Author Topic: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes  (Read 70318 times)

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Thanked: 47 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #480 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.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2018, 04:53:07 PM by snowmman »
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Thanked: 47 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #481 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.
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Thanked: 47 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #482 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
« Last Edit: November 27, 2018, 04:53:51 PM by snowmman »
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1584
  • Thanked: 328 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #483 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
« Last Edit: November 27, 2018, 05:14:39 PM by 377 »
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Thanked: 47 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #484 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.
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Thanked: 47 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #485 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.
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1584
  • Thanked: 328 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #486 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
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7595
  • Thanked: 706 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #487 on: November 27, 2018, 05:23:50 PM »
Does the serial number act like a VIN number telling what type of container it is?
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1584
  • Thanked: 328 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #488 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.

377
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1584
  • Thanked: 328 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #489 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
 

Offline Unsurelock

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
  • Thanked: 20 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #490 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?
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7595
  • Thanked: 706 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #491 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..
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1584
  • Thanked: 328 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #492 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

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
« Last Edit: November 27, 2018, 05:55:32 PM by 377 »
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7595
  • Thanked: 706 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #493 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..
« Last Edit: November 27, 2018, 06:01:38 PM by Shutter »
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7595
  • Thanked: 706 times
Re: Two Back Packs & Two Front Chutes
« Reply #494 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?