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

Nonetheless, we are faced once again with the $64,000 question: How exactly did the Air Force plot this flight path and with what data? After all, the path they plotted is very precise.

Once again:
The flight path coordinates were calculated from data tape recorded at the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Venter (DC).  The calculation and the plotting were almost certainly done by the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES).   It was their job to do such analyses, and the DC were just users of the system. The TAG team was formed. This info was shared with the TAG test team consisting of AF and NWA engineers (and FBI personnel) and 305 flight engineer Anderson, who tested all of this further, including an analysis of the FDR. 

This has all been known and on the table for years. 

Georger,

If you can duplicate the flight path as you describe above, why don't you work up a technical paper for the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Journal of Aircraft?  You could become world famous.  In real life, the situation is a bit more difficult than you describe.

How are you coming along on the placard free fall analysis?  I am eagerly awaiting your post on that.

Does anyone know where Crawford, WA is located?  Even National Geographic's seamless topographical maps don't seem to have it.  Its location or GPS coordinates would be appreciated.

What is wrong with what I wrote above?

This info [the radar data] was shared with the TAG test team consisting of AF and NWA engineers (and FBI personnel) and 305 flight engineer Anderson, who tested all of this further, including an analysis of the FDR.

Problems:

1.  According to Cliff, as quoted by EU, the accuracy of the radar data in the Portland area was plus or minus several miles.

2.  Did the FDR record VOR radials, DME distances, GMT, aircraft headings, altitudes, winds aloft speeds and directions, and other information useful in calculating a ground track?  How accurate could the FDR data be read?  I'll bet there are some big time problems here.

3.  Neither EU nor I have claimed that the airliner was more than about 3 Nautical Miles outside an 8 Nautical Mile wide airway.  Is the above data accurate enough to show such a relatively small distance?

4.  Finally, where is Crawford, WA?  Someone must know where it is?  Maybe Kermit knows.  Kermit, is Crawford anywhere close to the Portland REI store?

As a matter of fact, I know exactly where Crawford, Wa is located. First off it’s not a city but a area know as Crawford. For your information, Portland, Oregon has about 95 districts within its boundaries! Crawford is part of the Venersborg CDP. It’s at Latitude 45.803 longitude 122.485. Elevation 479. It’s not that far from where I have calculated Cooper’s possible LZ in the Battleground or Orchards area. The person I bought my present home from resides in that general area.

Kermit,

The longitude and latitude you give puts Crawford about two Nautical Miles south of Heisson.  Heisson is about one Nautical Mile outside the Eastern edge of V-23 when measured straight to the West.  It will be further outside when measured to the Northwest.

A recent 302 post indicated that Cooper jumped Northwest of Crawford, WA and about 4 miles West of I-S (which is obviously a misprint for I-5).  If the airliner was on the Western edge of V-23, it would not have crossed I-5 (in the Portland area) until it was well Southeast of Woodland.

If the airliner was 4 miles west of I-5, it would be over or West of the Columbia River and in Oregon.

Georger has posted a map claiming that EU and I are advocating a flight path that passed over the Western edge of St. Helens, Oregon.  That is NOT true.  Georger's claimed flight path is about 5 Nautical Miles further West than the one(s) EU and I support.

Georger has not presented a single thing that supports the FBI flight path.  But I suppose this will continue to be disputed on into the next century.

Sorry Robert but I seriously doubt that the reference to 1S is what you called a misprint of I 5. There is indeed a
1S and it was actually that section of the present 503 from Woodland all the way to Battleground. It was referred to as Secondary State Highway 1 S. Although this renumbering was enacted in 1963 on a National basis, it was apparently not enacted officially into Washington’s Highway system until 1970 and is now all called Highway 503. I thought the same as you until I came across the reference to Secondary State Highway 1S. So much for many of us just assuming it as a typo.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

BTW: R99 why are you so computer challenged? Can you do any searches or post any graphics? Do you know how? Too stubborn to learn? Against your rules and mission statement?

*In fact, I am downright curious R99. What is your computer background? Do you use any standard mathematical or avionics software in your flight path analysis tool kit ? Perhaps a form of CAD or some XL app? What is it or do you do everything by hand on paper and then type up the results into Word or something?  What software, if any, do you have and use?  Your programming skills? And the same question for EU!   

** R99, have you ever read an FDR tape? Are you qualified to do that? How about EU?

Georger,

How about revealing your aeronautical qualification, if you have any and I doubt if you do.  Your talents seem to be limited to just being a wise ass.

If you had bothered to read what I have written on the flight path and placard problems, you would know how I did them since I explained it there.  Computers were used on those problems when useful and included everything from grocery store arithmetic by hand, to hand held calculators, and to personal computers.  Programs included standard engineering calculations through GPS calculations. My experience with big computers dates back to about 1960 and primarily involved running large programs.  Some of those programs took all night to run on a CDC-6600 which was the largest machine the aeronautical research organization I worked for had access to in 1970.  I also have some 30+ college semester hours of computer programming training which was mostly in languages that have now disappeared.

I have never read an FDR tape and neither have you.  At the present time, there are probably less than five countries on the planet that have a realistic capability to read modern FDR's.  While I have not been able to determine the exact FDR that was on the NW 727, it was probably a first generation foil device (and I think Shutter has said as much) that recorded no more than five analog parameters (heading, altitude, airspeed, vertical acceleration, and time).  I have never had anything to do with one of these machines, although I have seen data derived from them in a number of accident/incident reports.  The 727 was delivered to NWA on April 28, 1965 and these first generation FDR's were not updated until the 1970s.  You cannot determine a flight path from just the analog parameters listed above.

I do have experience with flight test data starting a number of years before the hijacking.  Most of the flight test data was recorded onboard the aircraft with a tape device.  The data tape would then be run through a computer program to generate test values and the printouts would be turned over to the engineers to decide what they meant.  Some data was telemetered back and went through the same general workup.  This operation was much more sophisticated than an FDR.

How are you coming along on your placard analysis?  Have you been able to obtain the services of a Cray supercomputer, or its equivalent, yet?  And you may need more than one if you think you can do it the way you apparently have in mind.       

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

BTW: R99 why are you so computer challenged? Can you do any searches or post any graphics? Do you know how? Too stubborn to learn? Against your rules and mission statement?

*In fact, I am downright curious R99. What is your computer background? Do you use any standard mathematical or avionics software in your flight path analysis tool kit ? Perhaps a form of CAD or some XL app? What is it or do you do everything by hand on paper and then type up the results into Word or something?  What software, if any, do you have and use?  Your programming skills? And the same question for EU!   

** R99, have you ever read an FDR tape? Are you qualified to do that? How about EU?

Georger,

How about revealing your aeronautical qualification, if you have any and I doubt if you do.  Your talents seem to be limited to just being a wise ass.

If you had bothered to read what I have written on the flight path and placard problems, you would know how I did them since I explained it there.  Computers were used on those problems when useful and included everything from grocery store arithmetic by hand, to hand held calculators, and to personal computers.  Programs included standard engineering calculations through GPS calculations. My experience with big computers dates back to about 1960 and primarily involved running large programs.  Some of those programs took all night to run on a CDC-6600 which was the largest machine the aeronautical research organization I worked for had access to in 1970.  I also have some 30+ college semester hours of computer programming training which was mostly in languages that have now disappeared.

I have never read an FDR tape and neither have you.  At the present time, there are probably less than five countries on the planet that have a realistic capability to read modern FDR's.  While I have not been able to determine the exact FDR that was on the NW 727, it was probably a first generation foil device (and I think Shutter has said as much) that recorded no more than five analog parameters (heading, altitude, airspeed, vertical acceleration, and time).  I have never had anything to do with one of these machines, although I have seen data derived from them in a number of accident/incident reports.  The 727 was delivered to NWA on April 28, 1965 and these first generation FDR's were not updated until the 1970s.  You cannot determine a flight path from just the analog parameters listed above.

I do have experience with flight test data starting a number of years before the hijacking.  Most of the flight test data was recorded onboard the aircraft with a tape device.  The data tape would then be run through a computer program to generate test values and the printouts would be turned over to the engineers to decide what they meant.  Some data was telemetered back and went through the same general workup.  This operation was much more sophisticated than an FDR.

How are you coming along on your placard analysis?  Have you been able to obtain the services of a Cray supercomputer, or its equivalent, yet?  And you may need more than one if you think you can do it the way you apparently have in mind.       

How are you coming along on your placard analysis?

Go back and read what I said.

Basically I have decided to spare everyone another R99 tantrum - so wont be posting anything on the placard. Sometimes its best to avoid a problem rather than knowingly creating one. You are as predictable as fire in the Amazon  and gunfire in Beirut. 

Merry Christmas. 

Georger,

Now that you will have some spare time, you can wipe the egg off your face concerning the placard.  But you could at least give a hint as to what your aeronautical qualifications are.  You do have some, don't you?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Your west path, which I guess your partner Ulis does not even agree with!, is up against some very stiff odds of acceptance. It's up against entrenched doctrine for one thing. It's up against a system preserving entrenched doctrine which I doubt you can penetrate.

How utterly tone deaf and narcissistic. To think that you or anyone else thinks that they get to decide whether the Western Flight Path gets "accepted" or is accurate.

There is only one "real" flight path whether people agree or not. The true flight path, whatever it may be, is not less true because it doesn't pass a popularity contest.

R99 and I largely concur on a Western Flight Path. We're either right or wrong.

Who cares whether you agree or not? It's meaningless.

I'm very comfortable with the science and analysis on our end that calls into question the veracity of the FBI Flight Path and points toward the Western Flight Path. Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.