingers had been reported in the media for some time prior to 1971.

What? You don't believe the FBI, either?!!  Larry Carr told me specifically that tracking devices had not been invented yet and were unavailable to ping Cooper.

However, they were available by the time McCoy stole his airplane and according to Calame and Rhodes ditched the parachutes supplied by the FBI over Utah to get the trailing planes to go on a wild-goose chase.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on August 11, 2015, 03:33:38 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
DNA didn't become useful to law enforcement until long after 1971.  Your dislike for Peterson has led to your idea that he sneaked into and out of the US from Nepal just to hijack an airliner, and the FBI apparently doesn't buy that story.  Also, there is absolutely nothing to suggest that Cooper, whoever he may have been, "beat the system" as you like to put.

In 1971, there were probably hundreds of thousands of people in the US who had parachute training and could have made that jump from NWA 305.  However, there is absolutely no evidence to prove that Cooper was one of them.  While Cooper had some parachute knowledge, nothing suggests that he had ever made an actual jump.

Nothing? He knew more about the 727 and how to jump from a 727 than the feds, NWO, and most skydivers that have posed here and on the DZ.  Robert Nine-Nine, I think you are painting with a very broad brush these days.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on August 11, 2015, 03:40:21 PM
You have to wonder why he had trouble with the stairs, or understanding them after takeoff?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on August 11, 2015, 03:45:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
DNA didn't become useful to law enforcement until long after 1971.  Your dislike for Peterson has led to your idea that he sneaked into and out of the US from Nepal just to hijack an airliner, and the FBI apparently doesn't buy that story.  Also, there is absolutely nothing to suggest that Cooper, whoever he may have been, "beat the system" as you like to put.

In 1971, there were probably hundreds of thousands of people in the US who had parachute training and could have made that jump from NWA 305.  However, there is absolutely no evidence to prove that Cooper was one of them.  While Cooper had some parachute knowledge, nothing suggests that he had ever made an actual jump.

Nothing? He knew more about the 727 and how to jump from a 727 than the feds, NWO, and most skydivers that have posed here and on the DZ.  Robert Nine-Nine, I think you are painting with a very broad brush these days.

First, I didn't say that Cooper was not familiar with the 727s, such as those used in Southeast Asia.  He was, in fact, aware that the rear stairs of at least some 727s could be lowered in flight.  And, if I remember correctly, the 727 was the only airliner with aft stairs that could lower them in flight in 1971.

But I have seen nothing to suggest that Cooper had ANY actual parachute jumping experience. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on August 11, 2015, 03:51:34 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You have to wonder why he had trouble with the stairs, or understanding them after takeoff?

Cooper may have never seen the aft stairs, and its control panel, of the airline version of the 727 prior to this flight.  In all probability, the SEA 727s had a different aft stairs control panel plus other differences such as stronger motors to get the stairs back up and locked while airborne.   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on August 11, 2015, 03:57:29 PM
The SEA 727's didn't have the stairs. they were removed, and metal was applied to the portion of the stairs that were attached to the plane.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: sailshaw on August 12, 2015, 10:49:56 AM
Robert99    You say:  "But I have seen nothing to suggest that Cooper had ANY actual parachute jumping experience.
Report to moderator   Logged
Offline Robert99

 

Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #228 on: August 11, 2015, 03:51:34 PM »

    Quote

Quote from: Shutter on August 11, 2015, 03:40:21 PM

    You have to wonder why he had trouble with the stairs, or understanding them after takeoff?"

I say:  "When talking with 377, he said Cooper selected the right back chute as it was the Military carrier and not the Sports carrier and was designed to take greater opening forces. The two chutes were exactly alike per the owner and only the carriers were different (Military/Sports carrier). So, he knew what he was doing, The problem with getting the Aft Door open was probably due to not waiting long enough for the pressure to equalize across the door per my 727 Flight Attendant. This may have been his first time opening the Aft Airstair in flight, but he knew a lot about how it worked. Robert you are a little naive about the case and need to think outside the box or you will never solve the case.

Bob Sailshaw






'


Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on August 12, 2015, 11:03:21 AM
The plane wasn't pressurized.

The way I see it is Cooper had a 50/50 chance on picking one of the two chutes.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on August 12, 2015, 11:18:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The SEA 727's didn't have the stairs. they were removed, and metal was applied to the portion of the stairs that were attached to the plane.

If the SEA 727s didn't have stairs on them, then where did Cooper's information come from?  He knew that the stairs could be lowered in flight and he knew that the 727 could take off without the stairs being locked fully up.

Boeing did a program for "someone" involving lowering the stairs in flight.  This included both engineering studies and modifying actual airframes plus flight tests of those aircraft.  Where were those aircraft used?  It wasn't so UPS could drop packages in your driveway. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on August 12, 2015, 11:24:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The SEA 727's didn't have the stairs. they were removed, and metal was applied to the portion of the stairs that were attached to the plane.

If the SEA 727s didn't have stairs on them, then where did Cooper's information come from?  He knew that the stairs could be lowered in flight and he knew that the 727 could take off without the stairs being locked fully up.

Boeing did a program for "someone" involving lowering the stairs in flight.  This included both engineering studies and modifying actual airframes plus flight tests of those aircraft.  Where were those aircraft used?  It wasn't so UPS could drop packages in your driveway.



If Cooper was a load master on one of these planes I don't think it would take long to figure out a plan even with the stairs removed.

Here is the video of the SEA 727. I shortened it a little, but you can clearly see they slide down the rear exit where the permanent stairs would be, and when the show the shot from the chase plane the stairs are not extended...they were removed...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4MYHrQtp5c&spfreload=10
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on August 12, 2015, 11:30:20 AM
How do we really know Cooper knew the stairs would open in flight? didn't he make a claim of having them deployed from the cockpit? he also appears to have knowledge about chutes, but doesn't say a word about the dummy chute? did Cooper really know he could make the jump under those conditions, or was he assuming?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on August 12, 2015, 11:38:29 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Robert99    You say:  "But I have seen nothing to suggest that Cooper had ANY actual parachute jumping experience.
Report to moderator   Logged
Offline Robert99

 

Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #228 on: August 11, 2015, 03:51:34 PM »

    Quote

Quote from: Shutter on August 11, 2015, 03:40:21 PM

    You have to wonder why he had trouble with the stairs, or understanding them after takeoff?"

I say:  "When talking with 377, he said Cooper selected the right back chute as it was the Military carrier and not the Sports carrier and was designed to take greater opening forces. The two chutes were exactly alike per the owner and only the carriers were different (Military/Sports carrier). So, he knew what he was doing, The problem with getting the Aft Door open was probably due to not waiting long enough for the pressure to equalize across the door per my 727 Flight Attendant. This may have been his first time opening the Aft Airstair in flight, but he knew a lot about how it worked. Robert you are a little naive about the case and need to think outside the box or you will never solve the case.

Bob Sailshaw

If, as you say, the canopies were the same (how about the harness?) and only the containers were different, then the only information that Cooper had to base his decision on was that one looked like a military parachute.  And this suggests that he had a general familiarity with military parachutes even if he had never jumped one.

If Cooper actually took the missing and non-operable reserve parachute with him, it would suggest that he didn't know anything about reserve parachutes.  And this suggests that he was only familiar with emergency type parachutes.

You can stick with your Peterson-sneaked-into-the-USA-and-then-back-to-Nepal theory, 10-years-in-the-planning theory, plus your the-solution-is-the-postage-stamps theory, and I'll stick with things that make sense and are based on facts.


I think I fixed this post?
Shutter






Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on August 12, 2015, 11:45:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How do we really know Cooper knew the stairs would open in flight? didn't he make a claim of having them deployed from the cockpit? he also appears to have knowledge about chutes, but doesn't say a word about the dummy chute? did Cooper really know he could make the jump under those conditions, or was he assuming?

These points have been discussed repeatedly.  In 1971, the 727 was the only commercial airliner with aft stairs that could be opened in flight and Cooper knew this.  He doubled checked with the NWA ticket agent in Portland that the airliner he was on would be a 727.

I have never seen anything about Cooper claiming that the stairs could be deployed from the cockpit.

Cooper's knowledge of parachutes and sky-diving was very limited.  Take a look at another post I made a few minutes ago.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on August 12, 2015, 11:49:28 AM
I believe it was mentioned by Carr about opening the stairs from the cockpit....I'll check on it.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on August 12, 2015, 11:52:10 AM
Quote
He doubled checked with the NWA ticket agent in Portland that the airliner he was on would be a 727.

I'm sure he did check a verify it was a 727, but that's not conformation about the stairs. that's to insure he's on a 727. the plan was to jump from 727.....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on August 12, 2015, 12:52:04 PM
I can't find the reference to Cooper stating the stairs could be deployed from the cockpit...I guess I was wrong.. :'( :'(

This was his original plan..taken from the transcripts..6:21 PST

Cooper's instructions was to have the aft passenger door open and remain that way, and the stairs to be lowered after takeoff.

6:38 PST...3rd girl to stay with aircraft to manipulate stairs for him after plane is airborne.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on August 12, 2015, 03:36:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I can't find the reference to Cooper stating the stairs could be deployed from the cockpit...I guess I was wrong.. :'( :'(

This was his original plan..taken from the transcripts..6:21 PST

Cooper's instructions was to have the aft passenger door open and remain that way, and the stairs to be lowered after takeoff.

6:38 PST...3rd girl to stay with aircraft to manipulate stairs for him after plane is airborne.


It was only after arguing with Rataczak, who told Cooper that the airplane couldn't take off with the stairs down, that Cooper agreed to take off with the stairs fully up.  But Cooper immediately told Tina that he knew the aircraft could take off with the stairs down.

Rataczak and Cooper may have not understood what the other was saying.  The aircraft could not rotate for lift off if the stairs were down and locked without doing some damage to the stairs, assuming it had the longitudinal control power to crush the stairs.  Cooper apparently meant that he just wanted the stairs unlocked and hanging in the wind.

There are lights on the Flight Engineer's panel that indicate if the stairs are up or down.  There were also probably lights on the FE's panel to tell him if the baggage compartment doors were open or shut.  Maybe even for the cabin doors.

Shutter edit for quote repair....
You keep missing the last quote entry before typing. I fixed the post for you....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on July 21, 2016, 12:10:00 AM
Re:  Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes       

            I was wondering if I could ask  Mr. Smith some questions  concerning Reply #35 on Dec. 3 2014 ( as per the Ralph Hatley interview)?

     


Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on July 21, 2016, 01:48:48 AM
Ask away Hagg.

You can also contact me directly at brucesmith At rainierconnect Dot com. Or 360. 832. Six, too, for, ate.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on July 21, 2016, 11:14:31 AM
Thank you for indulging my curiosity Mr. Smith 
       I just recently(within the last few days) came across your posting of the interview with Mr. Ralph Hatley. As this was my first time seeing this information, to say it piqued my interest would be a colossal understatement.

I am hoping you (or anyone else for that matter) would help educate me as to his role (or at least let me know where I can reference this info). As be it that I just started visiting this website, I have been trying to educate myself on past postings but due to the volume of information (very impressive) it will take some time (please excuse me).

Another question would be to the date of this original interview? (12-2-14) this is correct ? (sorry for my ignorance)  Does anyone know whether he ever divulged this info (specifically the murders and such) publicly before this?

I am also wondering as to the present day status of Mr. Hatley and Mr. Himmelsbach?  Are they available for possible communication? If so, do you think either of them would acknowledge the validity of my claims, per my providing name of client and name of person(s) who was murdered? (I believe I might be able to do this)

Sorry for the delay in communication.   This has been a lot to process.    Thank you (everybody) for bearing with me.





Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on July 21, 2016, 10:11:07 PM
Ralph Hatley is a public figure and readily available to the public. He runs a DZ out of Eagle Creek, Oregon. Google is how I got in touch with him. I would imagine he would talk with you.

To sweeten the pot, Sailshaw and his lovely wife drove me down to Eagle Creek for the interview and treated everyone to a wonderful luncheon. Under those conditions, how could Ralph do anything but flap his gums, eh?

As for Ralph Himmelsbach, the other "RH," he's tougher to get in touch with. I suggest that your avail yourself of Jerry Thomas, aka JT, via the "private message" function of this forum. JT is in regular contact with RH-2, and so can pass on your request for direct contact.

I'm not sure what murders you are talking about - remember, I've been writing about murder and mayhem for some time, so my personal body count is a tad large. If you're talking about the deaths attributed to Ted Mayfield that Hatley and I discussed, well, that is public record and many have talked about Mayfield's' behavior. Ted's body count has yet to be adequately counted, it appears, according to some of the family members of the deceased that place the blame for their loss at Mayfield's feet. I think Ted was convicted on three deaths, but the families say a dozen or more. Honestly, I've forgotten how many people died at Ted' DZ at Pacific Aviation, which is one reason I don't jump out of airplanes, no matter how many naked women 377 tells me might be on the next flight...

But, if you're talking about the murder of Earl Cossey, well, that is a popular topic around here, so fire away! (so to speak). It's still unsolved, btw.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on July 21, 2016, 11:27:07 PM
After a solid hour of chatting, Ralph suddenly announced: " I am going to tell you something that's going to blow your asses out of the water." He proceeded to tell us a story that occurred in the 1977-1978 time period.        Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Packs           page 3  Reply#35 on December 03 2014
             
This story sounds familiar. I believe I might know the name of attorney Jim Leubke's  client  and the name of the person he murdered.
                                                                                   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on July 22, 2016, 03:14:38 AM
So tell us.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on July 22, 2016, 07:01:11 AM
Unfortunately, it's not that simple      Many factors involved       I may need to seek council first     
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on July 22, 2016, 05:11:59 PM
Okay. Let us know when you're ready.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: andrade1812 on September 15, 2016, 11:30:53 PM
I picked up a NB6 harness (sans parachute) off ebay for cheap... anyone have any advice how to put it on? It's NOT very intuitive.

It's from 2002, so maybe it's different than Cooper's... I dunno, We'll keep playing with it.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 15, 2016, 11:47:16 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I picked up a NB6 harness (sans parachute) off ebay for cheap... anyone have any advice how to put it on? It's NOT very intuitive.

It's from 2002, so maybe it's different than Cooper's... I dunno, We'll keep playing with it.

A picture of the front of an NB-6 will help you immensely.  And there is just such a picture at <http://n467us.com/Photo%20Evidence.htm>.

The best way to put the chute on is to put the shoulder straps on and leave the leg straps hanging straight down. 

The chest strap is in the form of an "X" rather than an "H" but you can quickly see that and fasten the snap correctly.

Then take the leg straps one at a time and, after making sure there are no twists in the straps, fasten each to the snap on the same side of the chute that it is on.

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: sailshaw on September 16, 2016, 10:49:03 AM
Robert99   You say in above:  "It was only after arguing with Rataczak, who told Cooper that the airplane couldn't take off with the stairs down, that Cooper agreed to take off with the stairs fully up.  But Cooper immediately told Tina that he knew the aircraft could take off with the stairs down."

I would like to comment:   "Cooper was correct in that the 727 with airstairs deployed could take off, fly, and land with the airstairs deployed. That was demonstrated by Boeing to the government at our test field at Moses Lake (Washington). The plane did not rotate on take off but just gained enough airspeed for the lift generated to clear the plane from the ground. The same level landing kept the airstairs from touching the ground. Rataczak was wrong and did not know what Cooper knew about the Boeing tests at Moses Lake. Cooper also knew the airstairs could be deployed once in the air also, so he elected not to take the time to argue with Rataczak. Cooper/Sheridan Peterson knew all he needed from working at Boeing in the "Manuals and Handbooks Group" where all the details were available about the airstairs. We even had a full scale 727 airstair Mechanical Systems test attached to the 727 full scale Flight Controls Test Rig that Cooper could have visited and watched it operate. That is how Cooper knew more than anyone else other than Boeing Engineering."

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 16, 2016, 12:39:32 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Robert99   You say in above:  "It was only after arguing with Rataczak, who told Cooper that the airplane couldn't take off with the stairs down, that Cooper agreed to take off with the stairs fully up.  But Cooper immediately told Tina that he knew the aircraft could take off with the stairs down."

I would like to comment:   "Cooper was correct in that the 727 with airstairs deployed could take off, fly, and land with the airstairs deployed. That was demonstrated by Boeing to the government at our test field at Moses Lake (Washington). The plane did not rotate on take off but just gained enough airspeed for the lift generated to clear the plane from the ground. The same level landing kept the airstairs from touching the ground. Rataczak was wrong and did not know what Cooper knew about the Boeing tests at Moses Lake. Cooper also knew the airstairs could be deployed once in the air also, so he elected not to take the time to argue with Rataczak. Cooper/Sheridan Peterson knew all he needed from working at Boeing in the "Manuals and Handbooks Group" where all the details were available about the airstairs. We even had a full scale 727 airstair Mechanical Systems test attached to the 727 full scale Flight Controls Test Rig that Cooper could have visited and watched it operate. That is how Cooper knew more than anyone else other than Boeing Engineering."

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com

If the stairs were not "locked down" (meaning in a rigid position), the 727 could have easily rotated and taken off with the stairs deployed.  After the first few hundred feet of ground roll, the stairs would be floating back up due to the aerodynamics (that is, they would be pushed up due to the wind).

Even if the stairs were locked down in a rigid position, the 727 probably had sufficient longitudinal control power to rotate and crush the stairs structure that was holding them in a rigid position.

Cooper + Boeing Engineering + Boeing Flight Test + everyone who happened to drive by Moses Lake and see the flight tests in progress + the Boeing customer for the modification and flight tests, knew about the stairs being deployable.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 16, 2016, 01:05:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I picked up a NB6 harness (sans parachute) off ebay for cheap... anyone have any advice how to put it on? It's NOT very intuitive.

It's from 2002, so maybe it's different than Cooper's... I dunno, We'll keep playing with it.

NB6's basic strap config has not changed at all over time, still the same.

Damn right it isn't intuitive.

I had a really hard time figuring out the chest strap hookup when I got my NB 8 (same harness config as NB 6) and I'd been jumping for decades.

Did you find the packing card pocket? Was it difficult to locate?

I think Cooper jumped an NB 8 not NB 6 but they are so similar it makes little difference. NB 8 container can take the larger 28 foot C9 canopy easily. The NB 6 container was designed for the smaller Navy 26 foot conical canopy.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 16, 2016, 01:14:48 PM
R99 wrote: "Cooper + Boeing Engineering + Boeing Flight Test + everyone who happened to drive by Moses Lake and see the flight tests in progress + the Boeing customer for the modification and flight tests, knew about the stairs being deployable."

What modification?

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 16, 2016, 01:32:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
R99 wrote: "Cooper + Boeing Engineering + Boeing Flight Test + everyone who happened to drive by Moses Lake and see the flight tests in progress + the Boeing customer for the modification and flight tests, knew about the stairs being deployable."

What modification?

377

First, the stairs could be lowered in flight without any modifications from the standard production airline configuration, as was demonstrated in the Cooper hijacking.  And Cooper knew that.

Second, why would Boeing Engineering and Flight Test get involved if modifications were not made?  The modifications could have been as simple as changing the stair control panel to include additional options, increasing the power of the electric motor that powered the stair retractions, perhaps including intermediate stopping positions for the stairs, etc..

Cooper's problems in lowering the stairs may have been the result of him never having seen the stair control panel on a standard production airline configuration 727 previously.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 16, 2016, 01:49:01 PM
Second, why would Boeing Engineering and Flight Test get involved if modifications were not made? 

Perhaps just to test and document that stairs could be lowered in flight safely. I've seen no evidence of special mods.

Don Kirlin would know. He got to see lots of Boeing docs related to 727 open ventral door flight tests.

He reportedly got an FAA STC for 727 skydive ops. Based the application on the Boeing tests.

377

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 16, 2016, 01:50:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Robert99   You say in above:  "It was only after arguing with Rataczak, who told Cooper that the airplane couldn't take off with the stairs down, that Cooper agreed to take off with the stairs fully up.  But Cooper immediately told Tina that he knew the aircraft could take off with the stairs down."

I would like to comment:   "Cooper was correct in that the 727 with airstairs deployed could take off, fly, and land with the airstairs deployed. That was demonstrated by Boeing to the government at our test field at Moses Lake (Washington). The plane did not rotate on take off but just gained enough airspeed for the lift generated to clear the plane from the ground. The same level landing kept the airstairs from touching the ground. Rataczak was wrong and did not know what Cooper knew about the Boeing tests at Moses Lake. Cooper also knew the airstairs could be deployed once in the air also, so he elected not to take the time to argue with Rataczak. Cooper/Sheridan Peterson knew all he needed from working at Boeing in the "Manuals and Handbooks Group" where all the details were available about the airstairs. We even had a full scale 727 airstair Mechanical Systems test attached to the 727 full scale Flight Controls Test Rig that Cooper could have visited and watched it operate. That is how Cooper knew more than anyone else other than Boeing Engineering."

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com

If the stairs were not "locked down" (meaning in a rigid position), the 727 could have easily rotated and taken off with the stairs deployed.  After the first few hundred feet of ground roll, the stairs would be floating back up due to the aerodynamics (that is, they would be pushed up due to the wind).

Even if the stairs were locked down in a rigid position, the 727 probably had sufficient longitudinal control power to rotate and crush the stairs structure that was holding them in a rigid position.

Cooper + Boeing Engineering + Boeing Flight Test + everyone who happened to drive by Moses Lake and see the flight tests in progress + the Boeing customer for the modification and flight tests, knew about the stairs being deployable.

The Moses Lake test facility isn't that far from the Yakima Test Center. Would a person familiar with one have known about the other and done some checking there?   (re- Fort Lewis personnel).

 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 16, 2016, 02:15:38 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
Robert99   You say in above:  "It was only after arguing with Rataczak, who told Cooper that the airplane couldn't take off with the stairs down, that Cooper agreed to take off with the stairs fully up.  But Cooper immediately told Tina that he knew the aircraft could take off with the stairs down."

I would like to comment:   "Cooper was correct in that the 727 with airstairs deployed could take off, fly, and land with the airstairs deployed. That was demonstrated by Boeing to the government at our test field at Moses Lake (Washington). The plane did not rotate on take off but just gained enough airspeed for the lift generated to clear the plane from the ground. The same level landing kept the airstairs from touching the ground. Rataczak was wrong and did not know what Cooper knew about the Boeing tests at Moses Lake. Cooper also knew the airstairs could be deployed once in the air also, so he elected not to take the time to argue with Rataczak. Cooper/Sheridan Peterson knew all he needed from working at Boeing in the "Manuals and Handbooks Group" where all the details were available about the airstairs. We even had a full scale 727 airstair Mechanical Systems test attached to the 727 full scale Flight Controls Test Rig that Cooper could have visited and watched it operate. That is how Cooper knew more than anyone else other than Boeing Engineering."

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com

If the stairs were not "locked down" (meaning in a rigid position), the 727 could have easily rotated and taken off with the stairs deployed.  After the first few hundred feet of ground roll, the stairs would be floating back up due to the aerodynamics (that is, they would be pushed up due to the wind).

Even if the stairs were locked down in a rigid position, the 727 probably had sufficient longitudinal control power to rotate and crush the stairs structure that was holding them in a rigid position.

Cooper + Boeing Engineering + Boeing Flight Test + everyone who happened to drive by Moses Lake and see the flight tests in progress + the Boeing customer for the modification and flight tests, knew about the stairs being deployable.

The Moses Lake test facility isn't that far from the Yakima Test Center. Would a person familiar with one have known about the other and done some checking there?   (re- Fort Lewis personnel).

I think the Army personnel at Fort Lewis/McChord AFB are the actual managers of the Yakima Test Center.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 16, 2016, 03:06:56 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I think Cooper jumped an NB 8 not NB 6 but they are so similar it makes little difference. NB 8 container can take the larger 28 foot C9 canopy easily. The NB 6 container was designed for the smaller Navy 26 foot conical canopy.

377

Okay, 377, now you gotta 'fess up. WHY do you think DB Cooper used an NB-8?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 16, 2016, 04:13:22 PM
Because I believe it contained a 28 ft C9 canopy. It is an inconsequential matter though, the NB 8 and NB 6 only differ in tiny details and pack volume. Hard to pack a C9 in an unmodified NB 6 container. Both NB 6 and NB 8 USN containers were plentiful and cheap in surplus. Most skydivers didn't want them (the USAF rigs were more suitable for skydiving). Most were used as pilot bail out rigs.

I wanted to own a Cooper rig and could have bought an NB 8 or NB 6. I bought an 8.

377

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 16, 2016, 04:30:16 PM
What do you think it was Bruce? NB 6 or NB 8?

I credit you with more chute savvy than any other journalist who has covered the case.

Your sleuthing with Norman broke new ground and shed more light on the unreliability of Cossey's statements.

I've played your History Channel interview a bunch of times. I really think you have acting talent. That's a compliment not a sarcastic remark.

"Cooper was on the INSIDE"  ;)

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 16, 2016, 05:42:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What do you think it was Bruce? NB 6 or NB 8?

I credit you with more chute savvy than any other journalist who has covered the case.

Your sleuthing with Norman broke new ground and shed more light on the unreliability of Cossey's statements.

I've played your History Channel interview a bunch of times. I really think you have acting talent. That's a compliment not a sarcastic remark.

"Cooper was on the INSIDE"  ;)

377

Yep fer sure! The inside of a plane. Then he got to the outside of a plane. Now ONLY the "Cooper Puppet Masters" KNOW with selfies 'knowing' and sent to billboards.  :))

All Cooper Puppet Masters are on the INSIDE!  The only question is: on the inside of what?

 


Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 16, 2016, 06:46:13 PM
Good one Georger! I needed a Friday laugh.  ;)

http://nymag.com/news/features/conspiracy-theories/

377

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 17, 2016, 03:01:26 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What do you think it was Bruce? NB 6 or NB 8?

I credit you with more chute savvy than any other journalist who has covered the case.

Your sleuthing with Norman broke new ground and shed more light on the unreliability of Cossey's statements.

I've played your History Channel interview a bunch of times. I really think you have acting talent. That's a compliment not a sarcastic remark.

"Cooper was on the INSIDE"  ;)

377

I say neither an NB-6, NB-8 or a C-9 canopy. I go with Hayden, who said that he presumed the two chutes he gave to NWO were identical, and the one he got back was a Pioneer with a 28-foot Steinthaul canopy inside. Hence, I say DB Cooper jumped with a 28-foot, conical Steinthaul canopy packed inside a Pioneer container, just as was displayed at the Washington State Historical Museum in their COOPER exhibit.

Thanks for the kudos, too, 377. I appreciate them.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on September 17, 2016, 09:01:26 AM
Re: Bruce
I say neither an NB-6, NB-8 or a C-9 canopy. I go with Hayden, who said that he presumed the two chutes he gave to NWO were identical, and the one he got back was a Pioneer with a 28-foot Steinthaul canopy inside. Hence, I say DB Cooper jumped with a 28-foot, conical Steinthaul canopy packed inside a Pioneer container, just as was displayed at the Washington State Historical Museum in their COOPER exhibit.
                     
                      I am curious as to where the chutes came from and who actually delivered them. I know there was much debate over this. Was there ever a collective opinion agreed upon?(either by this forum members or by people outside this forum) I would love to hear everyone's opinion. (as well as your's Bruce)

                    I hope you don't mind rehashing some of this with me as I know a lot of you have already discussed this matter in the past. I am hoping I may have something to contribute to the discussion. (let me know Shutter if I am out of line)
                     I will be busy most of today but I hope to return tonight to continue this.    Thanks

                      P.S. Bruce        I think I may be ready to discuss the matter relating to the Ralph Hatley interview. (if that is okay with you)
                     
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 17, 2016, 02:37:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Re: Bruce
I say neither an NB-6, NB-8 or a C-9 canopy. I go with Hayden, who said that he presumed the two chutes he gave to NWO were identical, and the one he got back was a Pioneer with a 28-foot Steinthaul canopy inside. Hence, I say DB Cooper jumped with a 28-foot, conical Steinthaul canopy packed inside a Pioneer container, just as was displayed at the Washington State Historical Museum in their COOPER exhibit.
                     
                      I am curious as to where the chutes came from and who actually delivered them. I know there was much debate over this. Was there ever a collective opinion agreed upon?(either by this forum members or by people outside this forum) I would love to hear everyone's opinion. (as well as your's Bruce)

                    I hope you don't mind rehashing some of this with me as I know a lot of you have already discussed this matter in the past. I am hoping I may have something to contribute to the discussion. (let me know Shutter if I am out of line)
                     I will be busy most of today but I hope to return tonight to continue this.    Thanks

                      P.S. Bruce        I think I may be ready to discuss the matter relating to the Ralph Hatley interview. (if that is okay with you)
                   

Take a look at pages 226, 227, and 228 of FBI File SE-164-81 for a discussion of the parachutes and where they were obtained.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 17, 2016, 03:40:51 PM
Those files are a good place to start - it is certainly where Geoffrey Gray did when he shocked Cooper World in 2011 and busted Earl Cossey's 40-year bubble of fame.

But these files are in error, as well. They claim a few things that are not corroborated. First, they state that Norman Hayden is the direct source of this information and Norman says he never spoke to the FBI about the chutes, nor was he interviewed in any way to develop this file.

Secondly, Norman says he never gave the NWO any military chutes, which the files claims. Norman steadfastly believes that he gave two identical Pioneer/Steinthaul chutes to NWO.

In actuality, the file seem to be an amalgam of Cossey and Hayden. Further, I believe this file was developed by John Detlor, who was the very chatty and nice G-Man in the HC docu. He is also the author of a History of the FBI. But he ain't talking to yours truly. Maybe I'm not nice enough. Or I'm too aggressive for his tastes. But around July 10th he did say that he would sit down for a chat after his bathroom renovations were completed, just after the broadcast of the HC docu. But he hasn't replied to any emails since July 15 or so.

As always, you can read a much deeper discussion of the parachute issue in my book. Still only $25!

As for "collective agreement," here or anywhere else, on the parachutes or anything else - FORGETABOUTIT!!!
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 17, 2016, 03:46:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

          P.S. Bruce        I think I may be ready to discuss the matter relating to the Ralph Hatley interview. (if that is okay with you)
                   

Give me a call. 360. 832. Six, Too, For, Ate. Afternoons and evenings are best. But today is out. Doing laundry this afternoon and then I'm going contra dancin' up in Tacoma.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 17, 2016, 03:49:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Those files are a good place to start - it is certainly where Geoffrey Gray did when he shocked Cooper World in 2011 and busted Earl Cossey's 40-year bubble of fame.

But these files are in error, as well. They claim a few things that are not corroborated. First, they state that Norman Hayden is the direct source of this information and Norman says he never spoke to the FBI about the chutes, nor was he interviewed in any way to develop this file.

Secondly, Norman says he never gave the NWO any military chutes, which the files claims. Norman steadfastly believes that he gave two identical Pioneer/Steinthaul chutes to NWO.

In actuality, the file seem to be an amalgam of Cossey and Hayden. Further, I believe this file was developed by John Detlor, who was the very chatty and nice G-Man in the HC docu. He is also the author of a History of the FBI. But he ain't talking to yours truly. Maybe I'm not nice enough. Or I'm too aggressive for his tastes. But around July 10th he did say that he would sit down for a chat after his bathroom renovations were completed, just after the broadcast of the HC docu. But he hasn't replied to any emails since July 15 or so.

As always, you can read a much deeper discussion of the parachute issue in my book. Still only $25!

As for "collective agreement," here or anywhere else, on the parachutes or anything else - FORGETABOUTIT!!!

Didn't Hayden sue the FBI to get the remaining back pack returned to him?  If so, I would strongly suggest that he DID talk to the FBI.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 17, 2016, 04:50:30 PM
Hayden says his attorneys did the talking - in DC, no less. Hayden gives an account of an interaction with a G-Man in Seattle when he picked up his chute from the feds. It wasn't pretty. It's in my book, btw.

When I read the parachute file to Hayden, he looked like he had never heard one word of it before. He was very dejected to hear how badly the feds messed up the story, at least from his perspective.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 17, 2016, 07:13:21 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hayden says his attorneys did the talking - in DC, no less. Hayden gives an account of an interaction with a G-Man in Seattle when he picked up his chute from the feds. It wasn't pretty. It's in my book, btw.

When I read the parachute file to Hayden, he looked like he had never heard one word of it before. He was very dejected to hear how badly the feds messed up the story, at least from his perspective.

It might re helpful if someone just quoted the file passages so we all know know WTF is being talked about?

Are these summary files - summarizing several accounts by different agents ... because there were overlapping negotiations to get chutes from several sources (several different people). Maybe the FBI isn't lying so much as weaving a complex thread to cover different negotiations that were going on?

Bruce, your bias and your atti-dude comes through "loud and clear" - that is hardly reassuring in this matter. Once again everything is screwed up and incomplete and it's hard to know who to blame except of course somebody must be blamed (your stock & trade) and it could not be you! Because you are a "Cooper Puppet Master" playing to an audience and an attitude.  :))   

ps: how many times have we repeated this same conversation over the years and nothing has changed?   :-\

ps2: Ok CPM's ... here's the only FBI doc page that matters!  O0
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 18, 2016, 12:34:26 AM
Yup, that is the file that I was referencing. To repeat, this is the file that I read to Norman that he refuted ever participating in, other than being the person who delivered two back chutes to NWO. Again, he says that the chutes he provided were very different than the ones listed in this file.

Yes, I would have to agree that this file is some kind of summary file - an amalgam of multiple sets of field notes from multiple agents.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 18, 2016, 01:55:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yup, that is the file that I was referencing. To repeat, this is the file that I read to Norman that he refuted ever participating in, other than being the person who delivered two back chutes to NWO. Again, he says that the chutes he provided were very different than the ones listed in this file.

Yes, I would have to agree that this file is some kind of summary file - an amalgam of multiple sets of field notes from multiple agents.

Yes, I would have to agree that this file is some kind of summary file - an amalgam of multiple sets of field notes from multiple agents.

Well there it is. Not so much deception as confusion? Keep in mind a lot of these summary reports are "internal work product" meant to be shared with other agents, other divisions, outside official consultants, etc., ... and not the general public. These are not precise news articles written for publication to readers of the New York Times! And very likely in its original version there were other reports and the numbers of those reports addendum. Have you ever seen or been given one of these socalled 'summary reports'? The whole story may or may not be in one single document, but in a whole group of reports over which several Agents may be assigned (and have knowledge of). That's how the real system works and was working back then . . .

This is why there are drawers or reports, files of reports, boxes of reports, shelves of reports ten feet long etc.

Thats how a bureaucracy works and what it generates, but this is not news! It would take the Smithsonian years to sort through it all ... but people want to take a few reports or just one reports and a few interviews and "write a book"! Jesus wept!

In this particular case we know there were overlapping attempts to secure and get chutes ... from multiple sources and one of those was (maybe the first choice) McChord Air Force base (where they have parachutes!  :)) ) Now imagine the number of reports written about that not just in the FBI but inside McChord and the Air Force, going all the way up the chains of command. The irony of this is a number of the civilian chutes (obtained or not obtained but considered) had gone through one person's hands (so far as we know) and his name was: Earl Cossey. He was the licensed rigger. Some speculate that is why Cossey referred to all of these chutes as "his". In that sense they were "his" chutes because they had all gone through Cossey's hands, so far as we know. A lot of this may boil down to semantics vs deception. Then are are attributes of personality. Cossey said he got damned tired of answering people's questions! .....
         
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 18, 2016, 02:57:43 AM
Many companies made 28 ft C9 canopies. Steinthal, Pioneer, Irwin, etc.

377

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: sailshaw on September 18, 2016, 10:51:52 AM
377  Just to try and add what I found out from Norm Hayden and it only adds to the confusion, while talking with Norm on the phone he said he purchased both chutes from a surplus place on Marginal Way at the same time and they were exactly alike. That would indicate to me that they were the same size and not 26 ft and 28 ft as described above.

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 18, 2016, 02:18:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Many companies made 28 ft C9 canopies. Steinthal, Pioneer, Irwin, etc.

377

So, it is possible that Norman's Steinthaul/Pioneer was a C-9? Wow.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 18, 2016, 02:36:07 PM
Parachute Deception: Who's lyin' and who's not.

Georger, I tend to agree that the parachute files we have access to, as you posted - via Geoffrey's apparent theft from the Seattle FO and Snowmman's subsequent hack of GG's cyber depository, and then MY theft of those files along with the actions of other researchers, such as the laudatory RMB - are examples of bureaucracy in action. Specifically, confusing and overlapping information is rampant. THAT is the point I try to make in my writing - that no one was in charge sorting all of this out, even to this day. Larry Carr still seems confused about the parachute issue, as revealed in his interview for the HC.

Is it possible that more than two back chutes were delivered to NWO on 11. 24. 71? YES! Is it possible that Cossey delivered his two, and Hayden his two, to give us at least four back chutes? YES!

But here is the rub - the FBI never said they got four back parachutes. Plus, Cossey's scenario is implausible, ie: initially he sent his back chutes to the wrong airport, Boeing Field, and no one has been able to tell us who made the delivery to the correct airport, Sea-Tac. When I asked Cossey about this he said "Fuck You" and hung up. Then someone killed him shortly thereafter, so I was never able to get an answer to this question.

Plus, Cossey lied to me throughout the years that I knew him. He was constantly changing his story. And he lied to other reporters, too, such as the Oregonian about the Amboy chute, when he told them it was DB Cooper's. Yes, he recanted, and then said it was a joke, but still...

So, who ya gonna call when it don't look good? Or when it don't sound 100 percent kosher? Cossey? Nah....

Now, this doesn't mean that the FBI is 100 percent truthful, either. I keep that possibility open, too, but I think the more salient dynamic is the mind-numbing bumbling of a LE bureaucracy in action. Sorting out the wheat from all the chaff is one of the most challenging issues of our day. All those surveillance cams, microphones, emails, phone calls...Yikes. How does anyone make sense of it all?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 18, 2016, 04:32:25 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Parachute Deception: Who's lyin' and who's not.

Georger, I tend to agree that the parachute files we have access to, as you posted - via Geoffrey's apparent theft from the Seattle FO and Snowmman's subsequent hack of GG's cyber depository, and then MY theft of those files along with the actions of other researchers, such as the laudatory RMB - are examples of bureaucracy in action. Specifically, confusing and overlapping information is rampant. THAT is the point I try to make in my writing - that no one was in charge sorting all of this out, even to this day. Larry Carr still seems confused about the parachute issue, as revealed in his interview for the HC.

Is it possible that more than two back chutes were delivered to NWO on 11. 24. 71? YES! Is it possible that Cossey delivered his two, and Hayden his two, to give us at least four back chutes? YES!

But here is the rub - the FBI never said they got four back parachutes. Plus, Cossey's scenario is implausible, ie: initially he sent his back chutes to the wrong airport, Boeing Field, and no one has been able to tell us who made the delivery to the correct airport, Sea-Tac. When I asked Cossey about this he said "Fuck You" and hung up. Then someone killed him shortly thereafter, so I was never able to get an answer to this question.

Plus, Cossey lied to me throughout the years that I knew him. He was constantly changing his story. And he lied to other reporters, too, such as the Oregonian about the Amboy chute, when he told them it was DB Cooper's. Yes, he recanted, and then said it was a joke, but still...

So, who ya gonna call when it don't look good? Or when it don't sound 100 percent kosher? Cossey? Nah....

Now, this doesn't mean that the FBI is 100 percent truthful, either. I keep that possibility open, too, but I think the more salient dynamic is the mind-numbing bumbling of a LE bureaucracy in action. Sorting out the wheat from all the chaff is one of the most challenging issues of our day. All those surveillance cams, microphones, emails, phone calls...Yikes. How does anyone make sense of it all?

At the time the FBI was 'helping' try minimise a crime (cooperating as per Nyrop). Then they tried to get organised to solve a crime after the fact. Complex yes. Confusing perhaps?

But nobody was thinking about satisfying Bruce Smith's demands/requests/circumspection etc 40 years down the road. Nobody was crossing t's and dotting i's in forethought to today's perspectives of which yours is just one.
 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 18, 2016, 05:24:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Parachute Deception: Who's lyin' and who's not.

Georger, I tend to agree that the parachute files we have access to, as you posted - via Geoffrey's apparent theft from the Seattle FO and Snowmman's subsequent hack of GG's cyber depository, and then MY theft of those files along with the actions of other researchers, such as the laudatory RMB - are examples of bureaucracy in action. Specifically, confusing and overlapping information is rampant. THAT is the point I try to make in my writing - that no one was in charge sorting all of this out, even to this day. Larry Carr still seems confused about the parachute issue, as revealed in his interview for the HC.

Is it possible that more than two back chutes were delivered to NWO on 11. 24. 71? YES! Is it possible that Cossey delivered his two, and Hayden his two, to give us at least four back chutes? YES!

But here is the rub - the FBI never said they got four back parachutes. Plus, Cossey's scenario is implausible, ie: initially he sent his back chutes to the wrong airport, Boeing Field, and no one has been able to tell us who made the delivery to the correct airport, Sea-Tac. When I asked Cossey about this he said "Fuck You" and hung up. Then someone killed him shortly thereafter, so I was never able to get an answer to this question.

Plus, Cossey lied to me throughout the years that I knew him. He was constantly changing his story. And he lied to other reporters, too, such as the Oregonian about the Amboy chute, when he told them it was DB Cooper's. Yes, he recanted, and then said it was a joke, but still...

So, who ya gonna call when it don't look good? Or when it don't sound 100 percent kosher? Cossey? Nah....

Now, this doesn't mean that the FBI is 100 percent truthful, either. I keep that possibility open, too, but I think the more salient dynamic is the mind-numbing bumbling of a LE bureaucracy in action. Sorting out the wheat from all the chaff is one of the most challenging issues of our day. All those surveillance cams, microphones, emails, phone calls...Yikes. How does anyone make sense of it all?

Bruce, let's stick to the "facts" for just a moment.  As used here, the word "facts" refers to the information on pages 226, 227 (which Georger has posted above as an attachment), and page 228 of the FBI File SE 164-81.

Here is a summary of what is on page 227:

1.  GEORGE HARRISON, the NWA station chief at SEATAC, talked to BARRY HALSTEAD, of Pacific Aviation which is located at Boeing Field (this is where the Air Museum is located), Seattle, in order to secure parachutes.

2.  HARRISON stated that the two chest packs were obtained through LYNN EMERICK of Seattle Sky Sports, Issaquah, Washington.  LYNN EMERICK stated that these two chest packs were transported to SEATAC by the Washington State Patrol.

3.  HARRISON states that the two back packs were obtained through HALSTEAD.  HALSTEAD stated that the two back packs which were provided to NWA were obtained from NORMAN HAYDEN.  HAYDEN stated that he called a taxi cab in Kent, Washington and had his two back packs delivered by the taxi cab to Boeing Flight Service, Seattle.

4.  HAYDEN'S detailed description of his two back packs is then given and those descriptions are ABSOLUTELY NOT identical or even close to it.  HAYDEN also stated that his two back packs were assembled for him by EARL COSSEY.  HAYDEN also stated that he could positively identify both of his back pack parachutes.

The above does not leave any unanswered questions as to how the chest pack parachutes got to SEATAC.

There is a POSSIBILITY of confusion as to how the back packs got to SEATAC.  Was Pacific Aviation actually located at Boeing Field or was it located at SEATAC?  Was Boeing Flight Service located at SEATAC or Boeing Field?

Kent, Washington is about five miles south of SEATAC and about 20 miles south of Boeing Field.  If anything in the Cooper hijacking is logical, it would seem that the most logical thing to do here would be to deliver the parachutes straight from Kent to SEATAC.  Consequently, it would seem that the various people who were scrambling to get the back pack parachutes to SEATAC may have misidentified some locations and/or companies in their "after action" paperwork.

There is nothing whatsoever to suggest that four back pack parachutes were involved here.

For the record, it was quite common in the early 1960s (my skydiving days) for the various components of a parachute (that is, harness, canopy, container, pilot chute, etc.) to be obtained from various sources and then assembled by a rigger for use as either an emergency parachute or a skydiver rig (which would probably have some modifications made to the canopy).
     
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 18, 2016, 06:19:15 PM
Let's cut to the chase, eh, Robert?

FACTS:

1. There is NO Boeing Flight Services anywhere. It is a fabrication. Whose is unknown.
2. I spoke with Barry Halstead at length, and he confirms Norman's version of events to a "T." Surprisingly, he had never heard of Earl Cossey until our conversation in 2010.
3. Not sure where Pacific Aviation is. I might have it in my notes. However, its location is immaterial as none of the chutes originated there, or were delivered there at any time. Halstead's involvement was totally by phone.
4. Hayden and Halstead both told me Hayden's taxi delivered the back chutes directly to the NWO Freight Office at Sea-Tac. ALL other statements are not true, or at least are in STRONG disagreement even if they are in an FBI summary note.
5. I spoke with Cossey at least three times, and in all of our conversations he stated that he sent HIS back chutes, one an NB6/NB8 and one a Pioneer, to Boeing Field by taxi, and then a private car and driver - still unidentified as of 2016 - took them to Sea-Tac and presented them to persons unknown. This is the version of the facts that Larry Carr has preferred throughout his association with Norjak. Sadly he is in error, or if he is correct he has yet to produce any corroboration or explanation for all the inconsistencies.
6. ALL of this information and a discussion of the related possibilities are presented in my book. Have you guys read it, yet?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 18, 2016, 06:23:44 PM
Innuendos:

Georger, you repeatedly infer that I am not privy to FBI files and such. That is very true. I have never seen any FBI file except for those that GG displays at his symposia. Plus, I've only spoken to one agent once about Norjak - Larry Carr in 2008, for 20 minutes.

That is my point. WHY has the FBI chosen not to speak to me? After all, I am the only person to have written an objective, non-suspect-based, case study book on Norjak.

So, why do YOU think the FBI choses to marginalize me?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 18, 2016, 07:08:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Let's cut to the chase, eh, Robert?

FACTS:

1. There is NO Boeing Flight Services anywhere. It is a fabrication. Whose is unknown.
2. I spoke with Barry Halstead at length, and he confirms Norman's version of events to a "T." Surprisingly, he had never heard of Earl Cossey until our conversation in 2010.
3. Not sure where Pacific Aviation is. I might have it in my notes. However, its location is immaterial as none of the chutes originated there, or were delivered there at any time. Halstead's involvement was totally by phone.
4. Hayden and Halstead both told me Hayden's taxi delivered the back chutes directly to the NWO Freight Office at Sea-Tac. ALL other statements are not true, or at least are in STRONG disagreement even if they are in an FBI summary note.
5. I spoke with Cossey at least three times, and in all of our conversations he stated that he sent HIS back chutes, one an NB6/NB8 and one a Pioneer, to Boeing Field by taxi, and then a private car and driver - still unidentified as of 2016 - took them to Sea-Tac and presented them to persons unknown. This is the version of the facts that Larry Carr has preferred throughout his association with Norjak. Sadly he is in error, or if he is correct he has yet to produce any corroboration or explanation for all the inconsistencies.
6. ALL of this information and a discussion of the related possibilities are presented in my book. Have you guys read it, yet?

Bruce, don't take this personally, but I don't necessarily believe everything or anything just because it is in some book.  I have just seen to many books along the way that were full of (bleeped) to do that.

Do you have any supporting evidence to back up your claim about Cossey sending two back pack parachutes to SEATAC.

Pacific Aviation was apparently an airline service provider at SEATAC.  It seems logical that George Harrison, the NWA Seattle Station Chief, would check with the people/companies he was acquainted with at SEATAC when he needed to come up with four parachutes in a hurry.

If the two back packs and two chest packs were taken directly to NWA at SEATAC, why did Cossey send his parachutes to Boeing Field, if he sent any parachutes anywhere at all?  In my previous post, I gave the source of the information about the two chest packs going directly to SEATAC.  And also pointed out that it was only logical that the two Hayden back packs were taken directly to SEATAC as well.

A couple of questions about your post to Georger which followed the one quoted above.  If you ignore practically all of the evidence, how can you say, "After all, I am the only person to have written an objective, non-suspect-based, case study book on Norjak"?  And again, why do YOU (BAS) think the FBI chooses to marginalize you?

As I recall from your earlier posts on DZ and elsewhere, Hayden has never opened (or pulled the ripcord) of the parachute that was returned to him.  How does he know which parachute his lawyers got back from the FBI?  How did the two parachutes differ?  I have been told by a knowledgeable individual in the Portland area that the parachute Cooper took with him was in fact an NB-6. 

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 18, 2016, 10:31:06 PM
Robert:
Bruce, don't take this personally, but I don't necessarily believe everything or anything just because it is in some book.  I have just seen to many books along the way that were full of (bleeped) to do that.

Do you have any supporting evidence to back up your claim about Cossey sending two back pack parachutes to SEATAC.

BAS:

I only offer the FBI parachute files, Carr's many posts, and Cossey's multiple statements to that effect. Why do you ask, Robert?

Robert:
Pacific Aviation was apparently an airline service provider at SEATAC.  It seems logical that George Harrison, the NWA Seattle Station Chief, would check with the people/companies he was acquainted with at SEATAC when he needed to come up with four parachutes in a hurry.

BAS:
Pacific Aviation was not located at Sea-Tac. It catered to the private airline industry - Pac Av sold airplanes, primarily, to private pilots. They also sold all the accessories necessary to fly a small private plane. Norman Hayden bought his acrobatic plane from Pac Av. Barry Halstead was the salesman. As far as I know, Pac Av had no business dealings with NWO or any commercial airline.

Robert
If the two back packs and two chest packs were taken directly to NWA at SEATAC, why did Cossey send his parachutes to Boeing Field, if he sent any parachutes anywhere at all? 

BAS

I have no idea why Cossey said he sent his back chutes to Boeing Field. Why do you ask me?

Robert
In my previous post, I gave the source of the information about the two chest packs going directly to SEATAC.  And also pointed out that it was only logical that the two Hayden back packs were taken directly to SEATAC as well.

BAS
I concur with those statements.

Robert:
A couple of questions about your post to Georger which followed the one quoted above.  If you ignore practically all of the evidence, how can you say, "After all, I am the only person to have written an objective, non-suspect-based, case study book on Norjak"? 

BAS:
What evidence am I ignoring?

Robert, I'll make you a deal. IF you read my book, I'll discuss your questions on whether it was objective, non-suspect-based, or a case study.

Robert:
And again, why do YOU (BAS) think the FBI chooses to marginalize you?

BAS:

I think the FBI chooses to marginalize me because I ask too many troubling questions. Do you think Larry Carr really wants to be grilled by me about all of his inconsistent statements? The Flight Path, the temperatures, the wind chill, the survivability, the parachutes, the Propeller Theory, why he allowed GG unsupervised access, who got selected to the Citizen Sleuths, etc.

Do you think Curtis Eng really wants to talk to me about why he has done diddily-squat about the titanium? Plus, his role with Marla and Uncle LD, his Al Di gambit, etc?

Robert:
As I recall from your earlier posts on DZ and elsewhere, Hayden has never opened (or pulled the ripcord) of the parachute that was returned to him. 

BAS:
True.

Robert:
How does he know which parachute his lawyers got back from the FBI? 

BAS:

Apparently, Norman trusted the FBI and their confidence in maintaining their chain of custody regarding the parachutes. IN turn, Norman trusted his attorneys to get the correct parachute back from the feds.

Why do you ask, Robert? Do you think Norman got the wrong parachute?

Robert:
How did the two parachutes differ? 

BAS:
Norman says that the two parachutes he provided to NWO were identical. I have stated that numerous times, Robert. Why don't you believe me?

Robert:
I have been told by a knowledgeable individual in the Portland area that the parachute Cooper took with him was in fact an NB-6.

BAS:
"Don't take this personally," Robert, but that is the kind of statement Jo Weber and Robert Blevins make. Are they your sources for the above comment, by any chance?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 18, 2016, 11:36:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Let's cut to the chase, eh, Robert?

FACTS:

1. There is NO Boeing Flight Services anywhere. It is a fabrication. Whose is unknown.
2. I spoke with Barry Halstead at length, and he confirms Norman's version of events to a "T." Surprisingly, he had never heard of Earl Cossey until our conversation in 2010.
3. Not sure where Pacific Aviation is. I might have it in my notes. However, its location is immaterial as none of the chutes originated there, or were delivered there at any time. Halstead's involvement was totally by phone.
4. Hayden and Halstead both told me Hayden's taxi delivered the back chutes directly to the NWO Freight Office at Sea-Tac. ALL other statements are not true, or at least are in STRONG disagreement even if they are in an FBI summary note.
5. I spoke with Cossey at least three times, and in all of our conversations he stated that he sent HIS back chutes, one an NB6/NB8 and one a Pioneer, to Boeing Field by taxi, and then a private car and driver - still unidentified as of 2016 - took them to Sea-Tac and presented them to persons unknown. This is the version of the facts that Larry Carr has preferred throughout his association with Norjak. Sadly he is in error, or if he is correct he has yet to produce any corroboration or explanation for all the inconsistencies.
6. ALL of this information and a discussion of the related possibilities are presented in my book. Have you guys read it, yet?

Bruce, why don't you try a bit of Googling? 

While it is apparently beyond recovery as to the exact status of the two companies in question as of 1971, Boeing Aircraft operates a Boeing Flight Services Company today and it is apparently located in Renton. 

Also, there is a Pacific Aviation Company today that is a major airline service company.  I don't know if it has any connection to Seattle today or ever.  So what company was BARRY HALSTEAD with in 1971 and how did he get involved in the parachute search?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 18, 2016, 11:41:26 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Let's cut to the chase, eh, Robert?

FACTS:

1. There is NO Boeing Flight Services anywhere. It is a fabrication. Whose is unknown.
2. I spoke with Barry Halstead at length, and he confirms Norman's version of events to a "T." Surprisingly, he had never heard of Earl Cossey until our conversation in 2010.
3. Not sure where Pacific Aviation is. I might have it in my notes. However, its location is immaterial as none of the chutes originated there, or were delivered there at any time. Halstead's involvement was totally by phone.
4. Hayden and Halstead both told me Hayden's taxi delivered the back chutes directly to the NWO Freight Office at Sea-Tac. ALL other statements are not true, or at least are in STRONG disagreement even if they are in an FBI summary note.
5. I spoke with Cossey at least three times, and in all of our conversations he stated that he sent HIS back chutes, one an NB6/NB8 and one a Pioneer, to Boeing Field by taxi, and then a private car and driver - still unidentified as of 2016 - took them to Sea-Tac and presented them to persons unknown. This is the version of the facts that Larry Carr has preferred throughout his association with Norjak. Sadly he is in error, or if he is correct he has yet to produce any corroboration or explanation for all the inconsistencies.
6. ALL of this information and a discussion of the related possibilities are presented in my book. Have you guys read it, yet?

Bruce, don't take this personally, but I don't necessarily believe everything or anything just because it is in some book.  I have just seen to many books along the way that were full of (bleeped) to do that.

Do you have any supporting evidence to back up your claim about Cossey sending two back pack parachutes to SEATAC.

Pacific Aviation was apparently an airline service provider at SEATAC.  It seems logical that George Harrison, the NWA Seattle Station Chief, would check with the people/companies he was acquainted with at SEATAC when he needed to come up with four parachutes in a hurry.

If the two back packs and two chest packs were taken directly to NWA at SEATAC, why did Cossey send his parachutes to Boeing Field, if he sent any parachutes anywhere at all?  In my previous post, I gave the source of the information about the two chest packs going directly to SEATAC.  And also pointed out that it was only logical that the two Hayden back packs were taken directly to SEATAC as well.

A couple of questions about your post to Georger which followed the one quoted above.  If you ignore practically all of the evidence, how can you say, "After all, I am the only person to have written an objective, non-suspect-based, case study book on Norjak"?  And again, why do YOU (BAS) think the FBI chooses to marginalize you?

As I recall from your earlier posts on DZ and elsewhere, Hayden has never opened (or pulled the ripcord) of the parachute that was returned to him.  How does he know which parachute his lawyers got back from the FBI?  How did the two parachutes differ?  I have been told by a knowledgeable individual in the Portland area that the parachute Cooper took with him was in fact an NB-6.

Cooper stated that he thot the chutes were coming from McChord. Maj Dawson reportedly says (see attached).
There is nothing in Bruce's account about McChord...

How did McChord get involved? Who contacted them? Then presumably McChord was unable to supply chutes which sent people scrambling for chutes from someone else ?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 18, 2016, 11:44:05 PM
Boeing flight & training services in Renton began in 1997. they are also located in Miami, and dubbed "sim city"
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 18, 2016, 11:53:49 PM
I have a picture of the Miami location. I did work right beside them. it's a 134,000 square feet, and has 24 simulators ranging from 9 million dollars to 15 million each....

"Miami is home to Boeing’s largest flight training center"
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 19, 2016, 12:12:17 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Robert:
Bruce, don't take this personally, but I don't necessarily believe everything or anything just because it is in some book.  I have just seen to many books along the way that were full of (bleeped) to do that.

Do you have any supporting evidence to back up your claim about Cossey sending two back pack parachutes to SEATAC.

BAS:

I only offer the FBI parachute files, Carr's many posts, and Cossey's multiple statements to that effect. Why do you ask, Robert?

R99 REPLIES:  The FBI parachute files, pages 226-228, do NOT support Cossey's statement.  Period!

Robert:
Pacific Aviation was apparently an airline service provider at SEATAC.  It seems logical that George Harrison, the NWA Seattle Station Chief, would check with the people/companies he was acquainted with at SEATAC when he needed to come up with four parachutes in a hurry.

BAS:
Pacific Aviation was not located at Sea-Tac. It catered to the private airline industry - Pac Av sold airplanes, primarily, to private pilots. They also sold all the accessories necessary to fly a small private plane. Norman Hayden bought his acrobatic plane from Pac Av. Barry Halstead was the salesman. As far as I know, Pac Av had no business dealings with NWO or any commercial airline.

R99 REPLIES:  See my reply to this in a post above.

Robert
If the two back packs and two chest packs were taken directly to NWA at SEATAC, why did Cossey send his parachutes to Boeing Field, if he sent any parachutes anywhere at all? 

BAS

I have no idea why Cossey said he sent his back chutes to Boeing Field. Why do you ask me?

R99 REPLIES:  There is no record of Cossey sending any parachutes anywhere.  Since you are making the original claim, or maybe just repeating Cossey's claim, you would seem to be the logical choice for amplifying on these claims.

Robert
In my previous post, I gave the source of the information about the two chest packs going directly to SEATAC.  And also pointed out that it was only logical that the two Hayden back packs were taken directly to SEATAC as well.

BAS
I concur with those statements.

Robert:
A couple of questions about your post to Georger which followed the one quoted above.  If you ignore practically all of the evidence, how can you say, "After all, I am the only person to have written an objective, non-suspect-based, case study book on Norjak"? 

BAS:
What evidence am I ignoring?

Robert, I'll make you a deal. IF you read my book, I'll discuss your questions on whether it was objective, non-suspect-based, or a case study.

R99 REPLIES:  For starters, read your response to Georger in reply #281 above. 

Full disclosure, I have a copy of one of the original e-mail versions of your book (which you sent me) and I bought one of the book versions (2nd edition?).  I have only browsed through selected portions of each of these versions.  And as of today, I see no reason to do otherwise.

Believe it or not, the Cooper hijacking does not dominate my life and I am not interested in wasting any more time with "Cossey claimed this, Joe Blow said that" type of baloney, especially when they are all full of it. 

Robert:
And again, why do YOU (BAS) think the FBI chooses to marginalize you?

BAS:

I think the FBI chooses to marginalize me because I ask too many troubling questions. Do you think Larry Carr really wants to be grilled by me about all of his inconsistent statements? The Flight Path, the temperatures, the wind chill, the survivability, the parachutes, the Propeller Theory, why he allowed GG unsupervised access, who got selected to the Citizen Sleuths, etc.

Do you think Curtis Eng really wants to talk to me about why he has done diddily-squat about the titanium? Plus, his role with Marla and Uncle LD, his Al Di gambit, etc?

Robert:
As I recall from your earlier posts on DZ and elsewhere, Hayden has never opened (or pulled the ripcord) of the parachute that was returned to him. 

BAS:
True.

Robert:
How does he know which parachute his lawyers got back from the FBI? 

BAS:

Apparently, Norman trusted the FBI and their confidence in maintaining their chain of custody regarding the parachutes. IN turn, Norman trusted his attorneys to get the correct parachute back from the feds.

Why do you ask, Robert? Do you think Norman got the wrong parachute?

Robert:
How did the two parachutes differ? 

BAS:
Norman says that the two parachutes he provided to NWO were identical. I have stated that numerous times, Robert. Why don't you believe me?

Robert:
I have been told by a knowledgeable individual in the Portland area that the parachute Cooper took with him was in fact an NB-6.

R99 REPLIES:  Would you believe Ralph Hartley?

BAS:
"Don't take this personally," Robert, but that is the kind of statement Jo Weber and Robert Blevins make. Are they your sources for the above comment, by any chance?

R99 REPLIES:  Of course not.  They are your buddies and you (according to your claims) are in regular contact with them.  I have not been in contact with either one since the DZ days.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 19, 2016, 12:18:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Boeing flight & training services in Renton began in 1997. they are also located in Miami, and dubbed "sim city"

Boeing started operating airline jet flight training services in the Seattle area about the 1960s, maybe even the 1950s.  The training utilized the Boeing Moses Lake facility among others.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 12:21:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Boeing flight & training services in Renton began in 1997. they are also located in Miami, and dubbed "sim city"

Boeing started operating airline jet flight training services in the Seattle area about the 1960s, maybe even the 1950s.  The training utilized the Boeing Moses Lake facility among others.


Perhaps, but there own site states the Renton location was founded in 1997....


1301 SW 16th Street
Renton, WA 98055
United States
Founded in 1997
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 19, 2016, 12:26:17 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Robert:
Bruce, don't take this personally, but I don't necessarily believe everything or anything just because it is in some book.  I have just seen to many books along the way that were full of (bleeped) to do that.

Do you have any supporting evidence to back up your claim about Cossey sending two back pack parachutes to SEATAC.

BAS:

I only offer the FBI parachute files, Carr's many posts, and Cossey's multiple statements to that effect. Why do you ask, Robert?

R99 REPLIES:  The FBI parachute files, pages 226-228, do NOT support Cossey's statement.  Period!

Robert:
Pacific Aviation was apparently an airline service provider at SEATAC.  It seems logical that George Harrison, the NWA Seattle Station Chief, would check with the people/companies he was acquainted with at SEATAC when he needed to come up with four parachutes in a hurry.

BAS:
Pacific Aviation was not located at Sea-Tac. It catered to the private airline industry - Pac Av sold airplanes, primarily, to private pilots. They also sold all the accessories necessary to fly a small private plane. Norman Hayden bought his acrobatic plane from Pac Av. Barry Halstead was the salesman. As far as I know, Pac Av had no business dealings with NWO or any commercial airline.

R99 REPLIES:  See my reply to this in a post above.

Robert
If the two back packs and two chest packs were taken directly to NWA at SEATAC, why did Cossey send his parachutes to Boeing Field, if he sent any parachutes anywhere at all? 

BAS

I have no idea why Cossey said he sent his back chutes to Boeing Field. Why do you ask me?

R99 REPLIES:  There is no record of Cossey sending any parachutes anywhere.  Since you are making the original claim, or maybe just repeating Cossey's claim, you would seem to be the logical choice for amplifying on these claims.

Robert
In my previous post, I gave the source of the information about the two chest packs going directly to SEATAC.  And also pointed out that it was only logical that the two Hayden back packs were taken directly to SEATAC as well.

BAS
I concur with those statements.

Robert:
A couple of questions about your post to Georger which followed the one quoted above.  If you ignore practically all of the evidence, how can you say, "After all, I am the only person to have written an objective, non-suspect-based, case study book on Norjak"? 

BAS:
What evidence am I ignoring?

Robert, I'll make you a deal. IF you read my book, I'll discuss your questions on whether it was objective, non-suspect-based, or a case study.

R99 REPLIES:  For starters, read your response to Georger in reply #281 above. 

Full disclosure, I have a copy of one of the original e-mail versions of your book (which you sent me) and I bought one of the book versions (2nd edition?).  I have only browsed through selected portions of each of these versions.  And as of today, I see no reason to do otherwise.

Believe it or not, the Cooper hijacking does not dominate my life and I am not interested in wasting any more time with "Cossey claimed this, Joe Blow said that" type of baloney, especially when they are all full of it. 

Robert:
And again, why do YOU (BAS) think the FBI chooses to marginalize you?

BAS:

I think the FBI chooses to marginalize me because I ask too many troubling questions. Do you think Larry Carr really wants to be grilled by me about all of his inconsistent statements? The Flight Path, the temperatures, the wind chill, the survivability, the parachutes, the Propeller Theory, why he allowed GG unsupervised access, who got selected to the Citizen Sleuths, etc.

Do you think Curtis Eng really wants to talk to me about why he has done diddily-squat about the titanium? Plus, his role with Marla and Uncle LD, his Al Di gambit, etc?

Robert:
As I recall from your earlier posts on DZ and elsewhere, Hayden has never opened (or pulled the ripcord) of the parachute that was returned to him. 

BAS:
True.

Robert:
How does he know which parachute his lawyers got back from the FBI? 

BAS:

Apparently, Norman trusted the FBI and their confidence in maintaining their chain of custody regarding the parachutes. IN turn, Norman trusted his attorneys to get the correct parachute back from the feds.

Why do you ask, Robert? Do you think Norman got the wrong parachute?

Robert:
How did the two parachutes differ? 

BAS:
Norman says that the two parachutes he provided to NWO were identical. I have stated that numerous times, Robert. Why don't you believe me?

Robert:
I have been told by a knowledgeable individual in the Portland area that the parachute Cooper took with him was in fact an NB-6.

R99 REPLIES:  Would you believe Ralph Hartley?

BAS:
"Don't take this personally," Robert, but that is the kind of statement Jo Weber and Robert Blevins make. Are they your sources for the above comment, by any chance?

R99 REPLIES:  Of course not.  They are your buddies and you (according to your claims) are in regular contact with them.  I have not been in contact with either one since the DZ days.

I may be all wet but my sense of the chutes is someone started with McChord as the supplier of the chutes, (as per Dawson's comments), and when that failed (someone) was forced to look for a civilian source ?  Then there were complications with that. There may even be something about this in the redacted ATC transcript? All of the above would account for the delay and a mad scramble trying to meet Cooper's deadline ?  If you go back to the transcript one set of chutes seems to have arrived first and they were waiting for the others? The money arrived. Then the last chutes needed arrived.

I thought all of these details had been clarified back at DZ?  The Bruce found Hayden and interviewed him and everything came unraveled? Does that about size it up?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 19, 2016, 12:27:22 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
Boeing flight & training services in Renton began in 1997. they are also located in Miami, and dubbed "sim city"

Boeing started operating airline jet flight training services in the Seattle area about the 1960s, maybe even the 1950s.  The training utilized the Boeing Moses Lake facility among others.


Perhaps, but there own site states the Renton location was founded in 1997....


1301 SW 16th Street
Renton, WA 98055
United States
Founded in 1997

The Renton location and organization may have been founded in 1997 during a corporate reorganization, or such, but Boeing has actually been doing airline training in the Seattle area for decades.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 12:30:53 AM
Quote
I may be all wet but my sense of the chutes is someone started with McChord as the supplier of the chutes, (as per Dawson's comments), and when that failed (someone) was forced to look for a civilian source ?  Then there were complications with that. There may even be something about this in the redacted ATC transcript? All of the above would account for the delay and a mad scramble trying to meet Cooper's deadline ?

possibly due to Norad cutting off the military from getting involved with the civilian problem. they gave air support, but nothing else?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 19, 2016, 12:32:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
I may be all wet but my sense of the chutes is someone started with McChord as the supplier of the chutes, (as per Dawson's comments), and when that failed (someone) was forced to look for a civilian source ?  Then there were complications with that. There may even be something about this in the redacted ATC transcript? All of the above would account for the delay and a mad scramble trying to meet Cooper's deadline ?

possibly due to Norad cutting off the military from getting involved with the civilian problem. they gave air support, but nothing else?
So who turned to the AForce in the first place? The FBI? Seatac?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 12:33:49 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
I may be all wet but my sense of the chutes is someone started with McChord as the supplier of the chutes, (as per Dawson's comments), and when that failed (someone) was forced to look for a civilian source ?  Then there were complications with that. There may even be something about this in the redacted ATC transcript? All of the above would account for the delay and a mad scramble trying to meet Cooper's deadline ?

possibly due to Norad cutting off the military from getting involved with the civilian problem. they gave air support, but nothing else?
So who turned to the AForce in the first place?

don't know, maybe SeaTac?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 19, 2016, 12:38:10 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
Quote
I may be all wet but my sense of the chutes is someone started with McChord as the supplier of the chutes, (as per Dawson's comments), and when that failed (someone) was forced to look for a civilian source ?  Then there were complications with that. There may even be something about this in the redacted ATC transcript? All of the above would account for the delay and a mad scramble trying to meet Cooper's deadline ?

possibly due to Norad cutting off the military from getting involved with the civilian problem. they gave air support, but nothing else?
So who turned to the AForce in the first place?

don't know, maybe SeaTac?

Perhaps Dawson at McChord volunteered once he became aware of the situation? But somebody told him what was going on and about the hijacker's request for chutes. And Cooper very clearly says he thought the chutes were coming from McChord. So was there conversation btwn the crew and Cooper about a chute delay, or chutes are coming from McChord but havent arrived? There isn;t anything about such a conversation on the plane in all of the transcripts/interviews ...   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 12:39:20 AM
The FBI just went through the 58 November issue with firing on a plane with hostages in it. I'll bet they were extremely nervous on what to do in this case.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 12:41:52 AM
Seatac had a plane coming in for a landing with a bomb on board (possibly) they could of panicked and asked for help since McChord was so close?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 19, 2016, 12:42:33 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The FBI just went through the 58 November issue with firing on a plane with hostages in it. I'll bet they were extremely nervous on what to do in this case.

Likewise Nyrop! So he tells everyone to cooperate to avoid risk..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 19, 2016, 12:46:29 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Seatac had a plane coming in for a landing with a bomb on board (possibly) they could of panicked and asked for help since McChord was so close?

I have had people who knew Dawson tell me that he wanted to set an example as a deterrent - he wanted this hijacker caught - and 'there weren't going to be Cuban hijackings in his back yard!'. But then he was told to stand down and do something 'minimal' ...

I have also been told McChord knew about the hijacking the minute it was announced - because they monitored people ...  maybe its a simple at Dawson volunteering to help because there seems no doubt h e wanted to catch the hijacker and set an example ?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 19, 2016, 12:52:19 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The FBI just went through the 58 November issue with firing on a plane with hostages in it. I'll bet they were extremely nervous on what to do in this case.

Some agents may have been nervous, but the FBI as an organization was not, from their subsequent behavior. They still acted like cowboys on plenty of occasions post-Norjak and Post 58 November, ala Western 701 and the shoot-out that Dorwin witnessed when his guys took out a hijacker while Dorwin was on the phone with him and trying to negotiate a stand-down.

Also, don't forget an armed, apparently, FBI agent boarded Flight 305 at Sea-Tac, according to passenger Larry Finegold, the Asst US DA.

I say armed "apparently" because GG wrote that the money was protected out on the runway by a "detective." I think it is plausible to assume that the "two men," who multiple passengers say boarded the plane with the money bag, were this detective and Al Lee, NWO's ground ops guy who was delivering the chutes and money. Those are the only two men that GG states were in the vicinity of Flight 305 when it rolled to a stop on runway 16L.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 12:53:41 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Seatac had a plane coming in for a landing with a bomb on board (possibly) they could of panicked and asked for help since McChord was so close?

I have had people who knew Dawson tell me that he wanted to set an example as a deterrent - he wanted this hijacker caught - and 'there weren't going to be Cuban hijackings in his back yard!'. But then he was told to stand down and do something 'minimal' ...


could of been a mixture of things. Norad might not play the 'example" game, and the FBI was still on the grill for what they did on October 4, 1971. Cooper got everything he asked for, except the correct bag, and the stairs deployed. on the same note, all the hijackers got demands met, so who knows how some of this all came into play....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 19, 2016, 12:57:18 AM
Dawson and McChord

I have no idea how Dawson, McChord, NORAD, and the chute thingy got started. All I know is that the newspaper reporter named Adele Ferguson knew Dawson and recorded his stories. Dawson has been dead for some time, and Adele is tough to find. No phone or email address that I could find, and she did not respond to a letter I sent to her snail mail address.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 19, 2016, 12:58:54 AM
Yo Bobby99

You still haven't answered my question Bobby99 - you gonna read my book or just post snarky stuff all the time?

Just askin'.

Looks like we got a new Bobby in town. Just sayin'...

BTW: BobbyB just emailed me to say that he agrees with you. I guess he respects your opinion of me. Sounds like you're in good company, Bobby99.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 01:00:01 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The FBI just went through the 58 November issue with firing on a plane with hostages in it. I'll bet they were extremely nervous on what to do in this case.

Some agents may have been nervous, but the FBI as an organization was not, from their subsequent behavior. They still acted like cowboys on plenty of occasions post-Norjak and Post 58 November, ala Western 701 and the shoot-out that Dorwin witnessed when his guys took out a hijacker while Dorwin was on the phone with him and trying to negotiate a stand-down.


for reasons unknown they did nothing once the passengers were released. that would of been the best time to react. even the crew was thinking of bailing. the plane left Seattle.......
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 01:02:18 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yo Bobby Nich-

You still haven't answered my question Bobby99 - you gonna read my book or just post snarky stuff all the time?

Just askin'.

Looks like we got a new Bobby in town. Just sayin'...


I have to much respect for R99 to even venture down that road. I think you guys can work the problem out without the title changes...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 19, 2016, 01:09:49 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I may be all wet but my sense of the chutes is someone started with McChord as the supplier of the chutes, (as per Dawson's comments), and when that failed (someone) was forced to look for a civilian source ?  Then there were complications with that. There may even be something about this in the redacted ATC transcript? All of the above would account for the delay and a mad scramble trying to meet Cooper's deadline ?  If you go back to the transcript one set of chutes seems to have arrived first and they were waiting for the others? The money arrived. Then the last chutes needed arrived.

I thought all of these details had been clarified back at DZ?  The Bruce found Hayden and interviewed him and everything came unraveled? Does that about size it up?

It was probably the FBI that tried to get military parachutes from McChord and they would probably have had pingers in them.  Cooper heard about the chutes possibly coming from McChord when he complained about the delays.  They then went to civilian chutes.

The George Harrison Papers at WSHM state that all four parachutes and the money were at the NWA air freight facility at SEATAC by 5:20 PM PST.

I think Georger is correct about things falling apart after Bruce and Hayden found each other.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 19, 2016, 01:11:25 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yo Bobby Nich-

You still haven't answered my question Bobby99 - you gonna read my book or just post snarky stuff all the time?

Just askin'.

Looks like we got a new Bobby in town. Just sayin'...


I have to much respect for R99 to even venture down that road. I think you guys can work the problem out without the title changes...



So, Shut, how much respect do you think 99 has for me?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 19, 2016, 01:16:53 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I think Georger is correct about things falling apart after Bruce and Hayden found each other.


A little clarification is called for here. The parachute issue started unraveling in 2011 when Geoffrey Gray published Skyjack and told the world that Norman Hayden was the owner and provider of the back chutes. I had never heard of Norman Hayden before then. But afterwards, I did interview Hayden, talked with Halstead and wrote my stuff, and intensified my investigation of Earl Cossey. By April 2013, Coss was dead. Coincidence? Maybe.

But those are the facts.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 01:17:24 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
Yo Bobby Nich-

You still haven't answered my question Bobby99 - you gonna read my book or just post snarky stuff all the time?

Just askin'.

Looks like we got a new Bobby in town. Just sayin'...


I have to much respect for R99 to even venture down that road. I think you guys can work the problem out without the title changes...



So, Shut, how much respect do you think 99 has for me?

That's something you have to ask R99.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 19, 2016, 01:19:30 AM
could someone go over to Kenny's house, go in the attic and get the damn chute putting an end to this  :)) :)) :)) :))
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 19, 2016, 01:25:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yo Bobby99

You still haven't answered my question Bobby99 - you gonna read my book or just post snarky stuff all the time?

Just askin'.

Looks like we got a new Bobby in town. Just sayin'...

BTW: BobbyB just emailed me to say that he agrees with you. I guess he respects your opinion of me. Sounds like you're in good company, Bobby99.

Bruce, I did answer your question.  See your reply #281 to Georger above.  Once you start including checking all the facts, and not just-wild eyed speculations, maybe I'll take a serious look at some parts of your book.

But I am not interested in your out-of-this-world guru - Minerva, or whatever her name is.

Ask Blevins if he and Meyer Louie actually "buried the hatchet" a few weeks ago at Ariel?  That is what Meyer claims.  Unfortunately, due to reasons I can't now remember, I couldn't make it to Ariel this year, or last year, or next year either. :)  In other words, you can break my plate at Ariel.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 19, 2016, 01:26:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

So, Shut, how much respect do you think 99 has for me?


That's something you have to ask R99.

Okay.

So, yo - 99, how much respect do you have for me?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 19, 2016, 01:27:57 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I may be all wet but my sense of the chutes is someone started with McChord as the supplier of the chutes, (as per Dawson's comments), and when that failed (someone) was forced to look for a civilian source ?  Then there were complications with that. There may even be something about this in the redacted ATC transcript? All of the above would account for the delay and a mad scramble trying to meet Cooper's deadline ?  If you go back to the transcript one set of chutes seems to have arrived first and they were waiting for the others? The money arrived. Then the last chutes needed arrived.

I thought all of these details had been clarified back at DZ?  The Bruce found Hayden and interviewed him and everything came unraveled? Does that about size it up?

It was probably the FBI that tried to get military parachutes from McChord and they would probably have had pingers in them.  Cooper heard about the chutes possibly coming from McChord when he complained about the delays.  They then went to civilian chutes.

The George Harrison Papers at WSHM state that all four parachutes and the money were at the NWA air freight facility at SEATAC by 5:20 PM PST.

I think Georger is correct about things falling apart after Bruce and Hayden found each other.

chaff according to Dawson ...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 19, 2016, 01:28:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
could someone go over to Kenny's house, go in the attic and get the damn chute putting an end to this  :)) :)) :)) :))

 :)) :))
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 19, 2016, 01:29:51 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

So, Shut, how much respect do you think 99 has for me?


That's something you have to ask R99.

Okay.

So, yo - 99, how much respect do you have for me?

Bruce, this is a serious matter and I will need a couple of weeks to think about it. :-\
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 19, 2016, 01:31:26 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Bruce, I did answer your question.  See your reply #281 to Georger above. 


You call this an answer? BTW: it is post #282.


"Bruce, don't take this personally, but I don't necessarily believe everything or anything just because it is in some book.  I have just seen to many books along the way that were full of (bleeped) to do that.

Do you have any supporting evidence to back up your claim about Cossey sending two back pack parachutes to SEATAC...."
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 19, 2016, 01:32:24 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

So, Shut, how much respect do you think 99 has for me?


That's something you have to ask R99.

Okay.

So, yo - 99, how much respect do you have for me?

Bruce, this is a serious matter and I will need a couple of weeks to think about it. :-\

I await your answer.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on September 19, 2016, 12:31:23 PM
           Sorry, life has gotten busy .

                 Appreciate the feedback.    Couple of quick questions.     Didn't D.B. instruct them to get the chutes locally(just not from McChord) ?    Wasn't he even adamant that they were available locally?(I thought he instructed the stewardess to ask about them several times)   Could it be more evidence of him being familiar with the area?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 19, 2016, 01:49:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
           Sorry, life has gotten busy .

                 Appreciate the feedback.    Couple of quick questions.     Didn't D.B. instruct them to get the chutes locally(just not from McChord) ?    Wasn't he even adamant that they were available locally?(I thought he instructed the stewardess to ask about them several times)   Could it be more evidence of him being familiar with the area?

More-or-less. Less-or-more. It all depends on how you interpret the passages you are citing. Now:

why not just post the passages so people know what you are referring to? otherwise this is a private communication between you and whoever knows what you are saying and talking about ?  :))




Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on September 20, 2016, 12:32:35 AM
Re: Georger  :

why not just post the passages so people know what you are referring to? otherwise this is a private communication between you and whoever knows what you are saying and talking about ?  :))

                        Point taken.....my apologies           
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 20, 2016, 01:45:44 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Re: Georger  :

why not just post the passages so people know what you are referring to? otherwise this is a private communication between you and whoever knows what you are saying and talking about ?  :))

                        Point taken.....my apologies         

well maybe I was too harsh - its not easy - I know that. But, it does keep us ALL on the same track, same page ... that's all Im saying. Thanks!
G   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 20, 2016, 01:49:06 PM
Clarification about my comments on Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation

Okay, so my comment that "Boeing Flight Services doesn't exist" is inaccurate. A more precise statement is to say that Barry Halstead told me in our 2011 conversation that he had never heard of Boeing Flight Services, and "I've worked for Boeing for years."

Along those lines, Barry also described Pacific Aviation - in 1971 - as akin to a marina servicing private boat owners.

Clearly, Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation have morphed into something very different than what they were on the night of Norjak.

Shut, maybe we need a new survey: How many people here truly believe that the parachutes DB Cooper used came from Earl Cossey via a taxi ride to Boeing Flight Services at Boeing Field and then a private car driven by an unknown person?

Relatedly, I think it is more accurate to describe the FBI parachute file, as listed a few posts ago by Georger, as simply a "summary statement" rather than as a "fact."
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 20, 2016, 02:05:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Clarification about my comments on Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation

Okay, so my comment that "Boeing Flight Services doesn't exist" is inaccurate. A more precise statement is to say that Barry Halstead told me in our 2011 conversation that he had never heard of Boeing Flight Services, and "I've worked for Boeing for years."

Along those lines, Barry also described Pacific Aviation - in 1971 - as akin to a marina servicing private boat owners.

Clearly, Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation have morphed into something very different than what they were on the night of Norjak.

Shut, maybe we need a new survey: How many people here truly believe that the parachutes DB Cooper used came from Earl Cossey via a taxi ride to Boeing Flight Services at Boeing Field and then a private car driven by an unknown person?

Relatedly, I think it is more accurate to describe the FBI parachute file, as listed a few posts ago by Georger, as simply a "summary statement" rather than as a "fact."

Bruce,

Are you claiming that there are no "facts" in the FBI parachute statement?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 20, 2016, 02:15:21 PM
No.

The bigger question is what information in the parachute summary is actually truthful.

What would you say, 99, is accurate in that document?

I say our job is to tease out what is factual and what is not. I'll give you a list of what I think is truthful shortly, but I gotta run.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 20, 2016, 03:13:38 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Clarification about my comments on Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation

Clearly, Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation have morphed into something very different than what they were on the night of Norjak.


Bruce,

Assuming that you were breathing the night of the hijacking, I would suggest that you have probably also clearly "morphed into something very different than what [you] were on the night of Norjak".

Forty-five years is a long time.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 20, 2016, 03:41:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Clarification about my comments on Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation

Okay, so my comment that "Boeing Flight Services doesn't exist" is inaccurate. A more precise statement is to say that Barry Halstead told me in our 2011 conversation that he had never heard of Boeing Flight Services, and "I've worked for Boeing for years."

Along those lines, Barry also described Pacific Aviation - in 1971 - as akin to a marina servicing private boat owners.

Clearly, Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation have morphed into something very different than what they were on the night of Norjak.

Shut, maybe we need a new survey: How many people here truly believe that the parachutes DB Cooper used came from Earl Cossey via a taxi ride to Boeing Flight Services at Boeing Field and then a private car driven by an unknown person?

Relatedly, I think it is more accurate to describe the FBI parachute file, as listed a few posts ago by Georger, as simply a "summary statement" rather than as a "fact."

All I am saying is the one FBI document is probably not the whole story. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 20, 2016, 04:54:24 PM
I agree, totally.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on September 23, 2016, 12:49:41 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Clarification about my comments on Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation

Okay, so my comment that "Boeing Flight Services doesn't exist" is inaccurate. A more precise statement is to say that Barry Halstead told me in our 2011 conversation that he had never heard of Boeing Flight Services, and "I've worked for Boeing for years."

Along those lines, Barry also described Pacific Aviation - in 1971 - as akin to a marina servicing private boat owners.

Clearly, Boeing Flight Services and Pacific Aviation have morphed into something very different than what they were on the night of Norjak.

Shut, maybe we need a new survey: How many people here truly believe that the parachutes DB Cooper used came from Earl Cossey via a taxi ride to Boeing Flight Services at Boeing Field and then a private car driven by an unknown person?

Relatedly, I think it is more accurate to describe the FBI parachute file, as listed a few posts ago by Georger, as simply a "summary statement" rather than as a "fact."




                         I will be the first to vote on your new poll. Yes I believe that the chutes came from Earl Cossey via taxi ride to Boeing Flight Services at Boeing Field and then a private car driven by unknown person (I believe I might know who this person was ). I am not sure I am ready to divulge his name yet. I really want to be sure first.                       

                       I will say that this is the same person I earlier had described as D. B. Cooper's partner in this ( the bar owner ). I should have really described him as a business man (one of his businesses was a bar ). This is also the same man that Ralph Hatley was talking about ( the one with the wife that worked at a bank ). Also the same person who wanted immunity for committing murder.
                         
                           When I have more time I will talk about the story Ralph Hatley told you. ( it wasn't D. B. that got murdered )





Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 23, 2016, 04:25:59 AM
Thanks for your vote, Hag. When and if you tell us who the wheel man was from Boeing Flight Services to Sea-Tac, perhaps you could also give us an address for Boeing Flight Services and maybe a description what kind of business it actually was, since no one I know can provide any information on this aspect of Cossey's story.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on September 23, 2016, 08:25:18 AM
posted by Bruce A. Smith:Thanks for your vote, Hag. When and if you tell us who the wheel man was from Boeing Flight Services to Sea-Tac, perhaps you could also give us an address for Boeing Flight Services and maybe a description what kind of business it actually was, since no one I know can provide any information on this aspect of Cossey's story.


                         I don't believe there ever was a Boeing Flight Services company. It was made up by the driver (and Cossey I guess ). Sounds crazy but I was told that they were going to try to bill law enforcement ( the F.B.I. ? ) for their services ( taxi costs, private vehicle usage, maybe the chutes ? ) I think the driver originally thought this up and told Cossey that is what they would do but then decided it wasn't a good idea to have his name involved so he nixed the idea. Sounds crazy I know but Hager swore it was true(I originally was going to leave this out because it sounded so crazy ) but I thought it a good idea to clear up the mystery about Boeing Flight Services. Fictitious company, never existed. As far as the other company mentioned (Pacific ), I don't know anything about it .
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 23, 2016, 12:30:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
posted by Bruce A. Smith:Thanks for your vote, Hag. When and if you tell us who the wheel man was from Boeing Flight Services to Sea-Tac, perhaps you could also give us an address for Boeing Flight Services and maybe a description what kind of business it actually was, since no one I know can provide any information on this aspect of Cossey's story.


                         I don't believe there ever was a Boeing Flight Services company. It was made up by the driver (and Cossey I guess ). Sounds crazy but I was told that they were going to try to bill law enforcement ( the F.B.I. ? ) for their services ( taxi costs, private vehicle usage, maybe the chutes ? ) I think the driver originally thought this up and told Cossey that is what they would do but then decided it wasn't a good idea to have his name involved so he nixed the idea. Sounds crazy I know but Hager swore it was true(I originally was going to leave this out because it sounded so crazy ) but I thought it a good idea to clear up the mystery about Boeing Flight Services. Fictitious company, never existed. As far as the other company mentioned (Pacific ), I don't know anything about it .

Boeing Flight Services company. ?      There would be all kinds of public records if they existed.  If the govt was going to be billed for services there would have to be an address and other records!  As a rule, the Govt doesn't pay Salmon riding around in a cab, camels yes, but not SALMON! ITS TOO FISHY! 

   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 23, 2016, 07:28:24 PM
So, Hag, do I have your story correct?

To wit:

Hager knew Cossey and the wheel man. The wheel man convinced Cossey to send the chutes to - where exactly is still unknown - and from there the wheel man took them to Sea-Tac. Later the wheel man tried to convince Cossey that they bill the FBI for their time, effort and the chutes, but Cossey backed out.

Is that the gist of what you are saying?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 23, 2016, 07:30:09 PM
Can you also refresh my memory on who exactly Hager is? He knows "Dan Cooper" or is the skyjacker? I've gotten a little hazy.

And you know Hager from the Vancouver area?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on September 24, 2016, 02:05:39 AM


Posted by: Bruce A. Smith
« on: September 23, 2016, 07:28:24 PM »
Insert Quote

 

So, Hag, do I have your story correct?

To wit:

Hager knew Cossey and the wheel man. The wheel man convinced Cossey to send the chutes to - where exactly is still unknown - and from there the wheel man took them to Sea-Tac. Later the wheel man tried to convince Cossey that they bill the FBI for their time, effort and the chutes, but Cossey backed out.

Is that the gist of what you are saying?


Posted by: Bruce A. Smith
« on: September 23, 2016, 07:30:09 PM »
Insert Quote

 

Can you also refresh my memory on who exactly Hager is? He knows "Dan Cooper" or is the skyjacker? I've gotten a little hazy.


                            I met Hager around 2001 in northwest Ohio. (where I have lived all my life ) Hager was from Ohio originally. He moved to the Washington and Oregon area in the early 1960's. He lived there until the mid to late 1990's. He lived in the northeastern part of Vancouver at the time of the hijacking. At one time he also lived in the St. John's area of Portland Oregon. I didn't know Hager (or the story of D. B. Cooper) before this. Hager passed away in 2007.
                           Yes, Hager knew D. B. Cooper and the wheelman ( D. B. Cooper's partner in crime ). I don't believe he ever met Cossey. (although Hager had friends that knew Cossey personally )

                           Hager met D. B. originally thru work. They became friends and hung out together at times. (hunting trips, playing pool, camping, flying to Reno etc...) D. B. and the wheelman were close friends. (the wheelman was D. B.'s ground crew for the hijacking along with a couple of other guys )     
                        Hager was an avid hunter (coon, bear, deer etc...) I believe the wheelman was also. (along with a group of other hunters ) They hunted around the northern parts of Vancouver area among other places. They also hunted around the Mt. St. Helens area. (Hager said it was a great place to hunt deer )They had some sort of hunter's camp (maybe a cabin ) there. It was located on the south to southeast part of  the mountain. (pretty close to it )
              This camp is where D. B. and the ground crew went to after the ground crew picked him up on the night of the hijacking. This camp is where a couple of murders would take place later (I will talk about that at a later time if anyone is interested ). This camp was lost forever after the 1980' eruption.
                Back to Cossey and the wheelman.....   Hager said that Cossey took the taxi to wherever and while he was doing that the wheelman drove to the Vancouver Washington area to pick up one of the chutes from somewhere (this was the reason for the delay of the chutes arrival ) This is also why D. B. was adamant about the chute being available locally. (He knew this for fact before the hijacking ) When the wheelman arrived back from Vancouver he met up with Cossey before the chutes were delivered.
                Hager thought that there might have been a third person involved. He said there might have been a passenger with the wheelman. I don't know who personally delivered the chutes ( Hager thought it was the wheelman but said it might have been this third guy ) Was Al Lee ever questioned about any of this? Is he still available to question?
                    Cossey was really just a pawn in all of this. Hager believed Cossey was an unwitting accomplice in all of this. (as well as Hager and maybe others ). Hager did say that the wheelman had control over Cossey. (might have been some kind of debt Cossey owed him...possibly a drug debt ) At the time of the hijacking I don't think Cossey had any knowledge that the wheelman was involved. I don't know if he figured it out later or not. It took Hager a few years to figure it.
             I believe that Cossey and the wheelman both wanted to bill law enforcement. I think Cossey leaked the fictitious company name to law enforcement before the wheelman changed his mind and realized it was a stupid idea.

                Hopefully this helps clear up some questions.  If not keep asking.

                             


Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 24, 2016, 03:28:46 AM
Wild story. Complex, too.

So, you first heard this story from Hager, circa 2001-2007, in Ohio.

Hager knew DB Cooper and Cossey, and a third person that we are calling the wheelman. Correct?

If the wheelman went to Vancouver to pick up the parachutes, what was Cossey doing?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 24, 2016, 01:39:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Posted by: Bruce A. Smith
« on: September 23, 2016, 07:28:24 PM »
Insert Quote

 

So, Hag, do I have your story correct?

To wit:

Hager knew Cossey and the wheel man. The wheel man convinced Cossey to send the chutes to - where exactly is still unknown - and from there the wheel man took them to Sea-Tac. Later the wheel man tried to convince Cossey that they bill the FBI for their time, effort and the chutes, but Cossey backed out.

Is that the gist of what you are saying?


Posted by: Bruce A. Smith
« on: September 23, 2016, 07:30:09 PM »
Insert Quote

 

Can you also refresh my memory on who exactly Hager is? He knows "Dan Cooper" or is the skyjacker? I've gotten a little hazy.


                            I met Hager around 2001 in northwest Ohio. (where I have lived all my life ) Hager was from Ohio originally. He moved to the Washington and Oregon area in the early 1960's. He lived there until the mid to late 1990's. He lived in the northeastern part of Vancouver at the time of the hijacking. At one time he also lived in the St. John's area of Portland Oregon. I didn't know Hager (or the story of D. B. Cooper) before this. Hager passed away in 2007.
                           Yes, Hager knew D. B. Cooper and the wheelman ( D. B. Cooper's partner in crime ). I don't believe he ever met Cossey. (although Hager had friends that knew Cossey personally )

                           Hager met D. B. originally thru work. They became friends and hung out together at times. (hunting trips, playing pool, camping, flying to Reno etc...) D. B. and the wheelman were close friends. (the wheelman was D. B.'s ground crew for the hijacking along with a couple of other guys )     
                        Hager was an avid hunter (coon, bear, deer etc...) I believe the wheelman was also. (along with a group of other hunters ) They hunted around the northern parts of Vancouver area among other places. They also hunted around the Mt. St. Helens area. (Hager said it was a great place to hunt deer )They had some sort of hunter's camp (maybe a cabin ) there. It was located on the south to southeast part of  the mountain. (pretty close to it )
              This camp is where D. B. and the ground crew went to after the ground crew picked him up on the night of the hijacking. This camp is where a couple of murders would take place later (I will talk about that at a later time if anyone is interested ). This camp was lost forever after the 1980' eruption.
                Back to Cossey and the wheelman.....   Hager said that Cossey took the taxi to wherever and while he was doing that the wheelman drove to the Vancouver Washington area to pick up one of the chutes from somewhere (this was the reason for the delay of the chutes arrival ) This is also why D. B. was adamant about the chute being available locally. (He knew this for fact before the hijacking ) When the wheelman arrived back from Vancouver he met up with Cossey before the chutes were delivered.
                Hager thought that there might have been a third person involved. He said there might have been a passenger with the wheelman. I don't know who personally delivered the chutes ( Hager thought it was the wheelman but said it might have been this third guy ) Was Al Lee ever questioned about any of this? Is he still available to question?
                    Cossey was really just a pawn in all of this. Hager believed Cossey was an unwitting accomplice in all of this. (as well as Hager and maybe others ). Hager did say that the wheelman had control over Cossey. (might have been some kind of debt Cossey owed him...possibly a drug debt ) At the time of the hijacking I don't think Cossey had any knowledge that the wheelman was involved. I don't know if he figured it out later or not. It took Hager a few years to figure it.
             I believe that Cossey and the wheelman both wanted to bill law enforcement. I think Cossey leaked the fictitious company name to law enforcement before the wheelman changed his mind and realized it was a stupid idea.

                Hopefully this helps clear up some questions.  If not keep asking.

                             

Haggar,

For your information, many of the people on this thread are veterans of the Cooper DropZone thread.  From our blessed DropZone experience, plus other such things, we have seen just about ever bullshit story that the human mind, including the sick imaginations of certified nutcases, can generate on the Cooper hijacking.  And your story is beginning to look like a worthy addition to those stories.

To cite one single example above.  You state that someone drove from the Seattle area to Vancouver to pick up the back pack parachutes which you say were owned by Cossey.  That presents a problem.

The airliner was hijacked as it was taking off from Portland just a few minutes before 3:00 PM PST.  The NWA flight crew notified their company of this a few minutes after 3:00 PM and apparently used the ARINC radio and teletype system to make that notification.

Information in the George Harrison collection at the WSHM lists the money, two chest pack parachutes, and two back pack parachutes as being ready in the NWA freight facility at SEATAC at 5:20 PM PST.

The above times means that there was less than 2:20 (2 hours and 20 minutes) for your Seattle co-conspirators to learn of the hijacking, drive a minimum of 304 miles (152 miles each way on Interstate 5 as a minimum) to Vancouver to pick up the Cossey parachutes, and deliver them to the SEATAC freight facility.

Driving 304 miles in 2:20 means an average speed of 130 MPH on Interstate 5 from start to finish.  If you put small wings on this car, it would probably fly.  But I don't think your story is going to do so.

No knowledgeable Cooper viewer on this thread is going to buy your story.

Sorry.  Have a nice day. :)

Robert99
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 24, 2016, 03:47:46 PM
I see two possibilities to Haggarknew's story.

1. He's a total bullshit artist and is playing us for all the Cooper Vortex reasons that we know and love so well, ala Jo Weber, Bob Knoss, RMB, et al.

Or:

2. He has a story that he heard from a guy in 2001 in Ohio and he's sharing it here. I think the latter is as strong a possibility as the former.

Yes, the time differential of driving to Vancouver and back to Seattle to retrieve parachutes is striking, and it's hard to believe or understand how and why Haggarknew missed that tidbit when Hager was telling him this tale fifteen years ago.

Nevertheless, this story is part of the DB Cooper folklore. Is it true? Probably not. Is it part of larger picture of how the DB Cooper skyjacking has impacted our culture? Yup.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 24, 2016, 06:45:42 PM
Lets try and ask for validation before calling someone a bullshit artist. Hagar has not shown any disrespect to this forum at this point. if things turn out to be different, we will cross that bridge in due time.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 24, 2016, 11:53:25 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Posted by: Bruce A. Smith
« on: September 23, 2016, 07:28:24 PM »
Insert Quote

 

So, Hag, do I have your story correct?

To wit:

Hager knew Cossey and the wheel man. The wheel man convinced Cossey to send the chutes to - where exactly is still unknown - and from there the wheel man took them to Sea-Tac. Later the wheel man tried to convince Cossey that they bill the FBI for their time, effort and the chutes, but Cossey backed out.

Is that the gist of what you are saying?


Posted by: Bruce A. Smith
« on: September 23, 2016, 07:30:09 PM »
Insert Quote

 

Can you also refresh my memory on who exactly Hager is? He knows "Dan Cooper" or is the skyjacker? I've gotten a little hazy.


                            I met Hager around 2001 in northwest Ohio. (where I have lived all my life ) Hager was from Ohio originally. He moved to the Washington and Oregon area in the early 1960's. He lived there until the mid to late 1990's. He lived in the northeastern part of Vancouver at the time of the hijacking. At one time he also lived in the St. John's area of Portland Oregon. I didn't know Hager (or the story of D. B. Cooper) before this. Hager passed away in 2007.
                           Yes, Hager knew D. B. Cooper and the wheelman ( D. B. Cooper's partner in crime ). I don't believe he ever met Cossey. (although Hager had friends that knew Cossey personally )

                           Hager met D. B. originally thru work. They became friends and hung out together at times. (hunting trips, playing pool, camping, flying to Reno etc...) D. B. and the wheelman were close friends. (the wheelman was D. B.'s ground crew for the hijacking along with a couple of other guys )     
                        Hager was an avid hunter (coon, bear, deer etc...) I believe the wheelman was also. (along with a group of other hunters ) They hunted around the northern parts of Vancouver area among other places. They also hunted around the Mt. St. Helens area. (Hager said it was a great place to hunt deer )They had some sort of hunter's camp (maybe a cabin ) there. It was located on the south to southeast part of  the mountain. (pretty close to it )
              This camp is where D. B. and the ground crew went to after the ground crew picked him up on the night of the hijacking. This camp is where a couple of murders would take place later (I will talk about that at a later time if anyone is interested ). This camp was lost forever after the 1980' eruption.
                Back to Cossey and the wheelman.....   Hager said that Cossey took the taxi to wherever and while he was doing that the wheelman drove to the Vancouver Washington area to pick up one of the chutes from somewhere (this was the reason for the delay of the chutes arrival ) This is also why D. B. was adamant about the chute being available locally. (He knew this for fact before the hijacking ) When the wheelman arrived back from Vancouver he met up with Cossey before the chutes were delivered.
                Hager thought that there might have been a third person involved. He said there might have been a passenger with the wheelman. I don't know who personally delivered the chutes ( Hager thought it was the wheelman but said it might have been this third guy ) Was Al Lee ever questioned about any of this? Is he still available to question?
                    Cossey was really just a pawn in all of this. Hager believed Cossey was an unwitting accomplice in all of this. (as well as Hager and maybe others ). Hager did say that the wheelman had control over Cossey. (might have been some kind of debt Cossey owed him...possibly a drug debt ) At the time of the hijacking I don't think Cossey had any knowledge that the wheelman was involved. I don't know if he figured it out later or not. It took Hager a few years to figure it.
             I believe that Cossey and the wheelman both wanted to bill law enforcement. I think Cossey leaked the fictitious company name to law enforcement before the wheelman changed his mind and realized it was a stupid idea.

                Hopefully this helps clear up some questions.  If not keep asking.

                             

Haggar,

For your information, many of the people on this thread are veterans of the Cooper DropZone thread.  From our blessed DropZone experience, plus other such things, we have seen just about ever bullshit story that the human mind, including the sick imaginations of certified nutcases, can generate on the Cooper hijacking.  And your story is beginning to look like a worthy addition to those stories.

To cite one single example above.  You state that someone drove from the Seattle area to Vancouver to pick up the back pack parachutes which you say were owned by Cossey.  That presents a problem.

The airliner was hijacked as it was taking off from Portland just a few minutes before 3:00 PM PST.  The NWA flight crew notified their company of this a few minutes after 3:00 PM and apparently used the ARINC radio and teletype system to make that notification.

Information in the George Harrison collection at the WSHM lists the money, two chest pack parachutes, and two back pack parachutes as being ready in the NWA freight facility at SEATAC at 5:20 PM PST.

The above times means that there was less than 2:20 (2 hours and 20 minutes) for your Seattle co-conspirators to learn of the hijacking, drive a minimum of 304 miles (152 miles each way on Interstate 5 as a minimum) to Vancouver to pick up the Cossey parachutes, and deliver them to the SEATAC freight facility.

Driving 304 miles in 2:20 means an average speed of 130 MPH on Interstate 5 from start to finish.  If you put small wings on this car, it would probably fly.  But I don't think your story is going to do so.

No knowledgeable Cooper viewer on this thread is going to buy your story.

Sorry.  Have a nice day. :)

Robert99

Unless he had one of these - he could average 156 mph.  :))  Dr Brad Gibson and I averaged that in 1969 on the newly constructed I80.  :)) :)) >:D
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 25, 2016, 01:03:38 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


Posted by: Bruce A. Smith
« on: September 23, 2016, 07:28:24 PM »
Insert Quote

 

So, Hag, do I have your story correct?

To wit:

Hager knew Cossey and the wheel man. The wheel man convinced Cossey to send the chutes to - where exactly is still unknown - and from there the wheel man took them to Sea-Tac. Later the wheel man tried to convince Cossey that they bill the FBI for their time, effort and the chutes, but Cossey backed out.

Is that the gist of what you are saying?


Posted by: Bruce A. Smith
« on: September 23, 2016, 07:30:09 PM »
Insert Quote

 

Can you also refresh my memory on who exactly Hager is? He knows "Dan Cooper" or is the skyjacker? I've gotten a little hazy.


                            I met Hager around 2001 in northwest Ohio. (where I have lived all my life ) Hager was from Ohio originally. He moved to the Washington and Oregon area in the early 1960's. He lived there until the mid to late 1990's. He lived in the northeastern part of Vancouver at the time of the hijacking. At one time he also lived in the St. John's area of Portland Oregon. I didn't know Hager (or the story of D. B. Cooper) before this. Hager passed away in 2007.
                           Yes, Hager knew D. B. Cooper and the wheelman ( D. B. Cooper's partner in crime ). I don't believe he ever met Cossey. (although Hager had friends that knew Cossey personally )

                           Hager met D. B. originally thru work. They became friends and hung out together at times. (hunting trips, playing pool, camping, flying to Reno etc...) D. B. and the wheelman were close friends. (the wheelman was D. B.'s ground crew for the hijacking along with a couple of other guys )     
                        Hager was an avid hunter (coon, bear, deer etc...) I believe the wheelman was also. (along with a group of other hunters ) They hunted around the northern parts of Vancouver area among other places. They also hunted around the Mt. St. Helens area. (Hager said it was a great place to hunt deer )They had some sort of hunter's camp (maybe a cabin ) there. It was located on the south to southeast part of  the mountain. (pretty close to it )
              This camp is where D. B. and the ground crew went to after the ground crew picked him up on the night of the hijacking. This camp is where a couple of murders would take place later (I will talk about that at a later time if anyone is interested ). This camp was lost forever after the 1980' eruption.
                Back to Cossey and the wheelman.....   Hager said that Cossey took the taxi to wherever and while he was doing that the wheelman drove to the Vancouver Washington area to pick up one of the chutes from somewhere (this was the reason for the delay of the chutes arrival ) This is also why D. B. was adamant about the chute being available locally. (He knew this for fact before the hijacking ) When the wheelman arrived back from Vancouver he met up with Cossey before the chutes were delivered.
                Hager thought that there might have been a third person involved. He said there might have been a passenger with the wheelman. I don't know who personally delivered the chutes ( Hager thought it was the wheelman but said it might have been this third guy ) Was Al Lee ever questioned about any of this? Is he still available to question?
                    Cossey was really just a pawn in all of this. Hager believed Cossey was an unwitting accomplice in all of this. (as well as Hager and maybe others ). Hager did say that the wheelman had control over Cossey. (might have been some kind of debt Cossey owed him...possibly a drug debt ) At the time of the hijacking I don't think Cossey had any knowledge that the wheelman was involved. I don't know if he figured it out later or not. It took Hager a few years to figure it.
             I believe that Cossey and the wheelman both wanted to bill law enforcement. I think Cossey leaked the fictitious company name to law enforcement before the wheelman changed his mind and realized it was a stupid idea.

                Hopefully this helps clear up some questions.  If not keep asking.

                             

Haggar,

For your information, many of the people on this thread are veterans of the Cooper DropZone thread.  From our blessed DropZone experience, plus other such things, we have seen just about ever bullshit story that the human mind, including the sick imaginations of certified nutcases, can generate on the Cooper hijacking.  And your story is beginning to look like a worthy addition to those stories.

To cite one single example above.  You state that someone drove from the Seattle area to Vancouver to pick up the back pack parachutes which you say were owned by Cossey.  That presents a problem.

The airliner was hijacked as it was taking off from Portland just a few minutes before 3:00 PM PST.  The NWA flight crew notified their company of this a few minutes after 3:00 PM and apparently used the ARINC radio and teletype system to make that notification.

Information in the George Harrison collection at the WSHM lists the money, two chest pack parachutes, and two back pack parachutes as being ready in the NWA freight facility at SEATAC at 5:20 PM PST.

The above times means that there was less than 2:20 (2 hours and 20 minutes) for your Seattle co-conspirators to learn of the hijacking, drive a minimum of 304 miles (152 miles each way on Interstate 5 as a minimum) to Vancouver to pick up the Cossey parachutes, and deliver them to the SEATAC freight facility.

Driving 304 miles in 2:20 means an average speed of 130 MPH on Interstate 5 from start to finish.  If you put small wings on this car, it would probably fly.  But I don't think your story is going to do so.

No knowledgeable Cooper viewer on this thread is going to buy your story.

Sorry.  Have a nice day. :)

Robert99

Unless he had one of these - he could average 156 mph.  :))  Dr Brad Gibson and I averaged that in 1969 on the newly constructed I80.  :)) :)) >:D

Regardless, he would still need at least one pit stop for both gas and tires. ;)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on September 25, 2016, 11:12:09 AM

Posted by: Shutter
« on: September 24, 2016, 06:45:42 PM »
Insert Quote

 

Lets try and ask for validation before calling someone a bullshit artist. Hagar has not shown any disrespect to this forum at this point. if things turn out to be different, we will cross that bridge in due time.

                         Thank you Shutter. I want to assure you I mean no disrespect to you or your forum or anyone on this forum. I can also assure you I am not trying to bullshit anyone. I am only trying to fulfill a promise I made to Hager before he passed away. He didn't want the story to die with him. I feel the need to respond to Bruce and Robert's post which I will do (hopefully I will have time for this later today). At that time I will also address the context in which I was told the story by Hager. This may help everybody understand how I came to be involved in telling his(Hager's) story. Please don't be too hard on Robert99 as he has a valid point as far as the time guideline and drive time  needed. I think my explanation as to the context in which I was told the story may help clarify some questions Robert 99 has legitimately raised.
                     Thank you once again.
                 


Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 25, 2016, 03:20:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Unless he had one of these - he could average 156 mph.  :))  Dr Brad Gibson and I averaged that in 1969 on the newly constructed I80.  :)) :)) >:D

Georger, did you write that obit a couple of years ago?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 25, 2016, 03:32:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Unless he had one of these - he could average 156 mph.  :))  Dr Brad Gibson and I averaged that in 1969 on the newly constructed I80.  :)) :)) >:D

Georger, did you write that obit a couple of years ago?

PM me.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: sailshaw on September 26, 2016, 10:48:14 AM
Haggar    I say  "I don't believe there ever was a Boeing Flight Services company."  I looked in my 1971 Boeing telephone book and could not find a Boeing Flight Services. Someone made that up just to have a reference that no one could check.

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 26, 2016, 03:29:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Haggar    I say  "I don't believe there ever was a Boeing Flight Services company."  I looked in my 1971 Boeing telephone book and could not find a Boeing Flight Services. Someone made that up just to have a reference that no one could check.

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com

What was the name of the Boeing organization that performed ground school and flight training in Boeing jet aircraft for the airlines, both US and foreign, in 1971?

Boeing definitely provided such training with some of the flight activities taking place out at Moses Lake.  Some of the training was probably included in the contract for selling Boeing aircraft.  But I think some of it included re-current type training and initial jet training for new employees who were transitioning into jets.

There were a number of accidents due to pilot error in the early jet airliner days, which started in the late 1950s, and involved jet airliners from Boeing, Douglas, and Convair.  I think Boeing started requiring that the buyer's of their airliners had to send at least their senior training pilots through Boeing ground schools and flight training.  And when that happened, the accident rate went down.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 26, 2016, 04:13:08 PM
Another chute find? Any clue about what was found and what the FBI concluded? Was it actually a parachute?

In Cooper country, canopies sprout from the ground like mushrooms.

http://collections.washingtonhistory.org/details.aspx?id=124569

Click on RELATED MEDIA link.

Thanks to Snowmman for pointing this out to me.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 26, 2016, 04:44:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Another chute find? Any clue about what was found and what the FBI concluded? Was it actually a parachute?

In Cooper country, canopies sprout from the ground like mushrooms.

http://collections.washingtonhistory.org/details.aspx?id=124569

Click on RELATED MEDIA link.

Thanks to Snowmman for pointing this out to me.

377

This has been discussed previously on DZ.  Note that the parachute canopy (or whatever it was) was found in the Columbia River UPSTREAM of where the Washougal empties into the Columbia.  So this does not support the Washougal Wash Down Theory or any other theory.

Assuming it was part of a parachute canopy in the first place, it probably was just one of maybe hundreds of surplus parachute canopies that were used in that area for various agricultural purposes such as covering hay bales and by shippers on the Columbia to cover shipping barges.

And it didn't have anything to do with the Amboy parachute either. 



Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 26, 2016, 05:02:14 PM
I have a hard time understanding why anyone would try using a nylon chute canopy as a sun cover more than once. They are not waterproof and are destroyed by solar UV REALLY QUICKLY. They are worthless as enduring car covers. We used some old canopies as suns shades on top of wood frames at our DZ. They were in shreds in two months of CA summer sun.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on September 26, 2016, 05:30:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have a hard time understanding why anyone would try using a nylon chute canopy as a sun cover more than once. They are not waterproof and are destroyed by solar UV REALLY QUICKLY. They are worthless as enduring car covers. We used some old canopies as suns shades on top of wood frames at our DZ. They were in shreds in two months of CA summer sun.

377

Agreed.  But after WW2 they were readily available, cheap, and weren't necessarily out in the sun ever day.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 26, 2016, 05:42:33 PM
I've had this document for some time now, but it's on my computer with hard drive problems...

They don't seem to verify the dummy chute.....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 26, 2016, 05:47:34 PM
I am beginning to wonder if the FBI could POSITIVELY ID Coopers main canopy if it were found today.

So much incorrect and contradictory evidence and info.  Cossey is dead as well.

Help us sort this out Bruce. I'll even tolerate some remote viewing if you must.  ;)

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on September 26, 2016, 06:05:14 PM
It seems that desperate times are calling for desperate measures, eh, 377? I'll see what I can view....

This is cool information. I had never heard of the Reed Island parachute find before. Nor have I ever seen the details for the front chute - 24-foot, white nylon canopy, model T-7A, and the container was pretty small: 10x14x6.

For others unfamiliar with this discussion, Reed Island is in the Columbia River about two miles upstream from Camas, WA, where the Washougal comes in. It's a good-sized island, but too big. Bigger than Caterpillar Island, for instance.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 26, 2016, 07:26:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It seems that desperate times are calling for desperate measures, eh, 377? I'll see what I can view....

This is cool information. I had never heard of the Reed Island parachute find before. Nor have I ever seen the details for the front chute - 24-foot, white nylon canopy, model T-7A, and the container was pretty small: 10x14x6.

For others unfamiliar with this discussion, Reed Island is in the Columbia River about two miles upstream from Camas, WA, where the Washougal comes in. It's a good-sized island, but too big. Bigger than Caterpillar Island, for instance.


This is why I always asked someone if they knew how many chutes have been found prior to Amboy. I doubt this chute is in evidence either (like the Amboy chute). the only thing Carr mentioned about the dummy chute was the fact of it being white. this document makes no reference to it being non functional, but they knew how long the lines were?

The other chest pack in evidence is 18 feet in length (lines)

"The length of an uncut cord (including the double-sewn cord used to tie into the cross-connector, the bundle of cords located between the butterfly snap-hook rings in the reserve container) is 218 inches (or 18.2 feet)."
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 26, 2016, 08:42:36 PM
For those who didn't download the document, I have included it below...you can enlarge the photo further after clicking on it. just left of the X will enlarge the photo further....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 27, 2016, 02:03:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
For those who didn't download the document, I have included it below...you can enlarge the photo further after clicking on it. just left of the X will enlarge the photo further....

Where does this come from?

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 27, 2016, 07:08:41 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
For those who didn't download the document, I have included it below...you can enlarge the photo further after clicking on it. just left of the X will enlarge the photo further....

Where does this come from?



WSHS website. I didn't know it was on there.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: sailshaw on September 27, 2016, 10:01:19 AM
Robert99  You ask about pilot training at Boeing in 1971. As best as I can remember we did it all at Moses Lake using planes in our line-up at Boeing field in front of the main hanger. It is where new airplanes from production are taken for delivery. I will look at my telephone document again but I think pilot train was done under Boeing Flight Test. I was involved in tests at Moses Lake and remember many JAL pilots training there. At Boardman in Oregon, which was close to the Columbia river, was also used for pilot training

Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 28, 2016, 12:13:15 AM
Just received this abs was asked to post it.

377

"Hello.

If had a chest reserve container that I believe was part of the DBC event, would the FBI be able to identify it? As a fer-instance, if the reserve container had a name label that said "Norm D" and contained a T-7A white canopy.

Also, my understanding about the red X and red end flaps ID'ing it as a training rig...that is solely based on Lynn Emrich looking around the shop the next day, and noticing that a training reserve was missing.  Is there any FBI file that says it had a red X and end flaps? I was wondering if potentially the training reserve had gone missing earlier, and Emrich's statement could be a honest mistake. (the assumption I guess, is that he had accurate totals of all training and non-training rigs in the shop, so that his accounting was perfect.

In short, I'm wondering what evidence proves there was a red X and end flaps, and whether it's "evidence" that could be wrong.

The main thing though, is this name label "Norm D". Let me know if that means anything. The name tag on the reserve left on n467us was "Johnson"...not the same.

Another question: does anyone know if the training reserves had the lines daisy-chained while packed? I know that Cossey said some panels were sewn together on the canopy"
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 28, 2016, 12:31:42 AM
I believe the information he speaks of is on the container. apparently, only a chute was found....

I don't recall "Johnson" on the container in evidence. I believe it says "coss" short for Cossey....

I doubt the information in the latest document is the main descriptive document about all 4 chutes. they probably have much more detail to them.

Can Emrich be found today?


Update: looking at the photo of the chest pack in evidence, it appears Johnson was written in marker, and Cossey possibly stitched his name on it?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 28, 2016, 12:44:13 AM
Agent Carr said the following about the dummy chute...

Quote
The agent who originally interviewed Cossey mistakenly reported it was sewn shut. it was not sewn shut, the canopy was cut in half and the panels then sewn together. This was done so that when students practiced deploying the emergency canopy they could easily gather it and quickly stuff it back in the container for another practice throw.

I can't find the other post, but he states the canopy is white on the dummy chute...

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on September 28, 2016, 01:56:28 AM
More.

377

Hello,

Assuming Cooper jumped with a NB6 (which I realize is a huge assumption, given the discrepancies that Bruce Smith has documented well.)

We don't know what year it was manufactured?
Reasonable to assume it was '60s vintage

A 1964 NB-6 made by Pioneer Aerodynamic Systems has part no. 605509

Here is a military procurement description of a 605509 parachute assembly

it lists a 28' canopy.
Cossey, before dying, was known to brag about stuffing a 28' canopy into a NB6 container, and using that, along with a rip mod, to talk up a "hard pull"...the assumption being that 26' canopy was standard.
Assuming Cooper jumped with a 605509, do people know for sure if it had a 28' canopy by default, or a 26'

I'm thinking maybe a NB6 of the right vintage, had a 28' canopy..see below.
Here is my understanding of a 605509 parachute assembly which I believe was added to the federal catalog Jan 01, 1963

An astute reader will note that the harness color is called "olive drab". I have no idea if they're talking about the actual harness as being a different color than the container
Technical Characteristics
Canopy Diameter:    28.000 feet nominal
Canopy Color:    White
Canopy Material:    Polyamide nylon
Canopy Opening Method:    Ripcord
Harness Manufacturer Code:    Part no. 56-010-1
Harness Color:    Olive drab
Harness Manufacturer Part Number:    Naf part no. 605509
Harness Type:    Quick releaseHarness Material:    Polyamide nylon
Pack Color:    Olive drab
Pack Material:    Polyamide nylon
Pack Type:    Attachable back
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on September 28, 2016, 07:57:17 AM
I think there is always a difference in color between the container and the harness due to they way they were made.

I thought Cossey said the chutes were from the late 50's, but might of said late 50's, early 60's?

I'm not sure at this point if it makes a difference if they put sheets in the container.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on September 28, 2016, 12:14:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
More.

377

Hello,

Assuming Cooper jumped with a NB6 (which I realize is a huge assumption, given the discrepancies that Bruce Smith has documented well.)

We don't know what year it was manufactured?
Reasonable to assume it was '60s vintage

A 1964 NB-6 made by Pioneer Aerodynamic Systems has part no. 605509

Here is a military procurement description of a 605509 parachute assembly

it lists a 28' canopy.
Cossey, before dying, was known to brag about stuffing a 28' canopy into a NB6 container, and using that, along with a rip mod, to talk up a "hard pull"...the assumption being that 26' canopy was standard.
Assuming Cooper jumped with a 605509, do people know for sure if it had a 28' canopy by default, or a 26'

I'm thinking maybe a NB6 of the right vintage, had a 28' canopy..see below.
Here is my understanding of a 605509 parachute assembly which I believe was added to the federal catalog Jan 01, 1963

An astute reader will note that the harness color is called "olive drab". I have no idea if they're talking about the actual harness as being a different color than the container
Technical Characteristics
Canopy Diameter:    28.000 feet nominal
Canopy Color:    White
Canopy Material:    Polyamide nylon
Canopy Opening Method:    Ripcord
Harness Manufacturer Code:    Part no. 56-010-1
Harness Color:    Olive drab
Harness Manufacturer Part Number:    Naf part no. 605509
Harness Type:    Quick releaseHarness Material:    Polyamide nylon
Pack Color:    Olive drab
Pack Material:    Polyamide nylon
Pack Type:    Attachable back

"The Parachutes That Ate the World!" by D.B. Cooper.

 ::)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: haggarknew on December 10, 2016, 12:48:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I see two possibilities to Haggarknew's story.

1. He's a total bullshit artist and is playing us for all the Cooper Vortex reasons that we know and love so well, ala Jo Weber, Bob Knoss, RMB, et al.

Or:

2. He has a story that he heard from a guy in 2001 in Ohio and he's sharing it here. I think the latter is as strong a possibility as the former.

Yes, the time differential of driving to Vancouver and back to Seattle to retrieve parachutes is striking, and it's hard to believe or understand how and why Haggarknew missed that tidbit when Hager was telling him this tale fifteen years ago.

Nevertheless, this story is part of the DB Cooper folklore. Is it true? Probably not. Is it part of larger picture of how the DB Cooper skyjacking has impacted our culture? Yup.
                             

                           
                               Hi Bruce. Sorry it has taken months to get back to you. Life gets busy and believe it or not ,the D. B. Cooper story isn't exactly that high on my priority list of things to do. To be honest , I didn't even know the story of the hijacking when Hager first told me that he knew who D. B. Cooper was. I had to do some research on the subject before I understood what he was talking about. (note to Robert99 ... most of that research was done by following you guys on the dropzone ....so yes I do know that many of you have followed this case for many years....I was referred to that website by Hager himself who often followed what was being discussed on that forum)  Sorry Bruce I regress. I will discuss Robert99's accusation of being a bullshit artist in a separate post at a later time.

                          Bruce, you are entirely right when you say I am just a guy from Ohio with a D.B.Cooper story that was told to him by a friend. I would like to share Hager's story of what really happened with you (and anyone else that wants to hear it) but I am not sure anyone here really wants to hear it. If that's the case, I won't waste my time here anymore. It is really up to the forum's members.  Yes or no... let me know

                             
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on December 10, 2016, 03:02:09 AM
Quote
I would like to share Hager's story of what really happened with you (and anyone else that wants to hear it) but I am not sure anyone here really wants to hear it. If that's the case, I won't waste my time here anymore. It is really up to the forum's members.  Yes or no... let me know

Hello Haggar.

you are more than welcome to post your story. this is an open forum. nobody can tell you what to post, or not post. people can believe a story, or they can choose not to believe. it's up to you, and not really the forum's choice. I'm sure you are aware that people will ask for proof, or anything they might need to verify what you are saying. that goes for all of us. we all go under the microscope, but sometimes people get upset when most disagree with what they might say. I've been put in my place many times, nobody gets a free ride.


You will have to email Bruce Smith. he has decided to back out from public discussion about DB Cooper.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on December 10, 2016, 12:10:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I see two possibilities to Haggarknew's story.

1. He's a total bullshit artist and is playing us for all the Cooper Vortex reasons that we know and love so well, ala Jo Weber, Bob Knoss, RMB, et al.

Or:

2. He has a story that he heard from a guy in 2001 in Ohio and he's sharing it here. I think the latter is as strong a possibility as the former.

Yes, the time differential of driving to Vancouver and back to Seattle to retrieve parachutes is striking, and it's hard to believe or understand how and why Haggarknew missed that tidbit when Hager was telling him this tale fifteen years ago.

Nevertheless, this story is part of the DB Cooper folklore. Is it true? Probably not. Is it part of larger picture of how the DB Cooper skyjacking has impacted our culture? Yup.
                             

                           
                               Hi Bruce. Sorry it has taken months to get back to you. Life gets busy and believe it or not ,the D. B. Cooper story isn't exactly that high on my priority list of things to do. To be honest , I didn't even know the story of the hijacking when Hager first told me that he knew who D. B. Cooper was. I had to do some research on the subject before I understood what he was talking about. (note to Robert99 ... most of that research was done by following you guys on the dropzone ....so yes I do know that many of you have followed this case for many years....I was referred to that website by Hager himself who often followed what was being discussed on that forum)  Sorry Bruce I regress. I will discuss Robert99's accusation of being a bullshit artist in a separate post at a later time.

                          Bruce, you are entirely right when you say I am just a guy from Ohio with a D.B.Cooper story that was told to him by a friend. I would like to share Hager's story of what really happened with you (and anyone else that wants to hear it) but I am not sure anyone here really wants to hear it. If that's the case, I won't waste my time here anymore. It is really up to the forum's members.  Yes or no... let me know

                           

Haggar,

Note in the Bruce Smith quotation you included above, that it is he (Bruce Smith) who calls you a bullshit artist.

Sweet little me just pointed out that you were posting a bunch of nonsense that didn't add up, was internally inconsistent, and along the lines that some of us here on Shutter's site had seen for years by some posters on DZ and we weren't buying what you were selling.

Robert99
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on December 10, 2016, 02:56:39 PM
I don;t believe DB Cooper was Lily Tomlin. Just for the record.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Lynn on March 01, 2018, 02:40:39 AM
Re: this thread, I'd like to go back to something Mr. Andrade mentioned way back - the amount of stuff DB Cooper was known to have that wasn't found on the plane:
- The briefcase and its contents
- The  sack House and Mitchell saw
- Whatever was in the sack
- The much larger sack the money came in
- The money, minus that found at Tena Bar
- The back chute and dummy chute
That's a lot, considering he had to have one hand free to pull the ripcord.

We know he attached the money to himself, and that there was a lot of time between when Tina last saw him and the jump. He could have reconfigured the money belt; we don't really know how he'd fixed it by the time he jumped. He could also have thrown a lot of the stuff out beforehand - nobody'd necessarily notice a discarded white sack, a dead battery, even road flares, out in the wilderness over 47 years, if indeed the bomb was fake. The briefcase might be noticed and associated with the businessman skyjacker. Maybe not, if it was empty.

The idea of a radio rendezvous seems unlikely to me. He was carrying a radio, leaving one hand free for the cord, and had a front and back chute, plus $200,000? IF he intended to wear both chutes, why did he ask for a backpack? (I don't know squat about skydiving rigs - can you wear a backpack and a rig at the same time? If not, then he must always have planned to rip up at least one chute.)

Also, does anyone remember where in the official docs it mentions Cooper insisting on local chutes and the delay resulting in 4 chutes? Or did he ask for 4 chutes initially? (And if so, why?) Sorry these basics are not hopping to mind, it's very late - might have to sift thru the interviews again.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 01, 2018, 02:49:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Re: this thread, I'd like to go back to something Mr. Andrade mentioned way back - the amount of stuff DB Cooper was known to have that wasn't found on the plane:
- The briefcase and its contents
- The  sack House and Mitchell saw
- Whatever was in the sack
- The much larger sack the money came in
- The money, minus that found at Tena Bar
- The back chute and dummy chute
That's a lot, considering he had to have one hand free to pull the ripcord.

We know he attached the money to himself, and that there was a lot of time between when Tina last saw him and the jump. He could have reconfigured the money belt; we don't really know how he'd fixed it by the time he jumped. He could also have thrown a lot of the stuff out beforehand - nobody'd necessarily notice a discarded white sack, a dead battery, even road flares, out in the wilderness over 47 years, if indeed the bomb was fake. The briefcase might be noticed and associated with the businessman skyjacker. Maybe not, if it was empty.

The idea of a radio rendezvous seems unlikely to me. He was carrying a radio, leaving one hand free for the cord, and had a front and back chute, plus $200,000? IF he intended to wear both chutes, why did he ask for a backpack? (I don't know squat about skydiving rigs - can you wear a backpack and a rig at the same time? If not, then he must always have planned to rip up at least one chute.)

Also, does anyone remember where in the official docs it mentions Cooper insisting on local chutes and the delay resulting in 4 chutes? Or did he ask for 4 chutes initially? (And if so, why?) Sorry these basics are not hopping to mind, it's very late - might have to sift thru the interviews again.


- The briefcase and its contents - MISSING NEVER FOUND
- The  sack House and Mitchell saw - MISSING NEVER FOUND IF IT EXISTED ?
- Whatever was in the sack - MISSING NEVER FOUND
- The much larger sack the money came in - TINA LAST SAW HIM TYING AROUND HIS WASTE WITH MONEY INSIDE
- The money, minus that found at Tena Bar - MISSING EXCEPT FOR THAT FOUND AT TINA BAR
- The back chute and dummy chute - FOUND ON PLANE - DUMMY CHUTE STRIPPED OF ITS CORDS
That's a lot, considering he had to have one hand free to pull the ripcord.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on March 01, 2018, 04:24:38 AM
Another Theory on WHERE DID EVERYTHING GO?

Although one 302 says two cords were missing from the cannibalized reserve chute, and another 302 says three cords were missing, the CS actually says that five cords are currently missing from the chute - and there is no official explanation for the discrepancies. Hence, it is plausible that Cooper cut five lengths of parachute cord while on 305.

That would give him 80-feet of rope.

Further, it is plausible to suggest that he tied everything not found on the plane in Reno - dummy chute, briefcase and bomb, the little sack everyone saw at the end of the hijacking, etc. - into some kind of bundle. Or maybe two, like a lengthy kite tail. Maybe it all went out the door attached to Coop.

This ropey-bundle-thingy might come in handy if Coop got tangled in a tree. He had a sizeable length of rope to extricate himself from the branches and get down (or closer) to the ground. The dummy chute would have also given him even more means of getting down - kind of like tying bedsheets together to escape from a bedroom window to escape a burning home (or prying parents seeking to thwart a teenage escape...).

Hence, Cooper had all of the stuff with him that was NOT FOUND on the plane in Reno.

Yes, when he gets to the ground he's got a Big Mess - his deployed parachute and harness, the money in a bag around his waist, the deployed dummy chute (maybe), the briefcase and bomb, and the yellow/green paper/burlap sack.

But maybe he also had an extraction team, so maybe everything got scooped up - remember he had 40 hours before anyone went looking for him in the woods - and that might be the getaway scenario. As a result= no body, no parachute, no briefcase, no bomb, no dummy chute, no rope, no moolah, no SeaFirst bank bag.

Note: This assumes that Cooper had no gear stashed in the overhead compartments that might have been stashed there early in the odyssey of Flight 305. My personal favorite fantasy scenario is that Cooper started his day in Washington DC at 8 am, brought onboard some extra goodies, left them on the plane at Minnie Apple but personally got off the plane, flew another flight from MSP to PDX, where he rejoined 305 at 2 pm-ish.

Note II: What would Cooper need that he could place in the overheads and not attract too much attention? Radio? Duct tape. Surgical supplies for injuries in the landing. Goggles. Ham sandwich? Perhaps he put ii all in an official NWO duffle bag, etc. Maybe he stenciled "Capt. Wm Scott" on it for even greater misdirection of scrutiny.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on March 01, 2018, 04:32:12 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

... did he ask for 4 chutes initially? (And if so, why?) Sorry these basics are not hopping to mind, it's very late - might have to sift thru the interviews again.


Ah, Lynn, there is a delightful video on the whole parachute issue - who, what, where and when - on YouTube and hosted by yours truly.

Also, Chapter 7 in the Cooper Bible, aka DB Cooper and the FBI, explains the above.

In a nutshell: Coop asked for four parachute - two "back" and two "front." It was part of his ransom deal. It is widely believed - although not conclusively confirmed - that he refused military parachutes from McChord AB, and indicated that he wanted civilian chutes.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on March 01, 2018, 04:35:19 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

... The back chute and dummy chute - FOUND ON PLANE - DUMMY CHUTE STRIPPED OF ITS CORDS


Incorrect. The dummy chute has never been found. The cords came from the second reserve chute. It was recovered at Reno and is currently in federal custody.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on March 01, 2018, 01:02:34 PM
Military parachute suspension lines are quite thin. Doubtful that they could be successfully used as 'ropes" for a descent, but maybe workable if the jumper could get a good ankle wrap. I have a military kit designed for jumper descents from trees. It is the called the "PLD" or Personnel Lowering Device. Worn in the USAF on bailout rigs and most ejection seats. 150 ft of flattened 3/4" tubular nylon webbing S-folded and stowed in elastic retainers in the "tray". There is a small friction device the is on one end usually kept in a zippered pocket on the left main lift web.

https://www.omahas.com/shop/personal-lowering-device-2pc/

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 01, 2018, 02:15:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

... The back chute and dummy chute - FOUND ON PLANE - DUMMY CHUTE STRIPPED OF ITS CORDS


Incorrect. The dummy chute has never been found. The cords came from the second reserve chute. It was recovered at Reno and is currently in federal custody.

Ok so is a dummy chute a reserve chute or a front chute or a back chute? Is a reserve chute a front chute or a back chute? Could a reserve be put in front and a dummy be put in the back? They say some people sit on chutes - which chute? Dummy, or Reserve, or Front, or Back? Lastly, is there an Ass Chute vs a Belly Chute?  :)   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 01, 2018, 02:26:56 PM
Could Cooper have put the back chute on upside down, and none of the witnesses knew the difference?

Did any of the passengers witness Cooper putting on a chute after they were delivered, or were the passengers all gone by then?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on March 01, 2018, 02:29:53 PM

"Could Cooper have put the back chute on upside down, and none of the witnesses knew the difference?"

Nope. Leg straps overhead would be very obvious.




Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Lynn on March 01, 2018, 11:05:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

... did he ask for 4 chutes initially? (And if so, why?) Sorry these basics are not hopping to mind, it's very late - might have to sift thru the interviews again.


Ah, Lynn, there is a delightful video on the whole parachute issue - who, what, where and when - on YouTube and hosted by yours truly.

Also, Chapter 7 in the Cooper Bible, aka DB Cooper and the FBI, explains the above.

In a nutshell: Coop asked for four parachute - two "back" and two "front." It was part of his ransom deal. It is widely believed - although not conclusively confirmed - that he refused military parachutes from McChord AB, and indicated that he wanted civilian chutes.

Yes, I thought I remembered that from your book (have been bouncing back and forth between chapters as things occur to me) and thought it had actually been mentioned by the FAs in the interviews. I just wasn't sure about the refusal of the military chutes. If that isn't established, though, it's odd he would ask for 4 chutes. The chute thing is a mind-bender, though (what about this case isn't?) because it's unclear what chutes Cooper actually got, and what kind of back chute he jumped with.

I do recall the dummy chute having gone with Cooper and the other chest chute having been stripped. I'm sure the dummy wasn't found aboard in Reno.

Okay, then, so here's what's been nagging at me: why ask for 4 chutes? Quick brainstorm produces this:
speculation

- Variety is the spice of skydiving, and Cooper, being a Libra, was highly indecisive  O0  I doubt it, though, bc as georger pointed out much earlier in this years-old thread, he was probably not a hippie (though like some older people of the time, he may have been sympathetic to some of their causes. There have always been progressives and reactionaries.) He was at least a generation ahead, the WWII generation.
- He was planning to force one or more hostages into diving with him but decided against it, for whatever reason - I don't personally believe this. A hostage would be more a hindrance than a help on the run.
- He always planned to cut up at least one parachute, and wanted another just to be on the safe side. I think Bruce may be right about the kite thing. 377 (who, by the way, is invaluable when it comes to this jump stuff - thank you, thank you, because I would have to be held hostage to jump out of a plane) may have a clearer view on the feasibility of this.

[Later edit - see posts to follow - the most likely reason for the 4 chutes was to make the feds believe he was going to take someone with him and therefore ensure the chutes were not sabotaged.]


DavidV's draft doc mentions there being no overhead compartments on that particular plane - is that accurate?:

"The takeoff announcement meant one final check of all passengers in her section, and Flo went about the task. There were no overhead bins on this craft, just a deep shelf running above the seats." [p. 14] I did also wonder if it was deep enough to stow something while he was still just a face in the crowd.


Shutter did speculate earlier on whether Cooper's not recognizing the dummy chute (if indeed he didn't  - it's hard to guess what he would have wanted with it if he did, though) meant he wasn't a skilled skydiver. But if Lynn Emrlick (sp?) didn't realize the error at first, Cooper not doing so under the gun is not necessarily a sign he was inexperienced. (By the way, just out of curiosity, what WAS inside the dummy chute? I don't really get what it consists of.) I also noticed that Lynn guy's name popping up a few places online, in regards to Cooper and skydiving in general. Petey even mentioned him online once, as well as stating he would have recognized the dummy chute.

Cossey really does seem to have obscured this chute issue a great deal. Did anyone ever find other experts the FBI consulted on matters relating to the chutes? (I'm sorry if this is already in your book, Bruce - I'm looking at the section on cigarette butts at the mo ). Am just getting used to my PC Kindle and don't want to lose my page! :P 



Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 01, 2018, 11:30:50 PM
The dummy chute had it's panels sewn shut to make it easier to repack...Cooper wasn't happy about the knapsack, and of course stating "no funny stuff" missing D rings and a dummy chute fall in the funny stuff category big time...

Here is a pic of the cabin inside 305..this was during the testing of the stairs...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Lynn on March 02, 2018, 12:47:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The dummy chute had it's panels sewn shut to make it easier to repack...Cooper wasn't happy about the knapsack, and of course stating "no funny stuff" missing D rings and a dummy chute fall in the funny stuff category big time...

Here is a pic of the cabin inside 305..this was during the testing of the stairs...
This photo is invaluable to me. Thank you. Trying to get as much realistic detail as possible for the fictional story. Also listening to lots of 1971 music (some distantly remembered from toddlerhood) to get a feel for what was playing at the time, though for all we know DBC at home may have been grooving on Louis Armstrong or Prima or Glenn Miller or Ella..;)

Re: the sack mentioned by Mitchell and House - I feel it definitely did exist, and further that House hasn't been given enough attention as a witness. She seems to have been honest, not an attention seeker, freely admitting she didn't get a good enough look at Cooper's face to recognize him if she saw him again, and not showing up on a doc years later claiming she and Cooper had a stare-down. She DID, however, notice the odd way DBC was carrying the briefcase, and gave extraordinary detail about that bag atop it.

Mitchell and House were also interviewed separately and the bag described by Mitchell doesn't clash with that described by House. As I mentioned to Bruce, the dimensions House cited for the bag - while noting the top of it was flattened - were about that of a shoe/boot box. That doesn't meant this is what the bag contained - but it wasn't the small, green bag  type Tina described. "Small" doesn't tell us a lot, but I imagine something between the size of a pharmacy bag that meds come in and a bag big enough to hold a magazine. Anything beyond that would be a medium-to-large bag. (Mitchell mentions "sack" - not usually used to describe a small bag). I am not concerned so much with what happened to the small green bag - he could have pocketed that. But I do wonder what those bags contained. I believe Robert99 mentioned attaching D rings was a long process and DBC didn't have time; he also wouldn't likely have anticipated the chutes coming with none. Offhand, when I think small green bags, I imagine book stores and stores with a "natural" image - holistic, sporting goods, like that. But of course there's no way to know. Dammit. :'(
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on March 02, 2018, 01:41:41 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

- He was planning to force one or more hostages into diving with him but decided against it, for whatever reason - I don't personally believe this. A hostage would be more a hindrance than a help on the run.


Lynn, while the airliner was on the ground at SEATAC, word was passed to the crew from the Chief FAA Psychologist in Oklahoma City, OK that Cooper would probably take a hostage with him and blow up the aircraft when they jumped.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Lynn on March 02, 2018, 02:05:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

- He was planning to force one or more hostages into diving with him but decided against it, for whatever reason - I don't personally believe this. A hostage would be more a hindrance than a help on the run.


Lynn, while the airliner was on the ground at SEATAC, word was passed to the crew from the Chief FAA Psychologist in Oklahoma City, OK that Cooper would probably take a hostage with him and blow up the aircraft when they jumped.
That was just the psychologist's speculation, however educated - and very likely the exact kind of speculation Cooper wanted. Bruce would remember better than I, but I believe there was only one skyjacking involving a (raving drunk) parachutist before Cooper, so even an expert would have had little to base their opinion on in Cooper's specific case.

georger is likely correct - the 2 extra parachutes could have been partly a Cooper ploy to keep them guessing about his level of ruthlessness (he didn't actually have to BE ruthless - perception is power). Nobody was going to risk riling him if he was cold enough to drag a (likely) first-time skydiver into the storm with him. He didn't voice such a threat to Tina, however, and didn't force her to remain after establishing she wasn't needed in the cabin any further.

The biggest thing this did for him, of course, (and now that I'm thinking about it - d'uh -  this was almost certainly the primary reason for 4 chutes) was ensure the FBI wouldn't deliberately sabotage the chutes. There was no precedent to tell him whether they would or not. (Cini had brought his own chute aboard, not that long before DBC; it's quite possible DBC had intended to bring his own, but the Cini incident made bringing a parachute aboard more of a sore thumb than it otherwise might have been.) If the FBI thought one or more crew members could be going down with him, they couldn't risk it just to retrieve the 200 grand. The feds didn't know one of the chutes delivered was a dummy; they'd have been letting themselves in for a world of trouble if they'd sent that chute aboard knowingly. Whether the feds would have sabotaged a chute even if only one had been requested is irrelevant - Cooper only had to mistrust the FBI, and for that, particularly in the Hoover era, he would have had to get in line.

Cooper also must always have known he'd need some lengths of cord, knapsack or no knapsack. He still would have had to hang on to the knapsack (with the money in it, but not the briefcase or the apparently bulky contents of the "sack"). He always intended to rip the parachute. He was carrying a knife that wasn't his hijacking weapon, after all. What was he planning to do with it, cut trees, kill a bear, set up camp? Along with being a potential defensive weapon if the crew knew the bomb wasn't real and refused to play along (which I'm guessing is a risk crew members weren't even authorized to take), his only other plan could be to cut something with it. Maybe his lines if he got tangled in trees?

But the bottom line is, he was carrying too much stuff to take it all with him without those lines, and he knew from the planning stages what he'd have with him. So even if he wanted people to think he was going to take a hostage with him - into the wilderness, with a bomb that isn't really much use as a threat outdoors - I don't believe for a minute he ever intended to do so.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 02, 2018, 03:37:32 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

- He was planning to force one or more hostages into diving with him but decided against it, for whatever reason - I don't personally believe this. A hostage would be more a hindrance than a help on the run.


Lynn, while the airliner was on the ground at SEATAC, word was passed to the crew from the Chief FAA Psychologist in Oklahoma City, OK that Cooper would probably take a hostage with him and blow up the aircraft when they jumped.
That was just the psychologist's speculation, however educated - and very likely the exact kind of speculation Cooper wanted. Bruce would remember better than I, but I believe there was only one skyjacking involving a (raving drunk) parachutist before Cooper, so even an expert would have had little to base their opinion on in Cooper's specific case. georger is likely correct - the 2 extra parachutes could have been partly a Cooper ploy to keep them guessing about his level of ruthlessness (he didn't actually have to BE ruthless - perception is power). Nobody was going to risk riling him if he was cold enough to drag a (likely) first-time skydiver into the storm with him. He didn't voice such a threat to Tina, however, and didn't force her to remain after establishing she wasn't needed in the cabin any further.

The biggest thing this did for him, of course, (and now that I'm thinking about it - d'uh -  this was almost certainly the primary reason for 4 chutes) was ensure the FBI wouldn't deliberately sabotage the chutes. (Cini had brought his own chute aboard, not that long before DBC; it's quite possible DBC had intended to bring his own, but the Cini incident made bringing a parachute aboard more of a sore thumb than it otherwise might have been.) If the FBI thought one or more crew members could be going down with him, they couldn't risk it just to retrieve the 200 grand. The feds didn't know one of the chutes delivered was a dummy; they'd have been letting themselves in for a world of trouble if they'd sent that chute aboard knowingly. Whether the feds would have sabotaged a chute even if only one had been requested is irrelevant - Cooper only had to mistrust the FBI, and for that, particularly in the Hoover era, he would have had to get in line.

Cooper also must always have known he'd need some lengths of cord, knapsack or no knapsack. He still would have had to hang on to the knapsack (with the money in it, but not the briefcase). He always intended to rip the parachute. He was carrying a knife that wasn't his hijacking weapon, after all. What was he planning to do with it, cut trees, kill a bear, set up camp? Along with being a potential defensive weapon if the crew knew the bomb wasn't real and refused to play along (which I'm guessing is a risk crew members weren't even authorized to take), his only other plan could be to cut something with it. Maybe his lines if he got tangled in trees? But the bottom line is, he was carrying too much stuff to take it all with him without those lines, and he knew from the planning stages what he'd have with him. So even if he wanted people to think he was going to take a hostage with him - into the wilderness, with a bomb that isn't really much use as a threat outdoors - I don't believe for a minute he ever intended to do so.

I think you have pretty much grasped the essentials. Cooper was playing out a strategy - he was a strategic person; which does not bode well for those thinking he was a rank novice-bungler fated to die in the jump. He was focused on two related goals (a) escape, and (b) control. His demands and actions fall within those two parameters.

The FAA psychiatrist may have been asked by somebody to make an early prediction (the hijacking was barely underway) - we don't know how he got involved or why or what he was told at this early stage of the hijacking. His assessment is more of a defensive warning (it seems to me) for the crew and others trying to manage the hijacking. His assessment was not "diagnostic" because he didn't know Cooper at all, or what Cooper intended, or what he would do.

Nyrop seems to have had the best assessment, however he came to that assessment. Nyrop ordered everyone to cooperate ... 'so we can get that xxxx off my plane as soon as possible'. Accommodating Cooper turned out to be the best strategy for a 'no harm' outcome.     

 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Lynn on March 02, 2018, 04:44:25 AM
georger, this brings me back to something that's been discussed somewhat before - what Cooper meant when he told Tina they were going to a very pleasant place (or whatever the exact quote was). By telling them to go to Mexico while ordering 4 chutes and keeping his pleasant place vague, he ensured the possibility of him taking her (and/or other crew) along whether he jumped or not kept his power at a premium until he was ready to jump.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 02, 2018, 05:43:37 AM
This forum has a photo gallery that can be found in the main menu...it has other pics of the plane, including the stairs..it's hard to see because of the number color but most categories have more than one page of photo's....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 02, 2018, 01:36:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
georger, this brings me back to something that's been discussed somewhat before - what Cooper meant when he told Tina they were going to a very pleasant place (or whatever the exact quote was). By telling them to go to Mexico while ordering 4 chutes and keeping his pleasant place vague, he ensured the possibility of him taking her (and/or other crew) along whether he jumped or not kept his power at a premium until he was ready to jump.

One could write a novel based on that remark! The whole hijacking cycles around it. The grudge, the plan, and possibly the outcome. If you are a writer Cooper's remark is pregnant with realities - have at it!  ;D

That remark tells us Cooper has a psyche, is an actual person, has an actual life as somebody from somewhere, has an actual history as a human being ... and its just one more tool in Cooper's toolkit to get people to cooperate and participate (willingly?). It's a diversion from reality? He didn;t make that remark to Rataczak, Scott, or to Flo or Alice! He has read Tina, or thinks he has, and he is telling Tina, 'This event has an end and will over with all ok', I believe. Tom Kaye has said he thinks Cooper was a 'womanizer'? (Shows skills and particle evidence on the tie indicating contact with multiple females?)

Cooper has thought things out and has envisioned a happy ending. Did he achieve it? At the time he made that comment he has to manage that happy conclusion happening. From a tactical point of view the plane is remarkably open, imho. The situation fluid. From today's point of view with so many open opportunities, Cooper is a tactical target and could be dead in the next 30 seconds... so, 'we are going to a very pleasant place'. Please come along with me? Let's forget this is a hijacking! All will be well . . .

We may be looking at tradecraft here. Someone with an actual mission who is off the books ... and not going to be found easily?
 

 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on March 02, 2018, 01:48:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
georger, this brings me back to something that's been discussed somewhat before - what Cooper meant when he told Tina they were going to a very pleasant place (or whatever the exact quote was). By telling them to go to Mexico while ordering 4 chutes and keeping his pleasant place vague, he ensured the possibility of him taking her (and/or other crew) along whether he jumped or not kept his power at a premium until he was ready to jump.

One could write a novel based on that remark! The whole hijacking cycles around it. The grudge, the plan, and possibly the outcome. If you are a writer Cooper's remark is pregnant with realities - have at it!  ;D

That remark tells us Cooper has a psyche, is an actual person, has an actual life as somebody from somewhere, has an actual history as a human being ... and its just one more tool in Cooper's toolkit to get people to cooperate and participate (willingly?). It's a diversion from reality? He didn;t make that remark to Rataczak, Scott, or to Flo or Alice! He has read Tina, or thinks he has, and he is telling Tina, 'This event has an end and will over with all ok', I believe. Tom Kaye has said he thinks Cooper was a 'womanizer'? (Shows skills and particle evidence on the tie indicating contact with multiple females?)

Cooper has thought things out and has envisioned a happy ending. Did he achieve it? At the time he made that comment he has to manage that happy conclusion happening. From a tactical point of view the plane is remarkably open, imho. The situation fluid. From today's point of view with so many open opportunities, Cooper is a tactical target and could be dead in the next 30 seconds... so, 'we are going to a very pleasant place'. Please come along with me? Let's forget this is a hijacking! All will be well . . .

 

Georger, please explain your reasoning behind your statement that "... particle evidence on the tie . . ." indicates that Cooper had contact with multiple females. ???
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on March 02, 2018, 01:48:15 PM
 "I believe Robert99 mentioned attaching D rings was a long process and DBC didn't have time; he also wouldn't likely have anticipated the chutes coming with none."

Installing D rings is a job that requires a really powerful sewing machine and is done in a riggers loft. No way to do it in a plane. One might be able to quickly jury rig carabiners to allow the attachment of a chest (front) reserve to a stock (no D rings) NB 6 or NB 8 rig.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 02, 2018, 01:57:42 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
georger, this brings me back to something that's been discussed somewhat before - what Cooper meant when he told Tina they were going to a very pleasant place (or whatever the exact quote was). By telling them to go to Mexico while ordering 4 chutes and keeping his pleasant place vague, he ensured the possibility of him taking her (and/or other crew) along whether he jumped or not kept his power at a premium until he was ready to jump.

One could write a novel based on that remark! The whole hijacking cycles around it. The grudge, the plan, and possibly the outcome. If you are a writer Cooper's remark is pregnant with realities - have at it!  ;D

That remark tells us Cooper has a psyche, is an actual person, has an actual life as somebody from somewhere, has an actual history as a human being ... and its just one more tool in Cooper's toolkit to get people to cooperate and participate (willingly?). It's a diversion from reality? He didn;t make that remark to Rataczak, Scott, or to Flo or Alice! He has read Tina, or thinks he has, and he is telling Tina, 'This event has an end and will over with all ok', I believe. Tom Kaye has said he thinks Cooper was a 'womanizer'? (Shows skills and particle evidence on the tie indicating contact with multiple females?)

Cooper has thought things out and has envisioned a happy ending. Did he achieve it? At the time he made that comment he has to manage that happy conclusion happening. From a tactical point of view the plane is remarkably open, imho. The situation fluid. From today's point of view with so many open opportunities, Cooper is a tactical target and could be dead in the next 30 seconds... so, 'we are going to a very pleasant place'. Please come along with me? Let's forget this is a hijacking! All will be well . . .

 

Georger, please explain your reasoning behind your statement that "... particle evidence on the tie . . ." indicates that Cooper had contact with multiple females. ???

Tom thought he saw what could be an abnormally high number of 'particles associated with makeup' indicating multiple female associations/multiple female contacts. Something far beyond a single exposure or even one single makeup regime (but a number of makeup regimes-formulations), indicating multiple females. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Lynn on March 04, 2018, 06:22:49 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
georger, this brings me back to something that's been discussed somewhat before - what Cooper meant when he told Tina they were going to a very pleasant place (or whatever the exact quote was). By telling them to go to Mexico while ordering 4 chutes and keeping his pleasant place vague, he ensured the possibility of him taking her (and/or other crew) along whether he jumped or not kept his power at a premium until he was ready to jump.

One could write a novel based on that remark! The whole hijacking cycles around it. The grudge, the plan, and possibly the outcome. If you are a writer Cooper's remark is pregnant with realities - have at it!  ;D

That remark tells us Cooper has a psyche, is an actual person, has an actual life as somebody from somewhere, has an actual history as a human being ... and its just one more tool in Cooper's toolkit to get people to cooperate and participate (willingly?). It's a diversion from reality? He didn;t make that remark to Rataczak, Scott, or to Flo or Alice! He has read Tina, or thinks he has, and he is telling Tina, 'This event has an end and will over with all ok', I believe. Tom Kaye has said he thinks Cooper was a 'womanizer'? (Shows skills and particle evidence on the tie indicating contact with multiple females?)

Cooper has thought things out and has envisioned a happy ending. Did he achieve it? At the time he made that comment he has to manage that happy conclusion happening. From a tactical point of view the plane is remarkably open, imho. The situation fluid. From today's point of view with so many open opportunities, Cooper is a tactical target and could be dead in the next 30 seconds... so, 'we are going to a very pleasant place'. Please come along with me? Let's forget this is a hijacking! All will be well . . .

 

Georger, please explain your reasoning behind your statement that "... particle evidence on the tie . . ." indicates that Cooper had contact with multiple females. ???

Tom thought he saw what could be an abnormally high number of 'particles associated with makeup' indicating multiple female associations/multiple female contacts. Something far beyond a single exposure or even one single makeup regime (but a number of makeup regimes-formulations), indicating multiple females.

I was not aware of this, georger, thank you. This could also indicate Cooper's own use of makeup, but I don't think he could have (without notice) worn anything more than light foundation, shadowing (mainly matte browns) and minimal lining of eyebrows. Those are really the only make-up tricks that can escape notice, particularly by females who wear make-up daily (as the stews certainly did - Flo couldn't have embodied the look of the era more). It's how you achieve the "natural look" without exposing your pimples or liver spots. I've said it before, but aging make-up and feature-transforming make-up (eg. bulking up a nose) cannot be disguised over a long period up close and will deteriorate and require re-application over hours. (Cooper's insistence on the dimming of the cabin lights was to prevent easy tailing by the military jets that did indeed follow, not to disguise his appearance this late in the game. It also proves, again, how very well he had thought out this crime. This was no copycat, and definitely no chimp. This guy makes James Bond look like Miniver Cheevy.)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 04, 2018, 06:28:16 PM
Quote
Cooper's insistence on the dimming of the cabin lights was to prevent easy tailing by the military jets that did indeed follow, not to disguise his appearance this late in the game.)

The blinds were down on the windows so you couldn't see in the plane (sniper) I believe this would be so they couldn't see what he was doing from the cockpit if they were looking, or trying to look..the beacons on the tail and wings could easily be seen..they were suppose to flash them when Cooper bailed...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Lynn on March 04, 2018, 06:33:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Cooper's insistence on the dimming of the cabin lights was to prevent easy tailing by the military jets that did indeed follow, not to disguise his appearance this late in the game.)

The blinds were down on the windows so you couldn't see in the plane (sniper) I believe this would be so they couldn't see what he was doing from the cockpit if they were looking, or trying to look..the beacons on the tail and wings could easily be seen..they were suppose to flash them when Cooper bailed...
That does make more sense. But still does point to a remarkable degree of forethought. And he doesn't appear to have gone to any great lengths to disguise himself. He was just the kind of guy who blended.

On that tack, does anyone know if any previous hijackers had avoided all direct contact with pilots and negotiated from the back of the plane? Was there any previous skyjacking where all communication had been through cabin crew members or via phone? Just wondering how much Cooper could have picked up from studying previous skyjackings through books and other media, and how much would require some degree of knowledge of FBI hijack protocols?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 04, 2018, 06:39:16 PM
I think his clothing was nothing more than to blend in..he could of wore a hat to confuse even more..If Cooper wasn't really that popular with friends and family, or anyone else. he would never be accused...his description fits so many of that time period..the 302's prove that as well...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on March 04, 2018, 06:39:59 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Cooper's insistence on the dimming of the cabin lights was to prevent easy tailing by the military jets that did indeed follow, not to disguise his appearance this late in the game.)

The blinds were down on the windows so you couldn't see in the plane (sniper) I believe this would be so they couldn't see what he was doing from the cockpit if they were looking, or trying to look..the beacons on the tail and wings could easily be seen..they were suppose to flash them when Cooper bailed...
That does make more sense. But still does point to a remarkable degree of forethought. And he doesn't appear to have gone to any great lengths to disguise himself. He was just the kind of guy who blended.

On that tack, does anyone know if any previous hijackers had avoided all direct contact with pilots and negotiated from the back of the plane? Was there any previous skyjacking where all communication had been through cabin crew members or via phone? Just wondering how much Cooper could have picked up from studying previous skyjackings through books and other media, and how much would require some degree of knowledge of FBI hijack protocols?

There was no need for direct contact between the hijacker and the pilots.  The only information that the hijacker needed to pass to the pilots was simple and could easily be done by the stews over the interphone from the cabin.

In the 1970 era, the FBI hijack protocol essentially consisted of just shooting the hijackers.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 04, 2018, 06:43:44 PM
McNally claims to have went into the cockpit to see 4 gauges to confirm they were doing what he directed them to do...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on March 04, 2018, 06:46:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
McNally claims to have went into the cockpit to see 4 gauges to confirm they were doing what he directed them to do...

Did he mention which four gauges?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 04, 2018, 06:47:59 PM
Previous hijackings were political in nature and required a country as a destination in most cases...no need for exact locations for a jump..the stews thought they might be going to Cuba...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 04, 2018, 06:49:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
McNally claims to have went into the cockpit to see 4 gauges to confirm they were doing what he directed them to do...

Did he mention which four gauges?

yes, he did...the exact one's I don't recall..he had trouble with the 4th calling of one..I'll search it out once I return from the store...no food...been a very lazy day for me today  O0 he was in the Navy and claims to have flown on planes in the electrical department...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: MEYDC on March 04, 2018, 10:25:48 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
georger, this brings me back to something that's been discussed somewhat before - what Cooper meant when he told Tina they were going to a very pleasant place (or whatever the exact quote was). By telling them to go to Mexico while ordering 4 chutes and keeping his pleasant place vague, he ensured the possibility of him taking her (and/or other crew) along whether he jumped or not kept his power at a premium until he was ready to jump.

One could write a novel based on that remark! The whole hijacking cycles around it. The grudge, the plan, and possibly the outcome. If you are a writer Cooper's remark is pregnant with realities - have at it!  ;D

That remark tells us Cooper has a psyche, is an actual person, has an actual life as somebody from somewhere, has an actual history as a human being ... and its just one more tool in Cooper's toolkit to get people to cooperate and participate (willingly?). It's a diversion from reality? He didn;t make that remark to Rataczak, Scott, or to Flo or Alice! He has read Tina, or thinks he has, and he is telling Tina, 'This event has an end and will over with all ok', I believe. Tom Kaye has said he thinks Cooper was a 'womanizer'? (Shows skills and particle evidence on the tie indicating contact with multiple females?)

Cooper has thought things out and has envisioned a happy ending. Did he achieve it? At the time he made that comment he has to manage that happy conclusion happening. From a tactical point of view the plane is remarkably open, imho. The situation fluid. From today's point of view with so many open opportunities, Cooper is a tactical target and could be dead in the next 30 seconds... so, 'we are going to a very pleasant place'. Please come along with me? Let's forget this is a hijacking! All will be well . . .

 

Georger, please explain your reasoning behind your statement that "... particle evidence on the tie . . ." indicates that Cooper had contact with multiple females. ???

Tom thought he saw what could be an abnormally high number of 'particles associated with makeup' indicating multiple female associations/multiple female contacts. Something far beyond a single exposure or even one single makeup regime (but a number of makeup regimes-formulations), indicating multiple females.
Tom is assuming it was from female associations, what if Cooper had used makeup in robberies? I wonder if he had robbed banks in his past. That was the first I had heard about it on the ties BTW.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 04, 2018, 10:30:56 PM
bank robbers usually just put a mask, or hood on, or glasses and a hat....personally, I really don't follow the make-up thingy...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 05, 2018, 12:27:20 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
georger, this brings me back to something that's been discussed somewhat before - what Cooper meant when he told Tina they were going to a very pleasant place (or whatever the exact quote was). By telling them to go to Mexico while ordering 4 chutes and keeping his pleasant place vague, he ensured the possibility of him taking her (and/or other crew) along whether he jumped or not kept his power at a premium until he was ready to jump.

One could write a novel based on that remark! The whole hijacking cycles around it. The grudge, the plan, and possibly the outcome. If you are a writer Cooper's remark is pregnant with realities - have at it!  ;D

That remark tells us Cooper has a psyche, is an actual person, has an actual life as somebody from somewhere, has an actual history as a human being ... and its just one more tool in Cooper's toolkit to get people to cooperate and participate (willingly?). It's a diversion from reality? He didn;t make that remark to Rataczak, Scott, or to Flo or Alice! He has read Tina, or thinks he has, and he is telling Tina, 'This event has an end and will over with all ok', I believe. Tom Kaye has said he thinks Cooper was a 'womanizer'? (Shows skills and particle evidence on the tie indicating contact with multiple females?)

Cooper has thought things out and has envisioned a happy ending. Did he achieve it? At the time he made that comment he has to manage that happy conclusion happening. From a tactical point of view the plane is remarkably open, imho. The situation fluid. From today's point of view with so many open opportunities, Cooper is a tactical target and could be dead in the next 30 seconds... so, 'we are going to a very pleasant place'. Please come along with me? Let's forget this is a hijacking! All will be well . . .

 

Georger, please explain your reasoning behind your statement that "... particle evidence on the tie . . ." indicates that Cooper had contact with multiple females. ???

Tom thought he saw what could be an abnormally high number of 'particles associated with makeup' indicating multiple female associations/multiple female contacts. Something far beyond a single exposure or even one single makeup regime (but a number of makeup regimes-formulations), indicating multiple females.
Tom is assuming it was from female associations, what if Cooper had used makeup in robberies? I wonder if he had robbed banks in his past. That was the first I had heard about it on the ties BTW.

I wondered the same thing.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on March 05, 2018, 04:40:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
McNally claims to have went into the cockpit to see 4 gauges to confirm they were doing what he directed them to do...

Did he mention which four gauges?

One was altitude, and another speed. I forget the other two.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 05, 2018, 05:53:08 PM
while speaking about the gauges he seemed confused, or forgetful...he said it was 4 gauges he wanted to see...altimeter, airspeed, magnetic compass, and he couldn't remember the fourth...he was worried about the time frame, light was not to far away so he wanted out..

he sat on the stairs, then slowly let his feet out to feel the wind, then claims he turned over on his stomach..he was worried because if they knew this was happening, they could pick him off the stairs..so he let go..he rolled over on his back and began to go down feet first. he said he had to free fall for one mile to get to 130 mph (terminal velocity)..as soon as he moved his right hand in to pull the rip chord, he left the other arm out and started to spin..he quickly pulled and was face down, so the chute popped him in the face. (spring loaded) receive two black eye's, and damaged his jaw..he quickly grabbed the lines and started pulling hoping for resistance...then he looked down and saw the money tumbling away....he stated he started screaming and yelling "all this work for nothing" he claims to have wanted to release the chute and drop, but had second thoughts, and started thinking about doing it again...

to hear this portion skip to about 22 minute into the video...

..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2OEx-dWP0U
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on March 06, 2018, 12:42:10 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
while speaking about the gauges he seemed confused, or forgetful...he said it was 4 gauges he wanted to see...altimeter, airspeed, magnetic compass, and he couldn't remember the fourth...he was worried about the time frame, light was not to far away so he wanted out..

he sat on the stairs, then slowly let his feet out to feel the wind, then claims he turned over on his stomach..he was worried because if they knew this was happening, they could pick him off the stairs..so he let go..he rolled over on his back and began to go down feet first. he said he had to free fall for one mile to get to 130 mph (terminal velocity)..as soon as he moved his right hand in to pull the rip chord, he left the other arm out and started to spin..he quickly pulled and was face down, so the chute popped him in the face. (spring loaded) receive two black eye's, and damaged his jaw..he quickly grabbed the lines and started pulling hoping for resistance...then he looked down and saw the money tumbling away....he stated he started screaming and yelling "all this work for nothing" he claims to have wanted to release the chute and drop, but had second thoughts, and started thinking about doing it again...

to hear this portion skip to about 22 minute into the video...

..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2OEx-dWP0U

A note on the term "terminal velocity".  Terminal velocity refers to the fastest speed possible and varies with altitude, among other things, in the case of a skydiver or aircraft. 

In the case of a skydiver, the fastest speed is at high altitude and in a head down position with the legs straight and the arms held along the body sides.  Our friend Amazon, of DropZone fame, used to hold a speed record for doing this type of thing.  I believe her record was about 300 MPH or so.  She reportedly routinely broke shroud line during the pull out and canopy deployment from these dives.

At Sea Level, standard atmospheric conditions, a skydiver in a horizontal spread position will have a descent rate of about 120-130 MPH.  For a head down and streamlined position, this will be about 180+ MPH.  But don't try either of these at home.   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on March 06, 2018, 04:14:50 AM
One of the things that impressed me about Martin McNally is that in the video he referred to the main parachutes as "back chutes." He called the front chutes, "reserves," though, which is what he used. The feds only gave him reserves - five of them actually.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 06, 2018, 06:34:41 AM
Some of his story is hard to swallow as truth...he appears to be a lonely guy..he was disappointed his parole officer would not be visiting any longer..it was a big change for him after being locked up for so long and always having people around him..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on March 06, 2018, 02:30:08 PM
Absolutely fascinating account of the jump. But I doubt its accuracy. Chances of him staying stable in a long freefall on his first jump is near ZERO. He claims he was decelerating from a fast exit down to terminal velocity which makes stability even less likely. Says he only became unstable when he reached for the ripcord handle.

He spins a riveting tale for sure.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 06, 2018, 03:19:53 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Some of his story is hard to swallow as truth...he appears to be a lonely guy..he was disappointed his parole officer would not be visiting any longer..it was a big change for him after being locked up for so long and always having people around him..

His exploit and his story may be the penultimate accomplishment of his life? He's one lucky dude.  :rofl:
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 06, 2018, 03:23:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Absolutely fascinating account of the jump. But I doubt its accuracy. Chances of him staying stable in a long freefall on his first jump is near ZERO. He claims he was decelerating from a fast exit down to terminal velocity which makes stability even less likely. Says he only became unstable when he reached for the ripcord handle.

He spins a riveting tale for sure.

377

Like this!  I very rarely break in with something totally OFF TOPIC but have you seen this! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5463173/Best-Actress-winner-Frances-McDormand-LOST-Oscar-gong.html    Not suggesting you represent this guy but maybe you can help deep-six this fellow. ... since the topic is "freefall and fame" at the expense of others!   ;)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on March 06, 2018, 04:09:35 PM
Felony larceny charged in the Oscar theft. Not being treated lightly. This guy is in serious trouble.

San Francisco treats theft a bit differently. Auto break-ins now exceed THIRTY THOUSAND a year, a disgrace. Average cost just to fix a broken car window is over $300. And the value of stuff taken is far in excess of that. Only THIRTEEN ARRESTS in the past 7 years. Auto burglary in SF is a lucrative low-risk occupation. Good for the car window repair business too.

https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Only-13-arrests-in-7-years-of-SF-online-auto-12526601.php

Now back to Cooper. McNally is such a great storyteller. He's got the thug voice too. Maybe he can get a job in some new Netflix series. Theyve hired thugs before. http://www.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/celebrity.news.gossip/03/10/wire.actress.arrested/index.html

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 06, 2018, 04:40:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Felony larceny charged in the Oscar theft. Not being treated lightly. This guy is in serious trouble.

San Francisco treats theft a bit differently. Auto break-ins now exceed THIRTY THOUSAND a year, a disgrace. Average cost just to fix a broken car window is over $300. And the value of stuff taken is far in excess of that. Only THIRTEEN ARRESTS in the past 7 years. Auto burglary in SF is a lucrative low-risk occupation. Good for the car window repair business too.

https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Only-13-arrests-in-7-years-of-SF-online-auto-12526601.php

Now back to Cooper. McNally is such a great storyteller. He's got the thug voice too. Maybe he can get a job in some new Netflix series. Theyve hired thugs before. http://www.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/celebrity.news.gossip/03/10/wire.actress.arrested/index.html

377

More to my tastes: https://explore.org/livecams/bald-eagles/decorah-eagles  Kids love it! She has three eggs as of last week.. school classes are watching and studying ... it snowed last night ...  :chr2:
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on March 06, 2018, 11:26:48 PM
I also saw an eagle-cam a few days ago showing an eagle almost getting blown out of her nest due to the wind from the nor'easter.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 06, 2018, 11:37:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I also saw an eagle-cam a few days ago showing an eagle almost getting blown out of her nest due to the wind from the nor'easter.

I have no idea how they take the winds! Just hunker down ... they will turn their backs to the wind just like all animals do in a storm... we have six bee hives, the grandkids love them, have bee suits and the whole works, so I noticed there is only one good bee site at the Ecocam website so, we are thinking about setting up another bee cam - live, as a school project. We are trying to figure out how to get power to the hives in the woods ... ??  :))     

Ive offered to put up a small wind generator in that area, need a county permit but the area school is all for it - we'll see what happens. This could generate many science projects for the kids ...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 07, 2018, 05:34:56 AM
How far away is the hive..set up a wireless camera...

What is power needed for? You could also run a wired cam out into the woods...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 07, 2018, 10:50:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How far away is the hive..set up a wireless camera...

What is power needed for? You could also run a wired cam out into the woods...

Power depends on the cam we use - could be 24v dc. Distance is about half a mile, just far enough to make a land line an issue, but I probably could get the Rural electric people to just put up a pole. We have always wanted to try some wind power as a separate project so we may combine these projects. We will definitely do something come warm weather because the kids are all for this, their school is all for this, ... and grandpa is all for this!   ;) We may coordinate this with the Decorah (EcoCam Explore) people. My concern is the lifetime of interest the kids will have in bees. So we are open to any other ideas. Maybe a wildlife cam? Maybe an all sky meteor and weather cam too? Maybe something with a good parabolic audio dish to pick up the audio side of things also? The audio of storms going through, insects at night, deer etc.   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robert99 on March 07, 2018, 12:51:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How far away is the hive..set up a wireless camera...

What is power needed for? You could also run a wired cam out into the woods...

Power depends on the cam we use - could be 24v dc. Distance is about half a mile, just far enough to make a land line an issue, but I probably could get the Rural electric people to just put up a pole. We have always wanted to try some wind power as a separate project so we may combine these projects. We will definitely do something come warm weather because the kids are all for this, their school is all for this, ... and grandpa is all for this!   ;) We may coordinate this with the Decorah (EcoCam Explore) people. My concern is the lifetime of interest the kids will have in bees. So we are open to any other ideas. Maybe a wildlife cam? Maybe an all sky meteor and weather cam too? Maybe something with a good parabolic audio dish to pick up the audio side of things also? The audio of storms going through, insects at night, deer etc.

Could a small solar panel provide sufficient power?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 07, 2018, 06:35:54 PM
Take a look here...Build a wireless trail cam with live video stream..

you can use a dedicated cellphone to patch it to your computer.....


https://itstillworks.com/12255380/how-to-build-a-wireless-trail-camera-with-a-live-video-stream
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 08, 2018, 12:41:37 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
How far away is the hive..set up a wireless camera...

What is power needed for? You could also run a wired cam out into the woods...

Power depends on the cam we use - could be 24v dc. Distance is about half a mile, just far enough to make a land line an issue, but I probably could get the Rural electric people to just put up a pole. We have always wanted to try some wind power as a separate project so we may combine these projects. We will definitely do something come warm weather because the kids are all for this, their school is all for this, ... and grandpa is all for this!   ;) We may coordinate this with the Decorah (EcoCam Explore) people. My concern is the lifetime of interest the kids will have in bees. So we are open to any other ideas. Maybe a wildlife cam? Maybe an all sky meteor and weather cam too? Maybe something with a good parabolic audio dish to pick up the audio side of things also? The audio of storms going through, insects at night, deer etc.

Could a small solar panel provide sufficient power?

No, but Shutter's ideas are good ... low cost, easily decommissioned if need be (people lose interest), ... thanks for the comments! 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on March 08, 2018, 12:43:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Take a look here...Build a wireless trail cam with live video stream..

you can use a dedicated cellphone to patch it to your computer.....


https://itstillworks.com/12255380/how-to-build-a-wireless-trail-camera-with-a-live-video-stream

Good idea. But I want sound also ... I like the simplicity of what you suggest. Have passed this on to the "Bee Brothers Inc" staff!  ;D
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on March 08, 2018, 05:31:51 AM
I believe the wifi cams do have sound..you can find them on Amazon & Ebay from $20 & up..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on March 08, 2018, 01:16:58 PM
This is the best remote viewing setup I have found. Unlike Bruce, I need hardware to do this  ;).

www.manything.com

One camera monitoring is free. It works great with old iPhones like the model 4 which can be bought on Amazon for about $35. The app allows live streaming, motion alerts, two-way audio, and has many other cool features. Needs to have a wifi connection.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 11, 2018, 06:52:15 PM
Re-Visiting the Amboy Chute

The Travel Channel is asking me about the Amboy Chute, so I'd like some help in refreshing my memory on what it is and what it isn't.

As I recall, the chute got pulled out of the ground circa 2009 and turned over the FBI. Larry Carr drove down to the property where it was discovered and Larry dug around for the shroud lines and harness, which weren't part of what he had in Seattle - he only had the remnants of the canopy.

Pix of the Amboy chute got posted - possibly at the DZ - and I have a few screen grabs, but I'm looking for more definitive pix. Do we have them in a vault here? Shut? Any ideas, guys?

The pix show a ratty, dirty white-ish chute that is mostly rumpled. Robbie Burroughs is in a pix with a manufacturing tab that says 1946 in one pix. The chute is said to be silk and not nylon, from what I recall. True?

Cossey told me that the Amboy chute was not DB Cooper's main or reserve, as the Amboy parachute was too big at 32-feet, and was the wrong material - based upon his narrative , of course, that he provided an NB-6 or and NB-8 depending on what narrative one likes, and such parachutes were rip-stop nylon.

In addition, nobody but Carr and Cossey have seen the chute, as far as we know. Tom Kaye and all of the CS team never saw it. I don't think GG or Galen have seen it either despite their frequent trips to Carr's and Eng's office. I haven't even gotten close to seeing it, either.

Further, nobody knows where it came from in Amboy. Meyer and I went on our historic trip there in 2012 looking for the property and got the Royal Runaround from everyone in Amboy.

I looked at sites that locals in Amboy said were the locations, such as Sperrel and Pup Creek roads, several Munch Rd locations, and around Buncombe Hollow Rd near Green Mountain. But nada.

Anything anyone can add is greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 11, 2018, 07:03:09 PM
I have some but have to find them...Carr speaks about the chute on You Tube as well....

The article you made with Cossey states it was a cargo chute....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 11, 2018, 07:10:13 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ef6Ok4EXp_M
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 11, 2018, 07:10:34 PM
Yup, that's what Cossey said. Plus he added that the feds asked him to keep his opinions quiet for a few days so that they could milk the press coverage.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 11, 2018, 07:14:19 PM
after listening to Carr on the video, it appears to have been a chute used by the previous owners for coverage or something and discarded..Kaye also believes something else but it doesn't appear to have any connection to the case..doesn't matter if it was silk, nylon etc...the date tells the story as well...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 11, 2018, 07:21:02 PM
Good to se the video again, Shut. Thanks.

So there are inconsistencies between TK and LC.

LC says that the parachute was found in a trash pile left on the side of a hill and was not deteriorated.  As a result, he said it wasn't part of the case because it hadn't been in the ground for 40 years.

Tom Kaye said the chute was dug out of the ground and the shroud lines cut off by local kids. Hence the shroud lines are still buried in the ground.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 11, 2018, 07:23:58 PM
The original story was a road was being built and the chute was snagged by the tractor...

I've always found the whole thing odd...it smells of a publicity stunt...nobody seems to know exactly where this occurred..many will tell you, then they trip and flutter a response...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 11, 2018, 07:26:23 PM
Blevins wants everyone to believe it's been buried since 1971...nobody knows how long it was half in the ground...could of been months to years....who knows...several other chutes have been found and nobody says anything...

Robert will also tell you Cossey looked at it for 10 seconds...that's false as well....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 11, 2018, 07:32:53 PM
Dona from the Ariel Tavern also said she knew where the chute was found...she gave the name of the road and said it was the last house or something like that...it's online somewhere...

I find it strange that after all these years nobody has come forward to tell the story....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 11, 2018, 07:49:33 PM
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 11, 2018, 07:52:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Dona from the Ariel Tavern also said she knew where the chute was found...she gave the name of the road and said it was the last house or something like that...it's online somewhere...

I find it strange that after all these years nobody has come forward to tell the story....

Dona told me and Meyer that the property was a "couple of houses" in from the corner of Spurrel and Pup Creek Roads in Amboy. Plus, she said that the owner of the property had five daughters. Meyer and I talked to a few people there. One guy said he had lived there all of his life and never heard of the parachute. Another resident, a talkative gal in an up-scaled suburban house, as opposed to most of the double-wide, rural, ramshackle house stock common to the area, said that her property was definitely not the spot where any parachute was found.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 11, 2018, 07:57:55 PM
It makes you wonder why it's so hard to find the location...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 11, 2018, 08:06:18 PM
a lot of tree covering the area...two possible sites with hills and garbage....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 11, 2018, 08:10:15 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.

that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on October 11, 2018, 11:28:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Dona from the Ariel Tavern also said she knew where the chute was found...she gave the name of the road and said it was the last house or something like that...it's online somewhere...

I find it strange that after all these years nobody has come forward to tell the story....

I stayed completely away from this ... Blev was involved. Once the event happened I am sure people just wanted no publicity and return to normal...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 12, 2018, 01:24:35 AM
Bobby B was not involved in this foray. Just Meyer and Me. In fact, it was our second trip to Ariel together. The first did involve RMB, who video recorded an interview with me, along with Dona chiming in from the background as she prepared for the Cooper Daze festivities.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 12, 2018, 01:25:21 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.

that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....

Ahhhh. Thank you. That explains a lot, and clears up my confusion. Mucho gracias.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 12, 2018, 01:27:18 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
a lot of tree covering the area...two possible sites with hills and garbage....

Thanks, Shut. This photo is very important. Meyer and I were at the upper-most property, seen circled on the upper left-hand side. We never toured the property, so I never saw the trash pile in the rear. We only talked to "Diane" in her driveway.

The second property should be investigated, though.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: foxmanb on October 13, 2018, 10:11:53 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.

I wish they would search this chute & cords for touch DNA. I think the only way for him to really cut those cords would have been to grab them and hold them tight in his hand while he cut.
that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 13, 2018, 10:41:40 AM
The chute was a cargo chute...even the markings on it were consistent with a cargo chute..it was 32 feet in diameter..no reason to do any testing on the chute...a lot of chutes sold had the lines already cut on them prior to selling so they can't be used as a parachute..a personnel chute has a lot more information on the canopy..no human life is lost if a cargo chute fails so limited information is printed on the canopy..

Cossey did more than a 10 second evaluation..when you are qualified to do something you can quickly rule things out..I deal with aluminum and can tell you in 3 seconds if something is made of aluminum...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 13, 2018, 10:46:30 AM
Quote
I wish they would search this chute & cords for touch DNA. I think the only way for him to really cut those cords would have been to grab them and hold them tight in his hand while he cut.
that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....

It's too late to do any testing on the reserve chute...too many hands have touched the lines...

I tried to fix your post but couldn't...that's why you will see my name under edit...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 13, 2018, 05:15:58 PM
If I can get the gas money, I'll be heading down to Amboy in the next week or two to check on these properties, plus head down to LaCenter if time permits to snoop around coffee shops and diners to see what the story is with the Colbert-Rackstraw digging that went on there a year ago.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on October 13, 2018, 11:45:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If I can get the gas money, I'll be heading down to Amboy in the next week or two to check on these properties, plus head down to LaCenter if time permits to snoop around coffee shops and diners to see what the story is with the Colbert-Rackstraw digging that went on there a year ago.

Good choice. They claims to have found Cooper evidence, Yeti evidence, and remains of the Voyager probe ? Please check on those. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 14, 2018, 12:00:34 AM
How much in fuel do you need?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 15, 2018, 01:30:12 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How much in fuel do you need?

40 bucks or so. I'm working on an angle where the costs might be shared. Might also go up to Yacolt, where Tom McDowell is. He's the guy who led the ground search.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on October 15, 2018, 10:40:59 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How much in fuel do you need?

40 bucks or so. I'm working on an angle where the costs might be shared. Might also go up to Yacolt, where Tom McDowell is. He's the guy who led the ground search.

I can send some fuel money if you need some. it's for a good cause?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on October 15, 2018, 11:08:05 PM
I think I'm good, Shut. Thanks, though. Let's save the gas money for another time.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Kermit on October 17, 2018, 01:27:41 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How much in fuel do you need?

40 bucks or so. I'm working on an angle where the costs might be shared. Might also go up to Yacolt, where Tom McDowell is. He's the guy who led the ground search.

Make note of the Railway which goes right through the Town.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Lynn on November 25, 2018, 03:05:58 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
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.

that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....

Ahhhh. Thank you. That explains a lot, and clears up my confusion. Mucho gracias.
My mind keeps going back to that reserve chute he took. What could he have done with it, if it was never attached properly to begin with? Why take it? Can anyone think of any stories they've ever heard about a reserve chute, or any chute, being used for another purpose in any situation? I think one person long ago mentioned using the chute's weight to produce a decoy bounce on the stairs but it didn't seem very plausible or workable. Having said that, am baffled by that chute.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on November 25, 2018, 04:24:08 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
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.

that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....

Ahhhh. Thank you. That explains a lot, and clears up my confusion. Mucho gracias.
My mind keeps going back to that reserve chute he took. What could he have done with it, if it was never attached properly to begin with? Why take it? Can anyone think of any stories they've ever heard about a reserve chute, or any chute, being used for another purpose in any situation? I think one person long ago mentioned using the chute's weight to produce a decoy bounce on the stairs but it didn't seem very plausible or workable. Having said that, am baffled by that chute.

There is no mystery here - its all explained in the docs.

He tried to fashion a money bag out of it, apparently. He told Tina that and explained why he was cannibalizing chutes ... since they forgot the knapsack he requested many times.

When  get the time I will post ALL of his requests for the knapsack from various testimony we have - as well as his various explaination/statement to people about why he was tearing chutes apart - to BUILD A MONEY BAG! Its all there in the files for anyone willing to read it.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: FLYJACK on November 25, 2018, 05:13:42 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.

that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....

Ahhhh. Thank you. That explains a lot, and clears up my confusion. Mucho gracias.
My mind keeps going back to that reserve chute he took. What could he have done with it, if it was never attached properly to begin with? Why take it? Can anyone think of any stories they've ever heard about a reserve chute, or any chute, being used for another purpose in any situation? I think one person long ago mentioned using the chute's weight to produce a decoy bounce on the stairs but it didn't seem very plausible or workable. Having said that, am baffled by that chute.

There is no mystery here - its all explained in the docs.

He tried to fashion a money bag out of it, apparently. He told Tina that and explained why he was cannibalizing chutes ... since they forgot the knapsack he requested many times.

When  get the time I will post ALL of his requests for the knapsack from various testimony we have - as well as his various explaination/statement to people about why he was tearing chutes apart - to BUILD A MONEY BAG! Its all there in the files for anyone willing to read it.

Not to disagree but where did the contents go? The contents of the dummy chute weren't found (or disclosed) If he emptied it to use for the money, did he toss the contents out the back? Why?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 25, 2018, 05:24:42 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.

that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....

Ahhhh. Thank you. That explains a lot, and clears up my confusion. Mucho gracias.
My mind keeps going back to that reserve chute he took. What could he have done with it, if it was never attached properly to begin with? Why take it? Can anyone think of any stories they've ever heard about a reserve chute, or any chute, being used for another purpose in any situation? I think one person long ago mentioned using the chute's weight to produce a decoy bounce on the stairs but it didn't seem very plausible or workable. Having said that, am baffled by that chute.

There is no mystery here - its all explained in the docs.

He tried to fashion a money bag out of it, apparently. He told Tina that and explained why he was cannibalizing chutes ... since they forgot the knapsack he requested many times.

When  get the time I will post ALL of his requests for the knapsack from various testimony we have - as well as his various explaination/statement to people about why he was tearing chutes apart - to BUILD A MONEY BAG! Its all there in the files for anyone willing to read it.

Not to disagree but where did the contents go? The contents of the dummy chute weren't found (or disclosed) If he emptied it to use for the money, did he toss the contents out the back? Why?

take a good look at the area below the flight path. a lot is nothing but heavy woods and close to Mt. Saint Helen. it's luck the placard was found. could of tossed anywhere along the path. 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: FLYJACK on November 25, 2018, 05:32:09 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
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
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.

that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....

Ahhhh. Thank you. That explains a lot, and clears up my confusion. Mucho gracias.
My mind keeps going back to that reserve chute he took. What could he have done with it, if it was never attached properly to begin with? Why take it? Can anyone think of any stories they've ever heard about a reserve chute, or any chute, being used for another purpose in any situation? I think one person long ago mentioned using the chute's weight to produce a decoy bounce on the stairs but it didn't seem very plausible or workable. Having said that, am baffled by that chute.

There is no mystery here - its all explained in the docs.

He tried to fashion a money bag out of it, apparently. He told Tina that and explained why he was cannibalizing chutes ... since they forgot the knapsack he requested many times.

When  get the time I will post ALL of his requests for the knapsack from various testimony we have - as well as his various explaination/statement to people about why he was tearing chutes apart - to BUILD A MONEY BAG! Its all there in the files for anyone willing to read it.

Not to disagree but where did the contents go? The contents of the dummy chute weren't found (or disclosed) If he emptied it to use for the money, did he toss the contents out the back? Why?

take a good look at the area below the flight path. a lot is nothing but heavy woods and close to Mt. Saint Helen. it's luck the placard was found. could of tossed anywhere along the path.

Yes, but my point is different. If you wanted to empty the dummy reserve to use for the money then why throw the contents off the plane?  You'd expect to find it laying in the cabin.

If Cooper threw the entire chute off the plane you'd likely never find it..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 25, 2018, 05:43:50 PM
correct, so I don't follow what you are saying. it leaves more questions than answers..

He didn't throw the other two chutes left behind..
If he was using one for the money then why did he stop with the one already opened.
He didn't need the other back pack so why didn't he throw that one out?


It goes on and on. only Cooper knows.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on November 25, 2018, 06:36:24 PM
One use for the "dummy chute" was to use it to assist DBC is descending from a tree in case he got snagged. The 14 feet worth of daisy-chained shroud lines, plus the 13-feet of a canopy, added to the 45-80 feet of cut cordline wrapped around the money bag, and DBC might have gotten to the ground when he otherwise would have been hung high and not-so dry...

...that's one possibility.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Unsurelock on November 25, 2018, 07:17:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
correct, so I don't follow what you are saying. it leaves more questions than answers..

He didn't throw the other two chutes left behind..
If he was using one for the money then why did he stop with the one already opened.
He didn't need the other back pack so why didn't he throw that one out?


It goes on and on. only Cooper knows.

Just spitballing of course, but someone who doesn't know what will happen when exiting a jet under the turbine might toss something out first to see what happens first.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 25, 2018, 07:20:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
correct, so I don't follow what you are saying. it leaves more questions than answers..

He didn't throw the other two chutes left behind..
If he was using one for the money then why did he stop with the one already opened.
He didn't need the other back pack so why didn't he throw that one out?


It goes on and on. only Cooper knows.

Just spitballing of course, but someone who doesn't know what will happen when exiting a jet under the turbine might toss something out first to see what happens first.


according to most (not me) they believe Cooper knew all about the stairs even though he had trouble with them and thought they could be lowered from the cockpit.

The briefcase seems to me to be the worst thing to attach. why take it with you? the handle sure as hell would hold it. of course his prints were on it but he had a reason not to leave it..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on November 25, 2018, 07:46:25 PM
Yup. Leave no evidence behind.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Unsurelock on November 25, 2018, 07:47:10 PM
I tend to think Cooper had knowledge without experience. Knowing is one thing. Doing is something entirely different.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: FLYJACK on November 25, 2018, 07:57:53 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yup. Leave no evidence behind.

Except the tie, cigs and money he gave the stews.


There are two different issues with the chute...

If he used it for money where did the contents go? and why? Tossing makes no sense.

If not, he tossed the entire thing.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 25, 2018, 08:03:35 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yup. Leave no evidence behind.

Except the tie, cigs and money he gave the stews.


There are two different issues with the chute...

If he used it for money where did the contents go? and why? Tossing makes no sense.

If not, he tossed the entire thing.

what he left behind in 1971 is totally different from today..it wasn't any concern for evidence.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on November 26, 2018, 12:00:29 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
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
Yup.

Also, what is the orange/pink parachute that is in the FBI's "Gallery." I've seen it in a lot of places, and usually associated with the Amboy chute, as I recall.

that was the reserve Cooper cut up.....

Ahhhh. Thank you. That explains a lot, and clears up my confusion. Mucho gracias.
My mind keeps going back to that reserve chute he took. What could he have done with it, if it was never attached properly to begin with? Why take it? Can anyone think of any stories they've ever heard about a reserve chute, or any chute, being used for another purpose in any situation? I think one person long ago mentioned using the chute's weight to produce a decoy bounce on the stairs but it didn't seem very plausible or workable. Having said that, am baffled by that chute.

There is no mystery here - its all explained in the docs.

He tried to fashion a money bag out of it, apparently. He told Tina that and explained why he was cannibalizing chutes ... since they forgot the knapsack he requested many times.

When  get the time I will post ALL of his requests for the knapsack from various testimony we have - as well as his various explaination/statement to people about why he was tearing chutes apart - to BUILD A MONEY BAG! Its all there in the files for anyone willing to read it.

Not to disagree but where did the contents go? The contents of the dummy chute weren't found (or disclosed) If he emptied it to use for the money, did he toss the contents out the back? Why?

who knows - maybe he was in the mood to toss things - or the guys at Reno who canvased the plane were blind and stupid ?  I could believe any of those ...
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on November 26, 2018, 12:01:35 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
correct, so I don't follow what you are saying. it leaves more questions than answers..

He didn't throw the other two chutes left behind..
If he was using one for the money then why did he stop with the one already opened.
He didn't need the other back pack so why didn't he throw that one out?


It goes on and on. only Cooper knows.

Just spitballing of course, but someone who doesn't know what will happen when exiting a jet under the turbine might toss something out first to see what happens first.

That actually isnt a bad thought! Maybe an expert would do that also!  Good thought!!  :congrats:
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: EU on November 26, 2018, 12:07:00 AM
Perhaps Cooper used the dummy reserve to pack a portion of the ransom. After all, the money bag was completely filled and would be easier to tie off at the top if some of the money was transferred to the dummy reserve.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on November 26, 2018, 12:10:32 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Perhaps Cooper used the dummy reserve to pack a portion of the ransom. After all, the money bag was completely filled and would be easier to tie off at the top if some of the money was transferred to the dummy reserve.

well I can see I get to post more docs...

lots of comments in docs about the knapsack, Cooper being pissed about it, explanations to crew why he was cannibalizing chutes, what he was doing with the money, fabricating containers and trying them ... etc. 

Let me put those quotes together and post ... tomorrow. There was no shortage of comment by Cooper and the crew on this subject. No need to speculate! No need to speculate!    :o
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 26, 2018, 03:57:37 AM
I don't think there's any evidence that Cooper opened the 2nd reserve, which it seems like people are suggesting?

There may be different interpretations by Tina, as to what he was doing when he opened the one reserve.

Be interesting to see if georger finds anything that suggests opening more than one reserve.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 26, 2018, 08:49:30 AM
I don't think he opened the second reserve. if he ever did it was after the plane left the ground..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Robertrand on November 26, 2018, 07:10:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Perhaps Cooper used the dummy reserve to pack a portion of the ransom. After all, the money bag was completely filled and would be easier to tie off at the top if some of the money was transferred to the dummy reserve.

I always assumed this as well because it would've have been more durable than the bank sack. But why not use both both reserve chute containers? Seems like an unnecessary risk to use the sack at all.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on November 26, 2018, 11:58:35 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Perhaps Cooper used the dummy reserve to pack a portion of the ransom. After all, the money bag was completely filled and would be easier to tie off at the top if some of the money was transferred to the dummy reserve.

I always assumed this as well because it would've have been more durable than the bank sack. But why not use both both reserve chute containers? Seems like an unnecessary risk to use the sack at all.

Why guess about this? Why do people prefer guessing over testimony?  Guessing is more exciting and you can make shit up! Maybe people will be discussing 'made up shit' 200 years from now then the poser can say: "I influenced civilisation" on his grave!  8)

But here's the facts:

Cooper Knapsack and Money Packing –

2310 – [Pilot Notes]    wants money in negotiable currency to be passed & a crew member . [Nothing in Pilot Notes about knapsack]

3:13pm  305: Passenger advises is hijacking enroute to Seattle. Stewardess (Schaffner) has been handed note requesting 200,000 and knapsack by 5:00pm this afternoon. Wants 2 back pack parachutes. Wants money in negotiable American currency denomination of bills not important. Has bomb in briefcase and will use if anything is done to block his request.

3:20pm     He must have knapsack with money before any other steps taken...


(7:41pm pst)   NWA - Stewardess Mucklow allowed to go to cockpit.

7:42 pm    t1
305:      MSP FLT OPS this is 305 outbound Seattle 14 miles (out) on V23.
                Seattle he is already trying to get the door down. Stewardess (Mucklow) is with us (in cockpit). He cannot get the stairs down.

305:      We now have an aft stair lite on.
MSP:      Roger.305.                                   
         

7:54 pm    t1   
MSP:      As soon as reasonably sure the man has left the quicker you can land.
305:       Roger. Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him and thinks he will attempt a jump.



Florence Schaffner 11/24/71
Cooper remarked about how heavy the money was. He seemed amused and child-like.
Schaffner furnished 13 pages of notes which she took during the course of the flight. 
[No statement about knapsack]

Interview 11-30 Mucklow:
Mucklow then used a plain envelope to write out the demands of the hijacker, listing that he wanted four parachutes including two back packs and two chest packs, $200,000 in cash in small bills, and that he wanted everything by “by five o’clock”.  ” Mucklow says that Florence Schaffner  delivered this note to the pilot’s compartment. [Nothing about knapsack]

The hijacker displayed an extensive knowledge of the aircraft and seemed specifically well informed in refueling procedures to the point that the crew had difficulty in convincing him that only 90% of the required fuel was on board at the time he was protesting the fact that refueling had not been completed. It was also during this time that he complained to Mucklow that he had requested the money be delivered in a knapsack but instead it was delivered in a cloth type bank bag, which displeased him. It was at this time that Mucklow recalls he stated he would be forced to use one of the parachutes to rewrap the money since he had not been furnished the knapsack. At this same time Mucklow says she suddenly observed him having a small green paper bag, contents unknown.
Mucklow received the impression that this hijacking was carefully planned and thought out in advance  in that the hijacker was even specifying that the money was to be furnished in a knapsack and even had already insisted that a discarded matchbook cover (he had provided for one of the stews to light a cigarette for him) be returned to him (and…

Interview of Mucklow 12/1-2 at her home in PA:
The hijacker later told (repeated to)  Mucklow that he wanted $200,000 in circulated US currency, two back and two front parachutes, and fuel trucks to meet the plane when it landed.
When Mucklow returned to the plane with the last back pack chute, she saw that the hijacker had one of the small chutes open and was cutting nylon cords out with his pocket knife. He took the nylon cord and wrapped it around the neck of the money bag numerous times and then he wrapped it a few times from top to bottom, and with the same piece (of cord)  he made a loop like a handle at the top. This nylon cord was pinkish in color. He appeared irritated that they hadn’t given him a knapsack for the money as requested, and after trying to put the money in an unfolded parachute, he decided to leave it in the canvas bag (and fabricate a holding line for that, instead).   
He said, “We’re going to Mexico City, gear down, flaps down, you can trim the plane to 15, you can stop anywhere in Mexico to refuel, but not here in the United States. The aft door must be open and the stairs down. The altitude, under 10,000 feet, they know they can’t go over that. Cabin lights out and everyone is to be forward of the first class curtain.” 


?> original request two back pack chutes .... may be added two front pack reserves as insurance in case the knapsack for hauling money got overlooked?  ::)
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 01:28:05 AM
Coopers alleged use of the word “trim” sure sounds like pilot talk rather than kicker, loadmaster or other aircrew.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 01:48:32 AM
georger:
I noticed once or twice you alluded to the "crew notes" saying they were taking by Scott.
The stuff you posted above says the right thing, that Schaffner wrote those notes

you wrote "Schaffner furnished 13 pages of notes which she took during the course of the flight.  "

So you agree the "crew notes" ..the written ones at Sluggo's site (from the FBI) were written by Flo, right?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on November 27, 2018, 12:50:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
georger:
I noticed once or twice you alluded to the "crew notes" saying they were taking by Scott.
The stuff you posted above says the right thing, that Schaffner wrote those notes

you wrote "Schaffner furnished 13 pages of notes which she took during the course of the flight.  "

So you agree the "crew notes" ..the written ones at Sluggo's site (from the FBI) were written by Flo, right?

I dont know - thats the question. Thats why I keep including that passage: where are the 13 pages of Flo's notes or are they the Pilot Notes?

14 pages are identified in the orig pilot note pdf ... so 13 pages? 14 pages? Looks like the passage I posted could be referring to the pilot notes. And Flo has always been assumed to be the transcriber of the pilot notes  based on what Im not sure ... based on some passage in the PI Transcript? "Flo is with us in the cabin now" ?

Who created the pdf? I think I got my copy off the old Sluggo website?

 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 02:17:36 PM
The pdf that is a transcription of those notes?
I did that, way back when.

Sluggo says snowmman provided it on his site.

In that pdf, I also mention, based on some of the comments about pilot/copilot/Tina that it was probably Flo.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Unsurelock on November 27, 2018, 02:23:56 PM
I had been interested in the chute questions for very few reasons. Did he ask for multiple chutes because there was an accomplice on board (unlikely)? Could his choice of chutes have told us anything about him? (1 in 4? Also unlikely.) Could his choice tell us if he died in the jump? Not unless Mucklow saw him strapping on the trainer.

What are the immediate goals of the chute inquiries? Are they functional or entertaining? Is the goal to ID Cooper or is it a leftover DZ topic that guys like me wouldn't understand? (377, I'm not jumping from anything higher that a car hood.) I feel like I'm missing something when I read the back and forth on this thread. Why do we want to understand the parachute selection, to profile Cooper?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on November 27, 2018, 02:29:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I had been interested in the chute questions for very few reasons. Did he ask for multiple chutes because there was an accomplice on board (unlikely)? Could his choice of chutes have told us anything about him? (1 in 4? Also unlikely.) Could his choice tell us if he died in the jump? Not unless Mucklow saw him strapping on the trainer.

What are the immediate goals of the chute inquiries? Are they functional or entertaining? Is the goal to ID Cooper or is it a leftover DZ topic that guys like me wouldn't understand? (377, I'm not jumping from anything higher that a car hood.) I feel like I'm missing something when I read the back and forth on this thread. Why do we want to understand the parachute selection, to profile Cooper?

Well one of the first communications between plane and ground has them asking for 2 back pack chutes. 2 not 4.

The passages are:

3:13pm  305: Passenger advises is hijacking enroute to Seattle. Stewardess (Schaffner) has been handed note requesting 200,000 and knapsack by 5:00pm this afternoon. Wants 2 back pack parachutes. Wants money in negotiable American currency denomination of bills not important. Has bomb in briefcase and will use if anything is done to block his request.

3:20pm     He must have knapsack with money before any other steps taken.

Is it possible he changed 2 to 4 as a backup in case they didnt deliver the knapsack? Or is this a misunderstanding between the stews and the cabin?

Cooper was in charge of his chute demands. 2 vs 4.  Somebody changed 2 to 4. Who made the change, Cooper or somebody in the crew? Or did Scott not understand he wanted 4 in his first request? I think it is Scott screwing things up and getting communications screwed up!

The passages above are in the PI Transcript.

It is pretty clear he asked for the money to be delivered in a knapsack - that was his request and his intention. But, the crew screwed that part up and the money got delivered in a bag with no knapsack sent in with the money. He made it very clear to Tina that he is pissed at being sent no knapsack. I posted those passages last night if anyone is reading my posts ?

 
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on November 27, 2018, 03:12:10 PM
What very likely happened was, Scott and the ground screwed things up with his 3:13 communication:

3:13pm  305: Passenger advises is hijacking enroute to Seattle. Stewardess (Schaffner) has been handed note requesting 200,000 and knapsack by 5:00pm this afternoon. Wants 2 back pack parachutes. Wants money in negotiable American currency denomination of bills not important. Has bomb in briefcase and will use if anything is done to block his request.

3:20pm     He must have knapsack with money before any other steps taken.

Maybe "2 back pack parachutes" should have been "4 back pack parachutes" ... and in spite of everything the knapsack instruction gets left out completely.

This lead directly to Cooper having to cannibalize a chute to try and fabricate a more suitable container for the money. Tying the money bag off at the top was not Cooper's first choice and he tried to avoid doing that. In the end however that is exactly what he was forced to do ... and did. That may have lead to money being found at Tina Bar after circulating in the Columbia and Nature for some time.

That probably means Cooper bailed somewhere in the Columbia drainage basin vs near Ariel. The FP drop timeline may be a few minutes wrong.

So the mere fact of money at Tina Bar does not guarantee that Cooper died - only that the container failed in some form which is exactly what Cooper was trying to avoid with his original request for a knapsack.

What comes around, goes around.   ;D   
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 03:25:17 PM
If you look at the winds around Portland at the time, it's unlikely canopy drift happened between the flight path around PDX and Tena Bar.
The wind is in the wrong direction.

It's more likely the money got dumped into the Columbia near PDX, and the water moved it towards the area of dredging near Tena Bar.

I don't think the money dropped directly from Cooper, to the area near Tena Bar.

So it's pretty odd to think Cooper may have jumped near PDX and an open canopy not be spotted by a random person.

Maybe he did just go in the river, and the body never found.

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: FLYJACK on November 27, 2018, 03:47:53 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If you look at the winds around Portland at the time, it's unlikely canopy drift happened between the flight path around PDX and Tena Bar.
The wind is in the wrong direction.

It's more likely the money got dumped into the Columbia near PDX, and the water moved it towards the area of dredging near Tena Bar.

I don't think the money dropped directly from Cooper, to the area near Tena Bar.

So it's pretty odd to think Cooper may have jumped near PDX and an open canopy not be spotted by a random person.

Maybe he did just go in the river, and the body never found.

Or the Willamette R...

The flightpath crossed the Willamette R right where the 717171684* code POSSIBLY deciphers...

(BTW: This isn't my leading LZ theory, just an alternate)



Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 04:36:12 PM
well, I think any jump location other than around PDX, requires an additional story as to why Cooper would "plant" bills on Tena Bar.

I don't think any plant story makes sense.

Now if the bills were found more quickly after a plant..i.e. not deteriorated, it might be plausible.

The rubber bands are perplexing. If rubber bands were really on individual 100 bill bundles, that supports the idea of a plant, in my mind. But it doesn't make sense.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 04:40:37 PM
among the canopies found and reported to the FBI, was a 24 foot canopy was found in Portland in 1976

Dismissed because not 28 foot.

this is one reason why it's important to understand the canopies.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 04:46:17 PM
Okay this is something I'd not noticed before.

An earlier parachute was found in Portland, apparently in Jan. 1972?

This FBI memo of 1/6/72 says a parachute found in Portland was dismissed by Cossey.

No diameter mentioned.

Could this have been Cooper's parachute, but a 26' canopy incorrectly dismissed?

Compared to the crazy stories from Colbert, and the Reca story, one could easily build a whole History Channel episode around this memo.

The Jan 6, 1972 Portland Parachute...why was it hushed up?

updated to include the 1/19/72 memo where the parachute was returned to unknown
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 05:10:04 PM
Interesting Snow.

Wouldnt that be something if a Cooper canopy had been found but incorrectly disregarded due to Cossey's incompetence, negligence or malfeasance?

A 24 ft canopy would not likely be used an emergency main, especially in an NB 6 or NB 8 rig. Too small a pack volume for those containers and a high descent rate, especially with a heavier jumper.

24 ft ripstop military canopies were, however, widely used as skydiving reserve canopies. They were small, dirt cheap and skydivers were willing to accept a high descent rate in return for lower jump weight and small reserve pack volume. High pack volume in a chest reserve made it harder to go forward towards a formation, the big chest reserve acting as an air brake. 

24 ft twill canopies were widely used as dummy reserves for training as they were essentially worthless.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 05:15:35 PM
The '76 portland canopy was 24' diameter
The '72 portland canopy is unknown diameter.
Yeah, would be funny if it was 26' diameter, like Hayden currently implies.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 05:16:40 PM
One reason I'm not that impressed with "parachute found" is that the NB6 didn't have any quick release for the canopy, right?

so if Cooper canopy was found, it would likely still be attached to the NB6 right?

and no reports of a back rig found.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 05:21:02 PM
Nobody has replied to my question about Cossey. Why did he give so much inaccurate and contradictory info about Coopers gear and especially the canopies?

And why did Cossey tell Bruce that one of Cooper's canopies was a PARADISE model? I have never heard of a PARADISE canopy and can find no mention of them online. Perhaps Snow can find something I missed. It usually goes that way. Cossey didn't say PARACOMANDER (a common sport canopy), he said PARADISE.

The FBI relied upon Coosey as the sole judge of whether found canopies were Cooper's. Bad idea I think.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 05:23:50 PM
Does the serial number act like a VIN number telling what type of container it is?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 05:27:32 PM
As far as I know, NB6 and NB8 rigs in stock Navy condition did not have riser releases.

Some were modified for civilian use to include them. Riser releases (usually called Capewells after the mfr of the most widely used type) are VERY VERY useful if you are being dragged along the ground in high winds.

Watch this video. Viewer discretion advised. You will see why I think riser releases are generally a good idea. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHrTWih0rnE

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 05:30:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Does the serial number act like a VIN number telling what type of container it is?

Not sure about this Shutter. I think the answer is no, but I am not 100% certain.

What complicates it is that many different manufacturers made NB 6 and NB 8 rigs for the military. SNs might have been duplicated in production runs by different mfrs.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Unsurelock on November 27, 2018, 05:36:52 PM
I did read your post, Georger. I understood what it meant. Good info.

What I am still trying to figure out is how that helps with the case. If the parachute chosen somehow explains the money find, is it important? Does it eliminate plant theories? Does that get us closer to knowing who Cooper is? Again, what is the goal of this line of investigation?

I like Snow's idea that the parachute may already have been found and overlooked. That would be significant if it was deployed and there was no corpse attached. Any others?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 05:42:26 PM
If the diameter was close and had no container it's worth a second look. if it had a container the serial number would be on it..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 05:52:36 PM
Canopies and containers have SNs. Riggers log them on the face of the packing card. They are supposed to inspect SNs to be sure they match the packing card info when they do inspections and repacks.

377

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi6r-H61PXeAhUTHHwKHbMKDCEQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chutingstar.com%2Fstarlog-reserve-parachute-packing-data-card-50-pack&psig=AOvVaw2p733UsCwOtJHRry1ZgGPd&ust=1543445573121356

https://goo.gl/images/w8uyiG
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 05:59:42 PM
If they are not the same as the container we can't verify a chute with no container. The Amboy chute appears to have the markings of a cargo chute as Cossey suggested..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 06:02:23 PM
Basically, we need to see the other side of the rigging card Bruce posted with Hayden's chute?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 06:05:39 PM
The training reserve was likely a 24 foot diameter T-7A right?

They didn't seem to be comparing to two possible Cooper canopies. Only the Cooper back rig.

Over time, the training reserve might have escaped a rotted container.
The container was canvas, the canopy nylon?

This attached memo from 11/26/71  provides more detail on the reserve Cooper took. It's unclear if it's correct, since they describe the taken back rig wrong..they describe the non-taken container.
it says this about the back rig, which makes no sense for the NB6
Chute harness is civilian luxury type made of 50 foot tan cotton material.

but the taken training reserve, probably was similar to the non-taken reserve, just modified?

So I'm thinking this is still a good description of the taken reserve.

A T-7A 24 foot white nylon canopy.

Note they say something about what's inscribed on the reserve. But there was no record of anything inscribed on the training reserve..so they wouldn't have known. I think the SAC messed up here, describing the left-behind reserve.

So it's funny they dismissed a 24 foot canopy, since Cooper probably threw out a training reserve with a 24 foot canopy (modified)

Chest pack type 24 foot white nylon canopy, white nylon shrouds, about 14’ length, model T-7A. Chute container was olive drab green with <redacted> inscribed. Container dimensions are 10” by 14” by 6".


Hey has anyone noticed how smoothly I post full page FBI memos that meet the 200KB per page restriction here?

The FBI memos themselves rarely meet that limit for full page.

All the bits are assembled with loving care.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 06:08:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If they are not the same as the container we can't verify a chute with no container. The Amboy chute appears to have the markings of a cargo chute as Cossey suggested..

Personnel canopies have SNs and Cossey would have recorded them in his rigger logbook. All of my military surplus (human carrying) canopies have SNs printed near the skirt band on the so called DATA PANEL.

Canopies and containers do not normally have matching SNs.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 06:10:04 PM
Snow wrote: "Hey has anyone noticed how smoothly I post full page FBI memos that meet the 200KB per page restriction here?"

Don't rub it in. Yes, I HAVE noticed.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 06:12:52 PM
Snow wrote: "Over time, the training reserve might have escaped a rotted container.
The container was canvas, the canopy nylon?"

I have seen both canvas and nylon mil surplus reserve containers.

If the canvas rotted it would leave the metal hardware behind and some of it is stainless, other cadmium plated steel, would last a LONG time.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 06:15:37 PM
Sounds like we need to contact WSHS and ask them to look at the packing card for the diameter of the chute? Hayden said both were identical, right?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 06:21:20 PM
Bruce did take the picture needed. It's attached.
26' ripstop conical
on the not-taken Hayden back rig

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Sounds like we need to contact WSHS and ask them to look at the packing card for the diameter of the chute? Hayden said both were identical, right?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 06:30:56 PM
It's been a while. I only remember the open reverse card portion...

Here in GG's files it's as if they explain 3 chutes on the plane. the one Hayden had is first on the list and the next two appear to be front chutes?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 06:46:00 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Sounds like we need to contact WSHS and ask them to look at the packing card for the diameter of the chute? Hayden said both were identical, right?

Yes, he said both identical and purchased from a surplus store. 26 ft navy Conical is a great canopy. I literally owe my life to one.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: 377 on November 27, 2018, 06:48:01 PM
Love it when nobody is fighting and we are discussing physical evidence, esp parachute gear. If only radios were relevant. Cooper was foolish not to take a tunable VHF AM pocket radio to monitor all the comms to and from the plane.

377
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Bruce A. Smith on November 27, 2018, 06:56:21 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I had been interested in the chute questions for very few reasons. Did he ask for multiple chutes because there was an accomplice on board (unlikely)? Could his choice of chutes have told us anything about him? (1 in 4? Also unlikely.) Could his choice tell us if he died in the jump? Not unless Mucklow saw him strapping on the trainer.

What are the immediate goals of the chute inquiries? Are they functional or entertaining? Is the goal to ID Cooper or is it a leftover DZ topic that guys like me wouldn't understand? (377, I'm not jumping from anything higher that a car hood.) I feel like I'm missing something when I read the back and forth on this thread. Why do we want to understand the parachute selection, to profile Cooper?

For me, the inquiry into the parachute question is important because it tells us who is lying, or forgetful, or deceptive, or stupid. Or something else. It's like a course correction device to better understand the narrative being delivered on what happened in Norjak.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 07:42:34 PM
Quote
Note they say something about what's inscribed on the reserve. But there was no record of anything inscribed on the training reserve..so they wouldn't have known. I think the SAC messed up here, describing the left-behind reserve.

They could only be talking about the training chute here? it's not reacted as the document above is covering "Norm D"
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 07:57:31 PM
Here's a pic of Earl Cossey at the 1968 National Championships.

He's wearing his personal rig

Notice it has the pull on the left side (right 377?) the cable housing over his left shoulder, comes down the left shoulder strap

Cossey in his interview with Ckret, talked about the NB6 Cooper had, as being his rig, and that he modified it for the pull under the right armpit.

Here's what Ckret posted on DZ.com. I think this story from Cossey is bullshit

Back to the NB6, Cossey modified the chute, we know that from the 28' canopy. And when we spoke he said he placed the handle under the right armpit. The motion he showed me was that Cooper would have had to hook his right thumb in the handle and push straight out, like a bench press motion. Once fully extended, he would have had to rotate his fully extended arm up over his head.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 08:02:02 PM
I think they messed up on the NB6 description.
I don't think the NB6 would have had a harness replaced on it? ...especially not "civilian luxury" ...in other fbi memos, that's the lingo they used on the Pioneer that was left behind.

I think some SAC just messed up copying info.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Note they say something about what's inscribed on the reserve. But there was no record of anything inscribed on the training reserve..so they wouldn't have known. I think the SAC messed up here, describing the left-behind reserve.

They could only be talking about the training chute here? it's not reacted as the document above is covering "Norm D"
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 08:09:08 PM
Shutter: I had read about the Reed Island parachute find, but don't seem to have the memo you posted.
Where did that come from?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Note they say something about what's inscribed on the reserve. But there was no record of anything inscribed on the training reserve..so they wouldn't have known. I think the SAC messed up here, describing the left-behind reserve.

They could only be talking about the training chute here? it's not reacted as the document above is covering "Norm D"
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 08:10:40 PM
In our vault..it's under "parachute not amboy" or something like that..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 08:11:03 PM
okay
but who got it, and how?
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 08:11:31 PM
http://website.thedbcooperforum.com/Cooper-Vault/
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 08:12:17 PM
I've had it a while...possibly Georger..
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: snowmman on November 27, 2018, 08:31:56 PM
okay, I got the full memo

Ms Gwen Whiting of the Wash. State Historical Society, 1911 Pacific Ave., Tacoma, WA provided it.
from Feb 26, 2014

it was FOIPA Request No: 1236036-000
Subject: Palmer Lenord (1980 Report)

I attached the full 3 pages from that FOIA

I wonder if they got more, if they were FOIA'ing the Palmer report.

Did georger get it from M. Gwen Whiting?
Maybe someone should check with Whiting and see if they have more FOIA?

Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: Shutter on November 27, 2018, 08:40:58 PM
The cover sheet says the subject was the Palmer report. it's possible this was posted on there site. around that period (2014) they had lots of info about Cooper but have taken it all down.
Title: Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
Post by: georger on November 28, 2018, 01:45:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
okay, I got the full memo

Ms Gwen Whiting of the Wash. State Historical Society, 1911 Pacific Ave., Tacoma, WA provided it.
from Feb 26, 2014

it was FOIPA Request No: 1236036-000
Subject: Palmer Lenord (1980 Report)

I attached the full 3 pages from that FOIA

I wonder if they got more, if they were FOIA'ing the Palmer report.

Did georger get it from M. Gwen Whiting?
Maybe someone should check with Whiting and see if they have more FOIA?

No.  :rofl: