Re Toutle,
I don't know the precise locations, and I'm not where I can look it up, but Mt St Helen's eruption caused a lot of topographical and property damage to that area including changing the flow of the Toutle River - maybe that's when the town proper moved.

Satellite images in the last 2 of Farf's posts show that buildings that were at the "old" Toutle are still there.  The white flows shown in the images (in the river beds) are probably from the eruption. 

Part of Farf's post indicated that his point ‘c’ is the modern location of the unincorporated village of Toutle and that his point ‘d’ was the old rail stop named "Toutle."   He didn't say where he got the correlation with the rail stop, and nobody asked.  It is by a railroad.  The current Toutle is unincorporated.  The location where it's now shown on maps/charts is where there's a little post office.  I think this is why the locations on the maps are where they are.  A "town" such as it was (a few houses) in the seventies is still where it was.

So my question is.. would the inaccurate alternate placement of Toutle on the FBI flight path map have made any difference in where / how the line is plotted?

No effect at all on the line or plotted points.

The attached part of the "FBI" flightpath plot covers the area around the path from north of the Portland (now Battleground) VORTAC to the south end of the plot to the extent that we have the plot.  Just to the east of where the big black line reaches Portland I've circled "175°" in white.  The original has a short arrow just below that "175" pointing directly away from the VORTAC.  This 175° and short arrow are identifying the "175° radial" outbound from the VORTAC.

I've added a thin black line from the VORTAC, through the little arrow, and on to points south.  This is V23.  For some reason it does not have the faint grey stripe of a VOR airway, or the "V" annotation.  Probably just because it was transiting a lot of other features, like the Portland and Vancouver light patterns.  The same is apparent for V23E on the 160° radial until the grey stripe shows up south of the Portland light pattern.

Although the flightpath south of Portland tracks pretty close to I-5, it also follows V23 pretty closely.

Maybe after reaching the VORTAC, which is a V23 "waypoint," they were thinking they would head on to the east of Portland as shown with the heavy white line, then changed their collective mind for some reason and turned and raced across Vancouver and the PDX "control area" to where they turned south at about the I-5.

They may well have not been aiming for I-5.  Note that where they turned was also at about the dashed line that is a circular arc at the area where they approached it.  The area inside the dashed line was called a "control area" for the airport.  Maybe the crew intended to turn when they got to the boundary.  I don't see on the map any upper altitude limit for the control area.  Maybe the crew just saw "control area" and tried to minimize time in it.

The plane would not have turned abruptly over Scholl airport, then made another abrupt turn at the next plotted point, as shown by the neaderthal black line.  They would have turned like in the white arrow leaving the Scholl location and this would have put them heading a bit more westerly when they got to the next plotted point.  Then an arc as shown by the next white arrow to the plotted point at the Columbia west of PDX.

As a humble seeking of truth and never-an-expert, I ask that you kindly permit me to make a few comments for your consideration.

First, "degrees" and "radials" are two different things and the words are not used interchangeably.  That is, the word degrees is not used in describing a radial.

In congested areas, such as Portland, some of the features of the topography and airways have to be omitted to make other things readable.  So you are correct and the omitted information will appear as soon as there is free space for it to be printed in a readable manner.  The 1971 Portland chart has been duplicated so much that it is difficult to read.

But in looking at the 1971 Portland chart, it appears that the only "control area" there is the "airport traffic control area", which was not printed on charts in that day, which has a specified diameter (I don't remember exactly but it was probably 10 statute miles) and a ceiling of 3000 feet above the airport elevation.

The magenta colored area is not a control area.  Rather, it specifies a visibility (in miles) and altitude (above ground level) below which VFR flight is permitted.

The dashed line marking an area around the Portland airport also has a specific meaning.  Fortunately, the FAA publishes an excellent booklet which describes the present day meaning of everything on their charts.  Just go to the faa.gov web page and search the publications until you find it.  You can download it free and it should answer all of your questions.

But the biggest question here is, why would the airliner fly such a convoluted path around Portland when a simple straight line on the west side of Portland would be the simplest and best?  Keep in mind that the airliner did not know until it was in the Portland area that it would probably be able to make it non-stop to Reno.   The NWA performance engineers in Minneapolis passed the crew that information through the ARINC system.  Passing Portland on the east side would have added another 10 to 15 miles to their distance.  Also, the aircraft was difficult to fly including turns and changes in altitude.

Robert99
A Humble-Seeker-After-Truth
Never-An-Expert
 

First, "degrees" and "radials" are two different things and the words are not used interchangeably.  That is, the word degrees is not used in describing a radial.

I did not use "degrees" and "radials" interchangeably (that is, to mean the same thing).  I didn't even use "degrees."  And your "the word degrees is not used in describing a radial" is not even remotely the same as your "that" (saying the words aren't used interchangeably).  Besides this, the statement is wrong.  Watch this:

A "radial" (in the aeronautical sense) is a direction or "line of direction" from a radio navigational transmitter, with the direction specified in degrees of angle from the direction of the magnetic north pole from the same transmitter.

You see.  The word "degrees" is used in describing a radial.  I just did it.  There is probably no way of describing a "radial" to someone not already steeped in aviation so that the person understands without using the word "degrees."

I think that your concern must be about my "175° radial," which when spelled out without a symbol would be "175-degree radial."  I expect that flyers sitting in the cafe near the airport don't say the "degree" or "degrees" and that it's left out of aviation comms just to minimize words.  All those av people understand without the "degree" or "degrees."  But the intent of my post was to try to communicate to english-language-reading people with various backgrounds.  I probably wouldn't be very good at writing in aviation jargon even if I wanted to.  You'll have to do the translating for yourself.

The 1971 Portland chart has been duplicated so much that it is difficult to read.

I can't imagine which chart you mean, or what the point is.  I don't have any difficulty reading the chart I posted.  I assume you're referring to generations of copies.  Copies of copies of copies, etc.

The dashed line marking an area around the Portland airport also has a specific meaning.  Fortunately, the FAA publishes an excellent booklet which describes the present day meaning of everything on their charts.  Just go to the faa.gov web page and search the publications until you find it.  You can download it free and it should answer all of your questions.

Won't work, Robert.  What we need is not "present day meaning."  We're looking at older charts.  All that matters is what the '71 sectional said.  I have a fairly current 1 for IFR chart symbols and one for VFR.  Thanks.

But in looking at the 1971 Portland chart, it appears that the only "control area" there is the "airport traffic control area", which was not printed on charts in that day, which has a specified diameter (I don't remember exactly but it was probably 10 statute miles) and a ceiling of 3000 feet above the airport elevation.

Yet, the area is on the piece of 1971 sectional I posted, marked with the long dashes, short spaces.  It's not totally circular.  I've attached a piece of a legend from a '71 L-1.  It shows that symbology as meaning "control zone" in 1971.  On the actual '71 L-1 chart the same outline as on the "FBI" plot is marked by the "T" fence for which the legend says "Control Zones within which fixed-wing special VFR flight is prohibited." (emphasis added)

From Wikipedia, not that they're experts:

"A control zone (CTR or Controlled Traffic Region) in aviation is a volume of controlled airspace, normally around an airport, which extends from the surface to a specified upper limit, established to protect air traffic operating to and from that airport. Because CTRs are, by definition, controlled airspace, aircraft can only fly in it after receiving a specific clearance from air traffic control. This means that ATC at the airport know exactly which aircraft are in that airspace, and can take steps to ensure aircraft are aware of each other, either using separation or by passing traffic information.

"In the USA the term control zone is no longer used and has been replaced by airspace class D. Typically it extends 5 miles in diameter with a height of 2500 ft AGL (above ground level) around small commercial airports. Aircraft are required to establish radio contact with the control tower before entering and to maintain in contact while in class D airspace. This implies that an aircraft must be equipped with at least a portable radio to fly in Class D airspace."

I have seen that the long dash, short space thing is identified as "class D" on newer charts (like wiki sorta says).  The way they put it, there could be some deviations on the radius and height.

The magenta colored area is not a control area.  Rather, it specifies a visibility (in miles) and altitude (above ground level) below which VFR flight is permitted.

I think you're referring to an area outlined with a magenta band on newer charts?  On the one I attached, it looks like a dim red band inside a dim blue band.  Apx 39nm dia on the chart?  Extends down to apx Oregon City, Lenhardt & Newberg?

But the biggest question here is, why would the airliner fly such a convoluted path around Portland when a simple straight line on the west side of Portland would be the simplest and best?  Keep in mind that the airliner did not know until it was in the Portland area that it would probably be able to make it non-stop to Reno.   The NWA performance engineers in Minneapolis passed the crew that information through the ARINC system.  Passing Portland on the east side would have added another 10 to 15 miles to their distance.  Also, the aircraft was difficult to fly including turns and changes in altitude.

They were focused on getting the guy out without the guy exploding a bomb.  I can imagine that they had to work at focusing hard just to function in the midst of the fear.  Getting him to leave was probably all they cared about.  It would be easy (mentally) just to fly where they had been cleared to fly.  V23  Easy just to watch the deviation and the compass.  If they had found that they wouldn't be able to make Reno because of 15 miles, they would have just had to try to convince the guy that they really did need to go to an alternate they had already established.

Hom, what do you suppose the purpose was for them to zig zag through the area between lake Merwin on down to the Columbia river? those are heavy rolls. I wonder why they didn't continue down the path from 8:12 instead of turning eastward. it seems they could of avoided getting near Vancouver, and Portland by continuing that course? what do you think the odds were of Cooper being at the bottom of the stairs during the roll at the 8:12 position?

First, feel free to comment Robert.

Shutter,

I think you're seeing more zig-zag than the plot says in a technical sense.  First, the neanderthal line is misleading at one of the places.  It has a straightish section from the HEAVY black cross at the point annotated "2010" approximately through the plot point at 2011 and continuing down almost to the 2012 point.  If you extend that line southward it looks like that path would pass to the west of Vancouver and most of Portland.

If you look closely at the 2012 plot point, however, you see that the end of the straightish section of neanderthal line doesn't go through the point.

The 2012 point is actually due south of the 2011 point.  If you extend a line between the 2011 point and the 2012 point, the extended line will pass practically through the center of Vancouver and Portland.

Besides the misleading effect of the neanderthal line, the actual positions of the flight for points 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 might all have been within a foot (or a "skosh") of the exact same longitude (122°36.5').  That is, all could have been virtually on a line running due south.  The plotted point's longitudes are within a range of 1', but the tolerance for each is +/-.5'

The plotted points definitely support the idea of a big "S" or dogleg from the 2012 point to the point at Scholl airport, then to about the I-5, then to V23.  I doubt that they planned all that out ahead of time.  I think they probably headed for the Portland VORTAC, got abeam of it or passed it a bit, then found themselves having to decide the next move.  The only thing I see that correlates somewhat with the path after Scholl airport is the boundaries of that control zone outlined with the dashed lines.  I don't know how it might relate.

I think the part of the path from 2010 to 2012 reflects them deciding to move straight toward the Portland VORTAC.  It would make it easier for them to track where they were without plotting.  I don't think they thought about where they were going to go on a minute by minute basis.  Maybe they were thinking in this time frame that they would pass to the east of Portland.

Pull back and look at the path from up around Toutle all the way to the VORTAC.  By the point annotated "2005" they were paralleling the V23 centerline about 1.75nm to 2.45nm to the east.  The course would have put them this distance to the east of the VORTAC.

One easy way to go straight toward the VORTAC is to tune to the frequency, set the desired direction to 149°mag, turn a bit westward until the deviation meter starts giving a good indication, start turning into the 149° mag (by compass) until the deviation zeros out.  You're on the V23 centerline moving toward the VORTAC.  It's easy then to monitor the deviation to keep yourself moving toward the VORTAC.

As for the odds, I don't know.  But the roll should be just a gradual turn to get on the V23 centerline going 149 deg magnetic.  They knew at this point that they needed the turns to be gradual.  They would have no reason to turn hard at this point.  If they overshot the centerline a bit, they would just turn back the other direction and approach the centerline from the other side.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Hom, what do you suppose the purpose was for them to zig zag through the area between lake Merwin on down to the Columbia river? those are heavy rolls. I wonder why they didn't continue down the path from 8:12 instead of turning eastward. it seems they could of avoided getting near Vancouver, and Portland by continuing that course? what do you think the odds were of Cooper being at the bottom of the stairs during the roll at the 8:12 position?

First, feel free to comment Robert.

Shutter,

I think you're seeing more zig-zag than the plot says in a technical sense.  First, the neanderthal line is misleading at one of the places.  It has a straightish section from the HEAVY black cross at the point annotated "2010" approximately through the plot point at 2011 and continuing down almost to the 2012 point.  If you extend that line southward it looks like that path would pass to the west of Vancouver and most of Portland.

If you look closely at the 2012 plot point, however, you see that the end of the straightish section of neanderthal line doesn't go through the point.

The 2012 point is actually due south of the 2011 point.  If you extend a line between the 2011 point and the 2012 point, the extended line will pass practically through the center of Vancouver and Portland.

Besides the misleading effect of the neanderthal line, the actual positions of the flight for points 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 might all have been within a foot (or a "skosh") of the exact same longitude (122°36.5').  That is, all could have been virtually on a line running due south.  The plotted point's longitudes are within a range of 1', but the tolerance for each is +/-.5'

The plotted points definitely support the idea of a big "S" or dogleg from the 2012 point to the point at Scholl airport, then to about the I-5, then to V23.  I doubt that they planned all that out ahead of time.  I think they probably headed for the Portland VORTAC, got abeam of it or passed it a bit, then found themselves having to decide the next move.  The only thing I see that correlates somewhat with the path after Scholl airport is the boundaries of that control zone outlined with the dashed lines.  I don't know how it might relate.

I think the part of the path from 2010 to 2012 reflects them deciding to move straight toward the Portland VORTAC.  It would make it easier for them to track where they were without plotting.  I don't think they thought about where they were going to go on a minute by minute basis.  Maybe they were thinking in this time frame that they would pass to the east of Portland.

Pull back and look at the path from up around Toutle all the way to the VORTAC.  By the point annotated "2005" they were paralleling the V23 centerline about 1.75nm to 2.45nm to the east.  The course would have put them this distance to the east of the VORTAC.

One easy way to go straight toward the VORTAC is to tune to the frequency, set the desired direction to 149°mag, turn a bit westward until the deviation meter starts giving a good indication, start turning into the 149° mag (by compass) until the deviation zeros out.  You're on the V23 centerline moving toward the VORTAC.  It's easy then to monitor the deviation to keep yourself moving toward the VORTAC.

As for the odds, I don't know.  But the roll should be just a gradual turn to get on the V23 centerline going 149 deg magnetic.  They knew at this point that they needed the turns to be gradual.  They would have no reason to turn hard at this point.  If they overshot the centerline a bit, they would just turn back the other direction and approach the centerline from the other side.

As you know, I completely reject the idea of the airliner passing on the east side of Portland.  It just doesn't make any sense for the aircraft to deviate so far from the route to Reno.

Also, the flight crew would NOT, repeat NOT, wait until they were past the Portland VORTAC to determine what they would do next.  There were three pilots in the cockpit that evening.  Anderson may have been acting as the Flight Engineer on that flight, but he was also a pilot.  They probably would have been planning their route at least 30 minutes ahead.  And simplicity itself would be to just fly a straight line from the area of the Mayfield/Malay Intersection to a point south of Portland where they would rejoin V-23.  Pilots who are interested in staying alive plan ahead.

The only "clearance" given to the airliner that evening by ATC was to "do whatever you have to and we will keep people out of your way".  Basically, the airliner had the right of way over all other aircraft that evening with the exception of aircraft experiencing real emergencies (such as fires, running out of fuel, etc.).

I will respond to your previous post in the near future as soon as I have some free time.

Ive been reading all of this ...

Trying to balance what they might have done or would do against what they did do to me is the central issue. There is the FBI map. Dawson says they basically flew a straight line from Toledo to the west side of Portland, as per a specific order Cooper gave once in the air out of Seatac, and crossed over the eastern tip of Hayden Island. Himmelsbach/JT say they flew some 14-20 miles East off V23 to the east crossing over the Troutdale airport. And Farflung mysteriously pulled a Dawson-like crossing over Hayden Island out of his hat, citing construction on Hayden Island after 1971. (Where did Farflung with obvious military flight experience get that!?) 

So what s the route they actually flew?

We know that whatever route they flew they had a rendezvous with a T33 (being vectored with 305 by R2) in some rather narrow time period south of Portland near Lake Oswego - an undeniable fact. We also know that some 5-10 minutes after 8:05 they experienced a 'bump' which they discussed and then reported to NWA all of which very easily extends the time Cooper jumped to beyond the 8:11 time slot usually assigned to Cooper's bailout. The plane was somewhere during these times!
   

We know that whatever route they flew they had a rendezvous with a T33 (being vectored with 305 by R2) in some rather narrow time period south of Portland near Lake Oswego - an undeniable fact.

What airport was the T33 out of?  Any info about what it was doing and where it was leading up to the rendezvous?

Thanks.  I just added a little to my question.