DB COOPER
General Category => DB Cooper => Topic started by: Shutter on February 24, 2014, 08:35:17 AM
-
Lots of questions surround the flight path.
-
I am currently working on the flight path via simulator. this has been a challenge getting the right software for the best results. to date, I have settled with X-plane software. I also have a Galaxy 3 tablet running wireless to the system that has all the navigational charts needed plus other options to boot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z-zkCAmDyU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z-zkCAmDyU)
-
I hope Ron & Pat decide to join us here and discuss further about the person training jumpers. lots of question will come of this I'm sure.
-
I'm anxious to hear more about Georger's knowledge of the "missing minutes" from Flight 305. This could be the reason the FBI was looking in the wrong location. If pilot Rataczak said, "5 to 10 minutes later," maybe it could really be 10 to 15 minutes later. That would put flight #305 much further south; almost into Oregon. I think the "missing minutes" are the key to the real drop zone. What say Georger?
-
I posted this at the DZ hoping to get some skydiver answers. Gonna post it here too in case we have any skydiver, aeronautical, or time/space continuum experts here.. ;)
First, Not sure that this has been posted before, but here's an article talking about the Travel Channel's "America Declassified" Nice read. http://parachutistonline.com/...fied-at-the-dropzone (http://parachutistonline.com/...fied-at-the-dropzone)
Now....As we know there is a document out there signed by a NW official that possibly indicates how the probable landing zone was arrived at. I'm interested in trying to find out if there could be other factors that could influence the landing zone that are not specifically talked about in that document.
So if we have any skydivers/experts who'd care to opine...
How far have you been blown from your dropzone due to wind or other factors?
What's the greatest unintended distance from a planned landing that you know of?
What influenced the distance in those cases?
Would the type of parachute that Dan Cooper was using make him more or less likely to be blown "off-course" by wind/weather?
Is there anything that Cooper could do before or after opening his chute (under the conditions as we know them) that would have increased his horizontal distance from a flight path? And I have no idea if horizontal distance is the right terminology so hoping you know what I mean.
-
page 2. I couldn't send both together.
Also - I found two tips. One is a nice surprise. If you take too long to type your post, you get a soft warning that lets you know that the post you're replying to has changed or someone else has posted. That might be a cool feature sometimes.
The other - there is a check off in the "Attachments and other options that says "Return to this topic". I'm gonna check it and see if that will make me stay in this category. :)
Edited to say - it works. Edited to add check new forum category for instructions to set this as default.
-
I fished around trying to find a setting, or something that is causing the change problem after posting. let's see if the option you mentioned works.....
added....it works using that option. nice catch smokin.... 8)
-
If what Georger said is true, that pilot Andy Anderson didn't record the exact time of the "bump," then the case is totally reliant on the recollections of the pilots as to when they thought he bailed out. And with all the confusion going on in the cockpit, the exact time will never be known. The "missing minutes" are the key to Cooper's landing area.
-
If what Georger said is true, that pilot Andy Anderson didn't record the exact time of the "bump," then the case is totally reliant on the recollections of the pilots as to when they thought he bailed out. And with all the confusion going on in the cockpit, the exact time will never be known. The "missing minutes" are the key to Cooper's landing area.
I think it's all in the timing. I have flown the path from Seattle to Portland. it can be done in the time frame they give. other options are being looked at. the money location must be some sort of clue in the path of the plane, or the jump time. if they are off on the timing, lots of water is around the jump zone. Robert99 has a pretty good theory, but we need some more to go on. perhaps he will chime in and discuss it in his words.
-
If what Georger said is true, that pilot Andy Anderson didn't record the exact time of the "bump," then the case is totally reliant on the recollections of the pilots as to when they thought he bailed out. And with all the confusion going on in the cockpit, the exact time will never be known. The "missing minutes" are the key to Cooper's landing area.
Let me put something of a semi-formal nature together and post it, but I need to consult several files first ... tomorrow at the latest if everything cooperates. Its very busy here.
Meyer if you see this I havent forgotten you.
-
Basically, there are no "missing" minutes. I realize that one minute is not listed but it is not lost. Whoever worked up the flight path in the so-called "FBI map" apparently found a radar blip while his clock read a certain time. He then marked the blip on the estimated map location and attached a time to it. If he did this for exactly one minute intervals, the distance between those radar blips would be the same distance since the aircraft's ground speed was essentially constant from the Mayfield/Malay Intersection as the airliner headed to the southeast (and it wasn't necessarily going to the Battleground VORTAC).
But the individual apparently didn't find a radar blip for the time his clock was reading the "missing" minute. To put it even more plainly, the times and positions on that map are not believable.
Robert99
-
If what Georger said is true, that pilot Andy Anderson didn't record the exact time of the "bump," then the case is totally reliant on the recollections of the pilots as to when they thought he bailed out. And with all the confusion going on in the cockpit, the exact time will never be known. The "missing minutes" are the key to Cooper's landing area.
I think it's all in the timing. I have flown the path from Seattle to Portland. it can be done in the time frame they give. other options are being looked at. the money location must be some sort of clue in the path of the plane, or the jump time. if they are off on the timing, lots of water is around the jump zone. Robert99 has a pretty good theory, but we need some more to go on. perhaps he will chime in and discuss it in his words.
The money find at Tina Bar is the key to solving what happened to Cooper. If sufficiently accurate information on the flight path location becomes available, it will quite likely be possible to give a very small area for Cooper's landing (or impact). By small area, I mean quite a bit less than one-half of a square mile. It is also quite likely that a meaningful statement can be made on Cooper's condition immediately after he returns to earth (dead or alive?).
The unique geographical and topographical conditions that exist in the Tina Bar area are such that severe limitations exist on what the flight path had to be, and whether Cooper was a pull or no-pull, in order for the money to get to Tina Bar. And if accurate flight path information, such as that in the un-redacted Seattle ATC transcripts, becomes available, I will be delighted to go out on a limb and amplify on the above.
Shutter is absolute right about the further south the airliner got from the Woodland area, the more water it would be flying over. If the flight crew bypassed Portland on the west side, the airliner would essentially be almost directly over the Columbia River as it passed Tina Bar.
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
Can you get other copies of these disks to try, or share?
-
If what Georger said is true, that pilot Andy Anderson didn't record the exact time of the "bump," then the case is totally reliant on the recollections of the pilots as to when they thought he bailed out. And with all the confusion going on in the cockpit, the exact time will never be known. The "missing minutes" are the key to Cooper's landing area.
I think it's all in the timing. I have flown the path from Seattle to Portland. it can be done in the time frame they give. other options are being looked at. the money location must be some sort of clue in the path of the plane, or the jump time. if they are off on the timing, lots of water is around the jump zone. Robert99 has a pretty good theory, but we need some more to go on. perhaps he will chime in and discuss it in his words.
The money find at Tina Bar is the key to solving what happened to Cooper. If sufficiently accurate information on the flight path location becomes available, it will quite likely be possible to give a very small area for Cooper's landing (or impact). By small area, I mean quite a bit less than one-half of a square mile. It is also quite likely that a meaningful statement can be made on Cooper's condition immediately after he returns to earth (dead or alive?).
The unique geographical and topographical conditions that exist in the Tina Bar area are such that severe limitations exist on what the flight path had to be, and whether Cooper was a pull or no-pull, in order for the money to get to Tina Bar. And if accurate flight path information, such as that in the un-redacted Seattle ATC transcripts, becomes available, I will be delighted to go out on a limb and amplify on the above.
Shutter is absolute right about the further south the airliner got from the Woodland area, the more water it would be flying over. If the flight crew bypassed Portland on the west side, the airliner would essentially be almost directly over the Columbia River as it passed Tina Bar.
In addition, new tests on the money could be run to help verify a specific scenario. These are tests beyond the scope and capability of what Tom was able to do -
-
Robert, are you able to view the disk? if so you can put them on your desktop and try a fresh copy from that direction. If the disk is corrupt, it most likely done with, but if you can access the files you can go from there. I just got home, so let me think about the options.
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
Robert if you can copy the disk(s) and get me a copy I can have our best IT people look at it -
likewise several at Rockwell, etc. I can try to go beyond that, if required. Is the disk encoded?
-
Robert99: I didn't mean "missing minutes" to be taken literally, but rather figuratively as an unaccounted for "time frame for jump exit." The exact exit time for Cooper will never be known. The pilots did not log the time of the bump, and the bump isn't an absolute indication of him leaving the aircraft. There is speculation in play on Cooper's time of probable departure. And the money find at Tina's Bar is important to the case, but limited in value if you believe that it is direct evidence of the flight path. It is not. There is a chance that the money find was a cunnard. This case carries no ablsolutes. Alignment of factual evidence does not produce a clear solution. And if you think you know the solution, you still have a problem, because the factual evidence does not fall into place to bare out a clear conclusion.
-
I would be interested in knowing your definition of "factual evidence". How did you arrive at the conclusion that the money at Tina Bar may have been planted? I believe that both the FBI, specifically Larry Carr, and lawyers on this thread are very skeptical about the money being planted based on their experience with criminals.
Have you read Tom Kaye's conclusions about the Washougal wash down theory? Based on some tests Kaye did with actual paper money, he essentially states that the wash down theory doesn't wash.
-
I would be interested in knowing your definition of "factual evidence". How did you arrive at the conclusion that the money at Tina Bar may have been planted? I believe that both the FBI, specifically Larry Carr, and lawyers on this thread are very skeptical about the money being planted based on their experience with criminals.
Have you read Tom Kaye's conclusions about the Washougal wash down theory? Based on some tests Kaye did with actual paper money, he essentially states that the wash down theory doesn't wash.
McCoy's jump was at a higher altitude. would the noise they heard be different from 10,000 vs McCoy's jump. I don't recall the altitude at this moment. this article was from the Parachutist Website. they describe it differently.
Added: I just realized that last two paragraphs are mine. I made this a while back, didn't notice until I posted it.
-
Robert99: I didn't mean "missing minutes" to be taken literally, but rather figuratively as an unaccounted for "time frame for jump exit." The exact exit time for Cooper will never be known. The pilots did not log the time of the bump, and the bump isn't an absolute indication of him leaving the aircraft. There is speculation in play on Cooper's time of probable departure. And the money find at Tina's Bar is important to the case, but limited in value if you believe that it is direct evidence of the flight path. It is not. There is a chance that the money find was a cunnard. This case carries no ablsolutes. Alignment of factual evidence does not produce a clear solution. And if you think you know the solution, you still have a problem, because the factual evidence does not fall into place to bare out a clear conclusion.
Coopsnoop, let me post the below to give some meat to the discussion. What follows includes
paraphrased testimony recently received from H. Anderson, received by myself and two others.
People can cherry pick what I am posting, agree, disagree, complain, ... whatever. But I believe
what follows is an accurate portrait and paraphrase of testimony recently received, juxtaposed
with the timeline in the Transcripts -
Intro: The period of the ‘oscillations & bump’ was used to set the time and location of Cooper’s
jump. These symptoms of a parachutist leaving the 727 via the rear door/stairs was
unanticipated by the flight crew at the time, therefore the crew was not sure what was going on
or it’s meaning. Tina had come forward and advised ‘it appears Cooper is getting ready to
jump’.
19:42 (07:42) Flt 305 reports “14 NM out of SEA on Victor-23. Cooper is trying to get the door
down, Stew is with us, he cannot get the stairs down. We now have an aft stair light on.
19:54 (07:54) Flt 305 reports: Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him
and [she] thinks he will jump.
19:54 (07:54) Flt Ops MSP advised that they have a direct phone patch hooked up on 131.8
MHz. [Phone patch to NWA … indicates crew thinks Cooper about to bail, communication restricted
to NWA?]
Time ?? Cooper calls on intercom requests “Slow down! Stabilize the plane…”. Unreported in
TR but verified in crew testimony. Scott responds by slowing and stabilizing the aircraft so Cooper
can bail. Rataczak communicating events to NWA as they happen. (source: Rataczak & Anderson)
20:05 (08:05) MSP-Flt Ops. Pilot reports that he has tried twice to contact Cooper unsuccessfully,
then he came on the PA system and said everything is OK. (Cooper still on the plane)
20:11 (08:11) Time generally attributed to Cooper’s jump. (FBI)
20:12 (08:12) Oscillations reported… Flt 305 advises they are getting some oscillations in the
cabin, Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. (Anderson & Rataczak later explain this
report did not include mention of a ‘bump’. Bump reported later to NWA by Rataczak “after we
discussed it for several minutes…”) (Cooper still on the plane or stairs)
20:15 (08:15) SEA CNTR advises Portland Altimeter (Corresponding Sea Level Barometric
Pressure) is 30.03 inches of Hg. [This is important because it shows that at 20:15:56 they were
very near Portland.]
Time ?? Rataczak reports Cooper may have bailed to NWA on 131.8 MHz . (‘The oscillations
had stopped and we hadn’t experienced any further bumps, so we discussed it among ourselves
and we decided the ‘bump’ was when Cooper bailed so Bill (Rataczak) called it in to NWA’ – exact
time and position uncertain. ‘Nobody was taking notes or noting times and positions of any of
these events. Bill (Rataczak) thought (later reported) the bump we felt was about 5-10 minutes
after our last contact with Cooper at 8:05. I agreed with that but it could have been later. We
weren’t sure what had happened or if he was gone at all. Scott wanted to go back and look but
that got vetoed. Bill estimated (recalling) that he could see the lights of Portland-Vancouver
coming up, but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet. Bill was looking ahead and out his right
window. The test flight we conducted verified the link between the ‘bump’ and the stairs slamming
back up when weight was taken off the stairs. The Air Force guys and one NWA tech made that
connection pretty quickly. We weren’t sure what the ‘bump’ meant at the time, we weren’t sure
Cooper was gone, but the test flight confirmed what the ‘bump’ was. No, we weren’t anywhere
near the Washougal when the bump happened. As I said, we could see the lights of Portland-
Vancouver coming up. ‘ (H. Anderson, paraphased)
20:20 (08:20) Flt Ops MSP request Go to 131.8 MHz. (NWA channel)
20:20 (08:20) Flt-Ops SEA advises Flt 305 is already on that frequency. Flt Ops MSP Advises we
are on the phone and will be talking with him shortly.
Note* Rataczak says the bump happened 5-10 mins after their last conversation with C at 8:05.
Rataczak’s bailout window is: 8:10-8:15. Anderson agrees but says it might have been slightly
later. What Anderson reveals is there was a delay in reporting, because they didn’t know what
had happened or what the bump meant for certain. They discussed the matter before reporting
the socalled ‘bump. But, this uncertainty as to precise time and location due to combined factors including delayed reporting, is reflected in the NWA-FBI search map. Indeed, including uncertainty in the NWA-FBI map confirms the fact there were "uncertainties" at play, in real time aboard flight 305 at the time. Otherwise, they could very easily have just issued a map of the primary search area and reduced the uncertainty the made-map conveys!
-
found this site through Bing. Took me a while but i figured out it must be only for talking about db cooper? I heard about that money they found on the river. I've always thought it meant he probably drowned or something.
welcome ... what are your interests in the DB Cooper case?
-
Robert99:
I didn't "conclude" that the money was planted. I'm using that as supposition, just as you may "conclude" that it wasn't planted. Who can prove what? If it was easy, the case have been solved long ago. You can examine anomalies in any criminal case, or scientific experiment, and use those anomolies to build your conclusion. But that would be flawed logic. As for FBI and lawyers using "their experience" to assume that the money couldn't be planted, well........maybe that's what Cooper wanted them to think. You have no idea what goes on in the mind of a clever criminal, Robert. Some of them may be smarter than the FBI or lawyers. As for Tom Kaye......I believe that he publicly rejected the washdown theory. That leaves two likely alternatives: a direct Cooper landing at Tina's Bar, or a plant. I think Tom Kaye is going with a "plant." Maybe Tom Kaye will post and expound.
Georger: I'll discuss your post tomorrow. I'm heading for bed.
-
Robert99:
I didn't "conclude" that the money was planted. I'm using that as supposition, just as you may "conclude" that it wasn't planted. Who can prove what? If it was easy, the case have been solved long ago. You can examine anomalies in any criminal case, or scientific experiment, and use those anomolies to build your conclusion. But that would be flawed logic. As for FBI and lawyers using "their experience" to assume that the money couldn't be planted, well........maybe that's what Cooper wanted them to think. You have no idea what goes on in the mind of a clever criminal, Robert. Some of them may be smarter than the FBI or lawyers. As for Tom Kaye......I believe that he publicly rejected the washdown theory. That leaves two likely alternatives: a direct Cooper landing at Tina's Bar, or a plant. I think Tom Kaye is going with a "plant." Maybe Tom Kaye will post and expound.
Georger: I'll discuss your post tomorrow. I'm heading for bed.
Coopsnoop said:
"I didn't "conclude" that the money was planted. I'm using that as supposition, just as you may "conclude" that it wasn't planted. Who can prove what? "
Well... I think the difference between planted vs. not-planted is testable and can be proved, if you
can show each condition has its own characteristic traits. It's a forensic matter. One set of traits
will indicate "planted". Another set of traits indicates "not planted".
For example, when things are exposed to the atmosphere they acquire particular isotopic traits,
due to the nature of the Earth's atmosphere (post atomic testing in the 1940s-50s). This is a
well documented universal fact used to date things. If a thing is buried it is not being exposed to
the atmosphere. Things buried vs things not buried have different isotopic exposure clocks. This
would apply to the Cooper money, as well any other physical object on Earth. (This was
mentioned years ago on DZ. back about 2008. People didn't pay much attention!) :)
BTW, such tests were available back in 1980 when the money was first discovered.
In a similar fashion, there are other criteria which imply "plant" vs. "non-plant" with different
clocks indicative of each - science is fun! :)
-
Robert99:
I didn't "conclude" that the money was planted. I'm using that as supposition, just as you may "conclude" that it wasn't planted. Who can prove what? If it was easy, the case have been solved long ago. You can examine anomalies in any criminal case, or scientific experiment, and use those anomolies to build your conclusion. But that would be flawed logic. As for FBI and lawyers using "their experience" to assume that the money couldn't be planted, well........maybe that's what Cooper wanted them to think. You have no idea what goes on in the mind of a clever criminal, Robert. Some of them may be smarter than the FBI or lawyers. As for Tom Kaye......I believe that he publicly rejected the washdown theory. That leaves two likely alternatives: a direct Cooper landing at Tina's Bar, or a plant. I think Tom Kaye is going with a "plant." Maybe Tom Kaye will post and expound.
Georger: I'll discuss your post tomorrow. I'm heading for bed.
Coopsnoop said:
"I didn't "conclude" that the money was planted. I'm using that as supposition, just as you may "conclude" that it wasn't planted. Who can prove what? "
Well... I think the difference between planted vs. not-planted is testable and can be proved, if you
can show each condition has its own characteristic traits. It's a forensic matter. One set of traits
will indicate "planted". Another set of traits indicates "not planted".
For example, when things are exposed to the atmosphere they acquire particular isotopic traits,
due to the nature of the Earth's atmosphere (post atomic testing in the 1940s-50s). This is a
well documented universal fact used to date things. If a thing is buried it is not being exposed to
the atmosphere. Things buried vs things not buried have different isotopic exposure clocks. This
would apply to the Cooper money, as well any other physical object on Earth. (This was
mentioned years ago on DZ. back about 2008. People didn't pay much attention!) :)
BTW, such tests were available back in 1980 when the money was first discovered.
In a similar fashion, there are other criteria which imply "plant" vs. "non-plant" with different
clocks indicative of each - science is fun! :)
Georger, is there a possibility for testing the money as you mention above and/or for further tests for river contamination?
-
Robert99:
I didn't "conclude" that the money was planted. I'm using that as supposition, just as you may "conclude" that it wasn't planted. Who can prove what? If it was easy, the case have been solved long ago. You can examine anomalies in any criminal case, or scientific experiment, and use those anomolies to build your conclusion. But that would be flawed logic. As for FBI and lawyers using "their experience" to assume that the money couldn't be planted, well........maybe that's what Cooper wanted them to think. You have no idea what goes on in the mind of a clever criminal, Robert. Some of them may be smarter than the FBI or lawyers. As for Tom Kaye......I believe that he publicly rejected the washdown theory. That leaves two likely alternatives: a direct Cooper landing at Tina's Bar, or a plant. I think Tom Kaye is going with a "plant." Maybe Tom Kaye will post and expound.
Georger: I'll discuss your post tomorrow. I'm heading for bed.
Coopsnoop said:
"I didn't "conclude" that the money was planted. I'm using that as supposition, just as you may "conclude" that it wasn't planted. Who can prove what? "
Well... I think the difference between planted vs. not-planted is testable and can be proved, if you
can show each condition has its own characteristic traits. It's a forensic matter. One set of traits
will indicate "planted". Another set of traits indicates "not planted".
For example, when things are exposed to the atmosphere they acquire particular isotopic traits,
due to the nature of the Earth's atmosphere (post atomic testing in the 1940s-50s). This is a
well documented universal fact used to date things. If a thing is buried it is not being exposed to
the atmosphere. Things buried vs things not buried have different isotopic exposure clocks. This
would apply to the Cooper money, as well any other physical object on Earth. (This was
mentioned years ago on DZ. back about 2008. People didn't pay much attention!) :)
BTW, such tests were available back in 1980 when the money was first discovered.
In a similar fashion, there are other criteria which imply "plant" vs. "non-plant" with different
clocks indicative of each - science is fun! :)
Georger, is there a possibility for testing the money as you mention above and/or for further tests for river contamination?
Sure, to some extent. At this point anyone running tests on this money, fragments, soil samples, band fragments (if they could be isolated)... etc. would want samples in as 'pristine' (uncontaminated) condition, as possible. And plenty of time to work with the samples and think things through (developing a schedule of applied tests). There is just a finite amount of this material left which would qualify as being 'uncontaminated'. The time for turning these precious
samples over to back yard mechanics, has ceased, imho! Professionals who know what they are doing will be required from this point on . . . that was always my first line of thought or I never would have made an overture to Larry, in the first place.
I feel the same about the rest of the Cooper evidence. The FBI needs to put somebody in charge of this evidence who really knows what he's doing. That means someone who is up to date and knowledgeable about the wide swath of forensic testing (including genetic testing) that could be applied to the physical evidence the FBI has, in this case.
If I were the FBI/Atty General, I would even go so far as to acquire the bills/fragments including the original evidence folders Ingram was given and has, to get those items of evidence back into government hands and secure them along with the rest of the Cooper physical evidence ... I feel very strongly about this because I think the original Court Judgement to split this evidence up, was wrong and very short-sighted.
As I told Eng once, I would NEVER! give up on this case. Time is a valuable ally in this matter
if used appropriately -
Yours is an important question and maybe the most important question of all, at this point -
-
Georger:
The different traits between "planted" and "non-planted" could possibly show up through some form of biological detection, I suppose. If the money was in a prior location for "x" number of years, its possible that there may be biological indicators that the money sat at another location besides Tina's Bar. We know that Tom Kaye tested for silver nitrate, which was determined, but that was indicative of the FBI using "sn" in their earlier test for fingerprints. So what other test exists? How about "anaerobic v. aerobic?" Would the bills go through accelerated degradation in one of those conditions? I guess the larger question would be: given the structural composition of the bills, what environmental factors would suggest the "rounded edges" and the "little holes" found on the bills? Remember, Dr. Palmer stated that the money packets were only at TB for 9 to 12 months prior.
-
Georger://
Nice summation of the communications between the crew and ATC/NWA. I think that you have opened the door to some further speculation. If Cooper is testing out the stairs, and that registers as "oscillations and bumps," then the "last" bump would arguably be the "bump that sent him out the door." Or would it? I propose a couple of other possibilities. What if the crew was also experiencing turbulance and relied on their "feel" of the airflow as the "last bump." Couldn't turbulance be confused with oscillations? Are their other indicators on board that can register air pressure differentials, and thus, oscillations? And another possibility. If Cooper is the deceptive genious that some believe, what would prevent him from producing oscillations by plunging the airstairs a few times to create backpressure and a false positive to the crew? If he has pilot training and knows aircraft, which he must to some degree, he might know how to create the impressions that will allow him to escape.
-
Georger:
The different traits between "planted" and "non-planted" could possibly show up through some form of biological detection, I suppose. If the money was in a prior location for "x" number of years, its possible that there may be biological indicators that the money sat at another location besides Tina's Bar. We know that Tom Kaye tested for silver nitrate, which was determined, but that was indicative of the FBI using "sn" in their earlier test for fingerprints. So what other test exists? How about "anaerobic v. aerobic?" Would the bills go through accelerated degradation in one of those conditions? I guess the larger question would be: given the structural composition of the bills, what environmental factors would suggest the "rounded edges" and the "little holes" found on the bills? Remember, Dr. Palmer stated that the money packets were only at TB for 9 to 12 months prior.
Coopsnoop, There is one additional peculiarity with the bills that should be considered. Tom Kaye has photographs on his web page that indicates one packet of the bills had been "torqued", presumably by water. Looking at those photographs is the best way to understand what I am talking about. There is a very remote possibility that this torqueing could have been done by airflow over a relatively long period (weeks or a few months) of time.
If the packet was torqued by water, then why wasn't evidence of river water contamination found on the bills? If it was done by airflow, the packet would have to be exposed to view for a lengthy period of time. Since Tina Bar is visited daily by fishermen and "sand trampers", why didn't they notice the money? The three packets of bills found at Tina Bar were very close to each other and did not appear to have been exposed to any great amount of violence (regardless of the torqueing).
-
Georger:
The different traits between "planted" and "non-planted" could possibly show up through some form of biological detection, I suppose. If the money was in a prior location for "x" number of years, its possible that there may be biological indicators that the money sat at another location besides Tina's Bar. We know that Tom Kaye tested for silver nitrate, which was determined, but that was indicative of the FBI using "sn" in their earlier test for fingerprints. So what other test exists? How about "anaerobic v. aerobic?" Would the bills go through accelerated degradation in one of those conditions? I guess the larger question would be: given the structural composition of the bills, what environmental factors would suggest the "rounded edges" and the "little holes" found on the bills? Remember, Dr. Palmer stated that the money packets were only at TB for 9 to 12 months prior.
Maybe we are 'sposed to be discussing the money in the Money Section? Realise things spill over
automatically. You mention "biological indicators" associated with different locations. That's a reasonable expectation one might test for. What "biological indicators" do you think would imply
plant vs. arrived by natural means? Can you be specific. Tom did not find any 'diatoms', I guess.
That is curious. Does that indicate "plant"?
There is this whole issue of degradation, and traits of degradation, which has yet to be nailed down. Rounded edges on bills. (Corners and edges tend to get rounded off in nature)?
Maybe we should take this to the Money section?
You ask good questions. Do you know Brian is here!? Hopefully we can bring Brian into this discussion. :)
-
Georger://
Nice summation of the communications between the crew and ATC/NWA. I think that you have opened the door to some further speculation. If Cooper is testing out the stairs, and that registers as "oscillations and bumps," then the "last" bump would arguably be the "bump that sent him out the door." Or would it? I propose a couple of other possibilities. What if the crew was also experiencing turbulance and relied on their "feel" of the airflow as the "last bump." Couldn't turbulance be confused with oscillations? Are their other indicators on board that can register air pressure differentials, and thus, oscillations? And another possibility. If Cooper is the deceptive genious that some believe, what would prevent him from producing oscillations by plunging the airstairs a few times to create backpressure and a false positive to the crew? If he has pilot training and knows aircraft, which he must to some degree, he might know how to create the impressions that will allow him to escape.
;) Hmmm, I dont think those 727 stairs were a "tuned harp" that Cooper played ... like Mozart
creating an effect ? ;) Very likely the stairs were vibrating in the airstream as a result of their own mechanical realities ... remember Cooper called forward and said: 'slow and stabilise the plane'. Doesn't sound to me like there was much opportunity there for independent orchestration or playing those stairs like a Xylophone, to fool everyone ?
-
Georger:
The different traits between "planted" and "non-planted" could possibly show up through some form of biological detection, I suppose. If the money was in a prior location for "x" number of years, its possible that there may be biological indicators that the money sat at another location besides Tina's Bar. We know that Tom Kaye tested for silver nitrate, which was determined, but that was indicative of the FBI using "sn" in their earlier test for fingerprints. So what other test exists? How about "anaerobic v. aerobic?" Would the bills go through accelerated degradation in one of those conditions? I guess the larger question would be: given the structural composition of the bills, what environmental factors would suggest the "rounded edges" and the "little holes" found on the bills? Remember, Dr. Palmer stated that the money packets were only at TB for 9 to 12 months prior.
Coopsnoop, There is one additional peculiarity with the bills that should be considered. Tom Kaye has photographs on his web page that indicates one packet of the bills had been "torqued", presumably by water. Looking at those photographs is the best way to understand what I am talking about. There is a very remote possibility that this torqueing could have been done by airflow over a relatively long period (weeks or a few months) of time.
If the packet was torqued by water, then why wasn't evidence of river water contamination found on the bills? If it was done by airflow, the packet would have to be exposed to view for a lengthy period of time. Since Tina Bar is visited daily by fishermen and "sand trampers", why didn't they notice the money? The three packets of bills found at Tina Bar were very close to each other and did not appear to have been exposed to any great amount of violence (regardless of the torqueing).
Yes, Tom's comments about torquing, are interesting. Maybe the whole group of bills was torqued,
from impact? If that is the case then it may be proof the bag and Cooper were separated and
the bag fell to the ground, on its own?
But we have had this conversation before, I think. If I recall, you are interested to know if some
'torquing' indicates direction of water flow .... indicative of direction the money traveled to its location at Tina Bar? Am I correct? :)
What evidence of "impact" would reveal itself in this money, as distinct from torquing or force on individual bills related to water pressure and direction of travel?
Can we be more specific in our requirements of traits and what different traits indicate, or rule out, in this money.
I wish Brian would join this conversation! :)
-
Georger:
The different traits between "planted" and "non-planted" could possibly show up through some form of biological detection, I suppose. If the money was in a prior location for "x" number of years, its possible that there may be biological indicators that the money sat at another location besides Tina's Bar. We know that Tom Kaye tested for silver nitrate, which was determined, but that was indicative of the FBI using "sn" in their earlier test for fingerprints. So what other test exists? How about "anaerobic v. aerobic?" Would the bills go through accelerated degradation in one of those conditions? I guess the larger question would be: given the structural composition of the bills, what environmental factors would suggest the "rounded edges" and the "little holes" found on the bills? Remember, Dr. Palmer stated that the money packets were only at TB for 9 to 12 months prior.
Coopsnoop, There is one additional peculiarity with the bills that should be considered. Tom Kaye has photographs on his web page that indicates one packet of the bills had been "torqued", presumably by water. Looking at those photographs is the best way to understand what I am talking about. There is a very remote possibility that this torqueing could have been done by airflow over a relatively long period (weeks or a few months) of time.
If the packet was torqued by water, then why wasn't evidence of river water contamination found on the bills? If it was done by airflow, the packet would have to be exposed to view for a lengthy period of time. Since Tina Bar is visited daily by fishermen and "sand trampers", why didn't they notice the money? The three packets of bills found at Tina Bar were very close to each other and did not appear to have been exposed to any great amount of violence (regardless of the torqueing).
Yes, Tom's comments about torquing, are interesting. Maybe the whole group of bills was torqued,
from impact? If that is the case then it may be proof the bag and Cooper were separated and
the bag fell to the ground, on its own?
But we have had this conversation before, I think. If I recall, you are interested to know if some
'torquing' indicates direction of water flow .... indicative of direction the money traveled to its location at Tina Bar? Am I correct? :)
What evidence of "impact" would reveal itself in this money, as distinct from torquing or force on individual bills related to water pressure and direction of travel?
Can we be more specific in our requirements of traits and what different traits indicate, or rule out, in this money.
I wish Brian would join this conversation! :)
I would also like to hear what Brian has to say about this.
The torqueing was counterclockwise as view from above. For the torqueing to take place, the bottom of the packet of bills would have to be firmly attached in some manner to the surface below it. If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar by the river water, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be lower than the end without a rubber band and would be under an inch or two of water.
If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar and NOT by the river water, it would have to be done by water entering the river as drainage from the Fazio farm and sand operation. In this case, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be pointed downstream (to the south at Tina Bar).
Brian, can you remember the orientation of the packets of bills you found at Tina Bar?
Robert99
-
Robert99 and Georger:
Good questions, both. Georger is right, we need to address this under the "money" subtopic. Torquing is an interesting angle of discussion, though. As for "playing with the airstairs," we'll never know for sure. The clever and deceptive mind can do such things when its crunch time. But if you put yourself in the place of Cooper, I doubt that you would heave yourself out the backend without some "thinking and figuring." This guy is out to save his skin and the booty. He's looking for a place to jump hoping that he can survive; and, he'd like to be able to getaway once on the ground too. Think about it. If you have a few extra minutes, which he did, he's going to process his "most likely odds" outcome.
Snoop.
-
Hey Brian. Welcome. A great team being assembled at your site, Shutter. Congratulations!!
-
Hey Brian. Welcome. A great team being assembled at your site, Shutter. Congratulations!!
Thanks, but I can't take all the credit. most of it belongs to all of us. if it wasn't for all of you guys, none of this would of happened. Bruce is also a key person, I'm sure he has a lot to do with many of the people that have joined. it's a team effort in order to make this all come together. it's getting there that's for sure. I asked Bruce earlier if he would like me to open a category for the mountain news. perhaps he missed it.
one of my main goals are being achieved. that is the ability to work together as a team, you just didn't see that on the other site (DZ). we tried, but was always distracted. I appreciate the credit, but must gracefully bow down to you guys. I simply turned the key. you guys give it the gas. 8)
Shutter
-
Georger:
The different traits between "planted" and "non-planted" could possibly show up through some form of biological detection, I suppose. If the money was in a prior location for "x" number of years, its possible that there may be biological indicators that the money sat at another location besides Tina's Bar. We know that Tom Kaye tested for silver nitrate, which was determined, but that was indicative of the FBI using "sn" in their earlier test for fingerprints. So what other test exists? How about "anaerobic v. aerobic?" Would the bills go through accelerated degradation in one of those conditions? I guess the larger question would be: given the structural composition of the bills, what environmental factors would suggest the "rounded edges" and the "little holes" found on the bills? Remember, Dr. Palmer stated that the money packets were only at TB for 9 to 12 months prior.
Coopsnoop, There is one additional peculiarity with the bills that should be considered. Tom Kaye has photographs on his web page that indicates one packet of the bills had been "torqued", presumably by water. Looking at those photographs is the best way to understand what I am talking about. There is a very remote possibility that this torqueing could have been done by airflow over a relatively long period (weeks or a few months) of time.
If the packet was torqued by water, then why wasn't evidence of river water contamination found on the bills? If it was done by airflow, the packet would have to be exposed to view for a lengthy period of time. Since Tina Bar is visited daily by fishermen and "sand trampers", why didn't they notice the money? The three packets of bills found at Tina Bar were very close to each other and did not appear to have been exposed to any great amount of violence (regardless of the torqueing).
Yes, Tom's comments about torquing, are interesting. Maybe the whole group of bills was torqued,
from impact? If that is the case then it may be proof the bag and Cooper were separated and
the bag fell to the ground, on its own?
But we have had this conversation before, I think. If I recall, you are interested to know if some
'torquing' indicates direction of water flow .... indicative of direction the money traveled to its location at Tina Bar? Am I correct? :)
What evidence of "impact" would reveal itself in this money, as distinct from torquing or force on individual bills related to water pressure and direction of travel?
Can we be more specific in our requirements of traits and what different traits indicate, or rule out, in this money.
I wish Brian would join this conversation! :)
I would also like to hear what Brian has to say about this.
The torqueing was counterclockwise as view from above. For the torqueing to take place, the bottom of the packet of bills would have to be firmly attached in some manner to the surface below it. If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar by the river water, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be lower than the end without a rubber band and would be under an inch or two of water.
If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar and NOT by the river water, it would have to be done by water entering the river as drainage from the Fazio farm and sand operation. In this case, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be pointed downstream (to the south at Tina Bar).
Brian, can you remember the orientation of the packets of bills you found at Tina Bar?
Robert99
Am I correct in assuming Tom saw this in only one bill. (He had a total of 3 bills not in consecutive
order). So how far can one extrapolate from one bill, even if there is torque in that one bill?
The torquing, if it is real, in one bill, may or may not represent torquing in adjacent bills which Tom did not have to examine. ???
;)
-
Georger:
The different traits between "planted" and "non-planted" could possibly show up through some form of biological detection, I suppose. If the money was in a prior location for "x" number of years, its possible that there may be biological indicators that the money sat at another location besides Tina's Bar. We know that Tom Kaye tested for silver nitrate, which was determined, but that was indicative of the FBI using "sn" in their earlier test for fingerprints. So what other test exists? How about "anaerobic v. aerobic?" Would the bills go through accelerated degradation in one of those conditions? I guess the larger question would be: given the structural composition of the bills, what environmental factors would suggest the "rounded edges" and the "little holes" found on the bills? Remember, Dr. Palmer stated that the money packets were only at TB for 9 to 12 months prior.
Coopsnoop, There is one additional peculiarity with the bills that should be considered. Tom Kaye has photographs on his web page that indicates one packet of the bills had been "torqued", presumably by water. Looking at those photographs is the best way to understand what I am talking about. There is a very remote possibility that this torqueing could have been done by airflow over a relatively long period (weeks or a few months) of time.
If the packet was torqued by water, then why wasn't evidence of river water contamination found on the bills? If it was done by airflow, the packet would have to be exposed to view for a lengthy period of time. Since Tina Bar is visited daily by fishermen and "sand trampers", why didn't they notice the money? The three packets of bills found at Tina Bar were very close to each other and did not appear to have been exposed to any great amount of violence (regardless of the torqueing).
Yes, Tom's comments about torquing, are interesting. Maybe the whole group of bills was torqued,
from impact? If that is the case then it may be proof the bag and Cooper were separated and
the bag fell to the ground, on its own?
But we have had this conversation before, I think. If I recall, you are interested to know if some
'torquing' indicates direction of water flow .... indicative of direction the money traveled to its location at Tina Bar? Am I correct? :)
What evidence of "impact" would reveal itself in this money, as distinct from torquing or force on individual bills related to water pressure and direction of travel?
Can we be more specific in our requirements of traits and what different traits indicate, or rule out, in this money.
I wish Brian would join this conversation! :)
I would also like to hear what Brian has to say about this.
The torqueing was counterclockwise as view from above. For the torqueing to take place, the bottom of the packet of bills would have to be firmly attached in some manner to the surface below it. If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar by the river water, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be lower than the end without a rubber band and would be under an inch or two of water.
If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar and NOT by the river water, it would have to be done by water entering the river as drainage from the Fazio farm and sand operation. In this case, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be pointed downstream (to the south at Tina Bar).
Brian, can you remember the orientation of the packets of bills you found at Tina Bar?
Robert99
Am I correct in assuming Tom saw this in only one bill. (He had a total of 3 bills not in consecutive
order). So how far can one extrapolate from one bill, even if there is torque in that one bill?
The torquing, if it is real, in one bill, may or may not represent torquing in adjacent bills which Tom did not have to examine. ???
;)
According to the website, he concluded this from one bill that he examined with multiple fragments adhered to the edge. Also - and I might be wrong about this, his web site wasn't real clear on it - some of his conclusions in general about the money came from pictures of the money.
An alternate theory, instead of torque with center alignment, is that the bills just came slightly askew within the rubber band from being fanned out in water, or being tossed around in water, or having water flow over them as flood waters rose and receded.
In other words, the bills might have been out of alignment but still within the band - so instead of the bills being exactly aligned one on top of the other forming a straight-edged rectangular bundle, you have a one on top of the other slightly diagonal bundle. And then one or two individual bills could have moved out of that alignment. I'm just not sure what the significance would be either way.
lol...another reason I don't like categories.... jk...this format is fine. ;D 8). ....Dang i just noticed there's not an angel icon.
-
Georger:
The different traits between "planted" and "non-planted" could possibly show up through some form of biological detection, I suppose. If the money was in a prior location for "x" number of years, its possible that there may be biological indicators that the money sat at another location besides Tina's Bar. We know that Tom Kaye tested for silver nitrate, which was determined, but that was indicative of the FBI using "sn" in their earlier test for fingerprints. So what other test exists? How about "anaerobic v. aerobic?" Would the bills go through accelerated degradation in one of those conditions? I guess the larger question would be: given the structural composition of the bills, what environmental factors would suggest the "rounded edges" and the "little holes" found on the bills? Remember, Dr. Palmer stated that the money packets were only at TB for 9 to 12 months prior.
Coopsnoop, There is one additional peculiarity with the bills that should be considered. Tom Kaye has photographs on his web page that indicates one packet of the bills had been "torqued", presumably by water. Looking at those photographs is the best way to understand what I am talking about. There is a very remote possibility that this torqueing could have been done by airflow over a relatively long period (weeks or a few months) of time.
If the packet was torqued by water, then why wasn't evidence of river water contamination found on the bills? If it was done by airflow, the packet would have to be exposed to view for a lengthy period of time. Since Tina Bar is visited daily by fishermen and "sand trampers", why didn't they notice the money? The three packets of bills found at Tina Bar were very close to each other and did not appear to have been exposed to any great amount of violence (regardless of the torqueing).
Yes, Tom's comments about torquing, are interesting. Maybe the whole group of bills was torqued,
from impact? If that is the case then it may be proof the bag and Cooper were separated and
the bag fell to the ground, on its own?
But we have had this conversation before, I think. If I recall, you are interested to know if some
'torquing' indicates direction of water flow .... indicative of direction the money traveled to its location at Tina Bar? Am I correct? :)
What evidence of "impact" would reveal itself in this money, as distinct from torquing or force on individual bills related to water pressure and direction of travel?
Can we be more specific in our requirements of traits and what different traits indicate, or rule out, in this money.
I wish Brian would join this conversation! :)
I would also like to hear what Brian has to say about this.
The torqueing was counterclockwise as view from above. For the torqueing to take place, the bottom of the packet of bills would have to be firmly attached in some manner to the surface below it. If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar by the river water, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be lower than the end without a rubber band and would be under an inch or two of water.
If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar and NOT by the river water, it would have to be done by water entering the river as drainage from the Fazio farm and sand operation. In this case, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be pointed upstream (to the south at Tina Bar).
Brian, can you remember the orientation of the packets of bills you found at Tina Bar?
Robert99
I have corrected the last few words in the next to last paragraph above to indicate that the end of the packet with the rubber band would be pointed "upstream" (rather than "downstream") which is to the south at Tina Bar.
Robert99
-
Georger:
The different traits between "planted" and "non-planted" could possibly show up through some form of biological detection, I suppose. If the money was in a prior location for "x" number of years, its possible that there may be biological indicators that the money sat at another location besides Tina's Bar. We know that Tom Kaye tested for silver nitrate, which was determined, but that was indicative of the FBI using "sn" in their earlier test for fingerprints. So what other test exists? How about "anaerobic v. aerobic?" Would the bills go through accelerated degradation in one of those conditions? I guess the larger question would be: given the structural composition of the bills, what environmental factors would suggest the "rounded edges" and the "little holes" found on the bills? Remember, Dr. Palmer stated that the money packets were only at TB for 9 to 12 months prior.
Coopsnoop, There is one additional peculiarity with the bills that should be considered. Tom Kaye has photographs on his web page that indicates one packet of the bills had been "torqued", presumably by water. Looking at those photographs is the best way to understand what I am talking about. There is a very remote possibility that this torqueing could have been done by airflow over a relatively long period (weeks or a few months) of time.
If the packet was torqued by water, then why wasn't evidence of river water contamination found on the bills? If it was done by airflow, the packet would have to be exposed to view for a lengthy period of time. Since Tina Bar is visited daily by fishermen and "sand trampers", why didn't they notice the money? The three packets of bills found at Tina Bar were very close to each other and did not appear to have been exposed to any great amount of violence (regardless of the torqueing).
Yes, Tom's comments about torquing, are interesting. Maybe the whole group of bills was torqued,
from impact? If that is the case then it may be proof the bag and Cooper were separated and
the bag fell to the ground, on its own?
But we have had this conversation before, I think. If I recall, you are interested to know if some
'torquing' indicates direction of water flow .... indicative of direction the money traveled to its location at Tina Bar? Am I correct? :)
What evidence of "impact" would reveal itself in this money, as distinct from torquing or force on individual bills related to water pressure and direction of travel?
Can we be more specific in our requirements of traits and what different traits indicate, or rule out, in this money.
I wish Brian would join this conversation! :)
I would also like to hear what Brian has to say about this.
The torqueing was counterclockwise as view from above. For the torqueing to take place, the bottom of the packet of bills would have to be firmly attached in some manner to the surface below it. If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar by the river water, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be lower than the end without a rubber band and would be under an inch or two of water.
If the torqueing was done at Tina Bar and NOT by the river water, it would have to be done by water entering the river as drainage from the Fazio farm and sand operation. In this case, the end of the packet with the rubber band still attached would be pointed downstream (to the south at Tina Bar).
Brian, can you remember the orientation of the packets of bills you found at Tina Bar?
Robert99
Am I correct in assuming Tom saw this in only one bill. (He had a total of 3 bills not in consecutive
order). So how far can one extrapolate from one bill, even if there is torque in that one bill?
The torquing, if it is real, in one bill, may or may not represent torquing in adjacent bills which Tom did not have to examine. ???
;)
In Tom's illustration and photographs, there is evidence that fragment stubs from more bills were still attached to the left end of the packet and restrained by the rubber band which had moved to that end.
Robert99
-
R99:
Why do you suppose Flight #305 dog-legged around PDX from the East to the West and back to the East?
-
R99:
Why do you suppose Flight #305 dog-legged around PDX from the East to the West and back to the East?
I don't think they got the path right if you ask me. I don't know if it was intentional, or what. R99 has a pretty good theory. I even put it to the test on my sim. it's possible. mistakes happen all the time. I'm not so sure they got it right. I think figuring the path out will tell the story of the money. I believe they are linked. can't prove it, but working on it. I just don't know....
-
R99:
Why do you suppose Flight #305 dog-legged around PDX from the East to the West and back to the East?
That "dog-legged" or "segmented circle" around the west side of Portland from what is now the Battleground VORTAC is NOT something that would have been done on that flight by that flight crew.
While on the ground in Seattle, the flight crew mentioned some possible "alternatives" to flying down Victor 23. They had been informed that the Chief FAA Psychologist had predicted that Cooper would take a hostage with him and then blow up the airliner as they jumped. Consequently, the crew did not want to fly over a densely inhabited area if they could avoid it.
When the airliner reached the Mayfield (now Malay) Intersection near Toledo, the most logical thing for them to do would be to head almost straight south and rejoin Victor 23 at or near the Canby Intersection. If they did that, they would pass almost directly over Tina Bar.
If the precise flight path was available, and it should be in the un-redacted Seattle ATC transcripts, and if it supports the straight line bypass on the west side of Portland, then Cooper's jump point can easily be pinpointed. At the same time, as I have pointed out previously, the geographical and topographical characteristics of Tina Bar are so unique that they have a real story to tell. And that story may include evidence that Cooper died in the jump as a no-pull.
Just from a general inspection of Georger's photography of the Tina Bar area, plus topographical information, it is obvious to me that Cooper could not have jumped at a point north (or downstream) of Tina Bar or further south (upstream) than the Flushing Channel to Vancouver Lake. And he probably landed on solid ground but very close to the east Columbia River shoreline.
There is also evidence on the so-called FBI maps that support a straight line bypass of Portland on the west side. In addition, the National Guard T-33, the USAF F-106s, and Himmelsbach and his helicopter all headed to the southwest side of Portland.
If the un-redacted Seattle ATC transcripts aren't made available within a reasonable time, I will expand on the above as much as the available data permits.
Actually, at this point in time, there seems to be very little related to the redactions that is not known except for the exact times and aircraft locations that are necessary to determine an accurate flight path.
Did anyone ever ask Rataczak or Anderson about their flight path as they passed Portland?
Robert99
-
R99:
The dog-leg route flies over "populated space" regardless. If jet is at 10,000 feet and Bohan is flying into PDX from the west at 5000 feet, four minutes behind #305, what difference would it make whether #305 flew a straight line over Government Island, or even flew to the east? 5000 feet of vertical separation is plenty enough to cross over PDX at night. There must be a better reason to establish the dog-leg over downtown Vancouver. The route generated by ATC and ARTCC, and provided to the FBI, is the accurate route made on 11/24/71.
-
R99:
The dog-leg route flies over "populated space" regardless. If jet is at 10,000 feet and Bohan is flying into PDX from the west at 5000 feet, four minutes behind #305, what difference would it make whether #305 flew a straight line over Government Island, or even flew to the east? 5000 feet of vertical separation is plenty enough to cross over PDX at night. There must be a better reason to establish the dog-leg over downtown Vancouver. The route generated by ATC and ARTCC, and provided to the FBI, is the accurate route made on 11/24/71.
First, the Bohan aircraft was not a known factor in anything related to the NWA aircraft that night. Bohan's aircraft probably took Victor 23E straight from the Seattle VORTAC to the Battleground VORTAC (which was known as the Portland VORTAC in 1971) and did not use V-23 itself (except in the common areas near the mentioned VORTACs). Sluggo's web page has copies of the maps that includes information that both the NWA and Bohan's aircraft would be using that night. However, both the airliners would probably be using the Jeppesen versions of those maps. Same information but some differences in formats.
The reasons for not wanting to fly over Portland would include reducing the probability of wreckage landing in Portland if Cooper did actually blow up the airliner. Taking a bypass on the west side would also save a couple of minutes flying time. It should be remembered that the NWA aircraft was in the Portland area before the performance group in Minneapolis told them that they appeared to have enough fuel to make it to Reno.
Do you know the source of the so-called "FBI Map"? Who generated it and where did they get their information? I presume that you have looked at the times and distances on that map. How do you explain the three nautical miles in one minute and then six nautical miles in the next minute indications?
-
R99:
Why do you suppose Flight #305 dog-legged around PDX from the East to the West and back to the East?
That "dog-legged" or "segmented circle" around the west side of Portland from what is now the Battleground VORTAC is NOT something that would have been done on that flight by that flight crew.
While on the ground in Seattle, the flight crew mentioned some possible "alternatives" to flying down Victor 23. They had been informed that the Chief FAA Psychologist had predicted that Cooper would take a hostage with him and then blow up the airliner as they jumped. Consequently, the crew did not want to fly over a densely inhabited area if they could avoid it.
When the airliner reached the Mayfield (now Malay) Intersection near Toledo, the most logical thing for them to do would be to head almost straight south and rejoin Victor 23 at or near the Canby Intersection. If they did that, they would pass almost directly over Tina Bar.
If the precise flight path was available, and it should be in the un-redacted Seattle ATC transcripts, and if it supports the straight line bypass on the west side of Portland, then Cooper's jump point can easily be pinpointed. At the same time, as I have pointed out previously, the geographical and topographical characteristics of Tina Bar are so unique that they have a real story to tell. And that story may include evidence that Cooper died in the jump as a no-pull.
Just from a general inspection of Georger's photography of the Tina Bar area, plus topographical information, it is obvious to me that Cooper could not have jumped at a point north (or downstream) of Tina Bar or further south (upstream) than the Flushing Channel to Vancouver Lake. And he probably landed on solid ground but very close to the east Columbia River shoreline.
There is also evidence on the so-called FBI maps that support a straight line bypass of Portland on the west side. In addition, the National Guard T-33, the USAF F-106s, and Himmelsbach and his helicopter all headed to the southwest side of Portland.
If the un-redacted Seattle ATC transcripts aren't made available within a reasonable time, I will expand on the above as much as the available data permits.
Actually, at this point in time, there seems to be very little related to the redactions that is not known except for the exact times and aircraft locations that are necessary to determine an accurate flight path.
Did anyone ever ask Rataczak or Anderson about their flight path as they passed Portland?
Robert99
And a straight line from Toledo to the west side of Portland is exactly what Dawson (and others)
reported happened - specifically: straight line from Toledo to the west side of Portland, crossed
the Columbia across the tip of Hayden island, T33 intercept near Oswego south of Portland -
see attached. The problem is nobody accepts Dawson's account, and there is no logical reason
why the NWA search map and the Dawson account would diverge; money and time and
investigative man hours and finding Cooper were at stake! There has to be a compelling
reason why the two accounts would differ so much.
Shutter tried the Dawson fp in his simulator and I think he liked the Transcript time-match results?
Shutter can explain his thoughts -
Hominid thinks the Dawson fp was a "political" statement and not true.
Rataczak says 'I am the only living person who knows what the flight path was'! So why not just
say what it was?
The NWA/FBI fp does offer the option of Cooper bailing later in time, than reported. 8:11 can
rather easily be extended to 8:13 or even 8:15 (perhaps) by one excuse or another: even
Rataczak says the bump happened 5-10mins after our last contact with Cooper at 8:05. That
creates a window 8:10-8:15. We also know that Rat's reports about their last contact with
Cooper is not the whole truth! Both Rataczak and Anderson have privately said Cooper called
forward after 8:05 with an additional demand: "Slow the plane...". Does this added fact extend
the drop window further, to say 8:10-8:16/17/18? Now Anderson adds a new fact! After
the bump "we discussed it before reporting it - Rat then called it in to NWA". Does this extend the
window further to say 8:20? By the time you add these extensions in, after deciding which are
allowable and which are not based on some subjective process, now you are closer to the
Columbia River on the NWA/FBI flight path map, and Cooper and his money could conceivably wind
up in the water, with some remnant of money eventually winding up at _ Tina Bar.
Let me attach the Dawson article if I can _
*Please make note of the fact I am NOT discussing the money find here - that can be done in the
Money section, and I think that is what Shutter intends. The money find is a complex story which
deserves treatment on its own independent of flight path considerations, imho.
-
Thanks Georger, I ran several tests from Toledo to Hayden Island (west point). I used two different planes in the test. the first was a cirrus jet. it's small and easy to fly. not a lot of bells and whistles with it. the second plane was a 727-100 of course.
I started the flight several miles short of Toledo, once over that position, I started the clock. at approx. 8:10 I was over the Woodland area, and by 8:14 I was over Tena Bar. Now, does this really prove anything? not really. the problem is the plane was basically flying south during the hijacking, even with some turns in the dropzone area, it's hard to say this path is right. basically you could move the flight path east or west and come up with the same numbers, but when you have evidence of a certain point that calculates. it can leave unanswered questions. you have Robert99 giving logical calculations, we have documentation from a Major in the Air Force speaking, and we have mystery money lying in a strange place with different opinions like the flight path itself.
do I believe this could be true? perhaps, but the only way to find out is to investigate the theory. perhaps Hominid will key in. he always likes the topic of the flight path.
Added: one thing left out here is the placard location.
-
Placard found in 78 just south of Silver Lake, right on flight path. Georger, or an airline pilot, might be better qualified to answer the question about distance/times between points, R99. However, Bohan's flight approach into PDX is very important to case. It goes to question of wind patterns at time of Cooper's jump.
-
Placard found in 78 just south of Silver Lake, right on flight path. Georger, or an airline pilot, might be better qualified to answer the question about distance/times between points, R99. However, Bohan's flight approach into PDX is very important to case. It goes to question of wind patterns at time of Cooper's jump.
Understood snoop. I was adding the fact of the location of the placard to Dawson's story. they don't match if you shoot straight down from Toledo. you might be under estimating what my simulator can do. I have answered some question R99 has had in the past pertaining to distance. it's a valuable tool in our arsenal.
-
Placard found in 78 just south of Silver Lake, right on flight path. Georger, or an airline pilot, might be better qualified to answer the question about distance/times between points, R99. However, Bohan's flight approach into PDX is very important to case. It goes to question of wind patterns at time of Cooper's jump.
Actually, without beating my chest and letting out with my Tarzan yell and with all due respect to Georger and any airline or other pilots on this thread, I might suggest in all modesty that I am better qualified to answer the questions about the distances and times between the points and other navigational aspects of the Cooper flight.
I have an aeronautical engineering degree, specializing in flight dynamics (performance and stability and control), plus two additional college degrees. I learned to fly starting at the age of 15 and was rated in general aviation and sports type aircraft. I also had Advanced and Instrument Ground Instructor Ratings, which means that I was rated to teach people preparing for commercial flying ratings and instrument flying ratings. I also have a limited number of skydiver type parachute jumps which were made 50 years ago just as skydiving started to become a recognized sport. I am now retired from all of the above.
To put the Cooper matter in perspective, it is a two-bit crime that should have been solved by the end of 1971. If Cooper had survived the jump, he probably would have been caught easily within a week. But he disappeared by sheer chance and the "experts" pointed the search people to the wrong area.
Calculating the flight path of the hijacked airliner is not brain surgery. It is not even rocket science. Even a teenage pilot should be able to do a good job at figuring it out. But accurate data, such as the Seattle ATC transcripts with embedded time hacks and controller phone talk, are needed to produce meaningful results. Unfortunately, those things were redacted from the Seattle ATC transcripts.
But thanks to the efforts of Georger and others, the cockpit conversations and other related items are now known. Very little, if anything at all, other than the flight path information remains unknown from the redacted transcripts. So what is the point in not releasing the un-redacted transcripts if a resolution of the Cooper hijacking is actually desired?
Bohan's flight has no relevance to the Cooper flight. The winds that Bohan reported are not substantiated by the actual measured weather. For instance, Bohan reported he made a landing at Portland with about a 25 to 30 knot crosswind. The actual top wind speed measured at Portland International Airport that day was only about 10 knots.
The data and assumptions I used in calculating the point where the placard could have separated from the airliner are given in those calculations on Tom Kaye's web page. I made ever effort to be "conservative", that is, the placard had to have travelled at least the distance given, but may well have travelled further. Even the shortest distance it travelled was west of the centerline of Victor 23. Also, the actual wind speeds and directions for the descent of the placard are still not known.
That is one of the reasons why the actual flight path of the airliner is needed. Once the actual flight path is known, then the winds aloft speeds and directions can also be calculated. And the placard problem can be redone with more accurate data and results.
Robert99
-
Did anyone ever ask Rataczak or Anderson about their flight path as they passed Portland?
Robert99
I spoke with Rataczak for 70 minutes in 2009. It was my only correspondence with him. He told me various things about the flight path, including that it's an "enigma," but he also said that he was east of Victor 23, and blown there by the wind.
I never asked him about his location over Portland, specifically, though.
I recall him telling me that Cooper jumped at 8:13, and was adamant about it with me. However, I didn't write it down in my notes, as I didn't know the time was so controversial and critical.
Bill has declined all further communication with me.
-
Did anyone ever ask Rataczak or Anderson about their flight path as they passed Portland?
Robert99
I spoke with Rataczak for 70 minutes in 2009. It was my only correspondence with him. He told me various things about the flight path, including that it's an "enigma," but he also said that he was east of Victor 23, and blown there by the wind.
I never asked him about his location over Portland, specifically, though.
I recall him telling me that Cooper jumped at 8:13, and was adamant about it with me. However, I didn't write it down in my notes, as I didn't know the time was so controversial and critical.
Bill has declined all further communication with me.
Well, quite obviously the FBI's flight path map does not confirm an east route. And what wind
would have blown the plane off by a large amount? Moreover, he has not told others what you
say he told you ... and other important spokes-people who were involved flatly reject this east
route theory.
There is a million things I could say here. An east route does not conform with other documented
facts. I'll leave it at that.
-
Thanks Georger, I ran several tests from Toledo to Hayden Island (west point). I used two different planes in the test. the first was a cirrus jet. it's small and easy to fly. not a lot of bells and whistles with it. the second plane was a 727-100 of course.
I started the flight several miles short of Toledo, once over that position, I started the clock. at approx. 8:10 I was over the Woodland area, and by 8:14 I was over Tena Bar. Now, does this really prove anything? not really. the problem is the plane was basically flying south during the hijacking, even with some turns in the dropzone area, it's hard to say this path is right. basically you could move the flight path east or west and come up with the same numbers, but when you have evidence of a certain point that calculates. it can leave unanswered questions. you have Robert99 giving logical calculations, we have documentation from a Major in the Air Force speaking, and we have mystery money lying in a strange place with different opinions like the flight path itself.
do I believe this could be true? perhaps, but the only way to find out is to investigate the theory. perhaps Hominid will key in. he always likes the topic of the flight path.
Added: one thing left out here is the placard location.
Hominid and I have spoken at length about Dawson's theory and I feel very safe in saying
Hominid rejects it as political and not credible.
My bias has to be toward R99's calculations ... pending something stronger.
-
'Hominid and I have spoken at length about Dawson's theory and I feel very safe in saying
Hominid rejects it as political and not credible."
what would Dawson gain by saying this for political reasons, or why would he say this?
-
Re: the placard.
With the storms and flooding that would have occurred within the two time periods, why is it assumed that the placard was found in 1979 in the same place that it landed in 1971? Under the right circumstances, a lot of ground could be covered in that time period.
I understand that sometimes you just have to take things at face value in order to get things done, and we have some back up to make assumptions for the placard spot with the known flight path - is that it? or is there another reason why the location of the placard is considered to be a given?
-
Re: the placard.
With the storms and flooding that would have occurred within the two time periods, why is it assumed that the placard was found in 1979 in the same place that it landed in 1971? Under the right circumstances, a lot of ground could be covered in that time period.
I understand that sometimes you just have to take things at face value in order to get things done, and we have some back up to make assumptions for the placard spot with the known flight path - is that it? or is there another reason why the location of the placard is considered to be a given?
Good question, the whole placard thing bothers me from get go. how did it get out of the plane. did Cooper rip it off the wall while trying to operate the stairs, and once he was out on the stairs it came out? that's to early into the time of the jump 8:04-5 area I believe.
Is this area prone to flooding? will it float? did the wind carry it several miles over the years? just like everything else, lots of questions...... 8)
-
Re: the placard.
With the storms and flooding that would have occurred within the two time periods, why is it assumed that the placard was found in 1979 in the same place that it landed in 1971? Under the right circumstances, a lot of ground could be covered in that time period.
I understand that sometimes you just have to take things at face value in order to get things done, and we have some back up to make assumptions for the placard spot with the known flight path - is that it? or is there another reason why the location of the placard is considered to be a given?
Good question, the whole placard thing bothers me from get go. how did it get out of the plane. did Cooper rip it off the wall while trying to operate the stairs, and once he was out on the stairs it came out? that's to early into the time of the jump 8:04-5 area I believe.
Is this area prone to flooding? will it float? did the wind carry it several miles over the years? just like everything else, lots of questions...... 8)
I don't know about the specific area, but the general area had some flooding in that time frame.
just going from personal experience - things that might not ordinarily float can be moved along by the force of the water. We have had items that probably would not float under ordinary circumstances appear on our creek bank after a flood.
Yes, just like everything else. one more thing to wonder about.
-
Re: the placard.
With the storms and flooding that would have occurred within the two time periods, why is it assumed that the placard was found in 1979 in the same place that it landed in 1971? Under the right circumstances, a lot of ground could be covered in that time period.
I understand that sometimes you just have to take things at face value in order to get things done, and we have some back up to make assumptions for the placard spot with the known flight path - is that it? or is there another reason why the location of the placard is considered to be a given?
Good question, the whole placard thing bothers me from get go. how did it get out of the plane. did Cooper rip it off the wall while trying to operate the stairs, and once he was out on the stairs it came out? that's to early into the time of the jump 8:04-5 area I believe.
Is this area prone to flooding? will it float? did the wind carry it several miles over the years? just like everything else, lots of questions...... 8)
I don't know about the specific area, but the general area had some flooding in that time frame.
just going from personal experience - things that might not ordinarily float can be moved along by the force of the water. We have had items that probably would not float under ordinary circumstances appear on our creek bank after a flood.
Yes, just like everything else. one more thing to wonder about.
The family that found the placard took Tom Kaye to the find location and he recorded the GPS coordinates. I checked those coordinates on a topographical map for the area and it was approximately 1500 feet above sea level. For comparison, Tina Bar is less than 20 feet above sea level and the Portland Airport's elevation is listed on aeronautical charts as 30 feet above sea level.
I don't remember anything from Tom Kaye describing the find location. So based on no reporting, the site may not have been remarkable in any sense. And, of course, no one can guarantee if the placard moved after its initial ground landing.
There is a picture of the placard on Sluggo's web page, I think, and it appears to me that it separated from the structure after flapping around in the wind for some time. I doubt if Cooper would take the time to tear it off since there was no reason whatsoever for him to do so.
Robert99
-
Re: the placard.
With the storms and flooding that would have occurred within the two time periods, why is it assumed that the placard was found in 1979 in the same place that it landed in 1971? Under the right circumstances, a lot of ground could be covered in that time period.
I understand that sometimes you just have to take things at face value in order to get things done, and we have some back up to make assumptions for the placard spot with the known flight path - is that it? or is there another reason why the location of the placard is considered to be a given?
Good question, the whole placard thing bothers me from get go. how did it get out of the plane. did Cooper rip it off the wall while trying to operate the stairs, and once he was out on the stairs it came out? that's to early into the time of the jump 8:04-5 area I believe.
Is this area prone to flooding? will it float? did the wind carry it several miles over the years? just like everything else, lots of questions...... 8)
I don't know about the specific area, but the general area had some flooding in that time frame.
just going from personal experience - things that might not ordinarily float can be moved along by the force of the water. We have had items that probably would not float under ordinary circumstances appear on our creek bank after a flood.
Yes, just like everything else. one more thing to wonder about.
The family that found the placard took Tom Kaye to the find location and he recorded the GPS coordinates. I checked those coordinates on a topographical map for the area and it was approximately 1500 feet above sea level. For comparison, Tina Bar is less than 20 feet above sea level and the Portland Airport's elevation is listed on aeronautical charts as 30 feet above sea level.
I don't remember anything from Tom Kaye describing the find location. So based on no reporting, the site may not have been remarkable in any sense. And, of course, no one can guarantee if the placard moved after its initial ground landing.
There is a picture of the placard on Sluggo's web page, I think, and it appears to me that it separated from the structure after flapping around in the wind for some time. I doubt if Cooper would take the time to tear it off since there was no reason whatsoever for him to do so.
Robert99
Can you post those coordinates?
-
Re: the placard.
With the storms and flooding that would have occurred within the two time periods, why is it assumed that the placard was found in 1979 in the same place that it landed in 1971? Under the right circumstances, a lot of ground could be covered in that time period.
I understand that sometimes you just have to take things at face value in order to get things done, and we have some back up to make assumptions for the placard spot with the known flight path - is that it? or is there another reason why the location of the placard is considered to be a given?
Good question, the whole placard thing bothers me from get go. how did it get out of the plane. did Cooper rip it off the wall while trying to operate the stairs, and once he was out on the stairs it came out? that's to early into the time of the jump 8:04-5 area I believe.
Is this area prone to flooding? will it float? did the wind carry it several miles over the years? just like everything else, lots of questions...... 8)
I don't know about the specific area, but the general area had some flooding in that time frame.
just going from personal experience - things that might not ordinarily float can be moved along by the force of the water. We have had items that probably would not float under ordinary circumstances appear on our creek bank after a flood.
Yes, just like everything else. one more thing to wonder about.
The family that found the placard took Tom Kaye to the find location and he recorded the GPS coordinates. I checked those coordinates on a topographical map for the area and it was approximately 1500 feet above sea level. For comparison, Tina Bar is less than 20 feet above sea level and the Portland Airport's elevation is listed on aeronautical charts as 30 feet above sea level.
I don't remember anything from Tom Kaye describing the find location. So based on no reporting, the site may not have been remarkable in any sense. And, of course, no one can guarantee if the placard moved after its initial ground landing.
There is a picture of the placard on Sluggo's web page, I think, and it appears to me that it separated from the structure after flapping around in the wind for some time. I doubt if Cooper would take the time to tear it off since there was no reason whatsoever for him to do so.
Robert99
Can you post those coordinates?
46.243157 degrees North Latitude and 122.683612 degrees West Longitude.
-
If you post the coordinates in degrees, minutes, and seconds it's easier to locate on Google map
-
The handle for the stairs is located at the top of the stairs to the left. I would guess the placard would be near this location. I question the amount of wind that could enter this area to cause the card the to come off. that'a why I tossed the idea of Cooper ripping it down in frustration to get the stairs down.
I'm not sure how it was attached. looking at the photo it appears it might have been attached by screws/pop rivets etc. look at the upper right portion of the placard, it looks as if something was holding it in place in the corners.
-
If you post the coordinates in degrees, minutes, and seconds it's easier to locate on Google map
If you know what longitude and latitude are then you should be able to convert fractions of a degree into minutes (there are 60 minutes in a degree) and then fractions of a minute into seconds (there are 60 seconds in a minute).
Otherwise, PM Meyer Louie and ask him to explain it. He is a mathematics professor.
-
R99:
Appreciate you weighing in with your skills and abilities. Between you, Georger (the college physics professor) and Louie (the college math professor) something ought to get figured out. But I will challenge you on a couple things. You say Bohan's reporting is not relevant. And that the previously discussed weather reports over PDX contradicts extraneous factors. Have you interviewed anyone who knew Bohan or flew with Bohan as a Continental 727 pilot? And, which weather reports do you have direct knowledge of? If you are relying strictly on what has been discussed already, you may not have "all" the info. Georger might tend to agree with this. Georger's earlier discussion about 305 flying over Haydon Island is pretty much right on. But you can debate with Georger all you want.
-
R99:
You say Bohan's reporting is not relevant. And that the previously discussed weather reports over PDX contradicts extraneous factors. Have you interviewed anyone who knew Bohan or flew with Bohan as a Continental 727 pilot?
I spoke with Capt Bohan's widow several years ago. She lives in thier Aberdeen, WA home, and the good captain died about ten years ago. His widow was unable to give me any details on the cross wind issue, nor the important question of how and why Bohan's Continental flight was allowed to creep up on 305 and be only four minutes behind.
Other planes were kept on the ground for hours, according to one pilot Sail and I spoke with, Everett Johnson. Something seems fishy here.
The widow said that her husband kept great records and she remembers the Nov 24, 1971 incident very well, and she said her husband spoke of it often. She was going to send me a copy of her husband's log, but she never did and I let the matter drop. Snowmman also helped me immeasurably on this by getting me Bohan's contact info.
-
now yur talking, Uncle Brucie. there were three in that Continental 727 cockpit. maybe Snow knows the other two? widow was a Continental flight attendant.
-
R99:
Appreciate you weighing in with your skills and abilities. Between you, Georger (the college physics professor) and Louie (the college math professor) something ought to get figured out. But I will challenge you on a couple things. You say Bohan's reporting is not relevant. And that the previously discussed weather reports over PDX contradicts extraneous factors. Have you interviewed anyone who knew Bohan or flew with Bohan as a Continental 727 pilot? And, which weather reports do you have direct knowledge of? If you are relying strictly on what has been discussed already, you may not have "all" the info. Georger might tend to agree with this. Georger's earlier discussion about 305 flying over Haydon Island is pretty much right on. But you can debate with Georger all you want.
Hayden Island flyover - how so 'right on'? Specify how and why it is 'right on' .... Im not sure what
you're talking about, seriously.
Second, I'm going to toss this out: The T33 intercept neat Lake Oswego. We know the place, the
area. Don't we have a pretty good idea of the time this intercept had to occur, from several
different angles? Which flight path best favors that T33 intercept window? (a) Dawson fp, (b) FBI
fp , or (c) East route?
I think R99 probably has an opinion about this?
BTW, just for the sake of saying it, don't anyone get the idea that Galen and I are joined at the
hip on any of these issues ... in case I need to say this. I think Galen will agree -
-
R99:
Appreciate you weighing in with your skills and abilities. Between you, Georger (the college physics professor) and Louie (the college math professor) something ought to get figured out. But I will challenge you on a couple things. You say Bohan's reporting is not relevant. And that the previously discussed weather reports over PDX contradicts extraneous factors. Have you interviewed anyone who knew Bohan or flew with Bohan as a Continental 727 pilot? And, which weather reports do you have direct knowledge of? If you are relying strictly on what has been discussed already, you may not have "all" the info. Georger might tend to agree with this. Georger's earlier discussion about 305 flying over Haydon Island is pretty much right on. But you can debate with Georger all you want.
Coopsnoop and Bruce Smith:
The story about Captain Bohan's claiming an 80 knot head wind from the south at 14,000 feet and about a 25-30 knot direct crosswind on landing is only reported in Himmelsbach's book to the best of my knowledge.
Regardless of what the winds were for Bohan at 14,000 feet, they were much, much less than that at 10,000 feet where NWA 305 was flying. If NWA 305 had a headwind anywhere near 80 knots, it would not have been able to get to Reno that night.
I have not interviewed anyone who knew Bohan and that is not necessary. The FBI obtained copies of all available weather information for Portland for that evening and it included such things as the hourly sequence reports (actual measured weather information) for all stations in the Northwest part of the country, forecasts of clouds and winds for the entire region, etc.. That information was posted on the DZ Cooper thread that is now closed plus it was repeated on the current DZ Cooper thread. Hominid and Georger also have that information.
Since the Portland International Airport was the location of the local National Weather Service Station, the very same information that was recorded there for aviation was used by such outlets as the Weather Underground on their web page. You can check their web page for the information for November 24, 1971. You can also check the Portland newspapers weather reports for that date since they also used the same information.
There are statements in the Seattle ground transcripts from the tower just before NWA 305 took off that they were going to let other aircraft start taking off just as soon as NWA 305 got clear of the Seattle airport traffic. Bohan's statement about being four minutes behind the airliner means to me that he took off four minutes after the airliner.
In all probability, Bohan would head to Portland down Victor Airway 23E which is direct from the Seattle VORTAC to what is now the Battleground VORTAC. Consequently, Bohan would not be following NWA 305 down the same airway. And Bohan probably was travelling twice as fast as NWA 305 during their flights. That means that Bohan was probably already at the gate in Portland by the time NWA 305 was passing the area.
The actual measured weather in the Portland area trumps all other claimed sources. Bohan's story is just not supported by actual facts.
Robert99
-
Georger and I are definitely not joined at the hip. But we sure agree on "one thing." Sorry, R99. Who's "actual facts" r u talking about? Maybe you only have "some" of the actual facts. Or, maybe you have all of the speculated "actual facts," produced by others. The FBI had some pretty sharp cookies in 1971, with your degrees and more. They thought they had all the actual facts. They haven't solved the case yet.
-
Georger and I are definitely not joined at the hip. But we sure agree on "one thing." Sorry, R99. Who's "actual facts" r u talking about? Maybe you only have "some" of the actual facts. Or, maybe you have all of the speculated "actual facts," produced by others. The FBI had some pretty sharp cookies in 1971, with your degrees and more. They thought they had all the actual facts. They haven't solved the case yet.
I am talking about the actual weather facts measured at Portland International Airport on November 24, 1971 by the good old United States National Weather Service. Where do your "facts" come from?
I'll also bet that the FBI had personnel in their Seattle and Portland offices in 1971 that had law degrees equivalent to yours and more.
And, as you say, they haven't solved the case yet either.
Robert99
-
Thanks Georger, I ran several tests from Toledo to Hayden Island (west point). I used two different planes in the test. the first was a cirrus jet. it's small and easy to fly. not a lot of bells and whistles with it. the second plane was a 727-100 of course.
I started the flight several miles short of Toledo, once over that position, I started the clock. at approx. 8:10 I was over the Woodland area, and by 8:14 I was over Tena Bar. Now, does this really prove anything? not really. the problem is the plane was basically flying south during the hijacking, even with some turns in the dropzone area, it's hard to say this path is right. basically you could move the flight path east or west and come up with the same numbers, but when you have evidence of a certain point that calculates. it can leave unanswered questions. you have Robert99 giving logical calculations, we have documentation from a Major in the Air Force speaking, and we have mystery money lying in a strange place with different opinions like the flight path itself.
do I believe this could be true? perhaps, but the only way to find out is to investigate the theory. perhaps Hominid will key in. he always likes the topic of the flight path.
Added: one thing left out here is the placard location.
Hominid and I have spoken at length about Dawson's theory and I feel very safe in saying
Hominid rejects it as political and not credible.
My bias has to be toward R99's calculations ... pending something stronger.
Hominid has emailed and I seem to have mischaracterised his remarks concerning Dawson.
His reference to "politician" was a joke. I failed to know that.
Hominid emailed today saying, quote: "There is just no independent evidence to support the
idea. My comment about him being a politician was a joke."
I guess what Hominid is saying is 'there is no independent evidence to support Dawson's account.'
Thanks to Hominid. I hope I got that right! ??? :-X
This is the problem one sometimes runs into trying to speak for other people. Hominid is free to come speak for himself, of course. I invite him to.
Apologies to Hominid.
-
BTW, just for the sake of saying it, don't anyone get the idea that Galen and I are joined at the
hip on any of these issues ... in case I need to say this. I think Galen will agree -
G, I can't imagine you ever being joined at a hip with anyone, even after reconstructive surgery.
(smile).
-
BTW, just for the sake of saying it, don't anyone get the idea that Galen and I are joined at the
hip on any of these issues ... in case I need to say this. I think Galen will agree -
G, I can't imagine you ever being joined at a hip with anyone, even after reconstructive surgery.
(smile).
Some would question that ... ;)
-
National Weather Service is a good place to start. But there are other sources available. And the best source just might be the "pilots who were actually flying in the damn stuff." Isn't that what pilots do? Relay to each other and the tower what the current conditions are so that other pilots will get a heads up. Himmelsbach was a WW2 pilot and flew his own plane while serving as an FBI agent. Other agents up in Seattle are pilots. Seasoned commercial pilots fly in and out of PDX all the time, knowing what the conditions might be during certain months of the year. These are all good sources. And if you want to hear about "gorge effect" winds barreling out of the Cascades, Georger might elaborate. Or, not.
-
Georger, I'll send you an e-mail on Hayden Island flyover.
-
National Weather Service is a good place to start. But there are other sources available. And the best source just might be the "pilots who were actually flying in the damn stuff." Isn't that what pilots do? Relay to each other and the tower what the current conditions are so that other pilots will get a heads up. Himmelsbach was a WW2 pilot and flew his own plane while serving as an FBI agent. Other agents up in Seattle are pilots. Seasoned commercial pilots fly in and out of PDX all the time, knowing what the conditions might be during certain months of the year. These are all good sources. And if you want to hear about "gorge effect" winds barreling out of the Cascades, Georger might elaborate. Or, not.
As I stated previously, I am well aware that the FBI has lawyers working in the organization. I am also aware that they have pilots and a lot of people with other skills and talents. But I don't think you are their spokesman.
The one point where Bohan's weather claims can be directly compared with actual measured weather is his landing at Portland. Bohan claims about a 25-30 knot direct crosswind component. The highest ground wind speed measured at Portland that day/night was only about 10 knots. Can you explain where the rest of Bohan's wind came from?
I am well aware of what pilot's inflight weather reports consist of and their purpose. But I do not believe in "faith based" weather claims.
Nor do I believe that there is a Great Ascended Weather Master who passes all his/her wisdom to his/her disciples and other true believers who must accept his/her claims without question. And, of course, the claims of the GAWM cannot be measured by the National Weather Service. Just believe them!
I have previously made it a point to take a good look at the topography of the Columbia River gorge in person. I am not particularly impressed by its capability to channel high winds. On the night of the hijacking, the surface wind was from the west and southwest and reported at about 10 knots at the Portland Airport. It is at least 20 miles further east to the entrance to the Columbia River gorge. Pasco, on the east end of that gorge, was also reporting surface winds of about 10 knots that evening.
Basically, the weather in Seattle, Portland, and further south the evening of the hijacking was relatively stable and improving. There was a frontal passage earlier that day, but it was well past Seattle when the airliner left there. But the clouds, overcasts, some rain showers, etc., that evening is not something that would pose a problem to an aircraft such as a 727. So I would appreciate an explanation from Bohan about how he determined he had an 80 knot headwind from the south.
Robert99
-
National Weather Service is a good place to start. But there are other sources available. And the best source just might be the "pilots who were actually flying in the damn stuff." Isn't that what pilots do? Relay to each other and the tower what the current conditions are so that other pilots will get a heads up. Himmelsbach was a WW2 pilot and flew his own plane while serving as an FBI agent. Other agents up in Seattle are pilots. Seasoned commercial pilots fly in and out of PDX all the time, knowing what the conditions might be during certain months of the year. These are all good sources. And if you want to hear about "gorge effect" winds barreling out of the Cascades, Georger might elaborate. Or, not.
As I stated previously, I am well aware that the FBI has lawyers working in the organization. I am also aware that they have pilots and a lot of people with other skills and talents. But I don't think you are their spokesman.
The one point where Bohan's weather claims can be directly compared with actual measured weather is his landing at Portland. Bohan claims about a 25-30 knot direct crosswind component. The highest ground wind speed measured at Portland that day/night was only about 10 knots. Can you explain where the rest of Bohan's wind came from?
I am well aware of what pilot's inflight weather reports consist of and their purpose. But I do not believe in "faith based" weather claims.
Nor do I believe that there is a Great Ascended Weather Master who passes all his/her wisdom to his/her disciples and other true believers who must accept his/her claims without question. And, of course, the claims of the GAWM cannot be measured by the National Weather Service. Just believe them!
I have previously made it a point to take a good look at the topography of the Columbia River gorge in person. I am not particularly impressed by its capability to channel high winds. On the night of the hijacking, the surface wind was from the west and southwest and reported at about 10 knots at the Portland Airport. It is at least 20 miles further east to the entrance to the Columbia River gorge. Pasco, on the east end of that gorge, was also reporting surface winds of about 10 knots that evening.
Basically, the weather in Seattle, Portland, and further south the evening of the hijacking was relatively stable and improving. There was a frontal passage earlier that day, but it was well past Seattle when the airliner left there. But the clouds, overcasts, some rain showers, etc., that evening is not something that would pose a problem to an aircraft such as a 727. So I would appreciate an explanation from Bohan about how he determined he had an 80 knot headwind from the south.
Robert99
... and I havent seen anything in actual wx facts to warrant Bohan's report, either. I have
been very persistent about keeping the door open to anything that would ground Bohan's alleged
report ... but nothing has ever surfaced of a factual nature to lock down "Himmelsbach's"
comments regarding Bohan's remarks (in some meeting etc). Let's keep track of the fact where
this comes from - Himmelsbach! Not Bohan! It's Himmelsbach's claim(s). I even tried to talk to
people who knew Ken Hastings, Dir of the airport, supposedly Bohan's personal friend and thee
person to whom Bohan supposedly filed his report .... and nada. I got nowhere with nothing to
even document such a report was ever filed. And still I leave the door open ... but the door is
closing.
The irony of all of this to me is we don't even need some special 'winds' factor, if anything like
the Dawson FP is true, or if the jump time on the FBI/NWA map is extended (which at this point
isn't that difficult to do). Anything that brings Cooper closer to water, the drainage basin
feeding the Columbia, or the Columbia itself, increasing the chances (and helps explain) $money$
winding up at Tina Bar. Once anything gets within the hydrological zone that feeds Tina Bar,
finding money on Tina Bar is almost a slam-dunk.
It's facts we lack, not theories and scenarios.
Himmelsbach is the person who promulgated the story - not Bohan! Himmelsbach also said
"fragments at three feet". The fact a central figure like 'H' would even write a book about a
supposedly important case, supposedly still open and active - disturbs me! I guess some retired
guys are allowed to indulge?" The Portland office wasn't even in charge of the case!
:)
-
Hominid has emailed and I seem to have mischaracterised his remarks concerning Dawson.
His reference to "politician" was a joke. I failed to know that.
Hominid emailed today saying, quote: "There is just no independent evidence to support the
idea. My comment about him being a politician was a joke."
I guess what Hominid is saying is 'there is no independent evidence to support Dawson's account.'
Thanks to Hominid. I hope I got that right! ??? :-X
This is the problem one sometimes runs into trying to speak for other people. Hominid is free to come speak for himself, of course. I invite him to.
Apologies to Hominid.
Thank you sir. Apology accepted, but unnecessary.
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
Robert,
Have you found a solution to the disk issues you are having?
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
Robert,
Have you found a solution to the disk issues you are having?
Vicki,
I haven't resolved the issue yet but I think it is going to be me, or at least my computer. I have about 15 DVDs related to those maps and I cannot open a single one of them. So I think it is safe to say the problem is on my computer and got there sometime after I sent copies of the map DVDs to Sluggo. It you want to look at the maps, you can do so at Sluggo's web page.
In the meantime, as soon as I get a pile of paper in the mail headed east, I plan to visit the firm in Tucson that worked up the disks that I sent to Sluggo. I have copies of those disks and if my guess is correct, they will open when put back on that firm's computer system. If my guess is confirmed, I'll either have them make additional copies of the disks or send some people the actual disks that I now have.
Anyway, I have large print outs of the maps courtesy of the Tucson firm. Once I get some of the map disks to people as I have promised, I'll not even bother trying to put them back on my machine. Those disks were problems from the day they arrived from the National Archives contractor and I am fed up with the (bleep) things. I'll let you know what happens in Tucson.
Robert99
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
Robert,
Have you found a solution to the disk issues you are having?
Vicki,
I haven't resolved the issue yet but I think it is going to be me, or at least my computer. I have about 15 DVDs related to those maps and I cannot open a single one of them. So I think it is safe to say the problem is on my computer and got there sometime after I sent copies of the map DVDs to Sluggo. It you want to look at the maps, you can do so at Sluggo's web page.
In the meantime, as soon as I get a pile of paper in the mail headed east, I plan to visit the firm in Tucson that worked up the disks that I sent to Sluggo. I have copies of those disks and if my guess is correct, they will open when put back on that firm's computer system. If my guess is confirmed, I'll either have them make additional copies of the disks or send some people the actual disks that I now have.
Anyway, I have large print outs of the maps courtesy of the Tucson firm. Once I get some of the map disks to people as I have promised, I'll not even bother trying to put them back on my machine. Those disks were problems from the day they arrived from the National Archives contractor and I am fed up with the (bleep) things. I'll let you know what happens in Tucson.
Robert99
Did Sluggo use all the images from the disks on his webpage? If so, copy the images from his site and put them into a folder on your desktop. Once in the folder you can write a new disc.
If that does not work, then good luck in Tuscon!
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
Robert,
Have you found a solution to the disk issues you are having?
Vicki,
I haven't resolved the issue yet but I think it is going to be me, or at least my computer. I have about 15 DVDs related to those maps and I cannot open a single one of them. So I think it is safe to say the problem is on my computer and got there sometime after I sent copies of the map DVDs to Sluggo. It you want to look at the maps, you can do so at Sluggo's web page.
In the meantime, as soon as I get a pile of paper in the mail headed east, I plan to visit the firm in Tucson that worked up the disks that I sent to Sluggo. I have copies of those disks and if my guess is correct, they will open when put back on that firm's computer system. If my guess is confirmed, I'll either have them make additional copies of the disks or send some people the actual disks that I now have.
Anyway, I have large print outs of the maps courtesy of the Tucson firm. Once I get some of the map disks to people as I have promised, I'll not even bother trying to put them back on my machine. Those disks were problems from the day they arrived from the National Archives contractor and I am fed up with the (bleep) things. I'll let you know what happens in Tucson.
Robert99
Did Sluggo use all the images from the disks on his webpage? If so, copy the images from his site and put them into a folder on your desktop. Once in the folder you can write a new disc.
If that does not work, then good luck in Tuscon!
My understanding is that Sluggo did put online everything that was on the disks. However, he had to slice up the maps due to a size problem but everything is there.
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
Robert,
Have you found a solution to the disk issues you are having?
Vicki,
I haven't resolved the issue yet but I think it is going to be me, or at least my computer. I have about 15 DVDs related to those maps and I cannot open a single one of them. So I think it is safe to say the problem is on my computer and got there sometime after I sent copies of the map DVDs to Sluggo. It you want to look at the maps, you can do so at Sluggo's web page.
In the meantime, as soon as I get a pile of paper in the mail headed east, I plan to visit the firm in Tucson that worked up the disks that I sent to Sluggo. I have copies of those disks and if my guess is correct, they will open when put back on that firm's computer system. If my guess is confirmed, I'll either have them make additional copies of the disks or send some people the actual disks that I now have.
Anyway, I have large print outs of the maps courtesy of the Tucson firm. Once I get some of the map disks to people as I have promised, I'll not even bother trying to put them back on my machine. Those disks were problems from the day they arrived from the National Archives contractor and I am fed up with the (bleep) things. I'll let you know what happens in Tucson.
Robert99
will they copy?
what is the file format? what software normally opens them?
-
Vicki & Georger,
The disks resulted from me contacting the National Archives in D.C. and asking if they had a very specific piece of paper. Each side of the paper had a map on it. After determining that they did have those maps in their files, the National Archives told me to contact one of their contractors (they supplied a list) and have the selected contractor make a digital copy of each map.
I elected to buy the digital map disks only, I passed on a printed copy, from the contractor. I could not open the first two copies of the map disks they sent me. After changing the file formats (to what I don't remember at this point), the third disk would open on my machine. After taking a look at the maps on the disk, I decided to have large paper copies (about 2/3 of the original size) made and that was done by a firm in Tucson.
The Tucson firm also gave me disks containing copies of their finished product. I reproduced copies of those disks on my machine using Roxio Easy CD & DVD Burning software and sent copies to Sluggo and he apparently did not have any problems with them except for their exceptionally large size. I have not done anything with those disks since Sluggo put them on his web page. It is possible that I also gave copies to another person but I don't specifically remember it.
So Sluggo's copies were reproduced on my machine about four years ago and I was probably running Windows Vista and the latest version of IE at that time. When Windows 7 came out, I immediately upgraded to the Ultimate version of it and at the present time have IE 11 on this machine.
My guess is that the Roxio software I have didn't get upgraded to Windows 7 and IE 11. Recently, the disks would not open or copy. So I removed the Roxio program a few days ago and don't plan to install it again. I'll let the people in Tucson figure it out.
-
I don't know if everyone seen the video I made of the first 4 minutes of flight 305. I was testing all my systems, fraps recorder, Sony Vegas Movie Maker, and obviously the simulator. the time was not set to nite time for visual purposes. the cloud coverage wasn't set either. the temps, and were set to what I believe to be correct. the other purpose was to show the impossibility to the travel time that is on the transcripts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBpKzJLVKa4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBpKzJLVKa4)
-
I watched the video with Clyde Lewis at the Ariel Tavern. Dona Elliot says she heard a plane, but didn't see it. she also claimed you couldn't see across the street. she is claiming the plane was miles off V23 flying east of Amboy. how many other planes were in this area. could she of heard a plane flying outside of 305's area for safety?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBPKuprO7A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBPKuprO7A)
-
Within minutes after NWA 305 took off and headed south on V-23, the Seattle Tower released other aircraft for take off. Captain Bohan states that he took off for Portland four minutes after NWA 305 took off. However it is unlikely that Bohan was cleared down V-23. In all probability he took V-23E, which is now known as V-495, straight to the Battleground VORTAC (formerly known as the Portland VORTAC). Since Bohan was landing at Portland, he would be descending to a lower altitude as he approached the Battleground VORTAC. Consequently, the people living under the V-23E airway would probably have noticed some lower flying aircraft headed into Portland from a more easterly direction. But there is no reason to believe that she heard NWA 305.
-
I watched the video with Clyde Lewis at the Ariel Tavern. Dona Elliot says she heard a plane, but didn't see it. she also claimed you couldn't see across the street. she is claiming the plane was miles off V23 flying east of Amboy. how many other planes were in this area. could she of heard a plane flying outside of 305's area for safety?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBPKuprO7A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBPKuprO7A)
I have no opinion yet on Elliot's story, but on the flight path -- isn't it interesting that with all of the fracas surrounding radar and satellites and the disappearance of a certain 777 in 2014 with all of our 21st century technology, why anyone would not entertain the notion that a radar flight path from 1971 might possibly, just possibly, be in error? 8)
-
I watched the video with Clyde Lewis at the Ariel Tavern. Dona Elliot says she heard a plane, but didn't see it. she also claimed you couldn't see across the street. she is claiming the plane was miles off V23 flying east of Amboy. how many other planes were in this area. could she of heard a plane flying outside of 305's area for safety?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBPKuprO7A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBPKuprO7A)
I have no opinion yet on Elliot's story, but on the flight path -- isn't it interesting that with all of the fracas surrounding radar and satellites and the disappearance of a certain 777 in 2014 with all of our 21st century technology, why anyone would not entertain the notion that a radar flight path from 1971 might possibly, just possibly, be in error? 8)
the whole thing might be accurate, but human error seems to be the fault. when the FBI say the "supposed flight path" you have to wonder how they came to there conclusions. the easterly path doesn't seem to line up. they would waste fuel getting back to V23. anything is possible, but I believe a westerly path is more accurate than eastward.
-
Within minutes after NWA 305 took off and headed south on V-23, the Seattle Tower released other aircraft for take off. Captain Bohan states that he took off for Portland four minutes after NWA 305 took off. However it is unlikely that Bohan was cleared down V-23. In all probability he took V-23E, which is now known as V-495, straight to the Battleground VORTAC (formerly known as the Portland VORTAC). Since Bohan was landing at Portland, he would be descending to a lower altitude as he approached the Battleground VORTAC. Consequently, the people living under the V-23E airway would probably have noticed some lower flying aircraft headed into Portland from a more easterly direction. But there is no reason to believe that she heard NWA 305.
Do you think it's possible she heard Bohan's flight the evening? she also claims the weather was horrible which doesn't match either. I notice Clyde Lewis wasn't to familiar with the flight path, or failed to note the time the plane was at 7000.
-
Within minutes after NWA 305 took off and headed south on V-23, the Seattle Tower released other aircraft for take off. Captain Bohan states that he took off for Portland four minutes after NWA 305 took off. However it is unlikely that Bohan was cleared down V-23. In all probability he took V-23E, which is now known as V-495, straight to the Battleground VORTAC (formerly known as the Portland VORTAC). Since Bohan was landing at Portland, he would be descending to a lower altitude as he approached the Battleground VORTAC. Consequently, the people living under the V-23E airway would probably have noticed some lower flying aircraft headed into Portland from a more easterly direction. But there is no reason to believe that she heard NWA 305.
Do you think it's possible she heard Bohan's flight the evening? she also claims the weather was horrible which doesn't match either. I notice Clyde Lewis wasn't to familiar with the flight path, or failed to note the time the plane was at 7000.
It is possible that she heard Bohan's plane if the time was about 8:10PM. Bohan would beat NWA 305 to the Portland area and, since he has been quoted as saying that he landed on Runway 10 that evening, he would have to swing west a bit from the Battleground VORTAC to line up with that runway. Taking magnetic variation into account, Bohan was landing basically to the east-southeast that night.
I don't know the elevation of Ariel right off, but I'll bet it is quite a bit higher than Portland International Airport which is just 30 feet above sea level. So she could have been in a foggy area with 100 percent humidity.
-
Within minutes after NWA 305 took off and headed south on V-23, the Seattle Tower released other aircraft for take off. Captain Bohan states that he took off for Portland four minutes after NWA 305 took off. However it is unlikely that Bohan was cleared down V-23. In all probability he took V-23E, which is now known as V-495, straight to the Battleground VORTAC (formerly known as the Portland VORTAC). Since Bohan was landing at Portland, he would be descending to a lower altitude as he approached the Battleground VORTAC. Consequently, the people living under the V-23E airway would probably have noticed some lower flying aircraft headed into Portland from a more easterly direction. But there is no reason to believe that she heard NWA 305.
Do you think it's possible she heard Bohan's flight the evening? she also claims the weather was horrible which doesn't match either. I notice Clyde Lewis wasn't to familiar with the flight path, or failed to note the time the plane was at 7000.
It is possible that she heard Bohan's plane if the time was about 8:10PM. Bohan would beat NWA 305 to the Portland area and, since he has been quoted as saying that he landed on Runway 10 that evening, he would have to swing west a bit from the Battleground VORTAC to line up with that runway. Taking magnetic variation into account, Bohan was landing basically to the east-southeast that night.
I don't know the elevation of Ariel right off, but I'll bet it is quite a bit higher than Portland International Airport which is just 30 feet above sea level. So she could have been in a foggy area with 100 percent humidity.
she says she lived in Amboy during 1971. sea level is 410 feet. the fog could be a factor for sure. Ariel is at 455 according to weather underground.
-
I watched the video with Clyde Lewis at the Ariel Tavern. Dona Elliot says she heard a plane, but didn't see it. she also claimed you couldn't see across the street. she is claiming the plane was miles off V23 flying east of Amboy. how many other planes were in this area. could she of heard a plane flying outside of 305's area for safety?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBPKuprO7A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBPKuprO7A)
I have no opinion yet on Elliot's story, but on the flight path -- isn't it interesting that with all of the fracas surrounding radar and satellites and the disappearance of a certain 777 in 2014 with all of our 21st century technology, why anyone would not entertain the notion that a radar flight path from 1971 might possibly, just possibly, be in error? 8)
Ive been thinking the exact same thing... so far as I can piece it together there was not one iota of thought about an east path Washougal route until the Ingram money find and the hydrologist Bradely's report, naming the Washougal River as a possible source/path for something, to the Columbia, then to Tina Bar. But so far as I know Bradley citing the Washougal was shere speculation; ie. nothing in flight path info itself to link the Washougal area to flight 305. Except for one thing! The persistent rumor from people like JT that the Washougal area already had been named and was in play before 1980! Named specifically by Scott and Rataczak in private conversions with guess who - Himmelsbach, of course. Then Rataczak saying publicly just a few years ago: "I'm the only living person who knows what the real flight path was". Surely 40 years later 'they' can't be holding back the true flight path just in case only Cooper (and Rataczak) would know! That limp excuse died years ago. The better excuse would be: 'nobody really knows'! Which could open the door to the Dawson account since if anyone was in a position to know, Dawson and his group surely knew! (Both NWA and the FBI were dependent on them, not the
other way around - that is a fact).
Tom still sticks to the Ariel FP because I guess, "smart guys had the info and knew". Thus no conceivable way for the money to get to Tina Bar by any natural means... and the money was never "in river water" (maybe exposed to water but not "in" it!), if you can buy that weak demonstration of science and never mind 3 or 4 FBI lab reports on the money that drew a different conclusion. And the worst of it all perhaps is the fact people won’t even discuss it openly! The Long Ears won't talk to the Short Ears. People have staked out their territory and won't budge. (Corinthians 333:945). A pox on all their houses!
:) :) :)
-
I think Tom missed my comment. perhaps you have an answer. how much evidence has been erased over time, and what happened when the money was first found? I still think the money and the path are extremely related to figuring this out. if in fact evidence is lost in the bills. you would not have a conclusion of it's arrival.
-
I think Tom missed my comment. perhaps you have an answer. how much evidence has been erased over time, and what happened when the money was first found? I still think the money and the path are extremely related to figuring this out. if in fact evidence is lost in the bills. you would not have a conclusion of it's arrival.
If you are asking me, Bruce's account given by Shrueder is the best account of what happened from the moment Ingram walked into the FBI with the money ... Shrueder (sp?) and other agents went out to the Faxio's almost immediately, after gathering up tools and twine (rakes, hoes, shovels etc) Dorwin threw into his car. Dorwin took charge while others posted at the road to keep people out. Bruce's account is spot-on with what Dorwin told me happened. Dorwin had the foresight due to his science background and interest in archaeology to grid the area off just as Bruce reports. All digging, raking etc commenced within those grid lines (seen on news ariel photos). Dorwin says they found-a this and-a that et cetera within the first afternoon. Bruce describes that exactly as Dorwin told me. Kaye also interviewed Dorwin and I assume Dorwin told Kaye the same story. Dorwin and his crew found exactly what Bruce reports Dorwin saying they found the first day, late into the first afternoon.
The second day the guy's and gal's from Seattle showed up and by afternoon several agents from the Portland office were pulled off due to the demands of other priorities surfacing. So by afternoon of the second day I seem to recall Dorwin was no longer at Tina Bar to personally witness anything. Dorwin was the lead 'negotiator' for the Portland office and was sent off to deal with some new situation that came up. Between Himmelsbach (Portland) and Pringle (Seattle office), the Tina Bar investigation moved very rapidly. Palmer was brought in, consultants were brought in, the Faxio's were enlisted with their tractor and backhoe at Palmer's request, and ground crews continued to dig holes and rake and explore (with hand screening of sand etc ...). With the exception of one fist-sized wad of what looked like decomposed money-matter, pulled from an area just east of the Ingram find location and lower than the Ingram closer to the water line, nothing more of a significant nature (ie actual bundles) was found. It's my understanding Seattle took charge of everything found and multiple samples were sent off for lab work (which fits with the reports Larry provided Tom and I). For some reason, Tom has never cited these lab reports - I don't know why. What Larry gave us were summary reports which include, mention, name, and give a brief summary of a series of lab reports) - referred to by Tom on his website as the "Transcript(s)" ?. This socalled "Transcript" included the Palmer Report.
Let me post this and we can go from there ...
-
Robert99, check this item out being testing by the guy who invented X-Plane.
VP-400
This is the VP-400 artificially-intellegent runway-seeker in test-flight.
If the engine quits, or the pilot passes out, the VP-400 chooses the airport and runway that are most likely to result in a successful power-off landing and brings the airplane in to the runway without further pilot intervention. See some of our test flying here from inside the cockpit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl_Vmypg76k (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl_Vmypg76k)
-
I don't think it is that easy.
-
I don't think it is that easy.
In case you missed it: Sluggo has surfaced, is going to revamp is site, and will check in here from time to time!
:) :)
-
I don't think it is that easy.
In case you missed it: Sluggo has surfaced, is going to revamp is site, and will check in here from time to time!
:) :)
Thanks for the update G. I look forward to Sluggo stopping by.
-
I don't think it is that easy.
In case you missed it: Sluggo has surfaced, is going to revamp is site, and will check in here from time to time!
:) :)
Thanks for the update G. I look forward to Sluggo stopping by.
When Sluggo revamps his site,maybe he could add a link to this forum. I think he has a link to, or mentions, the DZ. :D
-
I don't think it is that easy.
In case you missed it: Sluggo has surfaced, is going to revamp is site, and will check in here from time to time!
:) :)
Thanks for the update G. I look forward to Sluggo stopping by.
When Sluggo revamps his site,maybe he could add a link to this forum. I think he has a link to, or mentions, the DZ. :D
yes, I think he does have a link section. it would be nice to be connected to his site. I have a lot of respect for the work he has done over the years. top notch.
-
If a person is interested in doing a real analysis of the "FBI" flightpath plot, he or she needs to analyze the actual thing from the FBI - not the "red ball, blue ball" file that totally obscures the red crosses that mark the positions on the actual FBI file. Also, a person needs to understand about how positions are plotted on such charts by people who know how to do it. (Another useful area of knowledge I'll address in a later post if anyone cares.)
The attached figure is a low quality copy of part of the "FBI" flightpath plot. Forget about the positions plotted on it (and the broad felt-tip line) for now, and just think of the figure as a chart on which you will plot positions. Refer to the actual "FBI" plot if necessary to see details referenced in the discussion.
In the figure, four scales are identified with distinctive labels. The two latitude scales are the same. The two longitude scales look similar but are not exactly the same. The short marks along each scale mark full minutes of latitude or longitude. Every fifth mark along each scale is longer than the others. Every tenth mark is longer and extends equally on both sides of the scale line.
Note that no numbers appear by the minute marks. When using such a chart it is wise to carefully annotate the number of minutes for at least every 10-minute mark. Otherwise, you are likely to make mistakes such as occurred in plotting points to the west of PDX on the "FBI" flightpath plot.
This is important partly because you will find that some of the minute marks have been overprinted by some map features, and there are some map features that look much like minute marks but are not in the right places to be minute marks.
Where such a situation occurs, it's a good idea to mark a minute in the right place on the scale if you might be plotting something around missing coordinate mark. The spacing of the ones you add can be determined by measuring the spacing between other nearby minute marks. [On the "FBI" plot, for example, 5' of latitude equals 136 pixels.] Take care not to use spacing from one longitude scale on another longitude scale. The distance corresponding to a minute of longitude varies with latitude. A minute of longitude is a smaller distance the higher you go on the map. (For example, a minute of longitude is a distance of zero at the north and south poles.)
The marks are more readily recognized on the original flightpath plots than on this low-res copy I made, but you need to be able to magnify areas somewhat to do so.
On a complete aero chart such as the "FBI" plot chart from which I cut the figure, a few latitudes and longitudes are pre-printed. These are the latitudes and longitudes on which the scales are drawn. The longitude scale at the bottom of the figure is on latitude 45°30'N. The one at the top is on latitude 46°N. The latitude scale on the right is on longitude 122°30'W, and the one on the left is on longitude 123°W. The values are outside the extents of the figure, but they're marked along the scale lines.
To plot a point on the chart, you need to know the latitude and longitude of the point. You will draw a left-right line at the latitude and an up-down (away and back, N-S) line at the longitude. These two lines will intersect to make a cross marking the point to be plotted.
You don't want these lines to extend all the way across the chart if you're going to want to also plot other points because doing so would result in an unintelligable grid rather than a group of separate plotted points. So, when you start to draw a line for a latitude, you want it to extend only a bit each side of the longitude where you will draw the intersecting line.
Since it will sometimes be a little hard to estimate where the intersecting (second) line will be, especially if the plot cross is going to be far from a scale, the first line of a cross will typically be a bit longer than the second one. Such crosses (one line considerably longer than the other) are an indicator that the plotting was done by someone with some experience or instruction. Lines with mis-aligned sections are an indicator of an amateur that didn't make the initial lines long enough.
On a printed version of a chart a person can position and orient the lines using a "drafting machine," or by using just a straight edge and the scales preprinted on the chart. If a drafting machine is used, the machine and chart must be aligned before drawing the lines.
We'll use just the straight edge. On a digital file, the equivalent method is to use a tool that draws a thin straight line between the desired latitude on the left and right scales and another between the desired longitude on the upper and lower scales.
Drawing the lines that will intersect at the desired latitude and longitude is not as simple as you might think. How it is done will depend upon the skill level of the plotter and upon the perceived need for precision and accuracy.
If you place that straight edge exactly on the desired coordinate and then draw a line along that straight edge, you will find that the line is offset from that exact coordinate. This is because the drawing tool, such as a pencil, doesn't put the line exactly on the edge. A tool with a sharp tip will help. But the tip will have to be run close up against the edge. With an ordinary pencil, for example, tilt the pencil so that the needle-sharp tip is right up against the edge while you draw the line. With such a sharp tip, the drawn line will be very thin. If the pencil has a lead soft enough to make the line dark, the tip won't remain so sharp through more than a few plotted points.
Drawing tools such as mechanical pencils require a different technique for precision and accuracy. Place the center of the lead on the scale at the desired coordinate. Move the straight edge up against the drawing tool tip. Look closely at the offset between the edge and the lead center. Hold the straight edge down tight where you have just positioned it while you slide/rotate the other end of the straight edge to place the other end on the desired coordinate while visually adding an offset equal to the one you noted at the first setting. Then hold the straight edge at the last position and place the pencil there to ensure that the offset you added is correct. Adjust the offset if needed. Then hold this position while you check, and reposition if needed, the alignment on the first position. What you have done is position and align the straight edge so that the line drawn will be closely on the desired coordinate.
Different methods can be used to locate the positions on the scales, depending upon the precision of the data and the desired precision/accuracy of the finished plot. Take a latitude of X°30.7' for example. You could look at the scale and visually estimate a position 7/10 of the way from the 30' mark to the 31' mark. This is an easy way that would give results about as precise/accurate as the chart itself in the case of the aero charts used for the "FBI" flightpath plot. Because it is easy, this method would be used by a knowledgeable plotter if the source data (latitude and longitude vs. time) has a precision of less than a minute of latitude and longitude.
Or, you could use a caliper, proportional divider, or scale and divider to accurately mark the 7/10 point with a "needle-point" hole in the paper. This tiny hole gives a precise way of positioning the drawing tool. The pencil lead (or whatever) sinks into the hole, so the hole centers the drawing tool tip. The hole will also help keep the tool tip from moving when you move the straight edge up against the tool tip.
Or, you could use a scale on the straight edge of a piece of paper or plastic showing tenths of minutes. If plotting on a digital copy of a chart, you can make digital versions of such scales.
Finally, if you're trying to plot precisely, use a thin lead or something even finer.
-
excellent post as usual. let me ask this. what is more crucial, flying exactly to the flight path, or is the speed, altitude and weather the key factors. what I'm saying is can you be a couple degree's off here and there and still have a good run as long as you have everything else lined up? or is it that crucial to fly the path like a carbon copy?
-
here is an interesting post from Galen on Sluggo's forum several years ago:
"Just remember that Rataczak said he thought the "lights of Portland were coming into view." Rataczak actually told me in one interview that he thought the plane was "west" of I-5. When examining the radar plots of the flight path after the dog-leg around PDX, they "were" west of I-5."
-
excellent post as usual. let me ask this. what is more crucial, flying exactly to the flight path, or is the speed, altitude and weather the key factors. what I'm saying is can you be a couple degree's off here and there and still have a good run as long as you have everything else lined up? or is it that crucial to fly the path like a carbon copy?
Depends on what you mean by "to fly the path like a carbon copy." You definitely should not go directly from one plotted point to the next, to the next, etc. The flight would not have done that and the plot does not indicate that they did. Take the plotted points. Mark a rectangular zone one minute in longitude (.7nm) wide and one minute of latitude (1nm) high centered on each plotted point. Then fly through the rectangular "hoops" using the largest possible turn radiuses. This makes it possible to be a few degrees off at places without getting outside the plot limits. Getting through all the hoops would mean your flightpath would have been plotted as in the "FBI" flightpath plot. If you can only get close to doing this while matching the reported speeds, altitudes, weights, fuel flow, flap/gear settings, temperatures and wind directions I think it would have to be considered a pretty good validation--especially if we can verify that your model has the right lift/drag/thrust characteristics. Simple ;)
-
here is an interesting post from Galen on Sluggo's forum several years ago:
"Just remember that Rataczak said he thought the "lights of Portland were coming into view." Rataczak actually told me in one interview that he thought the plane was "west" of I-5. When examining the radar plots of the flight path after the dog-leg around PDX, they "were" west of I-5."
Yes. Interesting. Wrong. The "FBI" flightpath doesn't go definitely west of I-5 until it gets down to about Wilsonville, OR and that only lasted about a minute. While over Portland, the path is pretty much right over I-5. A position, btw, that would minimize density of population below the flight.
-
excellent post as usual. let me ask this. what is more crucial, flying exactly to the flight path, or is the speed, altitude and weather the key factors. what I'm saying is can you be a couple degree's off here and there and still have a good run as long as you have everything else lined up? or is it that crucial to fly the path like a carbon copy?
Depends on what you mean by "to fly the path like a carbon copy." You definitely should not go directly from one plotted point to the next, to the next, etc. The flight would not have done that and the plot does not indicate that they did. Take the plotted points. Mark a rectangular zone one minute in longitude (.7nm) wide and one minute of latitude (1nm) high centered on each plotted point. Then fly through the rectangular "hoops" using the largest possible turn radiuses. This makes it possible to be a few degrees off at places without getting outside the plot limits. Getting through all the hoops would mean your flightpath would have been plotted as in the "FBI" flightpath plot. If you can only get close to doing this while matching the reported speeds, altitudes, weights, fuel flow, flap/gear settings, temperatures and wind directions I think it would have to be considered a pretty good validation--especially if we can verify that your model has the right lift/drag/thrust characteristics. Simple ;)
within the plot limits is what I was getting at.
The current system is Flyjsims 727
Flight model:
At FlyJSim we take pride in our flight model. With over 200 hours of internal testing, you can be sure that the 727 series is at least 95% accurate to the real aircraft. We benefited from having much more information available to us for the 727 than for the Q400 and that allowed us to get even the most subtle nuance of the handling of this aircraft into the sim. This will let you operate the 727 from startup to shutdown just like a real 727 captain.
here are some reviews.
http://xplanereviews.com/index.php?/topic/141-aircraft-profile-boeing-727-series-by-flyjsim-part-one/ (http://xplanereviews.com/index.php?/topic/141-aircraft-profile-boeing-727-series-by-flyjsim-part-one/)
Part two
http://xplanereviews.com/index.php?/topic/142-aircraft-profile-boeing-727-series-by-flyjsim-part-two-flying-the-boeing-727/ (http://xplanereviews.com/index.php?/topic/142-aircraft-profile-boeing-727-series-by-flyjsim-part-two-flying-the-boeing-727/)
Here is a video checking the frame rate with the clouds loaded. plus a little tour of the 727. it's an older video, but a good one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfaReARlBZA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfaReARlBZA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1T7WdXNiCo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1T7WdXNiCo)
Current system specs
New Acer Tower
New GEForce GTX770 Video Card
1 Terabyte Hard Drive
8 Gigs Memory.
-
Also, a person needs to understand about how positions are plotted on such charts by people who know how to do it. (Another useful area of knowledge I'll address in a later post if anyone cares.)
Hey, plotting points on charts is not brain surgery. So please address that topic as you offered to do. Also, please cite chapter and verse in a navigational publication of some kind. I have some 30+ books on land, air, and sea navigation and I don't remember any of them even remotely discussing the plotting of points in the detail that you suggest. But then, maybe I missed the "point" so to speak.
Also, maps and charts are not miniature scaled versions of the topography. Instead, they are just representations of the topography. If you remember, there was a discussion a few years ago on the other thread about a feature (a town, if I remember correctly) which was off an airway on a previous map but on the airway in a current version of the same map. Farflung solved the problem by showing that the city had been moved more than two nautical miles to the west on the present day charts. That was the largest plotting mistake that I have personally seen on an aeronautical chart in the continental USA.
-
here is an interesting post from Galen on Sluggo's forum several years ago:
"Just remember that Rataczak said he thought the "lights of Portland were coming into view." Rataczak actually told me in one interview that he thought the plane was "west" of I-5. When examining the radar plots of the flight path after the dog-leg around PDX, they "were" west of I-5."
Yes. Interesting. Wrong. The "FBI" flightpath doesn't go definitely west of I-5 until it gets down to about Wilsonville, OR and that only lasted about a minute. While over Portland, the path is pretty much right over I-5. A position, btw, that would minimize density of population below the flight.
The flight path you show on your chart for the Portland area is directly over the Portland high population density area and west of I-5 as they existed in 1971. The flight path shown really doesn't make any sense in the first place. Even if you favor the Ariel route, then just continuing straight south would have the airliner easily passing in the low density area west of Portland and well positioned to rejoin V-23 just past Portland.
-
Hey, plotting points on charts is not brain surgery. So please address that topic as you offered to do. Also, please cite chapter and verse in a navigational publication of some kind. I have some 30+ books on land, air, and sea navigation and I don't remember any of them even remotely discussing the plotting of points in the detail that you suggest. But then, maybe I missed the "point" so to speak.
Also, maps and charts are not miniature scaled versions of the topography. Instead, they are just representations of the topography. If you remember, there was a discussion a few years ago on the other thread about a feature (a town, if I remember correctly) which was off an airway on a previous map but on the airway in a current version of the same map. Farflung solved the problem by showing that the city had been moved more than two nautical miles to the west on the present day charts. That was the largest plotting mistake that I have personally seen on an aeronautical chart in the continental USA.
The post was not for an expert such as you. The hope was just that someone who hasn't done any hand plotting or been instructed on it could get an idea how it's done by people who know how and by people who may not know so well. Something to enable someone to understand rather than something to accept because some "expert" or publication says so. Nothing is complicated for someone who knows all about it. Please cite the authorative navigational publication that says plotting points on charts is not brain surgery. What is your authorative source for the statements that "maps and charts are not miniature scaled versions .....of the topography"? Those are sure gems of expert knowledge.
Yeah. I remember the "discussion." It took Farf and I both beating you for several posts before we could finally get it into your head. And there was no mistake on the old and new charts. The old chart showed the village location based on the location of its railroad station. When the settlement grew and got a city hall, the new chart showed the location based on the city hall. Apparently you never did really get it.
It'll take me a bit of time to address the other topic, especially if I have to spend time with posts such as this.
-
The flight path you show on your chart for the Portland area is directly over the Portland high population density area and west of I-5 as they existed in 1971. The flight path shown really doesn't make any sense in the first place. Even if you favor the Ariel route, then just continuing straight south would have the airliner easily passing in the low density area west of Portland and well positioned to rejoin V-23 just past Portland.
The "FBI" flightpath was on charts of about '71 vintage. The attached should help you understand.
Maybe the crew didn't have a lot of time to consult with you about which way they should go. Maybe they were just trying to get back on V23. And that area straight south passes east of Portland, not west. On charts and maps, when you're reading it right-side-up, the stuff to your right is east and the stuff to your left is west. Source: Me.
-
Hey, plotting points on charts is not brain surgery. So please address that topic as you offered to do. Also, please cite chapter and verse in a navigational publication of some kind. I have some 30+ books on land, air, and sea navigation and I don't remember any of them even remotely discussing the plotting of points in the detail that you suggest. But then, maybe I missed the "point" so to speak.
Also, maps and charts are not miniature scaled versions of the topography. Instead, they are just representations of the topography. If you remember, there was a discussion a few years ago on the other thread about a feature (a town, if I remember correctly) which was off an airway on a previous map but on the airway in a current version of the same map. Farflung solved the problem by showing that the city had been moved more than two nautical miles to the west on the present day charts. That was the largest plotting mistake that I have personally seen on an aeronautical chart in the continental USA.
The post was not for an expert such as you. The hope was just that someone who hasn't done any hand plotting or been instructed on it could get an idea how it's done by people who know how and by people who may not know so well. Something to enable someone to understand rather than something to accept because some "expert" or publication says so. Nothing is complicated for someone who knows all about it. Please cite the authorative navigational publication that says plotting points on charts is not brain surgery. What is your authorative source for the statements that "maps and charts are not miniature scaled versions .....of the topography"? Those are sure gems of expert knowledge.
Yeah. I remember the "discussion." It took Farf and I both beating you for several posts before we could finally get it into your head. And there was no mistake on the old and new charts. The old chart showed the village location based on the location of its railroad station. When the settlement grew and got a city hall, the new chart showed the location based on the city hall. Apparently you never did really get it.
It'll take me a bit of time to address the other topic, especially if I have to spend time with posts such as this.
I trust that the following will help to refresh your memory. The discussion of "Strange Maps & Wandering VORTACs" was started by me with post #32349 on February 25, 2012. There were a number of posts on the subject and Farflung basically solved the "problem" in posts #32349 and #32350. Farflung included a comparison of two maps in post #32349 that perfectly illustrated what I was talking about and I told him the same thing in post #32363.
A number of other posts were made on the subject including your own post #32375 to me which I copy completely below:
"You're right. I'm looking at an '08 sectional from Sluggo's (which is slightly tilted) and I'm looking at the original flight path plot from the FBI. Maybe your '09 sectional doesn't show rivers and highways? I've reproduced bits of the two charts below. In each, the little circle represents Toutle location."
You attached two small bits of maps with the above post. However, to get a better idea of what actually changed in the mapping, you need a larger map of the area. Something including everything within about 10 or 15 miles of Toutle would clearly illustrate that, as I suggested in one post, the whole area seems to have been "expanded". Perhaps you could see this better on topographical charts.
On another subject, I thought all the "experts" worked on the Cooper case in 1971 and 1972. And here we are 42 years later. At this point, maybe only people who actually know what they are doing should be permitted to work on this matter.
-
I trust that the following will help to refresh your memory. The discussion of "Strange Maps & Wandering VORTACs" was started by me with post #32349 on February 25, 2012. There were a number of posts on the subject and Farflung basically solved the "problem" in posts #32349 and #32350. Farflung included a comparison of two maps in post #32349 that perfectly illustrated what I was talking about and I told him the same thing in post #32363.
A number of other posts were made on the subject including your own post #32375 to me which I copy completely below:
"You're right. I'm looking at an '08 sectional from Sluggo's (which is slightly tilted) and I'm looking at the original flight path plot from the FBI. Maybe your '09 sectional doesn't show rivers and highways? I've reproduced bits of the two charts below. In each, the little circle represents Toutle location."
You attached two small bits of maps with the above post. However, to get a better idea of what actually changed in the mapping, you need a larger map of the area. Something including everything within about 10 or 15 miles of Toutle would clearly illustrate that, as I suggested in one post, the whole area seems to have been "expanded". Perhaps you could see this better on topographical charts.
On another subject, I thought all the "experts" worked on the Cooper case in 1971 and 1972. And here we are 42 years later. At this point, maybe only people who actually know what they are doing should be permitted to work on this matter.
Here's some more refresher:
The point of Farf's post 32349 was that the Toutle location was moved from point "d" which was the railroad station to point "c" which is the current location. He immediately added post 32350, the attachment of which made the same point. Nothing about map expansion in his post OR in the maps in his attachment. Unfortunately, he was not big on just getting to the point.
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4279122#4279122 (http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4279122#4279122)
The last of your rambling, long post 32363:
"So it looks like the symbol for Toutle was wandering around between the two charts and not the PDX VORTAC.
Apparently as the charts were updated for the WGS84 coordinate system, the area around Toutle was changed (expanded?) more than other areas on the FBI map and that gave the visual impression, when considering nearby landmarks, that things hadn't changed at all. But the longitude and latitude changes seems to be the source of the discrepancy."
From this it was obvious that you still didn't get it. So Farf tried yet again. The attachment to his whimsical post was:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=132974; (http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=132974;)
Toutle moved. The maps in the figure showed no "expanded."
To this his last post on the topic you replied "Huh?" maybe because you didn't look at the illustration he attached to his post. You didn't even understand whose lack of reading comprehension he was referring to. He was good with those insults people didn't see. Farf posted no further on the topic, no doubt in realization that it was hopeless to try to explain it to you.
My post 32375 that you copied over was in response to your condescending post 32371.
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4279355#4279355 (http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4279355#4279355)
I attached only two small bits of maps because those were the only areas of anything changed having to do with Toutle. The point was to try to show YOU that "Toutle" had moved. The parts of maps that Farf and I posted had no indication of magically, mysteriously "expanded."
Georger and I each made another post and agreed on the idea that the solution was simply that the "Toutle" marker (circle) was moved because Toutle had grown and acquired a center of government. By this time you were hoping the topic would just go away.
I won't bother searching for your "expanded" because it's irrelevant.
No. If you have some thought to do what you might consider "work" on the matter, there's no reason you shouldn't go ahead and pursue it. Try to keep busy. Go searching for redacts.
You're on my ignore list. You have nothing worthwhile to say and I have better things to do.
-
That earlier post on Sluggo's site stands corrected. Hom is right, the flight path does not cross west of I-5, even after the dogleg north of PDX. Rather, it stays pretty much over I-5 after the dogleg and crosses almost directly over the I-5 bridge. However, that route was not chosen by the pilots because of population density below. And that comes straight from the mouth of the pilots themselves.
-
That earlier post on Sluggo's site stands corrected. Hom is right, the flight path does not cross west of I-5, even after the dogleg north of PDX. Rather, it stays pretty much over I-5 after the dogleg and crosses almost directly over the I-5 bridge. However, that route was not chosen by the pilots because of population density below. And that comes straight from the mouth of the pilots themselves.
Thanks. From my perspective, it's you saying Scott and Rataczak both said something like whatever "that" is. In the absense of any documentation, the claim could be a bit more credible if you would explain what the circumstances were when they made the statements. What did they say about why the route was chosen? Was it them what chose the route? Were these statements to the FBI?
-
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.
-
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.
Well here it is as best I know - I dont think R99 will mind my posting this:
Quote R99:
Here again are the coordinates:
46.243157 degrees North Latitude
122.683612 degrees West Longitude
Also, Tom sent me an e-mail several years ago which presumably included a picture of the placard find location. However, Tom's enclosure had a ".kmz" suffix which my computer could not open.
PS... I think this agree with Sluggo's coords.
-
That earlier post on Sluggo's site stands corrected. Hom is right, the flight path does not cross west of I-5, even after the dogleg north of PDX. Rather, it stays pretty much over I-5 after the dogleg and crosses almost directly over the I-5 bridge. However, that route was not chosen by the pilots because of population density below. And that comes straight from the mouth of the pilots themselves.
Why do you suppose they made the "dogleg" in the first place? It doesn't appear that the elevation or other flights were an issue so why not just stay on a straight path?
-
Wish I had all the answers, but I really don't. Rataczak wanted to "dump the pirate" out in the Pacific. Maybe Rat was steering and then Scott re-took control. Clouds were broken over Van/Port, and Rat saw the lights below from the starboard side. Anderson was on the interphone with the pirate. Lot's of scenarios here. Even Tosaw stated that Rat told him he was going to head straight out over the Pacific. Somewhere below them, RH onboard the Oregon NG Huey was trying to mount a chase. And to their west, out over Suavie Island, Bohan was making a final approach into PDX on 100. Lots going on.
-
Wish I had all the answers, but I really don't. Rataczak wanted to "dump the pirate" out in the Pacific. Maybe Rat was steering and then Scott re-took control. Clouds were broken over Van/Port, and Rat saw the lights below from the starboard side. Anderson was on the interphone with the pirate. Lot's of scenarios here. Even Tosaw stated that Rat told him he was going to head straight out over the Pacific. Somewhere below them, RH onboard the Oregon NG Huey was trying to mount a chase. And to their west, out over Suavie Island, Bohan was making a final approach into PDX on 100. Lots going on.
seems to me that we need to get one last interview with these guys before it's to late. really get into the path with Rat.
-
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.
-
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?
And here's some more trivia about Toutle fwiw....
http://jtenlen.drizzlehosting.com/wacowlitz/townsmz.html (http://jtenlen.drizzlehosting.com/wacowlitz/townsmz.html)
Toutle
The current site of Toutle is located 4 miles east of Silverlake on State Route 504. The site of the original townsite is unknown, but was located near the south fork of the Toutle River. In 1841, Toutle's name was derived from Hullooetell, a local Indian tribe name. Napoleon Gardner established the post office in 1883. His sons William F. Garder (who married Eliza May Bemis) and Harry Gardner were also postmasters. The townsite was moved in Feb. 1950 (Ramsey, p. 180).
Toutle Links:
For more information,
see the listing for Toutle in Meany's "Origin of Washington Place Names".
See the entry for Toutle in the "Oregon, Washington and Alaska Gazetteer and Business Directory, 1901-1902"
Mt. St. Helens Communities - Toutle - by Cowlitz County Tourism
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
Robert,
You probably haven't had an occasion to put someone on your "ignore" list here. I've found that (since I don't stay constantly logged in) if I just select to go to the last post on a topic, a post by the person on my ignore list shows up just as though I had no ignore list. So I saw sort of a nice start to your post and read on. Thank you for your effort.
I assume it would be OK with you if I respond some for your consideration. I'll be back with that.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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!
-
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.).
Yes, as I expected. As usual, you give no consideration to the idea that they were placing great importance on getting the guy out of the plane. That's what he said he wanted. He was in charge. What we have available says they were preoccupied/focused on helping him get out. Had they been able to get him out and be sure of it, they might even have been able to land at PDX. They didn't want to go to Reno. Whatever they did near Portland may even have been so because of the possibility of landing there.
-
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?
-
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?
The National Guard base at PDX ... is my understanding.
-
Thanks. I just added a little to my question.
-
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.).
Yes, as I expected. As usual, you give no consideration to the idea that they were placing great importance on getting the guy out of the plane. That's what he said he wanted. He was in charge. What we have available says they were preoccupied/focused on helping him get out. Had they been able to get him out and be sure of it, they might even have been able to land at PDX. They didn't want to go to Reno. Whatever they did near Portland may even have been so because of the possibility of landing there.
I happened to agree with this. Getting Cooper GONE was their top priority ~8:45 - 8:20. This is evidenced in crew interviews and the Transcripts we have...
After 8:20 things seem to have eased up, except they still weren't 100% sure he was gone, until finally near Reno Scott says: 'Im going back and look', and he comes back and reports: 'Apparently our friend has taken leave of us'.
And, he went back and looked in spite of being told not to!
-
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?
R99 should have that. I would have to look it up, but the rendezvous was very near Lake Oswego, if not over it, south of Portland in the ___?___ time slot.
BTW! Talking to and instructing the T33 is the whole reason R2 said: "That is reason I wasn't watching 305 when it crossed the Columbia to know exactly where it was (east, over, or west of Portland) but my impression is it was right on the center-line of V23 when it crossed the Columbia at Portland". I think, am fairly sure, R99 got the same story from R2 when he talked to him...
-
R99 should have that. I would have to look it up, but the rendezvous was very near to Lake Oswego south of Portland in the ___?___ time slot.
It seems likely that 305 might have sped up a bit from Scholl to V23 in order to get in front of the T33, and maybe slowed down a bit near Oswego to facilitate a rendezvous. The "FBI" plot indicates both of these.
Really gotta go!
-
R99 should have that. I would have to look it up, but the rendezvous was very near to Lake Oswego south of Portland in the ___?___ time slot.
It seems likely that 305 might have sped up a bit from Scholl to V23 in order to get in front of the T33, and maybe slowed down a bit near Oswego to facilitate a rendezvous. The "FBI" plot indicates both of these.
Just edited mine above to include:
BTW! Talking to and instructing the T33 is the whole reason R2 said: "That is reason I wasn't watching 305 on my screen when it crossed the Columbia to know exactly where it was (east, over, or west of Portland) but my impression is it was right on the center-line of V23 when it crossed the Columbia at Portland". I think, am fairly sure, R99 got the same story from R2 when he talked to him...
I need to run here ... meeting.
-
Talking to and instructing the T33 is the whole reason R2 said: "That is reason I wasn't watching 305 on my screen when it crossed the Columbia to know exactly where it was (east, over, or west of Portland) but my impression is it was right on the center-line of V23 when it crossed the Columbia at Portland". I think, am fairly sure, R99 got the same story from R2 when he talked to him...
305 speeding up between Scholl and the I-5 bridge area could also have contributed to R2 missing that part. And account for 305 overshooting and having to turn back to V23, slowing down in the process. Nothing to do with the control zone.
-
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?
R99 should have that. I would have to look it up, but the rendezvous was very near Lake Oswego, if not over it, south of Portland in the ___?___ time slot.
BTW! Talking to and instructing the T33 is the whole reason R2 said: "That is reason I wasn't watching 305 when it crossed the Columbia to know exactly where it was (east, over, or west of Portland) but my impression is it was right on the center-line of V23 when it crossed the Columbia at Portland". I think, am fairly sure, R99 got the same story from R2 when he talked to him...
First, let me point out that I agree that the crew was extremely interested in getting Cooper to jump. And they were also extremely interested in keeping him calmed down. So they were doing precisely as he told them to do. None of this would result in the aircraft making a detour to the east side of Portland.
Himmelsbach states that the T-33 took off to the west and this is supported by the fact that the relatively light ground wind was generally from the southwest. This means the T-33 would have used runway 28 for the takeoff. And the T-33 was probably heading to a military practice area which, in view of the terrain, would probably be somewhere west of Portland and maybe over the Pacific.
Refer to Hominid's map in his recent post. Take a look at the four red "x" marks on the west and southwest side of Portland. There may be more than four of these marks but it is difficult to identify them because of the magenta colors that are on that map. Someone was plotting points of interest over a distance of more than 10 miles. Note that there are two sets of two marks each that form a straight line with the Mayfield/Malay Intersection. Also note that Tina Bar is only about 1000 feet horizontally from these straight lines. Assuming that the airliner is represented by one of these straight lines, it would rejoin the centerline of V-23 at or very near to the Canby Intersection.
Further, there is a teletypewriter printout in the "FBI notes" that indicates the airliner reported it was "23 DME miles south of Portland", or something like that, and the teletypewriter printout was time stamped (which is the time someone pressed the send button) at 8:22 PM. While the airliner probably didn't have its tail pointed directly to the Portland VORTAC, it was still traveling away from there at the rate of about 3 DME miles per minute. This means that the DME counter would only display "23" for about a 20 to 25 second period.
Other information in the "George Harrison Papers" gives various times for that message. Those times range from 8:18 to 8:22. The 8:22 time was the time the message was sent by ARINC and it is not known if that was the initial time the message was sent or if this was a redirection of the message to NWA at Portland from somewhere else.
Based on recent discussions with highly knowledgeable people in the communications business, it would probably take some minutes for the people who received the airliner's message on the ground (ARINC) to formulate the message, type it, and then send it. By contrast, the 8:18 time could be the time someone heard the pilot's radio message on the phone patch from ARINC. Based on Shutter's simulations and my own analyses, the 8:18 time fits the situation much, much better.
-
R99 should have that. I would have to look it up, but the rendezvous was very near to Lake Oswego south of Portland in the ___?___ time slot.
It seems likely that 305 might have sped up a bit from Scholl to V23 in order to get in front of the T33, and maybe slowed down a bit near Oswego to facilitate a rendezvous. The "FBI" plot indicates both of these.
Really gotta go!
Keep in mind that if the airliner had speeded up, Cooper could have noticed. And he specifically told them to maintain a constant speed.
-
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?
R99 should have that. I would have to look it up, but the rendezvous was very near Lake Oswego, if not over it, south of Portland in the ___?___ time slot.
BTW! Talking to and instructing the T33 is the whole reason R2 said: "That is reason I wasn't watching 305 when it crossed the Columbia to know exactly where it was (east, over, or west of Portland) but my impression is it was right on the center-line of V23 when it crossed the Columbia at Portland". I think, am fairly sure, R99 got the same story from R2 when he talked to him...
First, let me point out that I agree that the crew was extremely interested in getting Cooper to jump. And they were also extremely interested in keeping him calmed down. So they were doing precisely as he told them to do. None of this would result in the aircraft making a detour to the east side of Portland.
Himmelsbach states that the T-33 took off to the west and this is supported by the fact that the relatively light ground wind was generally from the southwest. This means the T-33 would have used runway 28 for the takeoff. And the T-33 was probably heading to a military practice area which, in view of the terrain, would probably be somewhere west of Portland and maybe over the Pacific.
Refer to Hominid's map in his recent post. Take a look at the four red "x" marks on the west and southwest side of Portland. There may be more than four of these marks but it is difficult to identify them because of the magenta colors that are on that map. Someone was plotting points of interest over a distance of more than 10 miles. Note that there are two sets of two marks each that form a straight line with the Mayfield/Malay Intersection. Also note that Tina Bar is only about 1000 feet horizontally from these straight lines. Assuming that the airliner is represented by one of these straight lines, it would rejoin the centerline of V-23 at or very near to the Canby Intersection.
Further, there is a teletypewriter printout in the "FBI notes" that indicates the airliner reported it was "23 DME miles south of Portland", or something like that, and the teletypewriter printout was time stamped (which is the time someone pressed the send button) at 8:22 PM. While the airliner probably didn't have its tail pointed directly to the Portland VORTAC, it was still traveling away from there at the rate of about 3 DME miles per minute. This means that the DME counter would only display "23" for about a 20 to 25 second period.
Other information in the "George Harrison Papers" gives various times for that message. Those times range from 8:18 to 8:22. The 8:22 time was the time the message was sent by ARINC and it is not known if that was the initial time the message was sent or if this was a redirection of the message to NWA at Portland from somewhere else.
Based on recent discussions with highly knowledgeable people in the communications business, it would probably take some minutes for the people who received the airliner's message on the ground (ARINC) to formulate the message, type it, and then send it. By contrast, the 8:18 time could be the time someone heard the pilot's radio message on the phone patch from ARINC. Based on Shutter's simulations and my own analyses, the 8:18 time fits the situation much, much better.
All of this is plausible to me, but I have no 'gut instincts' as an experienced commercial pilot from that period or any other. Whatever instincts I have tell me the time slot for the T33 rendezvous is not compatible with an east route,
just not enough time to be in two places at once within reach of each other time-wise. If it would turn out the East route is true that would trash much of the existing data (interview statements etc) that exist. I have pointed that out to JT/Himms a million times and they simply will not budge from their position.
That leaves the FBI or the Dawson flight path, or a merger (somehow) of the two, which preserves an encounter with the T33 near Oswego in the time period assigned that event.
The T33 rendezvous may turn out to be one crucial fact.
-
R99 should have that. I would have to look it up, but the rendezvous was very near to Lake Oswego south of Portland in the ___?___ time slot.
It seems likely that 305 might have sped up a bit from Scholl to V23 in order to get in front of the T33, and maybe slowed down a bit near Oswego to facilitate a rendezvous. The "FBI" plot indicates both of these.
Really gotta go!
Keep in mind that if the airliner had speeded up, Cooper could have noticed. And he specifically told them to maintain a constant speed.
Robt99, what time do you have for the T33 intercept? 8:22 time frame?
-
R99 should have that. I would have to look it up, but the rendezvous was very near to Lake Oswego south of Portland in the ___?___ time slot.
It seems likely that 305 might have sped up a bit from Scholl to V23 in order to get in front of the T33, and maybe slowed down a bit near Oswego to facilitate a rendezvous. The "FBI" plot indicates both of these.
Really gotta go!
Keep in mind that if the airliner had speeded up, Cooper could have noticed. And he specifically told them to maintain a constant speed.
Robt99, what time do you have for the T33 intercept? 8:22 time frame?
Looking at Hominid's map again, and assuming that the eastern two large red "x"s are points on the airliner's path, and that it flew directly from the Mayfield/Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, then the western two large red "x"s are probably points on the T-33's flight path.
In addition to the two eastern red "x"s, there appears to be a third red "x" on that same line and just west of the words "Williamette" and "Caution". I think I can see both a vertical line and a horizontal line with both of them being partially obscured by the large black line that is supposed to be the airliner's flight path. Also, I think I can see a sixth red "x" which would be the third red "x" on the western lines and it is located just slightly below the east end of the word "Wilsonville".
If the "x" marks above are as assumed, or even if the airliner is the western set of marks and the T-33 the eastern set of marks, then both aircraft were headed directly for the Canby Intersection which is the intersection of that 085 radial and V-23.
Further, assuming that the above assumptions are correct and that the time at the "23 DME" location was 8:18, the airliner would have been about 1 or 2 nautical miles west of the V-23 center line at that point and about 4 nautical miles north of the Canby Intersection. So the airliner would arrive at the Canby Intersection no later than about 8:20.
It is not really possible to estimate the time the T-33 intercepted the airliner but their "flight paths" are reasonably close for all marked points. It should also be noted that the T-33 probably had a 50 to 100 MPH speed advantage over the airliner. So maybe the controller put the T-33 on a parallel track to the airliner and used his radar to estimate how far T-33 was behind the airliner.
-
First, let me point out that I agree that the crew was extremely interested in getting Cooper to jump. And they were also extremely interested in keeping him calmed down. So they were doing precisely as he told them to do. None of this would result in the aircraft making a detour to the east side of Portland.
I'm not supporting any detour to the east of Portland. The impacts of any demands he may have been making are uncertain.
Himmelsbach states that the T-33 took off to the west and this is supported by the fact that the relatively light ground wind was generally from the southwest. This means the T-33 would have used runway 28 for the takeoff. And the T-33 was probably heading to a military practice area which, in view of the terrain, would probably be somewhere west of Portland and maybe over the Pacific.
Why do you mention where it was probably heading? Was it already headed there and got called back to trail 305?
Refer to Hominid's map in his recent post. Take a look at the four red "x" marks on the west and southwest side of Portland. There may be more than four of these marks but it is difficult to identify them because of the magenta colors that are on that map. Someone was plotting points of interest over a distance of more than 10 miles. Note that there are two sets of two marks each that form a straight line with the Mayfield/Malay Intersection. Also note that Tina Bar is only about 1000 feet horizontally from these straight lines. Assuming that the airliner is represented by one of these straight lines, it would rejoin the centerline of V-23 at or very near to the Canby Intersection.
Those 4 "+" marks were mistakes. They're crossed out. Don't you use image editing software so you can magnify the images? There are only the four. They are each plotted exactly 5 minutes of longitude to the west of the correct positions. This was no doubt a result of the fact that the minute marks are not labelled. Just click or double click on the "ploterrors.bmp" and something on your computer should open it so you can magnify it.
Further, there is a teletypewriter printout in the "FBI notes" that indicates the airliner reported it was "23 DME miles south of Portland", or something like that, and the teletypewriter printout was time stamped (which is the time someone pressed the send button) at 8:22 PM. While the airliner probably didn't have its tail pointed directly to the Portland VORTAC, it was still traveling away from there at the rate of about 3 DME miles per minute. This means that the DME counter would only display "23" for about a 20 to 25 second period.
Other information in the "George Harrison Papers" gives various times for that message. Those times range from 8:18 to 8:22. The 8:22 time was the time the message was sent by ARINC and it is not known if that was the initial time the message was sent or if this was a redirection of the message to NWA at Portland from somewhere else.
Based on recent discussions with highly knowledgeable people in the communications business, it would probably take some minutes for the people who received the airliner's message on the ground (ARINC) to formulate the message, type it, and then send it. By contrast, the 8:18 time could be the time someone heard the pilot's radio message on the phone patch from ARINC. Based on Shutter's simulations and my own analyses, the 8:18 time fits the situation much, much better.
The Harrison papers have 2 people noting the event at 8:22 and one at 8:18. I believe they were all noting what they were all hearing on the phone patch circuit as it was happening. ARINC was relevant only in that NWA had arranged to get the ground radio support and phone patch from ARINC, because NWA didn't have its own ground radio network south of Portland. From 305 transmitting something, to NWA sites getting it, was practically instantaneous. Received by a radio, routed directly to telephone. NWA had essentially bought some hours of "company frequency" from ARINC. Not like the transmissions on standard regional frequencies that have a lot of traffic involving multiple airlines.
I think you're wrong about there being a TTY printout about the 23DME in the "FBI notes." There is a reference to it in the NWA incident report to the FBI. They wrote that up with the benefit of their people having heard the comms, just like noted in the Harrison papers.
Your next post:
Keep in mind that if the airliner had speeded up, Cooper could have noticed. And he specifically told them to maintain a constant speed.
Yes. Still, the plot indicates they sped up. Of course, the plot could have been displayed in an FBI office just to throw us all off.
-
Looking at Hominid's map again, and assuming that the eastern two large red "x"s are points on the airliner's path, and that it flew directly from the Mayfield/Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, then the western two large red "x"s are probably points on the T-33's flight path.
In addition to the two eastern red "x"s, there appears to be a third red "x" on that same line and just west of the words "Williamette" and "Caution". I think I can see both a vertical line and a horizontal line with both of them being partially obscured by the large black line that is supposed to be the airliner's flight path. Also, I think I can see a sixth red "x" which would be the third red "x" on the western lines and it is located just slightly below the east end of the word "Wilsonville".
Indeed there is that 3rd red "+" on that same longitude. It's one of the larger ones of the plotted points. There's another almost as large down by the Willamette River just east of the Wilsonville circle. A small one mostly hidden by the dark line east of the word "Tualatin." Another mostly hidden by the dark line just west of where I added "V23" under the thin radial I added. Another just to the left of the "Control Area" I added in white. These are all plotted points. The four you are referencing are mistakes that were crossed out.
-
Looking at Hominid's map again, and assuming that the eastern two large red "x"s are points on the airliner's path, and that it flew directly from the Mayfield/Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, then the western two large red "x"s are probably points on the T-33's flight path.
In addition to the two eastern red "x"s, there appears to be a third red "x" on that same line and just west of the words "Williamette" and "Caution". I think I can see both a vertical line and a horizontal line with both of them being partially obscured by the large black line that is supposed to be the airliner's flight path. Also, I think I can see a sixth red "x" which would be the third red "x" on the western lines and it is located just slightly below the east end of the word "Wilsonville".
Indeed there is that 3rd red "+" on that same longitude. It's one of the larger ones of the plotted points. There's another almost as large down by the Willamette River just east of the Wilsonville circle. A small one mostly hidden by the dark line east of the word "Tualatin." Another mostly hidden by the dark line just west of where I added "V23" under the thin radial I added. Another just to the left of the "Control Area" I added in white. These are all plotted points. The four you are referencing are mistakes that were crossed out.
The great circle course between the Mayfield/Malay Intersection and the Canby Intersection is 180.14 degrees True, which means with respect to the grid lines or, in this case, the longitude lines. I don't see anything relevant in your comments above.
-
Looking at Hominid's map again, and assuming that the eastern two large red "x"s are points on the airliner's path, and that it flew directly from the Mayfield/Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, then the western two large red "x"s are probably points on the T-33's flight path.
In addition to the two eastern red "x"s, there appears to be a third red "x" on that same line and just west of the words "Williamette" and "Caution". I think I can see both a vertical line and a horizontal line with both of them being partially obscured by the large black line that is supposed to be the airliner's flight path. Also, I think I can see a sixth red "x" which would be the third red "x" on the western lines and it is located just slightly below the east end of the word "Wilsonville".
Indeed there is that 3rd red "+" on that same longitude. It's one of the larger ones of the plotted points. There's another almost as large down by the Willamette River just east of the Wilsonville circle. A small one mostly hidden by the dark line east of the word "Tualatin." Another mostly hidden by the dark line just west of where I added "V23" under the thin radial I added. Another just to the left of the "Control Area" I added in white. These are all plotted points. The four you are referencing are mistakes that were crossed out.
The great circle course between the Mayfield/Malay Intersection and the Canby Intersection is 180.14 degrees True, which means with respect to the grid lines or, in this case, the longitude lines. I don't see anything relevant in your comments above.
Try reading them. The 4 plot points you're trying to make into T33 flight path WERE PLOTTING MISTAKES that were crossed out. They were each crossed out with three to four slashes like "///" in the same color as the plot crosses, but lighter. It appears that there are numerous plot points you're unable to see. You need to use some kind of software that will enable you to see the detail.
-
Looking at Hominid's map again, and assuming that the eastern two large red "x"s are points on the airliner's path, and that it flew directly from the Mayfield/Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, then the western two large red "x"s are probably points on the T-33's flight path.
In addition to the two eastern red "x"s, there appears to be a third red "x" on that same line and just west of the words "Williamette" and "Caution". I think I can see both a vertical line and a horizontal line with both of them being partially obscured by the large black line that is supposed to be the airliner's flight path. Also, I think I can see a sixth red "x" which would be the third red "x" on the western lines and it is located just slightly below the east end of the word "Wilsonville".
Indeed there is that 3rd red "+" on that same longitude. It's one of the larger ones of the plotted points. There's another almost as large down by the Willamette River just east of the Wilsonville circle. A small one mostly hidden by the dark line east of the word "Tualatin." Another mostly hidden by the dark line just west of where I added "V23" under the thin radial I added. Another just to the left of the "Control Area" I added in white. These are all plotted points. The four you are referencing are mistakes that were crossed out.
The great circle course between the Mayfield/Malay Intersection and the Canby Intersection is 180.14 degrees True, which means with respect to the grid lines or, in this case, the longitude lines. I don't see anything relevant in your comments above.
Try reading them. The 4 plot points you're trying to make into T33 flight path WERE PLOTTING MISTAKES that were crossed out. They were each crossed out with three to four slashes like "///" in the same color as the plot crosses, but lighter. It appears that there are numerous plot points you're unable to see. You need to use some kind of software that will enable you to see the detail.
I can only see the things I have previously described. But then, I am restricted to using my eyeballs since I don't have any sight enhancing software on my computer and don't know of any magic incantations that might be useful. What software or incantations would you recommend?
-
Looking at Hominid's map again, and assuming that the eastern two large red "x"s are points on the airliner's path, and that it flew directly from the Mayfield/Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, then the western two large red "x"s are probably points on the T-33's flight path.
In addition to the two eastern red "x"s, there appears to be a third red "x" on that same line and just west of the words "Williamette" and "Caution". I think I can see both a vertical line and a horizontal line with both of them being partially obscured by the large black line that is supposed to be the airliner's flight path. Also, I think I can see a sixth red "x" which would be the third red "x" on the western lines and it is located just slightly below the east end of the word "Wilsonville".
Indeed there is that 3rd red "+" on that same longitude. It's one of the larger ones of the plotted points. There's another almost as large down by the Willamette River just east of the Wilsonville circle. A small one mostly hidden by the dark line east of the word "Tualatin." Another mostly hidden by the dark line just west of where I added "V23" under the thin radial I added. Another just to the left of the "Control Area" I added in white. These are all plotted points. The four you are referencing are mistakes that were crossed out.
The great circle course between the Mayfield/Malay Intersection and the Canby Intersection is 180.14 degrees True, which means with respect to the grid lines or, in this case, the longitude lines. I don't see anything relevant in your comments above.
Try reading them. The 4 plot points you're trying to make into T33 flight path WERE PLOTTING MISTAKES that were crossed out. They were each crossed out with three to four slashes like "///" in the same color as the plot crosses, but lighter. It appears that there are numerous plot points you're unable to see. You need to use some kind of software that will enable you to see the detail.
What copy of the map are you working with? I confess I can't see anything like the three '///'s on my copy of the map. Could you crop and post an example of what you are seeing?
-
I can only see the things I have previously described. But then, I am restricted to using my eyeballs since I don't have any sight enhancing software on my computer and don't know of any magic incantations that might be useful. What software or incantations would you recommend?
I'm sorry, but I am not aware of what is available now. I use a "lite" version of Paint Shop Pro that I got years ago as a freebie with something computerie I bought. I think I can help otherwise, however. I've been attaching the files in .bmp format and it appears that this doesn't just expand by clicking on the image the way the .jpg images do. I'll use .jpg instead.
I've attached an image with the four plot points on the left side. I also dragged part of the plot from further north down and put it on the right side to show examples of what the normal red crosses look like. The image is only one JPEG away from the original file from Sluggo's site, which is the same as what the museum has. And I have my software set to use minimal compression in creating the .jpg files, so very little degradation occurs with each serial save.
-
It looks like, other than the fantasy by Gunther, you guys (R99 and Georger) having heard something similar from R2 is the only reason to think there was a T33 involved. Is this right? So, was anything said that would place the T33 anywhere specific at a specific time?
-
It looks like, other than the fantasy by Gunther, you guys (R99 and Georger) having heard something similar from R2 is the only reason to think there was a T33 involved. Is this right? So, was anything said that would place the T33 anywhere specific at a specific time? I have seen something in the records about some flight making some kind of progress at PDX. I think some of it is in those Harrison notes.
Here is some of the information on the T-33, starting on page 46 of Himmelsbach's book. It was an Air National Guard T-33 on a night training mission from Portland International Airport. It took off to the west about 7:50PM PST and was directed to contact Seattle ATC soon thereafter. Seattle ATC told the T-33 that they wanted it to track the airliner.
The T-33 then turned south towards Lake Oswego and about three miles behind and about 1000 feet above the airliner. Near Eugene, the T-33 was told to land at Klamath Falls, it did, and was not involved further in the hijacking matter.
According to the "FBI notes" at 8:52PM PST, the airliner was over the Eugene VORTAC, at 10,000 feet, and doing 170 KIAS. It should be noted that this 8:52 time is NOT stated as being the "time over station" which is the time that the airliner would physically pass overhead the Eugene VORTAC with a resulting shift of "TO" to "FROM" on the airliner's VOR instrument. The 8:52 time is simply the time the agent wrote down the information.
-
I can only see the things I have previously described. But then, I am restricted to using my eyeballs since I don't have any sight enhancing software on my computer and don't know of any magic incantations that might be useful. What software or incantations would you recommend?
I'm sorry, but I am not aware of what is available now. I use a "lite" version of Paint Shop Pro that I got years ago as a freebie with something computerie I bought. I think I can help otherwise, however. I've been attaching the files in .bmp format and it appears that this doesn't just expand by clicking on the image the way the .jpg images do. I'll use .jpg instead.
I've attached an image with the four plot points on the left side. I also dragged part of the plot from further north down and put it on the right side to show examples of what the normal red crosses look like. The image is only one JPEG away from the original file from Sluggo's site, which is the same as what the museum has. And I have my software set to use minimal compression in creating the .jpg files, so very little degradation occurs with each serial save.
I got a fresh copy of the map and I see what you are talking about - attached. The 4-5 west crosses are blemished vs. other crisp cross marks. Blemished, crossed out, attempt to cross out, attempt to scratch out? I'm not sure what the cause or intent would be. (Is there anything straightforward in this case?).
Note also that each of these crosses is thicker, drawn twice?, overlapped, than any of the single line red pencil crosses which are sharp and distinct along the #2 penciled flight path line(s). It makes me wonder if the west crosses are an after-thought? Why should mistakes have been only in the Portland (west) area? This could be a copy of an original map which did not have the west cross marks, like an office copy, then was worked with and crosses added by people looking at, working with, or evaluating the map (maybe in an FBI office)?
Here are sharp cross marks from the penciled flight path, for comparison.
-
It looks like, other than the fantasy by Gunther, you guys (R99 and Georger) having heard something similar from R2 is the only reason to think there was a T33 involved. Is this right? So, was anything said that would place the T33 anywhere specific at a specific time? I have seen something in the records about some flight making some kind of progress at PDX. I think some of it is in those Harrison notes.
Here is some of the information on the T-33, starting on page 46 of Himmelsbach's book. It was an Air National Guard T-33 on a night training mission from Portland International Airport. It took off to the west about 7:50PM PST and was directed to contact Seattle ATC soon thereafter. Seattle ATC told the T-33 that they wanted it to track the airliner.
The T-33 then turned south towards Lake Oswego and about three miles behind and about 1000 feet above the airliner. Near Eugene, the T-33 was told to land at Klamath Falls, it did, and was not involved further in the hijacking matter.
According to the "FBI notes" at 8:52PM PST, the airliner was over the Eugene VORTAC, at 10,000 feet, and doing 170 KIAS. It should be noted that this 8:52 time is NOT stated as being the "time over station" which is the time that the airliner would physically pass overhead the Eugene VORTAC with a resulting shift of "TO" to "FROM" on the airliner's VOR instrument. The 8:52 time is simply the time the agent wrote down the information.
Thanks. Then the T-33 would have been out somewhere for about a half hour before getting to 305 at about Lake Oswego? Might have gone straight out "there" for fifteen minutes, then back almost directly to Oswego. Doesn't seem to me like enough info to figure out what, if anything, 305 may have done to facilitate the hook-up. Doesn't seem like they would need to do anything for that purpose. Does that seem right to you?
-
I got a fresh copy of the map and I see what you are talking about - attached. The 4-5 west crosses are blemished vs. other crisp cross marks. Blemished, crossed out, attempt to cross out, attempt to scratch out? I'm not sure what the cause or intent would be. (Is there anything straightforward in this case?).
Note also that each of these crosses is thicker, drawn twice?, overlapped, than any of the single line red pencil crosses which are sharp and distinct along the #2 penciled flight path line(s). It makes me wonder if the west crosses are an after-thought? Why should mistakes have been only in the Portland (west) area? This could be a copy of an original map which did not have the west cross marks, like an office copy, then was worked with and crosses added by people looking at, working with, or evaluating the map (maybe in an FBI office)?
Most of the other plotted points are on longitudes that are just one or two minutes of longitude different from the immediately preceding point. In the case of these four points, the first is several minutes to the west of the immediately preceding one. So, the plotter uses the longitude scale that is quite near. Problem is that the minute marks don't have the values annotated by them. Every group of ten looks just like the others. There's very little difference between the groups of five. The plotter picked the wrong longitude for the northernmost of the four points. Plotted the other 3 based on differences from that one.
Eventually the plotter discovered the mistake. That pencil doesn't erase very well from the chart paper. It takes an electric eraser, and it's easy to burn through the paper. Easier just to scratch through the mistakes with the pencil.
So the plotter puts red crosses at the correct locations. These are precisely, absolutely exactly 5.0 minutes latitude to the east. These positions support the proposition that the first four were just mistakes. Although someone might have been "doodling" about "what if the plane came down 5' to the west," I can't image that they would reproduce the 1' back-and-forth part of the pattern.
-
It looks like, other than the fantasy by Gunther, you guys (R99 and Georger) having heard something similar from R2 is the only reason to think there was a T33 involved. Is this right? So, was anything said that would place the T33 anywhere specific at a specific time? I have seen something in the records about some flight making some kind of progress at PDX. I think some of it is in those Harrison notes.
Here is some of the information on the T-33, starting on page 46 of Himmelsbach's book. It was an Air National Guard T-33 on a night training mission from Portland International Airport. It took off to the west about 7:50PM PST and was directed to contact Seattle ATC soon thereafter. Seattle ATC told the T-33 that they wanted it to track the airliner.
The T-33 then turned south towards Lake Oswego and about three miles behind and about 1000 feet above the airliner. Near Eugene, the T-33 was told to land at Klamath Falls, it did, and was not involved further in the hijacking matter.
According to the "FBI notes" at 8:52PM PST, the airliner was over the Eugene VORTAC, at 10,000 feet, and doing 170 KIAS. It should be noted that this 8:52 time is NOT stated as being the "time over station" which is the time that the airliner would physically pass overhead the Eugene VORTAC with a resulting shift of "TO" to "FROM" on the airliner's VOR instrument. The 8:52 time is simply the time the agent wrote down the information.
Thanks. Then the T-33 would have been out somewhere for about a half hour before getting to 305 at about Lake Oswego? Might have gone straight out "there" for fifteen minutes, then back almost directly to Oswego. Doesn't seem to me like enough info to figure out what, if anything, 305 may have done to facilitate the hook-up. Doesn't seem like they would need to do anything for that purpose. Does that seem right to you?
The airliner would stay on course and the T-33 would be vectored to join up with it. Don't forget the "turned south" statement for the T-33. As shown by the western marks, the T-33 flight path must have been almost parallel with the airliner's flight path when each crossed the Columbia River west of Portland. This doesn't mean that the T-33 had "joined up" with the airliner by the time they crossed the Columbia. The time(s) at Lake Oswego are not given but the aircraft had probably joined up by the time they reached that location. Remember that the T-33 had a substantial speed advantage over the airliner.
-
I got a fresh copy of the map and I see what you are talking about - attached. The 4-5 west crosses are blemished vs. other crisp cross marks. Blemished, crossed out, attempt to cross out, attempt to scratch out? I'm not sure what the cause or intent would be. (Is there anything straightforward in this case?).
Note also that each of these crosses is thicker, drawn twice?, overlapped, than any of the single line red pencil crosses which are sharp and distinct along the #2 penciled flight path line(s). It makes me wonder if the west crosses are an after-thought? Why should mistakes have been only in the Portland (west) area? This could be a copy of an original map which did not have the west cross marks, like an office copy, then was worked with and crosses added by people looking at, working with, or evaluating the map (maybe in an FBI office)?
Most of the other plotted points are on longitudes that are just one or two minutes of longitude different from the immediately preceding point. In the case of these four points, the first is several minutes to the west of the immediately preceding one. So, the plotter uses the longitude scale that is quite near. Problem is that the minute marks don't have the values annotated by them. Every group of ten looks just like the others. There's very little difference between the groups of five. The plotter picked the wrong longitude for the northernmost of the four points. Plotted the other 3 based on differences from that one.
Eventually the plotter discovered the mistake. That pencil doesn't erase very well from the chart paper. It takes an electric eraser, and it's easy to burn through the paper. Easier just to scratch through the mistakes with the pencil.
So the plotter puts red crosses at the correct locations. These are precisely, absolutely exactly 5.0 minutes latitude to the east. These positions support the proposition that the first four were just mistakes. Although someone might have been "doodling" about "what if the plane came down 5' to the west," I can't image that they would reproduce the 1' back-and-forth part of the pattern.
Remember that the western marks are going straight south and that means they would be on the same longitude line.
-
Remember that the western marks are going straight south and that means they would be on the same longitude line.
Yes. The two westermost points exactly on 122°41'W. The other two exactly on 122°40'W. Exactly 1' difference. With the ±0.5' tolerance, the actual positions for all four could have been essentially 122°40.5'W. That is, all on the same longitude.
-
Refer to the attached snip of the "FBI" flightpath plot. See the plot cross largely covered by the neanderthal line a little south of the PDX latitude. See that this cross lines up almost perfectly with the 45°34' scale mark on the latitude scale to the right (at the bottom of the "296"). Only problem is, that is not the 34' scale mark. The 34' mark is actually hiding behind the peak of the dark "teepee" obstruction symbol, and on the right side of the latitude scale. Why should anyone care?
For almost all of the plot points on the "FBI" thing, the lat and lon can be determined with sufficient precision from visible parts of the red "+"s. In the remaining cases the coordinates can be determined by the fact that the neanderthal line and big black "+" entirely obscure the red "+"s. Of all the coordinates (both lat and lon) for all the plot points, every one except for the one addressed in the preceding paragraph is measured to be within ±0.2' of being on an exact whole minute. Not one of them is measured to be within ±.2 of halfway between whole minutes. With this number of coordinates, there is no way this could be unless the data being plotted had a precision of 1' latitude and 1' longitude. The source data was rounded to whole minutes of latitude and longitude.
-
Refer to the attached snip of the "FBI" flightpath plot. See the plot cross largely covered by the neanderthal line a little south of the PDX latitude. See that this cross lines up almost perfectly with the 45°34' scale mark on the latitude scale to the right (at the bottom of the "296"). Only problem is, that is not the 34' scale mark. The 34' mark is actually hiding behind the peak of the dark "teepee" obstruction symbol, and on the right side of the latitude scale. Why should anyone care?
For almost all of the plot points on the "FBI" thing, the lat and lon can be determined with sufficient precision from visible parts of the red "+"s. In the remaining cases the coordinates can be determined by the fact that the neanderthal line and big black "+" entirely obscure the red "+"s. Of all the coordinates (both lat and lon) for all the plot points, every one except for the one addressed in the preceding paragraph is measured to be within ±0.2' of being on an exact whole minute. Not one of them is measured to be within ±.2 of halfway between whole minutes. With this number of coordinates, there is no way this could be unless the data being plotted had a precision of 1' latitude and 1' longitude. The source data was rounded to whole minutes of latitude and longitude.
which implies ... ? ??? (radar data?). Level of Resolution of what?
-
which implies ... ? ??? (radar data?). Level of Resolution of what?
I haven't thought much about "implications." Yeah, resolution of 1 minute of latitude by 1 minute of longitude. However, here's some facts.
Knowing that the precision (smallness of the differences between data points) is large in relation to the range of data values in which we're interested permits us to say that a plot of the data will look "jerky." That the plotted points will make it look like the speed would have had to vary wildly even though the actual speed didn't.
Knowing the basic fact about the data permits us to explore how such a plot would vary depending upon the true speed, and thereby draw some valid and useful (though limited) conclusions about the actual positions and groundspeeds from the seemingly fouled up position plot. See the attached pdf.
Sample of "jerky" at constant groundspeed:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4286403#4286403
-
which implies ... ? ??? (radar data?). Level of Resolution of what?
I haven't thought much about "implications." Yeah, resolution of 1 minute of latitude by 1 minute of longitude. However, here's some facts.
Knowing that the precision (smallness of the differences between data points) is large in relation to the range of data values in which we're interested permits us to say that a plot of the data will look "jerky." That the plotted points will make it look like the speed would have had to vary wildly even though the actual speed didn't.
Knowing the basic fact about the data permits us to explore how such a plot would vary depending upon the true speed, and thereby draw some valid and useful (though limited) conclusions about the actual positions and groundspeeds from the seemingly fouled up position plot. See the attached pdf.
Sample of "jerky" at constant groundspeed:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4286403#4286403
Let's consider some basic geometric values here. I trust you realize that 1' (one minute) as used in your attachment represents one Nautical Mile (about 6080 feet) of latitude which is measured along a line of longitude (north and south) and in the Portland area about 0.7 of one Nautical Mile of longitude which is measured along a line of latitude (east and west).
To "drift" sideways by one single foot while covering a 6080 foot long Nautical Mile (or even a 4256 foot distance) is not sufficiently great to show up in the data. And you certainly cannot measure something like that on the maps that are available in the Cooper matter.
Frankly, I don't understand the "rounding errors" that you mention. The map with the time hacks on the flight path show such things as 3 Nautical Miles being covered in one minute and then 6 Nautical Miles being covered in the very next minute. That is a 100 percent difference and is not going to be the result of any rounding errors.
You continue to see things in that map that completely escapes me. I simply don't see any logical basis in what you are doing.
Sorry.
-
I installed a "Highlighter" unfortunately it's not automatic. it's simple though. you do the following that you see on the pic. If I show you in the post, it will highlight it. just like this
UPDATE...you can now just paste the url link in the post. that's it.
test link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._B._Cooper
-
Refer to the attached snip of the "FBI" flightpath plot. The source data was rounded to whole minutes of latitude and longitude.
Both lines of the large red "x"s west of Portland line up perfectly starting at the Mayfield/Malay Intersection and with both southern ends being at or very near the Canby Intersection. The points plotted form two lines from the Mayfield/Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection with one line being slightly offset from that intersection. The points in question lie on one or the other of those two lines. If the plotted points had been truncated to eliminate fractions of nautical miles, then those lines would either be pointed straight south or they would not all lie on a single line as they do for each of the cases and some of the points would be substantially offset from any direct line between the two points.
From what I can see, the information shown on the maps does not support your idea of rounding to whole minutes of longitude and latitude. I do not see any evidence of rounding at all.
-
Refer to the attached snip of the "FBI" flightpath plot. The source data was rounded to whole minutes of latitude and longitude.
Both lines of the large red "x"s west of Portland line up perfectly starting at the Mayfield/Malay Intersection and with both southern ends being at or very near the Canby Intersection. The points plotted form two lines from the Mayfield/Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection with one line being slightly offset from that intersection. The points in question lie on one or the other of those two lines. If the plotted points had been truncated to eliminate fractions of nautical miles, then those lines would either be pointed straight south or they would not all lie on a single line as they do for each of the cases and some of the points would be substantially offset from any direct line between the two points.
From what I can see, the information shown on the maps does not support your idea of rounding to whole minutes of longitude and latitude. I do not see any evidence of rounding at all.
What radar data format would have most likely been used to plot the FBI flight path map? Visual tapes or numerical data in some multivariate format? What variables would have been used to assign a plot?
-
which implies ... ? ??? (radar data?). Level of Resolution of what?
I haven't thought much about "implications." Yeah, resolution of 1 minute of latitude by 1 minute of longitude. However, here's some facts.
Knowing that the precision (smallness of the differences between data points) is large in relation to the range of data values in which we're interested permits us to say that a plot of the data will look "jerky." That the plotted points will make it look like the speed would have had to vary wildly even though the actual speed didn't.
Knowing the basic fact about the data permits us to explore how such a plot would vary depending upon the true speed, and thereby draw some valid and useful (though limited) conclusions about the actual positions and groundspeeds from the seemingly fouled up position plot. See the attached pdf.
Sample of "jerky" at constant groundspeed:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4286403#4286403
I think I understand what you are saying here but what I don't understand is the data extraction process that would have resulted in a flight path map, be it FBI or anyone else's. What was the process and Im guessing there were choices in how data was extracted and applied to generate a plot map? But what's the process?
Would they have visual tapes of the screen with some kind of grid on the screen and try and extract timed plot points from that, or was there actual numeric data of some kind which would be converted to timed map plots ?
I dont think this question has ever been addressed thoroughly.. anywhere. Exactly what data needs rounding off and where does the data come from and I assume it's numeric data?
-
I'm sure most of you have seen this comment about the sage.....
The SAGE was a real-time, computer based command and control system designed in the late 1950's and fully functional and deployed by 1963 and used up though 1983. This automated control system was used by NORAD for tracking and intercepting enemy bomber aircraft. In the later versions the system could automatically direct aircraft to an interception by sending instructions directly to the aircraft's autopilot. The system consisted of 24 Directional Centers around the United States as well as 3 Combat Centers. Data was collected at each of the directional centers from over 100 different sources such as radar, human volunteers and aircraft sightings. This information was collated and forwarded via telephone communication lines to one of the three combat centers. The information was interpreted by the computer and displayed on something totally revolutionary for that time period: a cathode ray tube display screen. The display, while similar to a radar screen, was extremely versatile. The operator of the terminal could pull up past positions of aircraft or missiles, as well as project future locations. In addition, the system used another feature far in advance of its time: a light gun. The gun was used by the operators to point at an aircraft on the screen, and the computer would respond by displaying related identification information about that aircraft. The system has the dubious distinction of holding the record for the world's largest (physical size) computer ever created.
did the F-106's track the plane?
http://www.f-106deltadart.com/sage_system.htm
A comment about the sage I found interesting....
One of the earlier posts on the SAGE website used the SNOWTIME acronym incorrectly. The term stood for SAC-NORAD Operational Weapons Testing Involving Military Electronics. Its primary purpose was not to test SAGE, but rather to test ground-based Army air defense weapons in the US, which in the late 1960s were mostly Nike-Hercules missile units stationed around major population centers and military facilities. In the late 1960s there were roughly 15 defended areas around the country. I was most familiar with the ones on the west coast -- Seattle, San Francisco, and LA.
The exercise was conducted annually, against one defended area at a time. It was conducted late night-early morning to minimize interference with the FAA's air traffic control radars. In the exercise SAC aircraft would fly against the area using their maximum radar jamming capabilities. And the Nike units were allowed to use almost all of their full wartime countermeasures systems to counter the jamming. As someone who served in the San Francisco Nike brigade 1968-1970, I know that it was usually a humbling experience for the Army. I seem to recall that typical results were that Nike units would defeat at best one third of the attacking aircraft. Keep in mind that the Nike mission was to shoot down attacking Soviet bomber flights, each of which was carrying multiple thermonuclear bombs. If just one bomber in a flight completed its mission, the target city would likely have been destroyed. The sad reality was that Nike-Hercules radars were using technology from the 1950s and probably would have been no match for attacking enemy bombers in an actual wartime situation. Fortunately, we never found out for certain if this was the case.
http://ed-thelen.org/sage-1.html
-
I'm sure most of you have seen this comment about the sage.....
The SAGE was a real-time, computer based command and control system designed in the late 1950's and fully functional and deployed by 1963 and used up though 1983. This automated control system was used by NORAD for tracking and intercepting enemy bomber aircraft. In the later versions the system could automatically direct aircraft to an interception by sending instructions directly to the aircraft's autopilot. The system consisted of 24 Directional Centers around the United States as well as 3 Combat Centers. Data was collected at each of the directional centers from over 100 different sources such as radar, human volunteers and aircraft sightings. This information was collated and forwarded via telephone communication lines to one of the three combat centers. The information was interpreted by the computer and displayed on something totally revolutionary for that time period: a cathode ray tube display screen. The display, while similar to a radar screen, was extremely versatile. The operator of the terminal could pull up past positions of aircraft or missiles, as well as project future locations. In addition, the system used another feature far in advance of its time: a light gun. The gun was used by the operators to point at an aircraft on the screen, and the computer would respond by displaying related identification information about that aircraft. The system has the dubious distinction of holding the record for the world's largest (physical size) computer ever created.
did the F-106's track the plane?
http://www.f-106deltadart.com/sage_system.htm
A comment about the sage I found interesting....
One of the earlier posts on the SAGE website used the SNOWTIME acronym incorrectly. The term stood for SAC-NORAD Operational Weapons Testing Involving Military Electronics. Its primary purpose was not to test SAGE, but rather to test ground-based Army air defense weapons in the US, which in the late 1960s were mostly Nike-Hercules missile units stationed around major population centers and military facilities. In the late 1960s there were roughly 15 defended areas around the country. I was most familiar with the ones on the west coast -- Seattle, San Francisco, and LA.
The exercise was conducted annually, against one defended area at a time. It was conducted late night-early morning to minimize interference with the FAA's air traffic control radars. In the exercise SAC aircraft would fly against the area using their maximum radar jamming capabilities. And the Nike units were allowed to use almost all of their full wartime countermeasures systems to counter the jamming. As someone who served in the San Francisco Nike brigade 1968-1970, I know that it was usually a humbling experience for the Army. I seem to recall that typical results were that Nike units would defeat at best one third of the attacking aircraft. Keep in mind that the Nike mission was to shoot down attacking Soviet bomber flights, each of which was carrying multiple thermonuclear bombs. If just one bomber in a flight completed its mission, the target city would likely have been destroyed. The sad reality was that Nike-Hercules radars were using technology from the 1950s and probably would have been no match for attacking enemy bombers in an actual wartime situation. Fortunately, we never found out for certain if this was the case.
http://ed-thelen.org/sage-1.html
So again, what type of data (and data format) gets data onto a map? Is it a manual process, automated plotting process .... ? ... what "numbers" need rounding off? My feeling is there is some kind of automated plotter involved that makes a map, when and if someone desires or needs a map? Is the NWA search map Sluggo calls the FBI Map an instance of a computer plotted map which used McChord's radar data? What old computer language? SNOBOL? This is the same era we would have been using PL1 and other languages for computer plotted charts, (maps), etc... (The boxes of cards for a single run were prodigious!) I used PL1 and several other languages for data crunching here ... it was often so laborious it was almost defeating! MY guess is the military systems were more automated.
-
quick check says Sage used JOVIAL computer language.
see link. page 3 of the PDF speaks about the 35 mm high speed camera used with SAGE.
https://www.ll.mit.edu/publications/journal/pdf/vol12_no2/12_2detectsatellitiesplanets.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/FPS-17
-
So again, what type of data (and data format) gets data onto a map? Is it a manual process, automated plotting process .... ? ... what "numbers" need rounding off? My feeling is there is some kind of automated plotter involved that makes a map, when and if someone desires or needs a map? Is the NWA search map Sluggo calls the FBI Map an instance of a computer plotted map which used McChord's radar data? What old computer language? SNOBOL? This is the same era we would have been using PL1 and other languages for computer plotted charts, (maps), etc... (The boxes of cards for a single run were prodigious!) I used PL1 and several other languages for data crunching here ... it was often so laborious it was almost defeating! MY guess is the military systems were more automated.
At the time, the country had an "air defense command" (at some point in time replaced by or absorbed into NORAD). Their job was to monitor the skies, especially around the periphery of the USA and Canada, for bombers from Russia or China, and to put fighters out to intercept bombers or anything that might be a bomber.
To do this, they could not just track enemy bombers. They had to track virtually everything in the air and check off all those planes that were confirmed to be "friendlies." Whatever was left, then, were the suspected "bogies."
So they constantly tracked everything out toward the horizon, everything that had a transponder in operation, everything with a return signal strong enough to be more than a low altitude "general aviation" private plane. everything They would have been tracking 305 to some degree even if 305 had not been hijacked.
To check off the "friendlies" the command's "direction centers" were in constant contact with FAA air traffic control centers. They constantly received flight plan data from the centers. They had hot lines so they could just pick up the phone and talk to flight controllers. They also had constant communication with direction centers (DCs) for adjacent regions so that known friendlies were passed from one region to another so that the second wouldn't have to go through the whole process of identifying the friendlies that came from the adjacent regions.
The command used "SAGE" to do this tracking. They got the source data principally from cutting edge radar sites. The data was processed, then the resulting data was displayed, at the regional DC. For our flightpath plot, the radar site involved before the flight got down a ways into Oregon was the site at Mt. Hebo, OR. The DC was DC-12 at McChord. So I'll refer to them in the following explanation of how the system worked.
If I remember correctly, the radar antenna went around 6 times per minute. Each time it went around, a computery thing analyzed the video output from the radar set along with precise data (from the antenna sytem) on where the antenna was pointing. From this analysis the device produced very accurate digital information on the range from the antenna to the "target," the target's azimuth with respect to "true" north, and the precise time at which the range and azimuth were measured. The device was constantly doing this for practically everything in the sky.
The device would load this location/time info into a magnetic storage drum rotating in sync with the antenna. The device was constantly loading such info for all the things the radar saw in the sky. Each turn of the antenna the device also loaded the same kind of data for at least one fixed target at a precisely surveyed location.
When the device put the info on the drum, it sent a message over two parallel telephone lines to the DC at McChord. The essence of the message was, "Hebo has just made available for you position data for target "x" squawking "y."
Depending upon the speed of a target and what priority the DC placed upon tracking that target, the DC might not immediately respond "send it on over." In this case, the data stored on the drum for that target would be replaced the next time the antenna swept past the target. The data was updated in each rotation of the antenna.
Eventually the DC would request the data for our flight 305. The data would be sent, again, over two parallel telephone circuits. The part of the device that did this was the world's first modem.
The McChord DC had two digital computers doing exactly the same thing most of the time. One was "active" and the other "standby." They did this so that the center wouldn't go dead if a computer failed. The computers were the world's first operational digital computers.
The computers took the position/time data from Hebo and combined this with data the computer already had on the surveyed location of the Hebo antenna, the error in Hebo's alignment with true north, the known location(s) of the fixed calibration target(s), and the digital model of the earth to calculate location of the target with respect to earth coordinates.
When the coordinates were calculated, they were made available for viewing at the monitors of the various kinds of staff at the DC. On the monitors, the people would generally see a track of a few past positions and something like the current or latest position. They could call up the data for whichever target(s) they were interested in.
After calculating positions for a few times for a given target, they would have been able to project position forward in time. I haven't seen any indication that they actually did this. They would also have been able to smooth out "jitter" from errors in the data from Hebo. Again, I don't know if they did.
The calculated coordinates were not recorded. But the data coming in from Hebo was routinely recorded. They were also able to record such data for specific targets. They normally just recorded over the tapes. But, if someone said "reserve that tape" they would hold it for later analysis.
One important thing about the normal use of the tracking data is that the DC did not need to calculate target positions down to the yard. All they needed to do is know closely enough where a bogie was that they could get an intercepter fighter close enough that the fighter could see the bogie on its radar or by eyeball. Getting within half a nautical mile was close enough.
So they had a tape about 305. The people at the DC had no idea what to do to get 305 position history out of that tape. They were users of SAGE, not "techies."
Also at McChord was a detachment of techies. They routinely evaluated proposed changes to the programming. They routinely did QA checks of SAGE at McChord. They routinely did analyses related to "incidents." They were a detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron ("RADES").
In much of the work they did, they would come into the McChord DC and take over the computer that was on standby. At times they'd run some evaluation version of the programming. They probably used the computer for running the analysis of the 305 data, because they were quite familiar with the computer. It is possible, however, that in 1971 they could have used a scientific calculator.
The analysis was calculation of 305 positions at exact minutes (no seconds). They certainly would have interpolated between positions at known times each side of the exact minutes. They calculated positions to a precision of 1 minute of latitude and longitude, probably because that's what the SAGE computer normally did because that's as close as the DC needed for its normal operation.
The coordinates were hand plotted on at least two paper charts. The red crosses do not have the uniformity that would come from a plotting machine.
-
page 3 of the PDF speaks about the 35 mm high speed camera used with SAGE.
At least during part of the life of SAGE some of the "control" centers had a "battle control" where the brass sat around and looked at a big, big screen where the bogies and interceptors were watched. They did this by taking pix of the monitor displays, very quickly processing the film, then projecting onto the rear of a projection screen. Didn't work very well and they eventually decided they didn't even need the CCs.
-
page 3 of the PDF speaks about the 35 mm high speed camera used with SAGE.
At least during part of the life of SAGE some of the "control" centers had a "battle control" where the brass sat around and looked at a big, big screen where the bogies and interceptors were watched. They did this by taking pix of the monitor displays, very quickly processing the film, then projecting onto the rear of a projection screen. Didn't work very well and they eventually decided they didn't even need the CCs.
I found some pics of the Sage from McChord a while back. here are the photo's.
-
I found some pics of the Sage from McChord a while back. here are the photo's.
I'd have to check to be sure, but I think the first one is the "Q7" computer. They had another long rack of equipment which was the interface to other sites, including the radar sites.
They had lots of something similar to the other pic. The monitor cabinet at least. Bunches of people doing each of several functions, and there were quite a few different functions. The data each operator saw was selected out of the huge quantity of overall data.
-
Here is a shot of the McChord Sage Installation.
here is the link with more photo's
http://www.smecc.org/sage_a_n_fsq-7.htm
-
So again, what type of data (and data format) gets data onto a map? Is it a manual process, automated plotting process .... ? ... what "numbers" need rounding off? My feeling is there is some kind of automated plotter involved that makes a map, when and if someone desires or needs a map? Is the NWA search map Sluggo calls the FBI Map an instance of a computer plotted map which used McChord's radar data? What old computer language? SNOBOL? This is the same era we would have been using PL1 and other languages for computer plotted charts, (maps), etc... (The boxes of cards for a single run were prodigious!) I used PL1 and several other languages for data crunching here ... it was often so laborious it was almost defeating! MY guess is the military systems were more automated.
The flightpath coordinates plotted on the searchzone map are minimal. Very easily done by hand. Location of the points onto the topo is very easy. The topo has two preprinted "+"s of specified lat and lon. The lat and lon are not on what we see because they are printed along the margins of the topo map. No need for automation or computers. The two points of known lat & lon:
1. westward in the center of sect 15: 45°55'N, 122°40'W
2. to the east by the quarry just right of center of sect 17: 45°55'N, 122°35'W
ie, both are on the same lat, 5' difference of longitude
-
So again, what type of data (and data format) gets data onto a map? Is it a manual process, automated plotting process .... ? ... what "numbers" need rounding off? My feeling is there is some kind of automated plotter involved that makes a map, when and if someone desires or needs a map? Is the NWA search map Sluggo calls the FBI Map an instance of a computer plotted map which used McChord's radar data? What old computer language? SNOBOL? This is the same era we would have been using PL1 and other languages for computer plotted charts, (maps), etc... (The boxes of cards for a single run were prodigious!) I used PL1 and several other languages for data crunching here ... it was often so laborious it was almost defeating! MY guess is the military systems were more automated.
The flightpath coordinates plotted on the searchzone map are minimal. Very easily done by hand. Location of the points onto the topo is very easy. The topo has two preprinted "+"s of specified lat and lon. The lat and lon are not on what we see because they are printed along the margins of the topo map. No need for automation or computers. The two points of known lat & lon:
1. westward in the center of sect 15: 45°55'N, 122°40'W
2. to the east by the quarry just right of center of sect 17: 45°55'N, 122°35'W
ie, both are on the same lat, 5' difference of longitude
What are the dates of the topographical maps that you mention? What are the lateral and vertical datums that are used in their plotting? Are you plotting 1971 longitude and latitude positions in WGS84 coordinates?
-
page 3 of the PDF speaks about the 35 mm high speed camera used with SAGE.
At least during part of the life of SAGE some of the "control" centers had a "battle control" where the brass sat around and looked at a big, big screen where the bogies and interceptors were watched. They did this by taking pix of the monitor displays, very quickly processing the film, then projecting onto the rear of a projection screen. Didn't work very well and they eventually decided they didn't even need the CCs.
is this what you are talking about with "battle control"
-
What are the dates of the topographical maps that you mention? What are the lateral and vertical datums that are used in their plotting? Are you plotting 1971 longitude and latitude positions in WGS84 coordinates?
1971 topo. NAD27 or 29, whatever it was for then. No.
-
is this what you are talking about with "battle control"
Yes. Note on the screen that the airborne things being tracked are represented by symbols. Not just "blips."
I don't recognize the shoreline it shows.
-
is this what you are talking about with "battle control"
Yes. Note on the screen that the airborne things being tracked are represented by symbols. Not just "blips."
I don't recognize the shoreline it shows.
yes, it's my understanding that what they see on the screen is what the computer is showing them.....
The first 30 seconds is choppy. I got hit with 3rd party copyright. they attempted to remove the music. didn't work very well. it will clear up after 30 seconds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q4qz4_0vPQ
-
yes, it's my understanding that what they see on the screen is what the computer is showing them.....
The first 30 seconds is choppy. I got hit with 3rd party copyright. they attempted to remove the music. didn't work very well. it will clear up after 30 seconds.
Nice.
-
This is a video I made from an NPR interview with Geoffrey Gray. this could go into the flight path, as well as suspects. he describes the flight path being 15 miles wide?. he also tosses the thought out about KC being Cooper. one lone man desperately continues to push KC to the "public" because he can not be taken seriously with Cooper Sleuths and his conclusions. most are proven to be false due to improper, or sloppy work. "Rookie" written all over the investigation. (not speaking of Gray)
ENJOY....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qzYBXvH5WM
-
For anyone interested in getting the topo map used to make the copy on which the searchzone data was plotted, here's a website that has it. Just select "Washington" and type in "La Center." The file is a zipped "geo" pdf. It's a 15' map.
http://geonames.usgs.gov/apex/f?p=262:1:0 (http://geonames.usgs.gov/apex/f?p=262:1:0)
-
Thanks Bruce. I'll toss the link in the vault for future use.....
sorry, I mean Hominid. how did I mix that up????? anyway, I posted the link. 8)
-
Can anyone figure out how Gray came to the conclusion of the flight path being 15 miles wide? did he read this in the files. isn't a Vector 4 miles wide, with 2 miles on each side? he also gives a range up to 8:17 on the jump. plenty of water in this area.
-
In 1971, a Victor airway extended 5 statute miles on each side of the airway centerline. Today, a Victor airway extends 4 nautical miles (4.6 statute miles) on each side of the airway centerline. The overall controlled airspace has changed dramatically from 1971 both horizontally and vertically.
-
Can anyone figure out how Gray came to the conclusion of the flight path being 15 miles wide? did he read this in the files. isn't a Vector 4 miles wide, with 2 miles on each side? he also gives a range up to 8:17 on the jump. plenty of water in this area.
I can. He got it wrong. He got other technical info wrong. Geoff just doesn't have a technical background and he freely admits that. I kind of admire him for letting it all hang out .... including the bloopers. He would freely admit he got technical info wrong if it was explained to him. Unfortunately it does weaken his book. :)
-
Georger is correct on this matter. Flight path re-engages with I-5 corridor (V-23) prior to crossing the Columbia. (Anderson). Witnesses actually saw 305 cross over downtown Vancouver (Tosaw, Cook, Georger's grandmother, others). Cooper probably jumped just south of Battleground (Carr). We were probably looking in the wrong area in 1971 (Himmelsbach). Winds from 166, near my fudge factor (Bohan). Saw a red object falling from an aircraft near Vancouver (Janet). It makes sense that Cooper landed somewhere near where the money was found (Tosaw). An examination of alignment for witness accounts, discovery of evidence, comprehensive weather data, and pilot's statements are probably going to establish the most likely dropzone. (Cook).
-
Georger is correct on this matter. Flight path re-engages with I-5 corridor (V-23) prior to crossing the Columbia. (Anderson). Witnesses actually saw 305 cross over downtown Vancouver (Tosaw, Cook, Georger's grandmother, others). Cooper probably jumped just south of Battleground (Carr). We were probably looking in the wrong area in 1971 (Himmelsbach). Winds from 166, near my fudge factor (Bohan). Saw a red object falling from an aircraft near Vancouver (Janet). It makes sense that Cooper landed somewhere near where the money was found (Tosaw). An examination of alignment for witness accounts, discovery of evidence, comprehensive weather data, and pilot's statements are probably going to establish the most likely dropzone. (Cook).
what was considered downtown Vancouver in 1971. we have so many variations with the flight path. Janet lives further east, she also states the plane flew right over her location. we know Cooper had the money at 8:05. where did this rest gooooooo.
-
Janet never stated that the plane flew directly over her location. And it didn't. She saw it from her location, which was about five miles east of I-5. Plane flew over north edge of downtown Vancouver, about at Mill Plain Rd. Georger's grandmother lived near this area too and she knew something. But the good stuff is buried in the Tosaw files, which Richard left behind.
-
Janet never stated that the plane flew directly over her location. And it didn't. She saw it from her location, which was about five miles east of I-5. Plane flew over north edge of downtown Vancouver, about at Mill Plain Rd. Georger's grandmother lived near this area too and she knew something. But the good stuff is buried in the Tosaw files, which Richard left behind.
Have meetings today but will come back and post Emma and Vern's story which parallels Janet's.
Emma went public, with family and friends, and put her's into writing.
-
Good on ya, Georger. I located your grandmom's old Vancouver address and her story corresponds to other witness accounts, inclusive of Janet's. As you know, I triangulated the witness's accounts and they all added up to the inevitable (at least for myself and Tosaw) the plane took a corrective southerly course from the NE and ended up flying right over downtown Van. This seems to comport with Andy's version too. The red flame, which your grandmom addresses from her account, seems to be independently confirmed by other sources. Cooper used the lights of Van/PDX, and the dark outline of the Columbia, as reference points for departure.
-
Thank God! Now we can all stop worrying ourselves about the flightpath.
-
Coopsnoop
Posts: 45
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #193 on: April 05, 2014, 10:32:01 PM »
Quote
Good on ya, Georger. I located your grandmom's old Vancouver address and her story corresponds to other witness accounts, inclusive of Janet's. As you know, I triangulated the witness's accounts and they all added up to the inevitable (at least for myself and Tosaw) the plane took a corrective southerly course from the NE and ended up flying right over downtown Van. This seems to comport with Andy's version too. The red flame, which your grandmom addresses from her account, seems to be independently confirmed by other sources. Cooper used the lights of Van/PDX, and the dark outline of the Columbia, as reference points for departure.
Thank God! Now we can all stop worrying ourselves about the flightpath.
Funny :) The fact is we don't know where Emma got her account, if was something she witnessed, others witnessed, or what. What she said on 11-25-71 and later in December 71 (and put into writing), was consistent namely, "When the plane went over here it was on fire. It drifted to the west and faded from view". The report was so fantastical and out of synch with any news reports at the time, family members dismissed Emma's account as an aberration. Later however, Emma's (oldest son) and another family member at Vancouver corroborated Emma's account, but unfortunately nobody here dug deeper. We don't know who the witnesses were, whether they were these self-same family members or somebody else! Then, a possible link surfaced. I discovered that my grand mother's oldest son worked for the same company that Janet and her husband did - at least we think that was the case. So maybe the origin of the story is Janet herself? Apparently Janet say's 'no'. I don't know. But I do know my uncle, Janet, and Janet's husband all worked for Wilhelm Trucking of Portland. It is possible that is where my uncle got the story then conveyed it to Emma, then to others ... we just don't know what the basis for Emma's and her son's stories were. All of these people are long deceased now...
That hardly adds up to confirmation of a flight path -
Emma was 75 in 1971; she lived to 101 years at Vancouver. She was a very rational person, so far as I ever knew; she worked as a school teacher or an accountant during her working life and raised two families. She and grandpa owned and operated stock trading companies in addition to her school teaching. Her story saying the "plane was on fire" was so fantastical it was completely out of character with the rest of her personality. But she was insistent she was reporting the facts! I laughed and took her account as a sign of old age, but she was insistent for some reason that her account was true and accurate - I just dropped it and didn't pursue it out of politeness. Her account never changed over the years except she would always add: "I know nobody believes it but it's true". I could easily have gotten to the bottom on this then, but discounted it completely. I never imagined I would be writing this years later! It's just one of those blind allies that never got pursued ...
-
I still have problems with Cooper knowing all of the locations required to do an accurate spot jump. why do we automatically assume he knew where he was at any given time, especially if he didn't give any directions other than Mexico. what proof is there that the cloud coverage was open in the right area's? are we assuming he knows the area by the McChord statement? this could apply with him covering the area where he was going to jump as well.
Did the FBI take any of these statements into account? or is this after the fact. Dona from the Tavern claimed the plane was flying low, and to the east of Amboy. this would be way off V23. much like the other evidence. it's all over the board.
-
I still have problems with Cooper knowing all of the locations required to do an accurate spot jump. why do we automatically assume he knew where he was at any given time, especially if he didn't give any directions other than Mexico. what proof is there that the cloud coverage was open in the right area's? are we assuming he knows the area by the McChord statement? this could apply with him covering the area where he was going to jump as well.
Did the FBI take any of these statements into account? or is this after the fact. Dona from the Tavern claimed the plane was flying low, and to the east of Amboy. this would be way off V23. much like the other evidence. it's all over the board.
Rataczak said he could 'see the lights of Vancouver coming up'. If he could see them, Cooper could see them. That is all that's required on a normal day. If Rataczak is lying then all bets are off - but Rataczak is a personal witness who was there.
As for "the plane was on fire". The Eugene flare dropping incident from the weekend before is documented - filings made. Himmelsbach was convinced Cooper's bomb was nothing but road flares (color of). Official chatter following 305's hand-off by Eugene went straight to a possible connection between the Eugene Incident and Himmelsbach's flare assessment; that chatter is documented. Then Janet/Emma/etal surface with their story of 'fire in the sky' in the very time slot officials place 305 passing through the Vancouver-Portland area. 'Suits' then visit Janet's family and possibly Emma's family too - that is alleged. Witnesses on flight 305 are shown a healthy sample of photos of people allegedly from the Eugene area, as possible Cooper suspects. These leads were being actively pursued.
Let’s go one step further:
If the witnesses at Vancouver indeed saw Cooper bailing with flares, or dropping flares, in the time slot they say these events happened, is it even possible flight #305 could have ever been far east off V23 near or over the Washougal, and still be back over Vancouver in the time slot assigned to reports there? Moreover, the flare witness report times at Vancouver do fit the time slot of the T33 intercept of #305 south of Portland.
There is no way in hell, Janet or Emma or members of their family knew about the prior flare report at Eugene from the weekend before. Likewise Himmelsbach's assessment that Cooper's bomb was in fact 'flares'. These events/ are completely independent of each other, but may merge in a common nexus, ie. Cooper having and using flares. The FBI very clearly explored a possible connection in gathering and showing Eugene suspects to witnesses who had seen Cooper...
-
The fact is we don't know where Emma got her account, if was something she witnessed, others witnessed, or what. What she said on 11-25-71 and later in December 71 (and put into writing), was consistent namely, "When the plane went over here it was on fire. It drifted to the west and faded from view". ..... We don't know who the witnesses were, whether they were these self-same family members or somebody else! Then, a possible link surfaced. I discovered that my grand mother's oldest son worked for the same company that Janet and her husband did - at least we think that was the case. So maybe the origin of the story is Janet herself? Apparently Janet say's 'no'. I don't know. But I do know my uncle, Janet, and Janet's husband all worked for Wilhelm Trucking of Portland. It is possible that is where my uncle got the story then conveyed it to Emma, then to others ... we just don't know what the basis for Emma's and her son's stories were.......
Emma was 75 in 1971; she lived to 101 years at Vancouver. She was a very rational person, so far as I ever knew; she worked as a school teacher or an accountant during her working life and raised two families. She and grandpa owned and operated stock trading companies in addition to her school teaching. Her story saying the "plane was on fire" was so fantastical it was completely out of character with the rest of her personality. But she was insistent she was reporting the facts! I laughed and took her account as a sign of old age, but she was insistent for some reason that her account was true and accurate ..... Her account never changed over the years except she would always add: "I know nobody believes it but it's true". ..
It seems to me that she would have been so insistent only if she had seen it herself. There were things she could have mistakenly thought were "the plane on fire." But the info about where the plane was, and when, should at least be considered as possibly correct. Too bad we don't know where she was so we could plot it.
BTW Is Vern the oldest son, your uncle? And, do you have that written account?
-
I still have problems with Cooper knowing all of the locations required to do an accurate spot jump. why do we automatically assume he knew where he was at any given time, especially if he didn't give any directions other than Mexico. what proof is there that the cloud coverage was open in the right area's? are we assuming he knows the area by the McChord statement? this could apply with him covering the area where he was going to jump as well.
Did the FBI take any of these statements into account? or is this after the fact. Dona from the Tavern claimed the plane was flying low, and to the east of Amboy. this would be way off V23. much like the other evidence. it's all over the board.
He didn't have to know all the locations. He didn't necessarily do an accurate spot jump. Most probably didn't. If we assume he knew where he was at any given time, then we are wrong. The directions he gave virtually guaranteed the flight would go V23. If he found the crew was thinking otherwise, he could have intervened and insisted on it.
Did Dona make an entry to that effect in her diary for 11-24-71? Who says, "Yeah. She told me that the next day."? Evidence has different levels of quality. 40+-year-old memories are virtually useless. They justify something like, "there's a possibility."
-
At what point did the fighter jets break off? is it possible the afterburners where seen that nite? if Cooper was on the stairs for several minutes. you would think he could only see from behind. I think it would have to be pretty well timed to guess where you were 40 + minutes into the flight.
-
The story of the flares is very interesting. I can't seem to locate anything in the FAA files. I also had someone look up the incident. I would love to back this up with some sort of documentation. I'm just wondering why the flares would be used. Cooper had to have known he was being followed. if he was an experienced jumper, would he need flares for wind direction, or location?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rou9GT1HXQU
-
Georger, checked with Janet again and it appears that the Wilhelm Trucking connection is accurate. I've now found others who also witnessed a similar visual account, but never came forward to authorities. Interesting thing, Janet's former husband at the time worked with local county law enforcement. He was backed-off, and she was backed-off by the locals as well as the FBI. Tosaw's classified report in '85 and my follow-up confirms this. Andy's accounting is the best from the cock-pit. As FE with all-round skills to see what was going on, and in direct communication with the perp, he was in position to remember things. btw, tell your friend Hominid it was a pleasure to make some calls that he benefitted from. Nothing like sharing with cordial and thankful individuals. later, bud.
-
The fact is we don't know where Emma got her account, if was something she witnessed, others witnessed, or what. What she said on 11-25-71 and later in December 71 (and put into writing), was consistent namely, "When the plane went over here it was on fire. It drifted to the west and faded from view". ..... We don't know who the witnesses were, whether they were these self-same family members or somebody else! Then, a possible link surfaced. I discovered that my grand mother's oldest son worked for the same company that Janet and her husband did - at least we think that was the case. So maybe the origin of the story is Janet herself? Apparently Janet say's 'no'. I don't know. But I do know my uncle, Janet, and Janet's husband all worked for Wilhelm Trucking of Portland. It is possible that is where my uncle got the story then conveyed it to Emma, then to others ... we just don't know what the basis for Emma's and her son's stories were.......
Emma was 75 in 1971; she lived to 101 years at Vancouver. She was a very rational person, so far as I ever knew; she worked as a school teacher or an accountant during her working life and raised two families. She and grandpa owned and operated stock trading companies in addition to her school teaching. Her story saying the "plane was on fire" was so fantastical it was completely out of character with the rest of her personality. But she was insistent she was reporting the facts! I laughed and took her account as a sign of old age, but she was insistent for some reason that her account was true and accurate ..... Her account never changed over the years except she would always add: "I know nobody believes it but it's true". ..
It seems to me that she would have been so insistent only if she had seen it herself. There were things she could have mistakenly thought were "the plane on fire." But the info about where the plane was, and when, should at least be considered as possibly correct. Too bad we don't know where she was so we could plot it.
BTW Is Vern the oldest son, your uncle? And, do you have that written account?
Yes to all - Vern was her oldest son by her first marriage – let’s take family discussion off line.
I kick myself that I did not get the specifics of Grandma and Vern's stories, but the focus for us here changed from anything related to DB Cooper to grandma's welfare. From January of '72 on we took Emma's story as just a product of a fertile imagination and nothing more, related to her aging. She had a very active life in a church at Vancouver and we wondered if the Cooper story had originated there. It wasn't until years later that I even knew Vern had worked for Wilhelm Trucking... and I did not know or hear Janet's story until decades later after Emma and Vern were both gone.
I will send you an email with more later tonight and we can bring this back to this forum, as appropriate.
-
Shut: Flo was the one who saw the "bomb." "6 or 8 reddish sticks, bundled together that looked like dynamite, with a large battery and wires connected to them." Isn't it just possible that old Coop might have had another reason to carry these items in preparation for a solo night jump?
Seasoned jumpers from a military background know the reason. As for "fire in the sky," red flares falling from high altitude at night could present that impression to untrained observers from below and at a distance.
-
Georger, checked with Janet again and it appears that the Wilhelm Trucking connection is accurate. I've now found others who also witnessed a similar visual account, but never came forward to authorities. Interesting thing, Janet's former husband at the time worked with local county law enforcement. He was backed-off, and she was backed-off by the locals as well as the FBI. Tosaw's classified report in '85 and my follow-up confirms this. Andy's accounting is the best from the cock-pit. As FE with all-round skills to see what was going on, and in direct communication with the perp, he was in position to remember things. btw, tell your friend Hominid it was a pleasure to make some calls that he benefitted from. Nothing like sharing with cordial and thankful individuals. later, bud.
Vern said he had been "approached" and for me "not to come up here and get involved. We don't want you up here!". Vern's remark raised my hackles. I had no thought whatever of going to Vancouver or anywhere else at the time, especially for anything related to "that crazy hijacking in the State of Washington?!" It was crazy on it's face and lead to concern about Emma's situation, frankly.
But Vern said they had "been approached" presumably by authorities in relation to their story.
This actually caused me to call another family member who worked with the FBI and we discussed this.
The State of Washington was totally out of my cousin's jurisdiction but he called a few cousins to inquire about Emma's welfare and came back to me with the news that Emma and Vern and that whole side of my family were fine and doing well, Grandma active in her church, Vern and his family all fit and doing well ... the net effect for me was to place my Grandmother's story in the category of a myth of some kind ... and from then on when the subject would come up I just listened and laughed and stated: "Grandma, I have ever heard anything like this in the news" and we would move on to other family news ...
My ultimate concern was Emma .... not this "DB Cooper thing".
-
Shut: Flo was the one who saw the "bomb." "6 or 8 reddish sticks, bundled together that looked like dynamite, with a large battery and wires connected to them." Isn't it just possible that old Coop might have had another reason to carry these items in preparation for a solo night jump?
Seasoned jumpers from a military background know the reason. As for "fire in the sky," red flares falling from high altitude at night could present that impression to untrained observers from below and at a distance.
absolutely, I'm not trying to discount the fact. I think a lot of people also believe it was road flares vs dynamite. most dynamite is brown. I'm a skeptic at everything, because you could also claim he used the flares for the simple reason to fool them. anything is possible. I guess the question I would ask is how many jumpers use flares for the purpose of wind direction, or visual use in a night jump? shouldn't Cooper have known the wind direction that night?
added: I'm sure there is a difference between military flares, and road flares. how well would we see an actual road flare from 10k, unless of course the altitude was in question.
-
Shut:
From military jumpers, considered experts in their field....................ground orientation at night. Not so much for wind direction. They need orientation, so as to know their position after correcting from a night tumble, as well as being able to see the ground approach them. Don't forget, this was from 1960's military training. Nothing like a fabulous getaway from a 727 at night, only to end up broken on the ground with a bag of dough.
-
Shut:
From military jumpers, considered experts in their field....................ground orientation at night. Not so much for wind direction. They need orientation, so as to know their position after correcting from a night tumble, as well as being able to see the ground approach them. Don't forget, this was from 1960's military training. Nothing like a fabulous getaway from a 727 at night, only to end up broken on the ground with a bag of dough.
Sluggo's admonition still applies (must apply in matters of this kind).
Facts vs. Myth. It's only through facts any progress will be made.
:)
-
Shut: Flo was the one who saw the "bomb." "6 or 8 reddish sticks, bundled together that looked like dynamite, with a large battery and wires connected to them." Isn't it just possible that old Coop might have had another reason to carry these items in preparation for a solo night jump?
Seasoned jumpers from a military background know the reason. As for "fire in the sky," red flares falling from high altitude at night could present that impression to untrained observers from below and at a distance.
absolutely, I'm not trying to discount the fact. I think a lot of people also believe it was road flares vs dynamite. most dynamite is brown. I'm a skeptic at everything, because you could also claim he used the flares for the simple reason to fool them. anything is possible. I guess the question I would ask is how many jumpers use flares for the purpose of wind direction, or visual use in a night jump? shouldn't Cooper have known the wind direction that night?
added: I'm sure there is a difference between military flares, and road flares. how well would we see an actual road flare from 10k, unless of course the altitude was in question.
Just guessing but I don't think you would even see a flare until it was down at about 5000 feet and below that I have no doubt you would see it, especially if there was a cloud layer reflecting its light from above - it would glow red hot and bright. That's my supposition. And if that cloud above it contained ice crystals to disperse the light around, I am sure you would see it and could follow its course ...
-
"Just guessing but I don't think you would even see a flare until it was down at about 5000 feet and below that I have no doubt you would see it, especially if there was a cloud layer reflecting its light from above - it would glow red hot and bright. That's my supposition. And if that cloud above it contained ice crystals to disperse the light around, I am sure you would see it and could follow its course ..."
Sounds plausible. the problem I see know is Janet claiming they were being tossed from the back of the plane, or the stairs I believe it was said. should be a simple enough test. take a flare on a back road and light it up. drive away and see where you start to see it fade. one mile is a little over 5,000.
-
The story of the flares is very interesting. I can't seem to locate anything in the FAA files. I also had someone look up the incident. I would love to back this up with some sort of documentation. I'm just wondering why the flares would be used. Cooper had to have known he was being followed. if he was an experienced jumper, would he need flares for wind direction, or location?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rou9GT1HXQU
I'm not offering or hinting at any conclusions, but the only reference or documentation of lights in the sky / flares that I have been able to find, so far, is a record of a meteor shower around the time of November 16, 17.
There was supposed to be quite spectacular "Leonid" meteor showers at a rate of about 170 per hour in November, 1971.
Not saying that they would be mistaken as flares and someone might have been off on their timeline, but it has been documented that meteor showers have been mistaken for UFOs in the past, so there's that.
-
Thanks smokin, where was the location of the sighting?
-
"Just guessing but I don't think you would even see a flare until it was down at about 5000 feet and below that I have no doubt you would see it, especially if there was a cloud layer reflecting its light from above - it would glow red hot and bright. That's my supposition. And if that cloud above it contained ice crystals to disperse the light around, I am sure you would see it and could follow its course ..."
Sounds plausible. the problem I see know is Janet claiming they were being tossed from the back of the plane, or the stairs I believe it was said. should be a simple enough test. take a flare on a back road and light it up. drive away and see where you start to see it fade. one mile is a little over 5,000.
Farflung showed graphic representations of what one can see from distances once, and it was very helpful, but I would still think that what you can see on the flat horizon might be different than what you can see from above or below. Just an opinion.
-
was that in daylight, or night time? I think at nite you wouldn't have much to worry about testing that way?
-
Thanks smokin, where was the location of the sighting?
They didn't mention a location but it was in the Oregonian and Seattle newspapers. I don't think it was post-sighting though - just one of those articles letting people know that it was coming so they could watch.
I googled some sites on the Leonid meteor showers that mentioned 1971 as being one of the years with a higher rate than normal and looking like fireballs with dust trails.
-
was that in daylight, or night time? I think at nite you wouldn't have much to worry about testing that way?
I don't remember but seems like I wondered the same thing later so it might have been daylight representations. I will look for the posts he made about it.
-
was that in daylight, or night time? I think at nite you wouldn't have much to worry about testing that way?
I don't remember but seems like I wondered the same thing later so it might have been daylight representations. I will look for the posts he made about it.
It does seem like this would be a relatively easy thing to reproduce to see whether it's bs or not. Just need a plane and a flare and a spotter......anyone?? :)
-
was that in daylight, or night time? I think at nite you wouldn't have much to worry about testing that way?
I don't remember but seems like I wondered the same thing later so it might have been daylight representations. I will look for the posts he made about it.
It does seem like this would be a relatively easy thing to reproduce to see whether it's bs or not. Just need a plane and a flare and a spotter......anyone?? :)
Dropzone post 35603
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4361261;search_string=janet;#4361261
-
you can just drop the link right onto the post now...
-
Farf is a pisser......I see his point, but looking at a light source shouldn't be different on the ground. now the backdrop is different, and weather etc. I think a general idea could be used with this test? dropping it from a plane would be the ultimate, but who is ready to spark a flare up in a cabin of a small plane lol....
-
Farf is a pisser......I see his point, but looking at a light source shouldn't be different on the ground. now the backdrop is different, and weather etc. I think a general idea could be used with this test? dropping it from a plane would be the ultimate, but who is ready to spark a flare up in a cabin of a small plane lol....
He also posted this on the next page or two....... don't know that it would matter, but I don't see anything depicted from nighttime.
Hey - anything worth talking about is worth an experiment or two, right. I've often said if we had buried money on the Columbia when the dropzone thread first started we'd have some real data to look at. ;) :)
http://www.prisonpolicy.org/zones/thousand_feet.html
-
Farf is a pisser......I see his point, but looking at a light source shouldn't be different on the ground. now the backdrop is different, and weather etc. I think a general idea could be used with this test? dropping it from a plane would be the ultimate, but who is ready to spark a flare up in a cabin of a small plane lol....
He also posted this on the next page or two.......
http://www.prisonpolicy.org/zones/thousand_feet.html
I remember that post. 10,000 is a long way up. then you have some sort of weather nobody agree's on lol
-
Farf is a pisser......I see his point, but looking at a light source shouldn't be different on the ground. now the backdrop is different, and weather etc. I think a general idea could be used with this test? dropping it from a plane would be the ultimate, but who is ready to spark a flare up in a cabin of a small plane lol....
He also posted this on the next page or two.......
http://www.prisonpolicy.org/zones/thousand_feet.html
I remember that post. 10,000 is a long way up. then you have some sort of weather nobody agree's on lol
Hey - anything worth talking about is worth an experiment or two, right. I've often said if we had buried money on the Columbia when the dropzone thread first started we'd have some real data to look at. In that spirit, I'd still like to see a nighttime flare experiment -- just for grins...... ;) :)
-
Farf is a pisser......I see his point, but looking at a light source shouldn't be different on the ground. now the backdrop is different, and weather etc. I think a general idea could be used with this test? dropping it from a plane would be the ultimate, but who is ready to spark a flare up in a cabin of a small plane lol....
He also posted this on the next page or two.......
http://www.prisonpolicy.org/zones/thousand_feet.html
I remember that post. 10,000 is a long way up. then you have some sort of weather nobody agree's on lol
Hey - anything worth talking about is worth an experiment or two, right. I've often said if we had buried money on the Columbia when the dropzone thread first started we'd have some real data to look at. In that spirit, I'd still like to see a nighttime flare experiment -- just for grins...... ;) :)
Yes, it would have been long enough for real data. I got a camera. I got the area. I don't have any flares. I'll see where they can be bought. 8)
-
At what point did the fighter jets break off? is it possible the afterburners where seen that nite? if Cooper was on the stairs for several minutes. you would think he could only see from behind. I think it would have to be pretty well timed to guess where you were 40 + minutes into the flight.
He would be able to see forward, but not straight ahead. He should have been able to tell when the flight made the turns "at" the Mayfield intersection (more like Toledo) AND at the Portland VORTAC.
-
I'm just wondering why the flares would be used. Cooper had to have known he was being followed. if he was an experienced jumper, would he need flares for wind direction, or location?
I think there was pretty much concensus at DZ that an experienced jumper would have no use for them, particularly at night. If one is below you when you jump, the light from it would make it impossible to see anything below it. It would be pretty dumb to throw one out where you are jumping. Why tell the world where you are? If you're commited to a jump, knowing wind direction doesn't do anything for you. You're gonna go wherever the wind blows you regardless.
-
"Just guessing but I don't think you would even see a flare until it was down at about 5000 feet and below that I have no doubt you would see it, especially if there was a cloud layer reflecting its light from above - it would glow red hot and bright. That's my supposition. And if that cloud above it contained ice crystals to disperse the light around, I am sure you would see it and could follow its course ..."
Sounds plausible. the problem I see know is Janet claiming they were being tossed from the back of the plane, or the stairs I believe it was said. should be a simple enough test. take a flare on a back road and light it up. drive away and see where you start to see it fade. one mile is a little over 5,000.
tests like that under all kinds of conditions have been done - reports on the internet.
-
smokin said:
I'm not offering or hinting at any conclusions, but the only reference or documentation of lights in the sky / flares that I have been able to find, so far, is a record of a meteor shower around the time of November 16, 17.
There was supposed to be quite spectacular "Leonid" meteor showers at a rate of about 170 per hour in November, 1971.
Not saying that they would be mistaken as flares and someone might have been off on their timeline, but it has been documented that meteor showers have been mistaken for UFOs in the past, so there's that.
[/quote]
records for this region were searched with a number of people and nothing was found for this period -
likewise charts for civil twilight etc were posted at DZ years ago - Im not going through that again. Life is too short...
likewise there are ample photos of flares at 10k, 5k, 2500 ft shot from the ground, on the internet. I posted many of those years ago at DZ .... there were posts about optical physics .... this is all old hat, frankly. But I can see Smokin accepts nothing ever posted at DZ except by Farflung - fine. Play it again Sam.
-
a flare............not to reveal your location to the world, but to an individual for ground location and pick-up. Nothing like having a plan. Myth vs. Fact? Well, depends on who has the facts, G. Hey Bruce, you really turning down Blev? The Auburn cops were looking forward to meeting you. :). Maybe he'll invite Jo instead.
-
a flare............not to reveal your location to the world, but to an individual for ground location and pick-up. Nothing like having a plan. Myth vs. Fact? Well, depends on who has the facts, G. Hey Bruce, you really turning down Blev? The Auburn cops were looking forward to meeting you. :). Maybe he'll invite Jo instead.
I'm tired of rebuilding the wheel. Who knows. Maybe Smokin will come up with something brand new. Leonids? Janet saw a Leonid? Or Janet saw a Coopernid? Facts below and I am done with this. Good luck -
[/i]AMS notes for 1971: The 1971 Leonids were expected to peak during the daylight hours, and counts that were reported to S&T on the mornings of the 17th and 18th were low. "However, a number of bright fireballs were seen which is typical for this shower." The highest counts came from two observers watching from Newton, North Carolina on the morning of the 17th. Between 10:00 and 11:00 UT they made independent hourly counts, the average of which was listed at 27. Low by usual standards. Other observers from around the country generally saw 10 to 20 per hour on the morning of the 17th. Counts in the West to Northwest were low. In the US 1971 records basically ceased on the 18th.
What the Soviets reported, however, was a significantly stronger display about 10-11 hours earlier . . . and another strong surge of activity two mornings later. This unusual bevy of Leonids was also briefly cited in the IMOs "Handbook For Visual Meteor Observations" edited by Paul Roggemans (1989 Sky Publishing Corp.). On page 163, for 1971 November 17, an hourly rate of 90 is attributed to "USSR Smirnov but this rate was not recorded for anywhere in the United States"
-- joe rao
Good luck rebuilding the wheel.
-
a flare............not to reveal your location to the world, but to an individual for ground location and pick-up.
Problem is that, regardless of the intent of the person dropping the flare(s), they would very likely be seen by people (like LE) other than accomplices. There are other possibilities for flares, and there are other possibilities for the plane appearing to be on fire.
Did the plane itself have a flare? If Coop dropped a flare, maybe it would be for a signal to accomplices--but not to say, "I'm jumping here."
-
a flare............not to reveal your location to the world, but to an individual for ground location and pick-up.
Problem is that, regardless of the intent of the person dropping the flare(s), they would very likely be seen by people (like LE) other than accomplices. There are other possibilities for flares, and there are other possibilities for the plane appearing to be on fire.
Did the plane itself have a flare? If Coop dropped a flare, maybe it would be for a signal to accomplices--but not to say, "I'm jumping here."
Leonids radiate from the constellation of Leo. On 11-(17-18)-71 at 8:30pst at Portland, Leo would have been several degrees below the Northern horizon with Leonids radiating as shown in the photo attached. The Janet apparition roughly follows the trajectory shown in red, at a much lower altitude than any Leonids very far above the cloud cover at 5000 feet. The Janet apparition was very likely below 5000 feet drifting north-east to south-west, as I understand her story. If a flare was involved it would have been bright enough to be seen and followed below 5000ft on that night, but not overwhelmingly bright as for example a Leonid fireball would be, seen by everyone and probably recorded by someone in a multi-State area.
-
Wheel's turning perfectly, G.
-
"I'm LANDING here." Keep hypothesizing. It keeps the wrong people confused.
-
I don't think smokin gave any indication that was the reason for the sightings. it was all she found. I was curious to how much road flares would generate vs military, or flares used for the purpose of aviation, and not flares for road side assistance. If you don't ask, you don't get answers!!
-
The post that I responded to was in response to someone posting that there were filed reports (WHERE, WHEN , WHO remain unknown - the statement was not sourced) of flare sightings the week? before the hijacking. I merely posted all that I could find. I have found no reports in FAA files or newspaper accounts or even the blue book of any flares or lights in the sky in the week before the hijacking except, yes, except for the Leonid meteor showers. I even prefaced it by saying I was making no consensus or judgement that this had anything to do with anything - as I had read the same blurb that Georger referenced in his response. I'm sure all will agree that Google is a wonderful thing (except when they are trying to take over the world and reading your email). I also looked at this site before I posted. http://meteorshowersonline.com/leonids.html.
But again, the only reason I posted it at all was because the reference to the meteor shower was all that was all I was able to find relating to lights in the sky in that area in the weeks leading up to the hijacking. Take it as you will.
Wheels are constantly being rebuilt and every aspect of Dan Cooper minutiae is constantly being regurgitated and recompiled and rehashed by every poster here and yon. LOL....yes, there is very little that has not been discussed at length before -- however -- since I don't know of anyone who has solved the case so far -- I guess that will have to do.
And, my contributions, as insignificant as they are, will continue to be offered unless I get kicked out.
One can only hope this sandbox stays free of the cat dung that is so prevalent in other places.
-
Don't worry, your contributions are well respected here, by all. I think we all understood your post. I did. I also appreciate efforts to find anything that could help document the event. all we can do is continue to search as time goes by. perhaps some light will surface. lets just keep chugging along and seek out more answers. obviously nobody has all of them, or we wouldn't be here.
I realize things can get edgy to say the least. I hope we can continue the levels of sanity in the Cooper saga....
your post was a valid response. hopefully it will end here.... 8)
-
No worries. It's been one of those Mondays. Business trip last week and today was all about being cheek deep in alligators and putting out fires.
I have not been able to find any experiments with flares at the distances we are talking about on the internet. I have found you-tube videos but nothing that I can correlate to the criteria for that night.
I do think that no one's memory, especially from forty years ago, is immune to unconscious embellishment. However, far from discounting post-event eye-witness flare accounts out of hand, I would like to know from actual practice whether it is likely that Janet and others saw what they think they saw. An experiment would be a step in that direction.
On the subject of memory....
This is one of the best mini-essays I've seen on memory away from the statistics and neuroscience of it all.....
http://deadconfederates.com/2011/10/22/embellishment-of-memory-humans-as-consumate-bullshitters/
an excerpt......
.....Consider an investigation of flashbulb memories from September 11, 2001. A few days after the tragic attacks, a team of psychologists led by William Hirst and Elizabeth Phelps began interviewing people about their personal experiences. In the years since, the researchers have tracked the steady decay of these personal stories. They’ve shown, for instance, that subjects have dramatically changed their recollection of how they first learned about the attacks. After one year, 37 percent of the details in their original story had changed. By 2004, that number was approaching 50 percent. The scientists have just begun analyzing their ten year follow-up data, but it will almost certainly show that the majority of details from that day are now inventions. Our 9/11 tales are almost certainly better – more entertaining, more dramatic, more reflective of that awful day – but those improvements have come at the expense of the truth. Stories make sense. Life usually doesn’t.
This last part is really important, and bears as well on the limitations of eyewitness testimony. Whenever people witness an event — a fender-bender in the parking lot, an argument between co-workers, the assault on Little Round Top — their perspective is necessarily different from that of other witnesses, and usually incomplete. Human memory is not a simple video recorder that inscribes a fixed and unchanging record of what we see and do; it’s fluid and dynamic process that changes over time. Our brains are wired by evolution and experience to makes sense of all those sensory inputs, to help us understand and react to what we’ve seen. In the process, we fill in gaps and make assumptions that establish a more coherent narrative to ourselves. This is involuntary and mostly unconscious. Such embellishment is not lying or deception, but neither does it reflect actual reality.
-
No worries. It's been one of those Mondays. Business trip last week and today was all about being cheek deep in alligators and putting out fires.
I have not been able to find any experiments with flares at the distances we are talking about on the internet. I have found you-tube videos but nothing that I can correlate to the criteria for that night.
I do think that no one's memory, especially from forty years ago, is immune to unconscious embellishment. However, far from discounting post-event eye-witness flare accounts out of hand, I would like to know from actual practice whether it is likely that Janet and others saw what they think they saw. An experiment would be a step in that direction.
On the subject of memory....
This is one of the best mini-essays I've seen on memory away from the statistics and neuroscience of it all.....
http://deadconfederates.com/2011/10/22/embellishment-of-memory-humans-as-consumate-bullshitters/
an excerpt......
.....Consider an investigation of flashbulb memories from September 11, 2001. A few days after the tragic attacks, a team of psychologists led by William Hirst and Elizabeth Phelps began interviewing people about their personal experiences. In the years since, the researchers have tracked the steady decay of these personal stories. They’ve shown, for instance, that subjects have dramatically changed their recollection of how they first learned about the attacks. After one year, 37 percent of the details in their original story had changed. By 2004, that number was approaching 50 percent. The scientists have just begun analyzing their ten year follow-up data, but it will almost certainly show that the majority of details from that day are now inventions. Our 9/11 tales are almost certainly better – more entertaining, more dramatic, more reflective of that awful day – but those improvements have come at the expense of the truth. Stories make sense. Life usually doesn’t.
This last part is really important, and bears as well on the limitations of eyewitness testimony. Whenever people witness an event — a fender-bender in the parking lot, an argument between co-workers, the assault on Little Round Top — their perspective is necessarily different from that of other witnesses, and usually incomplete. Human memory is not a simple video recorder that inscribes a fixed and unchanging record of what we see and do; it’s fluid and dynamic process that changes over time. Our brains are wired by evolution and experience to makes sense of all those sensory inputs, to help us understand and react to what we’ve seen. In the process, we fill in gaps and make assumptions that establish a more coherent narrative to ourselves. This is involuntary and mostly unconscious. Such embellishment is not lying or deception, but neither does it reflect actual reality.
Ah yes the memory gambit, again.
Come to think of it, I cant seem to remember who I am! Much less what I did yesterday or the day before.
What is today? Why am I here? I feel the door closing. :o Sartre was right! Being and Nothingness - Phenomenology - Nausea - then Nothing. The tactics of everything.
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
Welcome Guru, that's what we try to keep out of this forum. you will see some bumps along the way, but I try and keep things on topic. plenty of different categories, links etc. I consider it still in the testing stage.... 8)
Shutter
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
Funny@ ;)
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
Welcome Guru, that's what we try to keep out of this forum. you will see some bumps along the way, but I try and keep things on topic. plenty of different categories, links etc. I consider it still in the testing stage.... 8)
Shutter
Please note! I did not bring Existentialism and Phenomenology to the forum. Smokin99 did! By questioning "memory", Smokin is questioning the reliability of all human knowledge and the human thought process itself.
Under that condition, not only are Janet and Emma wrong!, all human knowledge is unreliable, and no so-called facts can ever exist, not just in the Cooper case, but in the whole human enterprise! This is no trivial matter! This is the very tool many are using to question all facts in the Cooper case ... except their alleged facts of course! It is one of the reasons we are here at this website vs another ... in the first place!
-
By questioning "memory", Smokin is questioning the reliability of all human knowledge and the human thought process itself.
Under that condition, not only are Janet and Emma wrong!, all human knowledge is unreliable, and no so-called facts can ever exist, not just in the Cooper case, but in the whole human enterprise! This is no trivial matter! This is the very tool many are using to question all facts in the Cooper case ... except their alleged facts of course! It is one of the reasons we are here at this website vs another ... in the first place!
Some alleged facts:
If, by "memory", you mean recall of events, it is well established scientific fact that it is unreliable and imperfect. Taking this into account does not mean outright rejection or invalidation of all memories.
I did not see Smokin questioning the reliability of all human knowledge. If she did so in the sense of the totality of human "knowledge" rather than every individual bit of human knowledge, she would be correct. Look at everything everyone in the world "knows." Most of it is wrong. People "know" things regardless of whether or not the things are facts. Taken as a whole, human knowledge is unreliable (incorrect) in the extreme. The human thought process is unreliable in the extreme. Humans are imperfect. People come up with ways to rationalize things they don't nearly understand. Humans "think" at least as much with their feelings as we do with any logic.
Recognizing the limitations of memory does not mean Janet and Emma were totally wrong. But we are all wrong to different extents. Something happened that night, some of it somewhat "physics" in nature. They saw (perceived) something. What they saw was a product both of what really happened, the environment, and of their own natures. Then, it's all been modified by time and by other peoples' interpretations. Saying that much of what everyone remembers is not correct is not saying anyone is totally wrong, that all human knowledge is unreliable, or that no facts can exist.
Memories are not facts. What people say are not facts. What people say others say are not facts. They all typically have some elements of fact.
Can't we all just get along?
-
Can't we all just get along?
I don't think anyone meant any disrespect towards G's family involvement. I don't think anyone was implying they seen something different than what has been told over the years, but, as we all often do. we search out all avenues of possibilities. this doesn't mean it applies to every situation. we don't know if 305 was seen that night. based on Geroger's background I believe what he says. I believe Emma seen something that night. trying to resolve it with a couple posts won't do it either. that's why I brought up the afterburner thingy.... I don't think s99 meant any disrespect either. hopefully we can work this problem without a problem. I think the story is fascinating and needs to be looked over. I'm still trying to find out anything on the flare reports prior to the hijacking. this might take a little time to surface.
we can always change the subject until more light is shed. 8)
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
Welcome Guru, that's what we try to keep out of this forum. you will see some bumps along the way, but I try and keep things on topic. plenty of different categories, links etc. I consider it still in the testing stage.... 8)
Shutter
Please note! I did not bring Existentialism and Phenomenology to the forum. Smokin99 did! By questioning "memory", Smokin is questioning the reliability of all human knowledge and the human thought process itself.
Under that condition, not only are Janet and Emma wrong!, all human knowledge is unreliable, and no so-called facts can ever exist, not just in the Cooper case, but in the whole human enterprise! This is no trivial matter! This is the very tool many are using to question all facts in the Cooper case ... except their alleged facts of course! It is one of the reasons we are here at this website vs another ... in the first place!
Actually you did bring up the psyche of it all. You did this by making correlations where there were none. Though I agree with the entirety of Hom's post, I can't take credit for weighing in on the totality of human consciousness. My eyes are beginning to glaze just thinking about it. ;)
Throughout my post it was pretty clear that I was referring to memory as the recall of specific events and not "the reliability of all human knowledge and the human thought process itself".
Just like I don't have to consciously remember the act of being born to have the knowledge that I was in fact born, I also don't have to have knowledge of aerodynamics to remember seeing a plane fly overhead. But accounts of both events - whether I'm recalling or retelling them - can be colored by my perceptions, my knowledge base, external stimuli (such as the passage of time and hearing other accounts), and societal norms -- and I might not even realize it. You know this as well so I'm not sure why my posts are causing you such angst of all sudden.
I am merely trying to be consistent in the desire to have the possibility/probability of events validated to know what weight to give someone's account of that event, thus my call for an experiment. -And what weight to give to the possibility of other explanations for those accounts. ---All of this without questioning the integrity of the person giving the account. Whether it's Janet or Emma or Margaret Geestman.
That said - I'm sorry if you took offense, I meant no slight or disrespect to anyone's family.
-
hopefully we can move on from this, and get back on topic.
I'm going to be posting some stall results from my simulator for Hominid to look at. I don't know if it's correct, but the 727 is hard to stall on the simulator. other aircraft in the sim react differently?. I'll post the info this weekend in the proper category.... 8)
-
hopefully we can move on from this, and get back on topic.
I'm going to be posting some stall results from my simulator for Hominid to look at. I don't know if it's correct, but the 727 is hard to stall on the simulator. other aircraft in the sim react differently?. I'll post the info this weekend in the proper category.... 8)
Sounds good to me.
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
Welcome Guru, that's what we try to keep out of this forum. you will see some bumps along the way, but I try and keep things on topic. plenty of different categories, links etc. I consider it still in the testing stage.... 8)
Shutter
Please note! I did not bring Existentialism and Phenomenology to the forum. Smokin99 did! By questioning "memory", Smokin is questioning the reliability of all human knowledge and the human thought process itself.
Under that condition, not only are Janet and Emma wrong!, all human knowledge is unreliable, and no so-called facts can ever exist, not just in the Cooper case, but in the whole human enterprise! This is no trivial matter! This is the very tool many are using to question all facts in the Cooper case ... except their alleged facts of course! It is one of the reasons we are here at this website vs another ... in the first place!
Actually you did bring up the psyche of it all. You did this by making correlations where there were none. Though I agree with the entirety of Hom's post, I can't take credit for weighing in on the totality of human consciousness. My eyes are beginning to glaze just thinking about it. ;)
Throughout my post it was pretty clear that I was referring to memory as the recall of specific events and not "the reliability of all human knowledge and the human thought process itself".
Just like I don't have to consciously remember the act of being born to have the knowledge that I was in fact born, I also don't have to have knowledge of aerodynamics to remember seeing a plane fly overhead. But accounts of both events - whether I'm recalling or retelling them - can be colored by my perceptions, my knowledge base, external stimuli (such as the passage of time and hearing other accounts), and societal norms -- and I might not even realize it. You know this as well so I'm not sure why my posts are causing you such angst of all sudden.
I am merely trying to be consistent in the desire to have the possibility/probability of events validated to know what weight to give someone's account of that event, thus my call for an experiment. -And what weight to give to the possibility of other explanations for those accounts. ---All of this without questioning the integrity of the person giving the account. Whether it's Janet or Emma or Margaret Geestman.
That said - I'm sorry if you took offense, I meant no slight or disrespect to anyone's family.
For us its a subjective matter to debate; others at the time had a different 'take' and acted accordingly! Suits showed up at Janet's door. Janet's husband in law enforcement came home with 'some advice to give in the matter'. Vern was visited by someone and dispensed his own 'advice' to family members.
Strange results for merely seeing Leonids on the 17th and 18th, not seen at Portland-Vancouver due to conditions.
Thank God the camera was invented otherwise all of modern science would still be being debated as 'somebody's unverified account' and we would still have gas lamps in our homes, and out houses and stamps and the horse and mule instead of the internet!
:)
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
Interesting link on the Bayesian analysis of flight 370.
Bayesian analysis of flight 370 (http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028265/how-i-narrowed-down-the-location-of-malaysia-air-using-monte-carlo-da)
Any application to flight 305 or aspects of it, or to the money flow analysis? A similar analysis was suggested over at DZ years ago but got no traction, until Shutter took up a flight simulation.
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
Interesting link on the Bayesian analysis of flight 370.
Bayesian analysis of flight 370 (http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028265/how-i-narrowed-down-the-location-of-malaysia-air-using-monte-carlo-da)
Any application to flight 305 or aspects of it, or to the money flow analysis? A similar analysis was suggested over at DZ years ago but got no traction, until Shutter took up a flight simulation.
Thanks for the link Georger. I noticed some of the information he used is from X-Plane. http://data.x-plane.com/index.html
First, I followed the lead of WNYC’s 777 runway map by downloading the original XPlane dataset(1) and parsing through it to plot all of the runways longer than 5,000 ft, considered to be a minimum distance for a Boeing 777 to land (but not take off), as black dots. These do not factor in, in terms of where the airplane is located, but do show near where a 777 could land, if it’s in the area.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS1CMkS5EOY
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
Interesting link on the Bayesian analysis of flight 370.
Bayesian analysis of flight 370 (http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028265/how-i-narrowed-down-the-location-of-malaysia-air-using-monte-carlo-da)
Any application to flight 305 or aspects of it, or to the money flow analysis? A similar analysis was suggested over at DZ years ago but got no traction, until Shutter took up a flight simulation.
Thanks for the link Georger. I noticed some of the information he used is from X-Plane. http://data.x-plane.com/index.html
First, I followed the lead of WNYC’s 777 runway map by downloading the original XPlane dataset(1) and parsing through it to plot all of the runways longer than 5,000 ft, considered to be a minimum distance for a Boeing 777 to land (but not take off), as black dots. These do not factor in, in terms of where the airplane is located, but do show near where a 777 could land, if it’s in the area.
Shutter and Georger, where is this link to the Bayesian analysis of MH flight 370 that you are talking about?
-
Ah, ha!!...I came for DB Cooper and I found Existentialism!!! How cool is that?!
That sure beats reading drivel from people selling books and ego trips.
Interesting link on the Bayesian analysis of flight 370.
Bayesian analysis of flight 370 (http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028265/how-i-narrowed-down-the-location-of-malaysia-air-using-monte-carlo-da)
Any application to flight 305 or aspects of it, or to the money flow analysis? A similar analysis was suggested over at DZ years ago but got no traction, until Shutter took up a flight simulation.
Thanks for the link Georger. I noticed some of the information he used is from X-Plane. http://data.x-plane.com/index.html
First, I followed the lead of WNYC’s 777 runway map by downloading the original XPlane dataset(1) and parsing through it to plot all of the runways longer than 5,000 ft, considered to be a minimum distance for a Boeing 777 to land (but not take off), as black dots. These do not factor in, in terms of where the airplane is located, but do show near where a 777 could land, if it’s in the area.
Shutter and Georger, where is this link to the Bayesian analysis of MH flight 370 that you are talking about?
You mean this? 370 analysis link (http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028265/how-i-narrowed-down-the-location-of-malaysia-air-using-monte-carlo-da)
http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028265/how-i-narrowed-down-the-location-of-malaysia-air-using-monte-carlo-da
See also: link1 (http://www.slideshare.net/misilamani/the-bayes-theory-autosaved-32357547)
and discussion at,
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2014/03/26/mh370-new-satellite-analysis-helps-define-flights-end-point/
-
Shutter and Georger, where is this link to the Bayesian analysis of MH flight 370 that you are talking about?
You mean this? 370 analysis link (http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028265/how-i-narrowed-down-the-location-of-malaysia-air-using-monte-carlo-da)
http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028265/how-i-narrowed-down-the-location-of-malaysia-air-using-monte-carlo-da
See also: link1 (http://www.slideshare.net/misilamani/the-bayes-theory-autosaved-32357547)
and discussion at,
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2014/03/26/mh370-new-satellite-analysis-helps-define-flights-end-point/
It was apparently Link 1. Thank you.
-
Here is a short video I made showing the view from the rear stairs on the simulator....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=my4tox9Bn1I
-
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!! I'm having flashbacks!
-
Don't worry, Shutter has erased your fingerprints. Go back to bed.
-
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!! I'm having flashbacks!
Hmmm, flashbacks? I didn't see any inverted, nose diving, totally out of control roller coaster plummets to earth leaving no survivors? 8) ;D ;)
-
Here is a short video I made showing the view from the rear stairs on the simulator....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=my4tox9Bn1I
very nice! Question: Is the time and lighting condition accurate? What time did you set to? 8:11pm pst or close
to that?
-
I didn't set anything to that evening, I can. I was just showing the view so to speak. I don't know how accurate it is from day/nite? it does have day/month that can be set.
I'll set it for Nov, 24 @ 8:10 and show the view.
-
Coop, I just listened to a radio program that aired a month after the chute find. is there any supporting evidence that Cooper left the third chute on the plane after he jumped? I understand the missing D rings, but would still like to have something concrete about 3 chutes left behind.
this topic could also go under the clues topic, but does pertain to the flight path & jump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPrVJMa4C9I
-
I know of no records or documentation that states three chutes found abroad 305. Only two. One was a reserve, opened and strewn over a few seats, now in Seattle evidence. The second was the Pioneer and went back to Hayden eventually - 1980-something.
-
I know of no records or documentation that states three chutes found abroad 305. Only two. One was a reserve, opened and strewn over a few seats, now in Seattle evidence. The second was the Pioneer and went back to Hayden eventually - 1980-something.
That's what Galen stated in the video.....
-
I know of no records or documentation that states three chutes found abroad 305. Only two. One was a reserve, opened and strewn over a few seats, now in Seattle evidence. The second was the Pioneer and went back to Hayden eventually - 1980-something.
That's what Galen stated in the video.....
Unless someone has documentation or a source, I go with Ckret's version which is 2 chutes found on the plane.
One intact. The other stripped for chord. (as Bruce says) 2 chutes gone one of which was the chute with missing panels (which 377 says might have still worked!) but marked with an X and used as a demonstration chute ...
-
I know of no records or documentation that states three chutes found abroad 305. Only two. One was a reserve, opened and strewn over a few seats, now in Seattle evidence. The second was the Pioneer and went back to Hayden eventually - 1980-something.
That's what Galen stated in the video.....
Unless someone has documentation or a source, I go with Ckret's version which is 2 chutes found on the plane.
One intact. The other stripped for chord. (as Bruce says) 2 chutes gone one of which was the chute with missing panels (which 377 says might have still worked!) but marked with an X and used as a demonstration chute ...
377 would have to clarify what he means...here is what Carr said. I'm sure you have seen this.
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.
-
Did Cooper keep the lights off in the cabin? I've been reading about McCoy's jump. it's so much different than what Cooper did. after reading it, you have to wonder if Cooper even had a plan where he was going to jump. if you ask me, it points again that he was going to jump early?
"The hijacker opened his luggage and covered the peephole between the cockpit and cabin. Observed by Second Officer Floyd Smith (fictitious name) through a slight space under the cockpit door, the hijacker quickly put on a jumpsuit, helmet, and parachute. Once he had shut off the cabin lights to better view the ground, the gunman demanded to be kept abreast of wind, ground, and air speeds; altimeter settings; and sky conditions."
-
Did Cooper keep the lights off in the cabin?
I don't remember what, if anything, Ckret may have said. But there is some evidence in the "Harrison" papers and one bit in the comm transcripts. At the same time as the "oscillation" report, someone at SEATAC noted that the forward cabin lights were on. Then, at 0559Z, there was a notation that apparently 305 had confirmed that one of the aft entry lights was on and the airstair lights were on. This was reported again at 0641Z. Then, when the plane landed at Reno, the tower said stair lights were on.
The aft entry lights were selectable. Either a dim incandescent or a bright fluorescent. The stair lights were two spotlights shining down on the end of the stair plus small lights on either side of the steps, alternating from one step to the next, but with one on each side of the second step up from the bottom.
I don't remember if anything has been established about the aft cabin lights.
-
Did Cooper keep the lights off in the cabin?
I don't remember what, if anything, Ckret may have said. But there is some evidence in the "Harrison" papers and one bit in the comm transcripts. At the same time as the "oscillation" report, someone at SEATAC noted that the forward cabin lights were on. Then, at 0559Z, there was a notation that apparently 305 had confirmed that one of the aft entry lights was on and the airstair lights were on. This was reported again at 0641Z. Then, when the plane landed at Reno, the tower said stair lights were on.
The aft entry lights were selectable. Either a dim incandescent or a bright fluorescent. The stair lights were two spotlights shining down on the end of the stair plus small lights on either side of the steps, alternating from one step to the next, but with one on each side of the second step up from the bottom.
I don't remember if anything has been established about the aft cabin lights.
Looking out from the stairs shouldn't have any affect with lighting, but inside you would think a glare issue would occur? it seems to bring it back to wanting to jump earlier than later? McCoy covered every angle except his mouth, and leaving a note behind...
-
Our suspect told us she opened the stairs in Southwest Washington. She was sitting at the top of the staircase where she was shielded from the wind watching for the lights of the Portland. She knew they would be flying Victor 23 and she knew the approximate speed so she could use her watch to time her jump to her predetermined spot near Woodburn, Oregon. (The fact that she could see the lights that night was verified in the transcripts from the flight when the pilot mentioned seeing the lights when they passed over Vancouver.) She also used the angle of the search light from Aurora Airport (45 degrees) to narrow in on the site. She had chosen Woodburn because the area was so flat. She had used the cord from one of the chutes to tie the moneybag to her in a manner that she could use it as a depth finder when she got close to the ground. She timed her jump but also used the light from I5 to let her know when to pull her chute (at about 1000 feet above the ground).
-
I've ran two tests today from take off to a finish point of crossing the Lewis river. I'm getting a time of 34 minutes of flight time. that's what the clock reads. I'm starting the clock, and allowing a 30 second stall prior to take off, or a 7:36:30 second real time take off time.
Temp 42 degree's
wind 180 degrees at 21 knots
altitude 10,000
Fuel Flow 4500
Flaps 15 degrees
Gear down
TAT reads -9
speed 160-170 KIAS
Ground Speed 195-201
It appears to me after doing this dozens of times. the path can be flown in the manor it's shown on the map. I think it boils down to asking how accurate the path is from east to west in many locations.
we have people claiming the plane was west of the known flight path. this has some documentation attached with it. I believe others believe the path was east of the known flight path. how do we figure out where the hell the plane was on November 24, 1971 at 7:51 to about 8:22 that evening?
-
I've ran two tests today from take off to a finish point of crossing the Lewis river. I'm getting a time of 34 minutes of flight time. that's what the clock reads. I'm starting the clock, and allowing a 30 second stall prior to take off, or a 7:36:30 second real time take off time.
Temp 42 degree's
wind 180 degrees at 21 knots
altitude 10,000
Fuel Flow 4500
Flaps 15 degrees
Gear down
TAT reads -9
speed 160-170 KIAS
Ground Speed 195-201
It appears to me after doing this dozens of times. the path can be flown in the manor it's shown on the map. I think it boils down to asking how accurate the path is from east to west in many locations.
we have people claiming the plane was west of the known flight path. this has some documentation attached with it. I believe others believe the path was east of the known flight path. how do we figure out where the hell the plane was on November 24, 1971 at 7:51 to about 8:22 that evening?
It sure as XXXX didn't come in over the Troutdale airport as JT says. There is ample firsthand documentation to discount that completely. I wish Rataczak would talk with us seriously. Oh well ...
Good work. Thanks.
PS: The placard defines the northern segment of the FP. I guess you can't use the money at TBar in the same way -
even if you draw a reasonable arc (well defined) around the whole area of TBar and assume the plane had to cross somewhere within that radius. That would be the ordinary approach. If you back up toward Vancouver say 4 miles now I'm willing to bet the FBI would have accepted that as falling within 'defined limits', whatever those limits are?
Yes there is the matter of flow. Maybe the money washed in from Idaho! I think that's somewhere east of the Washougal. Maybe it washed in from ..... France where they had the Dan Cooper comic! France is east of the Washougal! Point is, in this whole discussion lasting years literally nobody (save for R99) has been willing to try and define a reasonable radius from Tina Bar ... which the people in France would accept! Funny.
So, here's a brand new theory: the dredging deposits at Tina Bar aren't the whole story! There were deposits put east of Tina Bar, on Fazio property, which we have not been told about! Those deposits came from ... dredging more near Portland! Viola! It is those deposits that moved the money to Tina Bar after a period of time? Some scenario like that. That compromise keeps the FBI flight path and moves money to Tina Bar. I like compromises with the Devil!
-
There has to be a simple solution to all of this. either the path is off, east, or west, or something is wrong with the timing, and how the transcripts are recorded? human error, along with calculation error's could hold the secret. If you go by Rats calculations of up to 15 minutes on the pressure bump. he is past the Columbia and plopped in the Willamette, or any of the surround waters? Smith lake, Byee lake.
Here is a short video I made showing roughly the 8:16 - 8:17 mark. the plane starts it's turn, but look at all the water!!!!!!! I'm not exactly on the path, but close enough for the video. the video is in slow motion so you can see better. the plane would wiz by to fast in regular speed :)
I just noticed I forgot to take the video out of my Tomcat breaking the sound barrier....a bonus I guess HaHa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koDzl-PF13Y
-
The placard really bugs me for some reason. looking at the photo it appears it was attached at the corners. Cooper possibly, in his frustration ripped it off the wall while trying to get the stairs down, or past the point where he thought they would go down. it could of landed on the stairs, but how did it get out if he ripped it off the wall miles back. he must of been on the stairs which would cause more airflow into the area?
The transcripts say the last contact was 55 minutes ago at the 8:52 mark. that's not 8:05. this would put Coopers last contact before Toledo. have I went too far off the deep end on this? it seemed precise by saying 55, not a half hour, or 45, but around 55 minutes?
(http://www.trbimg.com/img-4f696e1f/turbine/la-db-cooper7_lp9yabnc/620)
-
The placard really bugs me for some reason. looking at the photo it appears it was attached at the corners. Cooper possibly, in his frustration ripped it off the wall while trying to get the stairs down, or past the point where he thought they would go down. it could of landed on the stairs, but how did it get out if he ripped it off the wall miles back. he must of been on the stairs which would cause more airflow into the area?
The transcripts say the last contact was 55 minutes ago at the 8:52 mark. that's not 8:05. this would put Coopers last contact before Toledo. have I went too far off the deep end on this? it seemed precise by saying 55, not a half hour, or 45, but around 55 minutes?
where, what time, does the Transcript say this? ... Ok have it below:
"(8:52pm pst) NWA - Flight over EUC (EUG?) VOR, 100000’, 170KIAS, fuel aboard
33,5000lb, FP and configuration remained the same (on V23). Advised that they had had
no communications with the HJ for “about the last 55 minutes” despite several attempts on cockpit to cabin inter phone and PA system. Crew has assured that fuel was more than adequate to get to RNO, that RNO weather was good, etc. SEADD had also been actively following and participating in these events. "
The they is NWA or ATC ? Contradicts everything Ckret, Rataczak, Anderson, etal have ever said.
-
see photo...it's at the 8:52 mark.
-
see photo...it's at the 8:52 mark.
Yep, found it and revised mine above. Its stuff like this that drives me crazy. Maybe different clocks, different info, from different people.
-
see photo...it's at the 8:52 mark.
Yep, found it and revised mine above. Its stuff like this that drives me crazy. Maybe different clocks, different info, from different people.
Seems Anderson would be the key person to talk to about tracking....
-
see photo...it's at the 8:52 mark.
Yep, found it and revised mine above. Its stuff like this that drives me crazy. Maybe different clocks, different info, from different people.
Seems Anderson would be the key person to talk to about tracking....
Tracking? You mean the flight path? We already talked to him about times etc ... he confirms R's 8:05 but says there was one more communication (specific instruction) after 8:05, then added the part about them all 'discussing' the bump at length before Rat then reported it ...
-
see photo...it's at the 8:52 mark.
Yep, found it and revised mine above. Its stuff like this that drives me crazy. Maybe different clocks, different info, from different people.
Seems Anderson would be the key person to talk to about tracking....
Tracking? You mean the flight path? We already talked to him about times etc ... he confirms R's 8:05 but says there was one more communication (specific instruction) after 8:05, then added the part about them all 'discussing' the bump at length before Rat then reported it ...
was it a interview with him, or someone out of the media?
-
see photo...it's at the 8:52 mark.
Yep, found it and revised mine above. Its stuff like this that drives me crazy. Maybe different clocks, different info, from different people.
Seems Anderson would be the key person to talk to about tracking....
Tracking? You mean the flight path? We already talked to him about times etc ... he confirms R's 8:05 but says there was one more communication (specific instruction) after 8:05, then added the part about them all 'discussing' the bump at length before Rat then reported it ...
was it a interview with him, or someone out of the media?
Interview last year - Hom and I submitted rounds of questions over several weeks.
-
I've ran two tests today from take off to a finish point of crossing the Lewis river. I'm getting a time of 34 minutes of flight time. that's what the clock reads. I'm starting the clock, and allowing a 30 second stall prior to take off, or a 7:36:30 second real time take off time.
Temp 42 degree's
wind 180 degrees at 21 knots
altitude 10,000
Fuel Flow 4500
Flaps 15 degrees
Gear down
TAT reads -9
speed 160-170 KIAS
Ground Speed 195-201
It appears to me after doing this dozens of times. the path can be flown in the manor it's shown on the map. I think it boils down to asking how accurate the path is from east to west in many locations.
we have people claiming the plane was west of the known flight path. this has some documentation attached with it. I believe others believe the path was east of the known flight path. how do we figure out where the hell the plane was on November 24, 1971 at 7:51 to about 8:22 that evening?
It sure as XXXX didn't come in over the Troutdale airport as JT says. There is ample firsthand documentation to discount that completely. I wish Rataczak would talk with us seriously. Oh well ...
Good work. Thanks.
PS: The placard defines the northern segment of the FP. I guess you can't use the money at TBar in the same way -
even if you draw a reasonable arc (well defined) around the whole area of TBar and assume the plane had to cross somewhere within that radius. That would be the ordinary approach. If you back up toward Vancouver say 4 miles now I'm willing to bet the FBI would have accepted that as falling within 'defined limits', whatever those limits are?
Yes there is the matter of flow. Maybe the money washed in from Idaho! I think that's somewhere east of the Washougal. Maybe it washed in from ..... France where they had the Dan Cooper comic! France is east of the Washougal! Point is, in this whole discussion lasting years literally nobody (save for R99) has been willing to try and define a reasonable radius from Tina Bar ... which the people in France would accept! Funny.
So, here's a brand new theory: the dredging deposits at Tina Bar aren't the whole story! There were deposits put east of Tina Bar, on Fazio property, which we have not been told about! Those deposits came from ... dredging more near Portland! Viola! It is those deposits that moved the money to Tina Bar after a period of time? Some scenario like that. That compromise keeps the FBI flight path and moves money to Tina Bar. I like compromises with the Devil!
Georger and Shutter, let's discuss some limitations involving the Tina Bar area. At Tina Bar, the Columbia River runs almost straight north, or about 2 degrees east of true north to be exact. So the Fazio property is EAST of Tina Bar and about one-fourth of a mile wide (measured east to west). On the east side of the Fazio property, at least the sand and dairy operations part of it, is the North West Lower River Road which is built on top of a levee. So basically nothing is going to move across the Fazio property from the east except during extreme flooding which would have to top the North West Lower River Road and cover most of the Fazio property.
I believe some dredged material was placed between the river's edge and the sand operation which is on the south side of the dairy operation. But personally, I doubt that any dredged material included Cooper or the money. Since more than one packet of bills were found together, it suggests to me that they didn't move very far after getting out of the money bag and also suggests repeatability in that the packets may have arrived at the same location at slightly different times (maybe a handful of days).
The Columbia River's normal level is about 5 to 7 feet Above Sea Level with a daily tidal variation of less than 2 feet. Based on photographs of the FBI agents digging after the money find, I would estimate that the money was found at about 10 to 12 feet ASL. And the money would have to arrive at Tina Bar at that level or above it.
Further, Tom Kaye's money experiments indicated that the first thing that happens to a packet of bills (with one rubber band at the center) is that the bills fan out and then the packet sinks and stays on the bottom. This means to me that once on the bottom, the bills would never return to the surface. So to repeat, the money would have to arrive at Tina Bar at the level it was found or from above that level.
Tom used his experiments to discount the Washougal Wash Down theory. I completely agree with that and would go further by stating that the airliner was never over the Washougal watershed in the first place. So in my opinion, if the money was ever in the Columbia River its entrance into the river would have to be roughly somewhere between Tina Bar and the point where the airliner crossed back over solid ground several miles south of Tina Bar.
Remember that if the airliner was bypassing Portland on the west side, as suggested by some of the maps and book narratives, it would basically fly over the Columbia River for several miles and would not be further west than the west side of the river as it passed Tina Bar. This simple consideration suggests that Cooper would have to be a no-pull and died in the jump. It also suggest that Cooper landed on solid ground on the EAST side of the river in the Tina Bar area. The reasoning for this is quite simple and involves parachute operational considerations. The flushing channel between the Columbia River and Vancouver Lake is basically the southernmost point that Cooper could have landed.
So broadly speaking, in my opinion Cooper landed somewhere between Tina Bar and the flushing channel (north and south) and between the Columbia River and the North West Lower River Road (east and west). A study of contour maps reduces greatly the possible landing sites for Cooper. When all is said and done, a landing area for Cooper can probably be stated that is less than one-half square mile in size, and perhaps as little as one-eight of a square mile. Hopefully, more accurate data than is presently available will be released in due time. If that happens, then meaningful progress can be made in resolving the Cooper case.
Robert99
-
I've ran two tests today from take off to a finish point of crossing the Lewis river. I'm getting a time of 34 minutes of flight time. that's what the clock reads. I'm starting the clock, and allowing a 30 second stall prior to take off, or a 7:36:30 second real time take off time.
Temp 42 degree's
wind 180 degrees at 21 knots
altitude 10,000
Fuel Flow 4500
Flaps 15 degrees
Gear down
TAT reads -9
speed 160-170 KIAS
Ground Speed 195-201
It appears to me after doing this dozens of times. the path can be flown in the manor it's shown on the map. I think it boils down to asking how accurate the path is from east to west in many locations.
we have people claiming the plane was west of the known flight path. this has some documentation attached with it. I believe others believe the path was east of the known flight path. how do we figure out where the hell the plane was on November 24, 1971 at 7:51 to about 8:22 that evening?
It sure as XXXX didn't come in over the Troutdale airport as JT says. There is ample firsthand documentation to discount that completely. I wish Rataczak would talk with us seriously. Oh well ...
Good work. Thanks.
PS: The placard defines the northern segment of the FP. I guess you can't use the money at TBar in the same way -
even if you draw a reasonable arc (well defined) around the whole area of TBar and assume the plane had to cross somewhere within that radius. That would be the ordinary approach. If you back up toward Vancouver say 4 miles now I'm willing to bet the FBI would have accepted that as falling within 'defined limits', whatever those limits are?
Yes there is the matter of flow. Maybe the money washed in from Idaho! I think that's somewhere east of the Washougal. Maybe it washed in from ..... France where they had the Dan Cooper comic! France is east of the Washougal! Point is, in this whole discussion lasting years literally nobody (save for R99) has been willing to try and define a reasonable radius from Tina Bar ... which the people in France would accept! Funny.
So, here's a brand new theory: the dredging deposits at Tina Bar aren't the whole story! There were deposits put east of Tina Bar, on Fazio property, which we have not been told about! Those deposits came from ... dredging more near Portland! Viola! It is those deposits that moved the money to Tina Bar after a period of time? Some scenario like that. That compromise keeps the FBI flight path and moves money to Tina Bar. I like compromises with the Devil!
Georger and Shutter, let's discuss some limitations involving the Tina Bar area. At Tina Bar, the Columbia River runs almost straight north, or about 2 degrees east of true north to be exact. So the Fazio property is EAST of Tina Bar and about one-fourth of a mile wide (measured east to west). On the east side of the Fazio property, at least the sand and dairy operations part of it, is the North West Lower River Road which is built on top of a levee. So basically nothing is going to move across the Fazio property from the east except during extreme flooding which would have to top the North West Lower River Road and cover most of the Fazio property.
I believe some dredged material was placed between the river's edge and the sand operation which is on the south side of the dairy operation. But personally, I doubt that any dredged material included Cooper or the money. Since more than one packet of bills were found together, it suggests to me that they didn't move very far after getting out of the money bag and also suggests repeatability in that the packets may have arrived at the same location at slightly different times (maybe a handful of days).
The Columbia River's normal level is about 5 to 7 feet Above Sea Level with a daily tidal variation of less than 2 feet. Based on photographs of the FBI agents digging after the money find, I would estimate that the money was found at about 10 to 12 feet ASL. And the money would have to arrive at Tina Bar at that level or above it.
Further, Tom Kaye's money experiments indicated that the first thing that happens to a packet of bills (with one rubber band at the center) is that the bills fan out and then the packet sinks and stays on the bottom. This means to me that once on the bottom, the bills would never return to the surface. So to repeat, the money would have to arrive at Tina Bar at the level it was found or from above that level.
Tom used his experiments to discount the Washougal Wash Down theory. I completely agree with that and would go further by stating that the airliner was never over the Washougal watershed in the first place. So in my opinion, if the money was ever in the Columbia River its entrance into the river would have to be roughly somewhere between Tina Bar and the point where the airliner crossed back over solid ground several miles south of Tina Bar.
Remember that if the airliner was bypassing Portland on the west side, as suggested by some of the maps and book narratives, it would basically fly over the Columbia River for several miles and would not be further west than the west side of the river as it passed Tina Bar. This simple consideration suggests that Cooper would have to be a no-pull and died in the jump. It also suggest that Cooper landed on solid ground on the EAST side of the river in the Tina Bar area. The reasoning for this is quite simple and involves parachute operational considerations. The flushing channel between the Columbia River and Vancouver Lake is basically the southernmost point that Cooper could have landed.
So broadly speaking, in my opinion Cooper landed somewhere between Tina Bar and the flushing channel (north and south) and between the Columbia River and the North West Lower River Road (east and west). A study of contour maps reduces greatly the possible landing sites for Cooper. When all is said and done, a landing area for Cooper can probably be stated that is less than one-half square mile in size, and perhaps as little as one-eight of a square mile. Hopefully, more accurate data than is presently available will be released in due time. If that happens, then meaningful progress can be made in resolving the Cooper case.
Robert99
It is a viable theory. Im not sure I like packets arriving separately then stacking in the same location? I would prefer packets arriving in cemented blocks held together by sediment. Of course if Dorwin's 'part of a brief case was found' is ever confirmed, then its a new ball game.
By what date do you want the money in the Ingram location? Under how much sediment?
-
It is a viable theory. Im not sure I like packets arriving separately then stacking in the same location? I would prefer packets arriving in cemented blocks held together by sediment. Of course if Dorwin's 'part of a brief case was found' is ever confirmed, then its a new ball game.
By what date do you want the money in the Ingram location? Under how much sediment?
Last July, Meyer Louie and I talked to a fisherman named "Jon" (or maybe "John") who claimed that he had basically visited Tina Bar just about ever day since the date of the hijacking. And with the other fisherman who were at Tina Bar frequently, it is a bit of a surprise that the money was not found before it was covered by sand. I don't see any rational explanation for the non-discovery unless there was snow or other bad weather that keep people away for several days or longer.
I believe Brian Ingram stated that the packets were under about 1 to 3 inches of sand. And they were cemented together. Also, one of the packets had obviously been exposed to water before it was cemented since some of the bills had been rotated and portions of them torn off before being buried. You have stated elsewhere that the sand between the bills was "rounded" and that Palmer called it Columbia River "silt". Presumably, the "silt" in question also coated the land above the level where the bills were found. This last point could have been accomplished during earlier flooding, some of which got to 16 feet above sea level or just below the top of the "dam" for the dairy retention pond. Jon said that he had never seen the river water level high enough to actually flow into the retention pond.
Unless you and Tom Kaye are permitted to do some additional tests that finds evidence of Columbia River water contamination, such as those missing diatoms, there is no data to indicate that the money packets were ever in the river. This despite the obvious conclusion that the money may well have been buried in cemented form under several inches of sand, which in turn was under maybe up to 6 or 10 feet of river water. So the packets would have been exposed to the round sand or "silt" prior to arriving at the location of their discovery at Tina Bar.
To me, this suggests that the prior location(s) of the packets would have been exposed to moving water (other than river water) on at least some occasions and that was the water that cemented the packets and "torqued" one of them. Perhaps the cementing of the packets could occur while the bills were more or less protected to some extent by the money bag, or whatever, but the torqued packet would need direct contact without protection with moving water (perhaps rainwater) before being cemented. This suggests that the packets spent some significant time elsewhere before they arrived at Tina Bar. The fact that some of the bills were in quite good condition when cemented supports the idea that the cementing took place soon after the hijacking.
Do you know what the Columbia River water level at Vancouver was on the date of the hijacking? When did it reach 10 to 12 feet? Also, the construction of the flushing channel and the marina, just upstream of Tina Bar, may have figured into this one way or another. Does Amazon, who used to keep her boat there, know the date of the marina's construction?
Robert99
-
The transcripts say the last contact was 55 minutes ago at the 8:52 mark. that's not 8:05. this would put Coopers last contact before Toledo. have I went too far off the deep end on this? it seemed precise by saying 55, not a half hour, or 45, but around 55 minutes?
where, what time, does the Transcript say this? ... Ok have it below:
"(8:52pm pst) NWA - Flight over EUC (EUG?) VOR, 100000’, 170KIAS, fuel aboard
33,5000lb, FP and configuration remained the same (on V23). Advised that they had had
no communications with the HJ for “about the last 55 minutes” despite several attempts on cockpit to cabin inter phone and PA system. Crew has assured that fuel was more than adequate to get to RNO, that RNO weather was good, etc. SEADD had also been actively following and participating in these events. "
The they is NWA or ATC ? Contradicts everything Ckret, Rataczak, Anderson, etal have ever said.
This is not from a transcript. It is part of the incident report produced by NWA and provided to the FBI. The report is generally in chronological sequence, but has several cases of things being lumped together in a single paragraph and assigned one time although the different things were actually logged at separate times in the actual transcripts. Times in this incident report are therefore inprecise. The beginning of the report is a page that explains that the info was produced mostly from notes kept by multiple people. The page also cautions that times may not be precise.
Below are copies of parts of the notes made by two people (Immel & Lowenthal). (I'll put one in the following post.)These are from the George Harrison papers.
Note that the info about the last contact was actually logged at 0500Z, not 0452. Whoever did the incident report took things that happened at two different times and assigned them both a single time. From both of these note sources, the last contact was at about 0405Z (8:05).
The "they" is the 305 crew. "They" refers to "Flight" at the beginning.
-
2nd source of notes
Damn. Those turned out big.
-
Hmmm, why, or how would they leave out the 9:00 entry, and seemingly get the figures mixed up. TAT, FF (fuel flow) etc. wasn't the transcripts type in "play by play" action, or as they were being transmitted?
-
Perhaps I can help clarify these matters at least a bit. When in the Seattle and Portland areas, the Air Traffic Control transcript (which has been heavily redacted) contained only the information related to the air traffic control functions. These exchanges between the flight crew and various air traffic controllers were made on the standard ATC VHF radio frequencies. These exchanges could be heard by anyone who had a VHF receiver that could be tuned to the appropriate frequency and was within range of the transmissions by the airliner and the controllers. The controllers also had telephone conversations between each other while coordinating the controlling of the airliner. These telephone conversations would also be recorded but not necessarily embedded in the same tape as the radio transmissions.
The aircraft performance information, plus other things, was being transmitted on an ARINC VHF radio frequency, "formatted" by the receiving ARINC ground station, and then transmitted on the ARINC teletype network to various Northwest Airlines locations including Seattle and Minneapolis. In the special case of the hijacking, the ARINC VHF radio communications were also phone patched to Seattle and Minneapolis and perhaps other locations. Thus the NWA ground stations that had the phone patches would hear the transmissions from the airliner on the ARINC frequency live and then, a few minutes later, would receive the formatted teletype version of the message. The teletype version of the message would contain a time record that indicated when it was transmitted on the teletype system and this could be, and would be, a few minutes after the actual live transmission. One of the people in Seattle lists the time of the live reception of the "23 DME miles south of Portland" message as 8:18 while the teletype version was transmitted with an 8:22 time hack.
Presumably, the entire voice radio exchanges between the airliner, ARINC personnel, and NWA personnel would have been tape recorded. And the radio exchanges on the ARINC frequency could be heard by anyone with a VHF radio receiver and within range of the appropriate transmitters. However, there does not seem to have been a complete transcript prepared of the ARINC messages related to the NWA airliner.
Robert99
-
Hmmm, why, or how would they leave out the 9:00 entry, and seemingly get the figures mixed up. TAT, FF (fuel flow) etc. wasn't the transcripts type in "play by play" action, or as they were being transmitted?
They didn't leave out the 9pm (0500Z) entry OR get the figures mixed up. THIS INFO IS NOT IN "THE TRANSCRIPTS"!
The info you're showing is not part of a TRANSCRIPT. It is part of an incident report prepared after the incident, largely from notes (including event times) prepared by people who were listening as the events unfolded. The temp and FF were reported and were noted, but whoever prepared the incident report didn't include the temp. Why should they? Do you think that temp was going to mean anything to the people (FBI) who were going to get the report? And there was no reason to specifically state the FF because they said, instead, that it was the same as it had been.
The "transcripts" are "play by play." This incident report is like an executive summary.
-
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the two sets. the paragraph I put on here is from the PDF that explains at the top the information was taken primarily from manual recorded notes during communications connected with the hijacking, or as they said it high-jacking. on 11/25/71. should I not be stating transcripts? I understand the section Georger posted, those, if I'm correct are the Harrison papers.
-
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the two sets. the paragraph I put on here is from the PDF that explains at the top the information was taken primarily from manual recorded notes during communications connected with the hijacking, or as they said it high-jacking. on 11/25/71. should I not be stating transcripts? I understand the section Georger posted, those, if I'm correct are the Harrison papers.
Shutter, take a look at the top of the page you are quoting and if it says "08/20/2008, 13:15, FAX ( FBI's FAX number blacked out), F.B.I. Seattle, 001/017" then you are looking at the first page of the 17 pages of the "FBI Notes". These "notes" were compiled from a number of documents and all 17 pages of them were FAXed to Sluggo by Larry Carr in 2008. They may very well contain information from the Seattle ATC transcripts as well as the ARINC teletypewriter printouts plus notes from other personnel who were listening in on the ARINC and ATC voice communications.
So the "notes" contain any errors that may have appeared in the original documents that the FBI used to compile their notes. In addition, these notes are not all inclusive of the original documents. As Hominid says, they are basically a summary of the overall incident.
Robert99
-
Yes, that's the date on the PDF.....
-
which ones should I be looking at for accurate information?
-
which ones should I be looking at for accurate information?
Specifically what information are you looking for?
-
So the "notes" contain any errors that may have appeared in the original documents that the FBI used to compile their notes.
They are not notes compiled by the FBI. They are an incident report by/from NWA. READ IT.
-
So the "notes" contain any errors that may have appeared in the original documents that the FBI used to compile their notes.
They are not notes compiled by the FBI. They are an incident report by/from NWA. READ IT.
I just want to make sure of what I'm looking at it correct. like the 8:52 mark. which set has the best known times frames? I remember going through this with Hominid, but it's been a while since I really started back reading them. sometimes the tools in the shed get dull on me :)
-
I just want to make sure of what I'm looking at it correct. like the 8:52 mark. which set has the best known times frames? I remember going through this with Hominid, but it's been a while since I really started back reading them. sometimes the tools in the shed get dull on me :)
The "transcripts," which include transcribed radio comms and include the teletype messages with time stamps, is a PDF that is 1.02MB. I think it is available at DZ and also the Seattle Post Intelligencer. The history museum got a copy recently directly from the FBI. Here is the link to it: history museum copy of transcripts (http://collections.washingtonhistory.org/emuwebwshs/objects/common/webmedia.php?irn=18961)
-
I just want to make sure of what I'm looking at it correct. like the 8:52 mark. which set has the best known times frames? I remember going through this with Hominid, but it's been a while since I really started back reading them. sometimes the tools in the shed get dull on me :)
The "transcripts," which include transcribed radio comms and include the teletype messages with time stamps, is a PDF that is 1.02MB. I think it is available at DZ and also the Seattle Post Intelligencer. The history museum got a copy recently directly from the FBI. Here is the link to it: history museum copy of transcripts (http://collections.washingtonhistory.org/emuwebwshs/objects/common/webmedia.php?irn=18961)
I have both PDF's, one says DB Cooper transcripts, and starts at 3:07 pm. the other 6-20-2008 as the title to the PDF. also has the handwritten times on them in black.
-
It is a viable theory. Im not sure I like packets arriving separately then stacking in the same location? I would prefer packets arriving in cemented blocks held together by sediment. Of course if Dorwin's 'part of a brief case was found' is ever confirmed, then its a new ball game.
By what date do you want the money in the Ingram location? Under how much sediment?
Last July, Meyer Louie and I talked to a fisherman named "Jon" (or maybe "John") who claimed that he had basically visited Tina Bar just about ever day since the date of the hijacking. And with the other fisherman who were at Tina Bar frequently, it is a bit of a surprise that the money was not found before it was covered by sand. I don't see any rational explanation for the non-discovery unless there was snow or other bad weather that keep people away for several days or longer.
I believe Brian Ingram stated that the packets were under about 1 to 3 inches of sand. And they were cemented together. Also, one of the packets had obviously been exposed to water before it was cemented since some of the bills had been rotated and portions of them torn off before being buried. You have stated elsewhere that the sand between the bills was "rounded" and that Palmer called it Columbia River "silt". Presumably, the "silt" in question also coated the land above the level where the bills were found. This last point could have been accomplished during earlier flooding, some of which got to 16 feet above sea level or just below the top of the "dam" for the dairy retention pond. Jon said that he had never seen the river water level high enough to actually flow into the retention pond.
Unless you and Tom Kaye are permitted to do some additional tests that finds evidence of Columbia River water contamination, such as those missing diatoms, there is no data to indicate that the money packets were ever in the river. This despite the obvious conclusion that the money may well have been buried in cemented form under several inches of sand, which in turn was under maybe up to 6 or 10 feet of river water. So the packets would have been exposed to the round sand or "silt" prior to arriving at the location of their discovery at Tina Bar.
To me, this suggests that the prior location(s) of the packets would have been exposed to moving water (other than river water) on at least some occasions and that was the water that cemented the packets and "torqued" one of them. Perhaps the cementing of the packets could occur while the bills were more or less protected to some extent by the money bag, or whatever, but the torqued packet would need direct contact without protection with moving water (perhaps rainwater) before being cemented. This suggests that the packets spent some significant time elsewhere before they arrived at Tina Bar. The fact that some of the bills were in quite good condition when cemented supports the idea that the cementing took place soon after the hijacking.
Do you know what the Columbia River water level at Vancouver was on the date of the hijacking? When did it reach 10 to 12 feet? Also, the construction of the flushing channel and the marina, just upstream of Tina Bar, may have figured into this one way or another. Does Amazon, who used to keep her boat there, know the date of the marina's construction?
Robert99
1. Jon's question is valid. Galen’s answer is money was found a few months before Feb 1980/Ingram. Another possible answer is the money was deposited and covered over by the same process – a high water event. Or as Tom suggested, the money was weathering out from deeper strata, in successive stages over a number of years . Again, there are tests that might help answer this question.
2. Lack of diatoms: The usual cause of a lack of surface diatoms is (a) lack of oxygen, (b) buried below the habitat zone. A possible third answer is: money was not there long enough, or too high on the beach, to be affected by the 1979 season of diatoms ? Again more tests need to be run.
3. Water data etc for 1971. I will try to dig that out. I think there was high water in ’72 but not as high as in 79.
4. I agree. There is nothing known that requires the bills were ever “in” the Columbia; only exposed to silt bearing river water, in the Columbia basin somewhere. Round river water sand would be conveyed in any exposed place.
What seems apparent is that no other unusual traits/sands/minerals were found either. Just a uniform slate of traits compatible with the Columbia river basin in the Tina Bar vicinity (versus places like the Washougal which has distinctive geological traits). In fact the uniformity of traits, common to this area, may be a distinguishing fact. And some traits specific to time spent at Tina Bar itself.
Let me stop with this much.
-
Hmmm, why, or how would they leave out the 9:00 entry, and seemingly get the figures mixed up. TAT, FF (fuel flow) etc. wasn't the transcripts type in "play by play" action, or as they were being transmitted?
They didn't leave out the 9pm (0500Z) entry OR get the figures mixed up. THIS INFO IS NOT IN "THE TRANSCRIPTS"!
The info you're showing is not part of a TRANSCRIPT. It is part of an incident report prepared after the incident, largely from notes (including event times) prepared by people who were listening as the events unfolded. The temp and FF were reported and were noted, but whoever prepared the incident report didn't include the temp. Why should they? Do you think that temp was going to mean anything to the people (FBI) who were going to get the report? And there was no reason to specifically state the FF because they said, instead, that it was the same as it had been.
The "transcripts" are "play by play." This incident report is like an executive summary.
I think you are correct here. Im sorry I referred to my quote as being FROM the "Transcript", because in fact my quote I posted is from the "NWA Incident report".
I have this Word doc I use here. The doc is an assembled working doc. consisting of (1) the PI Transacript(s), (2) The NWA Incident Report, and (3) a few other documents I have. Everything is chronologically assembled, more or less as best as possible ... to get an overall "cross referenced flavor" of what was happening at some specific time.
Hom is entirely correct! This doc I use is a "bastardised" thing. But I use it so I wont have to go searching through a bunch of docs and can consult just one doc and usually find something, if I have a time (more or less)! Sorry for the confusion...
Didn't the NWA Incident report originally come from Carr via Sluggo?
-
Didn't the NWA Incident report originally come from Carr via Sluggo?
It is my understanding that the 17 page "FBI Notes" or "NWA Incident Report" was sent to Sluggo by Carr based on Sluggo's comments in the DZ thread. This document is also included in the 99 page version of the PI document. I believe Sluggo had all of this information posted on his web page in 2008. The background of the PI document seems to be something of a mystery and I don't know if it originated before or after Sluggo had the information on his web page.
-
.... the 17 page "FBI Notes" or "NWA Incident Report" ..... This document is also included in the 99 page version of the PI document.
The incident report is not part of the 99 pg PI document, which is "the transcript" (entirely transcript of different categories of radio comms). A small part of what is in the transcript is in the back of the incident report.
-
Ok, which bullshit story do we believe between the two documents.....which ones should go in the garbage? Hominid, you are the man when it comes to these documents. how about making one with the best known information in it, or can this be done?
My point being, it seems lots of people, including myself get confused with the two PDF's. we have lags in the time, differences between the two etc.
-
Didn't the NWA Incident report originally come from Carr via Sluggo?
It is my understanding that the 17 page "FBI Notes" or "NWA Incident Report" was sent to Sluggo by Carr based on Sluggo's comments in the DZ thread. This document is also included in the 99 page version of the PI document. I believe Sluggo had all of this information posted on his web page in 2008. The background of the PI document seems to be something of a mystery and I don't know if it originated before or after Sluggo had the information on his web page.
Take the attached photo and try to reconstruct (stack) the piles of bills into the stack found by Ingram.
(of course nobody knows what the cemented assemblage he found looked like!)
-
Didn't the NWA Incident report originally come from Carr via Sluggo?
It is my understanding that the 17 page "FBI Notes" or "NWA Incident Report" was sent to Sluggo by Carr based on Sluggo's comments in the DZ thread. This document is also included in the 99 page version of the PI document. I believe Sluggo had all of this information posted on his web page in 2008. The background of the PI document seems to be something of a mystery and I don't know if it originated before or after Sluggo had the information on his web page.
Take the attached photo and try to reconstruct (stack) the piles of bills into the stack found by Ingram.
(of course nobody knows what the cemented assemblage he found looked like!)
After getting the money back in its original order, please put Humpty Dumpty back together again for the benefit of the young pre-kindergarten kids.
-
Ok, which bullshit story do we believe between the two documents.....which ones should go in the garbage? Hominid, you are the man when it comes to these documents. how about making one with the best known information in it, or can this be done?
My point being, it seems lots of people, including myself get confused with the two PDF's. we have lags in the time, differences between the two etc.
The transcripts and the NWA incident report are just two of the few "windows" into the case. They are each part of the "evidence" we have, mostly about what the FBI has in its case file and evidence box. There is no one piece of the evidence that is all we need. There would probably be little concensus on what the best known info is.
Regarding when various things happened, parts of the "transcripts" are more precise and accurate than the incident report. Comparing things that were addressed in both reveals that things that were documented in the transcripts as occurring at different times were lumped together under single times in the report (and sometimes even out of sequence). And when you figure out that one of the documents is an incident report prepared after the fact, rather than an event log, then you can see why the report is not a good source of timing info. Don't use the report for accurate time, or in place of what is in the transcripts about times.
Until recently, the report was the only thing we had that addresses some of the events (Portland and south). There was no choice but to use the report info about the events, but keeping in mind that the time info in the report is less precise (besides the fact that the report is just some NWA management saying what they thought happened). Even at this point there is some info in the report that you can't find anywhere else.
The transcripts are themselves actually multiple documents, each with its own precision regarding time. The Seattle center transcript is the best because it gives times down to the second. These are probably times at which the communications began, but it doesn't matter much because these comms are generally brief.
At the bottom end of the transcripts are those for which the only times given are approximate times at the beginnings and ends of recordings.
In between, are the Oakland center transcripts and the teletype messages, which have nothing to do with ARINC as Robert claims. With the teletype messages you have to account for the fact that everything in a message was voice over a radio before the minute after the specified minute. That is, a message identified as 0411 was sent between 8:11:00 and 8:12:00 pst.
Recently we got a new source about what happened and when. These are logs created by multiple NWA employees (especially 2 of them) during the hijacking. One of them just told me that it was SOP in the company that people all over the company would make such logs, and someone would transcribe radio comms into a teletype, whenever they became aware of an "incident." He explains the obvious, that such logs become very useful in reconstructing what happened.
Of course we must expect that there would be some human error in such data. But the man said the employees (including himself) purposely tried to note times when the transmissions began, and said that every timepiece (including their watches) was meticulously synchronized to zulu time. There are now multiple, fairly accurate sources of what happened and when. Where they don't all agree, it is sometimes possible to resolve the ambiguity.
For anyone who reads this post, I'm sorry. It's too hard to say it in a sentence.
-
No problem Hom, write two pages if you so desire! thanks for all the info. it's frustrating on my end. I've read them both several times, but forget which is which while quoting something. it's a difficult situation when it comes to the PDF's. it's not so hard when you are aware of the details. I'll get it stuck in my head one way, or the other.....:)
-
Robert99, do you know much about the claims of the flight path east of the known path? I know Jerry Thomas is strong the path flew east. anything to toss into the conversation about this. I'd like to find everything out about the claims, all of them.
-
At the bottom end of the transcripts are those for which the only times given are approximate times at the beginnings and ends of recordings.
In between, are the Oakland center transcripts and the teletype messages, which have nothing to do with ARINC as Robert claims. With the teletype messages you have to account for the fact that everything in a message was voice over a radio before the minute after the specified minute. That is, a message identified as 0411 was sent between 8:11:00 and 8:12:00 pst.
HOMINID, SET UP AND PAY ATTENTION FOR A MINUTE HERE!
ARINC had EVERYTHING to do with those teletype messages and the networks over which they were transmitted. ARINC stands for AERONAUTICAL RADIO, INCORPORATED. It was set up to provide radio communications for the airlines that was not related to air traffic control. If you don't know what ARINC does, then Goggle it! The VHF radio frequency being used for the phone patch was an ARINC frequency and, again, the ARINC teletype messages were prepared from voice messages over that frequency.
As aircraft avionics and satellite capabilities have improved over the decades, voice and data transmitting capabilities have improved to the point where even engine performance parameters can be sent automatically from anywhere on the planet (if the airliner is above about 20,000 feet) to any place(s) desired. This is the source of the information (from a European company) that is now being used in the search for the missing Malaysian airliner.
Your first sentence above is not clear. Some of the teletypewriter printouts have the times listed both in PST and in Zulu time. The PST is plainly labeled and the Zulu time is in the last line of the printout and is bracketed by two letters on each end. Zulu time is 8 hours AHEAD of PST. There is nothing complicated about this.
Your assumption that the voice message was received only a minute before the message was transmitted by teletype is not supported by facts. For a very short message consisting of only a few words, it may be able to format it and transmit it in the same minute that is showing on the clock. But for longer messages, a short paragraph or so and shown in some of the printouts, it may well take two or three minutes for receipt, processing, and transmitting.
Robert99
-
Robert99, do you know much about the claims of the flight path east of the known path? I know Jerry Thomas is strong the path flew east. anything to toss into the conversation about this. I'd like to find everything out about the claims, all of them.
There is no data to support a flight path on the east side of Portland or anything that isn't on the far west side of Portland. A flight path on the east side of Portland would have added another 10 to 15 miles of flying (about 4 or 5 minutes) and would be great enough to show up in the data. It doesn't.
JT, like Jo and some others, needs a east side flight path to support their Washougal route or some other claim. There is no evidence that the airliner was ever over the Washougal watershed.
-
Robert99, do you know much about the claims of the flight path east of the known path? I know Jerry Thomas is strong the path flew east. anything to toss into the conversation about this. I'd like to find everything out about the claims, all of them.
There is no data to support a flight path on the east side of Portland or anything that isn't on the far west side of Portland. A flight path on the east side of Portland would have added another 10 to 15 miles of flying (about 4 or 5 minutes) and would be great enough to show up in the data. It doesn't.
JT, like Jo and some others, needs a east side flight path to support their Washougal route or some other claim. There is no evidence that the airliner was ever over the Washougal watershed.
That's kind of what I thought. I'm sure a fuel issue would also X this path out. hopefully we can get to the bottom of the damn scripts.
-
SIT UP AND PAY ATTENTION!
(anyone interested in learning something moderately
useful about the "Cooper" hijacking case)
HOMINID, SET UP AND PAY ATTENTION FOR A MINUTE HERE!
ARINC had EVERYTHING to do with those teletype messages and the networks over which they were transmitted. ARINC stands for AERONAUTICAL RADIO, INCORPORATED. It was set up to provide radio communications for the airlines that was not related to air traffic control. If you don't know what ARINC does, then Goggle it! The VHF radio frequency being used for the phone patch was an ARINC frequency and, again, the ARINC teletype messages were prepared from voice messages over that frequency.
Thank you for the condescending, basic (but useless) information. Someone who doesn't know could indeed easily find out by a web search something about "what ARINC does." (I don't recommend Goggle.) Someone who wants to know something actually relevant to the cooper case will have to find out what ARINC DID IN 1971 and what part of that service was actually USED BY NORTHWEST AIRLINES IN 1971. Your last sentence above is totally wrong, as I'll explain presently.
Someone who learns more than what your simpleton "Goggle" search yielded can find out that ARINC was indeed set up to provide radio comms for the airlines. However, it was "set up" by a group of airlines and was originally owned by that group. When that group "set up" ARINC, they transferred their existing long-range radio comm network assets to this new corporation they had established. Those airlines did it voluntarily. Not all airlines participated. NWA was not part of that group of airlines that transferred their comm networks to ARINC.
In 1971, Northwest Airlines had little need for ARINC and used ARINC very little. The reason for this is simple. Northwest Airlines had their own very extensive, very capable long range radio communications network. Every time they extended their service area, since the beginnings of the airline, they would install a very good radio station at each new airport they served. Had they ever sold off their radio network as a separate company, that company alone would have been worth probably 5%-10% as much as NWA. NWA had its own frequency assignments from the federal government.
(I was amazed when I learned how recently NWA finally transferred its long range radio communication assets to ARINC. It was just a handful of years before their merger into Delta. 2004 if I remember right.)
Because NWA had its own very good comm network in 1971, NWA's routine use of ARINC was pretty much limited to occasional situations in which a flight found itself somewhere in which it could not "get through" by radio but needed to communicate right away (rather than waiting until they could get through). The flight crews trained for this even if they never ended up actually having to do it.
To use ARINC in this situation, the company had to have an account with ARINC. The flight crew would radio the regional office of ARINC using the frequency everyone knew for that office. They would identify themselves (e.g., "Northwest flight 305") and say they wanted a message relayed to company dispatch, flight ops or whatever (as identified in the account subscription).
The ARINC office would take the message by voice, write it out in a highly structured way using standardized abbreviations, QA it, then teletype it to whatever airline office was identified in the airline subscription. ARINC used people very familiar with airline lingo to do all this, so the teletypes they sent out did not have the bonehead mistakes apparent throughout the teletype messages we see in the "transcripts."
For those situations in which a flight was "out of contact," NWA could also call ARINC to have ARINC contact the flight and relay a message to the flight. And, they could arrange for ARINC to set up a "phone patch."
"Phone patch" was an ARINC service that NWA actually did use during the hijacking, but not at all as you claim.
ARINC had a lot of radio stations scattered around, like at Salem, Eugene and Medford, OR. They also had a lot of radio frequencies assigned to them. (The same was true of NWA.) These assets were constantly being used for airline comms wherever the flights happened to be. But, in any specific area, ARINC generally had some frequencies available that were not being used.
When ARINC received a call from NWA (for example) to set up a "phone patch" with a flight, ARINC would select one of its frequencies that was not being used in the area where the flight was (or was going to be) and would tell the airline to use that selected frequency. ARINC would connect a telephone circuit to a transceiver set to the selected frequency. The other end of the telephone circuit would be at an NWA office.
The flight 305 crew would talk into their radio (set to the assigned frequency), the transceiver nearby (like at Eugene) would receive the signal and send it out over the telephone circuit. NWA flight ops would talk back into the telephone, the signal would travel by telephone to that transceiver, which would convert it to a radio signal that would "wing its way" up to flight 305. A patch between radio and telephone, hence "phone patch." No teletype. However, this ARINC service did normally include the recording of all communication on the circuit.
When the flight eventually flew long enough to get close to the range limit of that initial radio station and its transceiver, ARINC would have to arrange to provide similar service through another radio station (at Medford, for example). Another frequency would be available there, so ARINC would set a transceiver there to a new frequency and would patch that transceiver output into the same telephone circuit. And ARINC would notify NWA, which would notify the flight.
Anyone with the right radio could listen to the communications. But no flight other than 305 is going to talk on the frequency because doing so could result in ARINC terminating service for their airline. Besides, all the airlines have a stake in being able to have such semi-dedicated service. The phone patch was similar in function to a "dedicated" telephone line.
Back to the "phone patch" and hijack night:
When NWA found that 305 was going to be flying south of Portland, they knew they needed to arrange for comm coverage south of Portland. This is because their own network didn't extend down there, because they had no routes down there. So, they contacted ARINC and arranged for the phone patch south of Portland. The patch was set up and 305 actually switched over to it even before reaching Portland. Curious, isn't it, that the first use of the phone patch started when the teletype messages ended?
As the flight proceeded to Reno, ARINC assigned new frequencies (for different physical areas). The logs and transcripts refer to this. They were the frequency changes that were not associated with handoffs between controllers. At the end, there was even chatter about ARINC needing a bit of advance notice if the flight proceeded on down to Mexico.
The logs in the "Harrison" papers also include references to communications in which someone inquired about whether or not these (phone patch) comms were being recorded, with someone answering "affirmative."
At the bottom end of the transcripts are those for which the only times given are approximate times at the beginnings and ends of recordings.
In between, are the Oakland center transcripts and the teletype messages, which have nothing to do with ARINC as Robert claims. With the teletype messages you have to account for the fact that everything in a message was voice over a radio before the minute after the specified minute. That is, a message identified as 0411 was sent between 8:11:00 and 8:12:00 pst.
Your first sentence above is not clear. Some of the teletypewriter printouts have the times listed both in PST and in Zulu time. The PST is plainly labeled and the Zulu time is in the last line of the printout and is bracketed by two letters on each end. Zulu time is 8 hours AHEAD of PST. There is nothing complicated about this.
Robert99
What I was trying for in that first sentence is that some of the transcripts are at the bottom of the spectrum as far as time precision is concerned. Nothing to do with the teletype printouts.
Your assumption that the voice message was received only a minute before the message was transmitted by teletype is not supported by facts. For a very short message consisting of only a few words, it may be able to format it and transmit it in the same minute that is showing on the clock. But for longer messages, a short paragraph or so and shown in some of the printouts, it may well take two or three minutes for receipt, processing, and transmitting.
Your assumption that there was any "format it and transmit it" is not supported by facts. The messages were sent in the minute range identified at the end of the message, regardless of when the beginning of the message was first heard.
-
SIT UP AND PAY ATTENTION!
(anyone interested in learning something moderately
useful about the "Cooper" hijacking case)
HOMINID, SET UP AND PAY ATTENTION FOR A MINUTE HERE!
ARINC had EVERYTHING to do with those teletype messages and the networks over which they were transmitted. ARINC stands for AERONAUTICAL RADIO, INCORPORATED. It was set up to provide radio communications for the airlines that was not related to air traffic control. If you don't know what ARINC does, then Goggle it! The VHF radio frequency being used for the phone patch was an ARINC frequency and, again, the ARINC teletype messages were prepared from voice messages over that frequency.
Thank you for the condescending, basic (but useless) information. Someone who doesn't know could indeed easily find out by a web search something about "what ARINC does." (I don't recommend Goggle.) Someone who wants to know something actually relevant to the cooper case will have to find out what ARINC DID IN 1971 and what part of that service was actually USED BY NORTHWEST AIRLINES IN 1971. Your last sentence above is totally wrong, as I'll explain presently.
Someone who learns more than what your simpleton "Goggle" search yielded can find out that ARINC was indeed set up to provide radio comms for the airlines. However, it was "set up" by a group of airlines and was originally owned by that group. When that group "set up" ARINC, they transferred their existing long-range radio comm network assets to this new corporation they had established. Those airlines did it voluntarily. Not all airlines participated. NWA was not part of that group of airlines that transferred their comm networks to ARINC.
In 1971, Northwest Airlines had little need for ARINC and used ARINC very little. The reason for this is simple. Northwest Airlines had their own very extensive, very capable long range radio communications network. Every time they extended their service area, since the beginnings of the airline, they would install a very good radio station at each new airport they served. Had they ever sold off their radio network as a separate company, that company alone would have been worth probably 5%-10% as much as NWA. NWA had its own frequency assignments from the federal government.
(I was amazed when I learned how recently NWA finally transferred its long range radio communication assets to ARINC. It was just a handful of years before their merger into Delta. 2004 if I remember right.)
Because NWA had its own very good comm network in 1971, NWA's routine use of ARINC was pretty much limited to occasional situations in which a flight found itself somewhere in which it could not "get through" by radio but needed to communicate right away (rather than waiting until they could get through). The flight crews trained for this even if they never ended up actually having to do it.
To use ARINC in this situation, the company had to have an account with ARINC. The flight crew would radio the regional office of ARINC using the frequency everyone knew for that office. They would identify themselves (e.g., "Northwest flight 305") and say they wanted a message relayed to company dispatch, flight ops or whatever (as identified in the account subscription).
The ARINC office would take the message by voice, write it out in a highly structured way using standardized abbreviations, QA it, then teletype it to whatever airline office was identified in the airline subscription. ARINC used people very familiar with airline lingo to do all this, so the teletypes they sent out did not have the bonehead mistakes apparent throughout the teletype messages we see in the "transcripts."
For those situations in which a flight was "out of contact," NWA could also call ARINC to have ARINC contact the flight and relay a message to the flight. And, they could arrange for ARINC to set up a "phone patch."
"Phone patch" was an ARINC service that NWA actually did use during the hijacking, but not at all as you claim.
ARINC had a lot of radio stations scattered around, like at Salem, Eugene and Medford, OR. They also had a lot of radio frequencies assigned to them. (The same was true of NWA.) These assets were constantly being used for airline comms wherever the flights happened to be. But, in any specific area, ARINC generally had some frequencies available that were not being used.
When ARINC received a call from NWA (for example) to set up a "phone patch" with a flight, ARINC would select one of its frequencies that was not being used in the area where the flight was (or was going to be) and would tell the airline to use that selected frequency. ARINC would connect a telephone circuit to a transceiver set to the selected frequency. The other end of the telephone circuit would be at an NWA office.
The flight 305 crew would talk into their radio (set to the assigned frequency), the transceiver nearby (like at Eugene) would receive the signal and send it out over the telephone circuit. NWA flight ops would talk back into the telephone, the signal would travel by telephone to that transceiver, which would convert it to a radio signal that would "wing its way" up to flight 305. A patch between radio and telephone, hence "phone patch." No teletype. However, this ARINC service did normally include the recording of all communication on the circuit.
When the flight eventually flew long enough to get close to the range limit of that initial radio station and its transceiver, ARINC would have to arrange to provide similar service through another radio station (at Medford, for example). Another frequency would be available there, so ARINC would set a transceiver there to a new frequency and would patch that transceiver output into the same telephone circuit. And ARINC would notify NWA, which would notify the flight.
Anyone with the right radio could listen to the communications. But no flight other than 305 is going to talk on the frequency because doing so could result in ARINC terminating service for their airline. Besides, all the airlines have a stake in being able to have such semi-dedicated service. The phone patch was similar in function to a "dedicated" telephone line.
Back to the "phone patch" and hijack night:
When NWA found that 305 was going to be flying south of Portland, they knew they needed to arrange for comm coverage south of Portland. This is because their own network didn't extend down there, because they had no routes down there. So, they contacted ARINC and arranged for the phone patch south of Portland. The patch was set up and 305 actually switched over to it even before reaching Portland. Curious, isn't it, that the first use of the phone patch started when the teletype messages ended?
As the flight proceeded to Reno, ARINC assigned new frequencies (for different physical areas). The logs and transcripts refer to this. They were the frequency changes that were not associated with handoffs between controllers. At the end, there was even chatter about ARINC needing a bit of advance notice if the flight proceeded on down to Mexico.
The logs in the "Harrison" papers also include references to communications in which someone inquired about whether or not these (phone patch) comms were being recorded, with someone answering "affirmative."
At the bottom end of the transcripts are those for which the only times given are approximate times at the beginnings and ends of recordings.
In between, are the Oakland center transcripts and the teletype messages, which have nothing to do with ARINC as Robert claims. With the teletype messages you have to account for the fact that everything in a message was voice over a radio before the minute after the specified minute. That is, a message identified as 0411 was sent between 8:11:00 and 8:12:00 pst.
Your first sentence above is not clear. Some of the teletypewriter printouts have the times listed both in PST and in Zulu time. The PST is plainly labeled and the Zulu time is in the last line of the printout and is bracketed by two letters on each end. Zulu time is 8 hours AHEAD of PST. There is nothing complicated about this.
Robert99
What I was trying for in that first sentence is that some of the transcripts are at the bottom of the spectrum as far as time precision is concerned. Nothing to do with the teletype printouts.
Your assumption that the voice message was received only a minute before the message was transmitted by teletype is not supported by facts. For a very short message consisting of only a few words, it may be able to format it and transmit it in the same minute that is showing on the clock. But for longer messages, a short paragraph or so and shown in some of the printouts, it may well take two or three minutes for receipt, processing, and transmitting.
Your assumption that there was any "format it and transmit it" is not supported by facts. The messages were sent in the minute range identified at the end of the message, regardless of when the beginning of the message was first heard.
You have made a very abrupt U-turn on your claims about ARINC's involvement in the airliner communications on the evening of the hijacking. Now instead of claiming that ARINC was not involved at all, you give a lecture about the history of ARINC and your assumptions about its relationship with NWA.
Again, contrary to your earlier allegations, the Xerox copies of the ARINC teletype messages (which you call "transcripts") are a record of how and what NWA and others, excluding the Seattle and Oakland ATC Centers, communicated with the hijacked airliner. The Seattle and Oakland ATC Centers, plus other air traffic control facilities, used their own equipment to communicate with the airliner. The NWA/FBI and others used ARINC capabilities for both the teletype messages as well as the voice phone patches. And contrary to your claims, the ARINC teletype messages were "formatted" to ARINC standards before transmission. I'm taking ARINC's word on that point over your claims.
It is unlikely that NWA had superior communication capabilities to TWA, PAA, and other such airlines that had extensive international operations. And let me point out again, ARINC was not involved in air traffic control which was handled by the FAA through their own facilities. Generally, you don't seem to understand the functions of these organizations and who had responsibility for what.
-
You have made a very abrupt U-turn on your claims about ARINC's involvement in the airliner communications on the evening of the hijacking. Now instead of claiming that ARINC was not involved at all, you give a lecture about the history of ARINC and your assumptions about its relationship with NWA.
No U-turn. If you had actually read my earlier post you would know that I have never claimed that ARINC was not involved at all. It's also obvious that you didn't actually read the most recent post. No surprise. (That's why I didn't address it to you.) It's typical of you. Scan things looking for something you can bend to support your stupid concepts, or something to attack because it doesn't support your stupid concepts.
You should try to actually understand the lecture. It explains why NWA was able to do in 1971 the same things as ARINC did as long as NWA's flight was in their historical service area. The only difference was that ARINC had to be concerned with routing to and from their airline customers, while NWA didn't have to be concerned with that. It's not assumptions.
Again, contrary to your earlier allegations, the Xerox copies of the ARINC teletype messages (which you call "transcripts") are a record of how and what NWA and others, excluding the Seattle and Oakland ATC Centers, communicated with the hijacked airliner. The Seattle and Oakland ATC Centers, plus other air traffic control facilities, used their own equipment to communicate with the airliner.
I don't usually call them transcripts. I prefer "TTY log," but they are part of the 99 page document I call "transcripts" since that is what all the different parts are. The TTY log is in fact a transcript, not of a recording but of the conversations as they were occurring--which is part of the reason they have so many errors.
What you said in the first sentence is not contrary to any of my earlier allegations except that I say ARINC has nothing to do with those teletype messages. Maybe try actually reading my earlier allegations. All the rest is obvious to me and probably everyone else. Since you know it too, it appears it's obvious to any idiot.
The NWA/FBI and others used ARINC capabilities for both the teletype messages as well as the voice phone patches. And contrary to your claims, the ARINC teletype messages were "formatted" to ARINC standards before transmission. I'm taking ARINC's word on that point over your claims.
"The" teletype messages? Many organizations other than ARINC had the capabilities of sending and receiving teletype messages without ARINC involvement. Even individuals (like "hams") do. Sure. Call it "formatted."
It is unlikely that NWA had superior communication capabilities to TWA, PAA, and other such airlines that had extensive international operations.
Stupid comment. Pointless. I never said NWA had communication capabilities superior to those of such airlines. NWA did have long-range radio communications capabilities that were superior to such capabilities of the airlines who had transferred those capabilities to ARINC when they established ARINC. Those airlines had given up capabilities and become reliant on ARINC. NWA had not. Try to learn to read for comprehension.
And let me point out again, ARINC was not involved in air traffic control which was handled by the FAA through their own facilities. Generally, you don't seem to understand the functions of these organizations and who had responsibility for what.
Thanks for the useless info everyone knows. Generally, you are incapable of learning.
-
Hominid, YOU need to start reading your own posts. And if your local library has a dictionary, stop by and look up the meaning of the word "t-r-a-n-s-c-r-i-p-t", among others. With luck, the library will have a docent to help you with this task.
So let's take a look at a some of those messages in the Xerox copies of the ARINC teletype print outs that appear in the 99 page PI document. Let's start with the very first message on the very first page of those print outs.
Does the message at 3:07 PM PST represent anything other than a routine departure message related to a specific aircraft and stations? Are we safe in assuming that this message relates to Flight 305, that the flight took off from Portland, and that its destination is Seattle?
Does the message at 6:42 PM PST have anything to do with Flight 305? Or is it just a routine transmission over the ARINC system related to another NWA aircraft?
Does the message at 7:34 PM PST have anything to do with Flight 305? Or is it just another routine transmission over the ARINC system related to another NWA aircraft? This specific message has been discussed at length on another Cooper thread.
Whether you can believe it or not, the above messages were not emergencies and were routinely transmitted over the ARINC system on the afternoon and evening of November 24, 1971, in accordance with NWA's contract with ARINC.
It would be helpful if you confined your lectures to subjects that you have at least some knowledge of.
Robert99
-
Robert99
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
∞ buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
_______∞__________
SMACK!
DAMNED PESKY GNAT
-
Robert99
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
∞ buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
∞
buzz
_______∞__________
SMACK!
DAMNED PESKY GNAT
Skin so Soft - (or vanilla)
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/06/16/garden/a-gardener-s-world-psssst-a-bath-oil-as-bug-spray.html (http://www.nytimes.com/1988/06/16/garden/a-gardener-s-world-psssst-a-bath-oil-as-bug-spray.html)
-
According to another person Bill Rataczak made this statement:
"We know where Cooper jumped. We just don't know where he landed."
I haven't found that quote yet, but here is one from Rataczak.
"During our descent into Reno, we made a P.A. to Cooper (if he was still there) that the stairs
needed to be raised for landing so they would not be damaged, which could prevent a subsequent takeoff'
And here:
“I agree with my good friend, FBI Agent Ralph Himmelsbach, who bird-dogged the Cooper case for
many years,” Rataczak says. “I don’t think he made it out alive. I think he’s down there in the blackberry
brambles someplace.”
Doesn't sound to me as if he, or anyone knows exactly where Cooper jumped, or they wouldn't have checked with
Cooper on the PA if they were aware he left the plane.
-
This is from Wiki. did Scott fly the plane anytime after leaving SEA?
Subsequent analyses called the original landing zone estimate into question: Scott, who was flying the aircraft manually because of Cooper's speed and altitude demands, later determined that his flight path was significantly farther east than initially assumed.[6] Additional data from a variety of sources—in particular Continental Airlines pilot Tom Bohan, who was flying four minutes behind Flight 305—indicated that the wind direction factored into drop zone calculations had been wrong, possibly by as much as 80 degrees.[56] This and other supplemental data suggested that the actual drop zone was probably south-southeast of the original estimate, in the drainage area of the Washougal River.[57]
"I have to confess," wrote retired FBI chief investigator Ralph Himmelsbach in his 1986 book, "if I [were] going to look for Cooper, I would head for the Washougal."[58] The Washougal Valley and its surroundings have been searched by multiple private individuals and groups in subsequent years; to date, nothing directly traceable to the hijacking has been found.[6]
-
According to another person Bill Rataczak made this statement:
"We know where Cooper jumped. We just don't know where he landed."
I haven't found that quote yet, but here is one from Rataczak.
"During our descent into Reno, we made a P.A. to Cooper (if he was still there) that the stairs
needed to be raised for landing so they would not be damaged, which could prevent a subsequent takeoff'
And here:
“I agree with my good friend, FBI Agent Ralph Himmelsbach, who bird-dogged the Cooper case for
many years,” Rataczak says. “I don’t think he made it out alive. I think he’s down there in the blackberry
brambles someplace.”
Doesn't sound to me as if he, or anyone knows exactly where Cooper jumped, or they wouldn't have checked with
Cooper on the PA if they were aware he left the plane.
I think if you check back on posts by that other person you will find that the statement used to be that they knew when he jumped, not where he jumped, and that the "when" was when the pressure pulse occurred, NOT at 0xxxZ. You won't find anywhere but "that other person" saying they knew where the HJ jumped. I think they were confident, but not absolutely certain, that he had jumped at the time the pressure pulse occurred, whenever that was.
-
This is from Wiki. did Scott fly the plane anytime after leaving SEA?
Subsequent analyses called the original landing zone estimate into question: Scott, who was flying the aircraft manually because of Cooper's speed and altitude demands, later determined that his flight path was significantly farther east than initially assumed.[6] Additional data from a variety of sources—in particular Continental Airlines pilot Tom Bohan, who was flying four minutes behind Flight 305—indicated that the wind direction factored into drop zone calculations had been wrong, possibly by as much as 80 degrees.[56] This and other supplemental data suggested that the actual drop zone was probably south-southeast of the original estimate, in the drainage area of the Washougal River.[57]
"I have to confess," wrote retired FBI chief investigator Ralph Himmelsbach in his 1986 book, "if I [were] going to look for Cooper, I would head for the Washougal."[58] The Washougal Valley and its surroundings have been searched by multiple private individuals and groups in subsequent years; to date, nothing directly traceable to the hijacking has been found.[6]
The wiki is so fouled up it is worthless. All of the fouled up accounts of the case are what are used as the sources for wiki. In general, Scott was not flying the plane. We've had some indication he held the wheel a bit to feel the "oscillations," and I've seen something to the effect that he took the controls to land at Reno. Himmelsback is as reliable as wiki.
-
According to another person Bill Rataczak made this statement:
"We know where Cooper jumped. We just don't know where he landed."
I haven't found that quote yet, but here is one from Rataczak.
"During our descent into Reno, we made a P.A. to Cooper (if he was still there) that the stairs
needed to be raised for landing so they would not be damaged, which could prevent a subsequent takeoff'
And here:
“I agree with my good friend, FBI Agent Ralph Himmelsbach, who bird-dogged the Cooper case for
many years,” Rataczak says. “I don’t think he made it out alive. I think he’s down there in the blackberry
brambles someplace.”
Doesn't sound to me as if he, or anyone knows exactly where Cooper jumped, or they wouldn't have checked with
Cooper on the PA if they were aware he left the plane.
I think if you check back on posts by that other person you will find that the statement used to be that they knew when he jumped, not where he jumped, and that the "when" was when the pressure pulse occurred, NOT at 0xxxZ. You won't find anywhere but "that other person" saying they knew where the HJ jumped. I think they were confident, but not absolutely certain, that he had jumped at the time the pressure pulse occurred, whenever that was.
That was a copy/paste from a post made by Blevins. according to him that's what Rataczak said. I find it contradicts what Rataczak says at a conference....
I was pretty sure Scott didn't fly the plane after takeoff from SEA. what about his statement of the path being more to the east. is this also incorrect to what Scott said? or is there some truth in that statement?
-
That was a copy/paste from a post made by Blevins. according to him that's what Rataczak said. I find it contradicts what Rataczak says at a conference....
I was pretty sure Scott didn't fly the plane after takeoff from SEA. what about his statement of the path being more to the east. is this also incorrect to what Scott said? or is there some truth in that statement?
Blevins' statement is a "morphing" of what he had posted before to the effect that "they" knew when the HJ jumped. I think the Scott saying the path would have been more to the east is ONLY an allegation by Himmelsbach. No corroboration. Scott can't be asked about it except by a medium. It's not in Scott's public statements of record.
-
That was a copy/paste from a post made by Blevins. according to him that's what Rataczak said. I find it contradicts what Rataczak says at a conference....
I was pretty sure Scott didn't fly the plane after takeoff from SEA. what about his statement of the path being more to the east. is this also incorrect to what Scott said? or is there some truth in that statement?
Blevins' statement is a "morphing" of what he had posted before to the effect that "they" knew when the HJ jumped. I think the Scott saying the path would have been more to the east is ONLY an allegation by Himmelsbach. No corroboration. Scott can't be asked about it except by a medium. It's not in Scott's public statements of record.
makes sense. I can't remember where I seen it. isn't there some documentation from Scott? good luck trying to find a medium who couldn't easily find this subject lol.
I'm getting a feeling of floating...thump....end of session.....
-
Here's an article re. Scott on the occasion of his death. Note what his wife said he said about public info concerning the hijacking. The presentation to the aero club is also available online.
'D.B. Cooper' pilot dies; William Scott never talked much about 1971 skyjacking
March 15, 2001
By Susan Gilmore
Seattle Times staff reporter
For 30 years, William "Scotty" Scott said little about the world's most famous skyjacking,
shunning assorted authors and movie producers who came knocking at his door.
Mr. Scott died of prostate cancer Sunday at his home in Green Valley, Ariz., taking to the
grave much of what he knew about that fateful night, said his wife, Frances. "When he came
home that night," she said, "he told his family about it, and that was the end of it. He
was a very quiet man. Very reserved."
Only in recent years had he begun to talk about the skyjacking that perplexed the FBI and
continues to rivet those who think Cooper may have survived the jump of 10,000 feet into
the blackness of a storm over Southwest Washington.
Her husband was convinced Cooper died in the leap, said Frances Scott. "He felt he jumped
into Lake Merwin (Cowlitz County) and got tangled up in dead trees and died," she said.
On the 25th anniversary of the heist, Mr. Scott spoke to a local pilots club.
Mr. Scott never saw Cooper. "He was intent on flying the plane and being able to get people
out of there alive and save the aircraft for Northwest," said his widow. Little by little,
she said, her husband had begun to talk about it the past few years. "It was good for him,"
she said. "In later years, he'd get mad at authors. Scotty would say, 'No, that's not the
way it happened.' They weren't there; he was."
-
I met Susan Gilmore (the Seattle Times reporter on this article) a few years ago right before she retired. Evidently, she did a lot of reporting on little DB Cooper stories over the years. She said Jerry Thomas would call fairly frequently and check in. It's too bad I don't work there any more and she doesn't. I might have been able to do some research and make it look like I was working. :)
-
According to another person Bill Rataczak made this statement:
"We know where Cooper jumped. We just don't know where he landed."
I haven't found that quote yet, but here is one from Rataczak.
"During our descent into Reno, we made a P.A. to Cooper (if he was still there) that the stairs
needed to be raised for landing so they would not be damaged, which could prevent a subsequent takeoff'
And here:
“I agree with my good friend, FBI Agent Ralph Himmelsbach, who bird-dogged the Cooper case for
many years,” Rataczak says. “I don’t think he made it out alive. I think he’s down there in the blackberry
brambles someplace.”
Doesn't sound to me as if he, or anyone knows exactly where Cooper jumped, or they wouldn't have checked with
Cooper on the PA if they were aware he left the plane.
I think if you check back on posts by that other person you will find that the statement used to be that they knew when he jumped, not where he jumped, and that the "when" was when the pressure pulse occurred, NOT at 0xxxZ. You won't find anywhere but "that other person" saying they knew where the HJ jumped. I think they were confident, but not absolutely certain, that he had jumped at the time the pressure pulse occurred, whenever that was.
the other person cherry picks (if he can find something) what fits his needs. That has been his modus since he first surfaced. It's almost guaranteed that what he picks and publishes is quoted out of context and may have even been changed! His quoting Kitt is a perfect example of that and Kitt was not happy about it.
-
According to another person Bill Rataczak made this statement:
"We know where Cooper jumped. We just don't know where he landed."
I haven't found that quote yet, but here is one from Rataczak.
"During our descent into Reno, we made a P.A. to Cooper (if he was still there) that the stairs
needed to be raised for landing so they would not be damaged, which could prevent a subsequent takeoff'
And here:
“I agree with my good friend, FBI Agent Ralph Himmelsbach, who bird-dogged the Cooper case for
many years,” Rataczak says. “I don’t think he made it out alive. I think he’s down there in the blackberry
brambles someplace.”
Doesn't sound to me as if he, or anyone knows exactly where Cooper jumped, or they wouldn't have checked with
Cooper on the PA if they were aware he left the plane.
I think if you check back on posts by that other person you will find that the statement used to be that they knew when he jumped, not where he jumped, and that the "when" was when the pressure pulse occurred, NOT at 0xxxZ. You won't find anywhere but "that other person" saying they knew where the HJ jumped. I think they were confident, but not absolutely certain, that he had jumped at the time the pressure pulse occurred, whenever that was.
That was a copy/paste from a post made by Blevins. according to him that's what Rataczak said. I find it contradicts what Rataczak says at a conference....
I was pretty sure Scott didn't fly the plane after takeoff from SEA. what about his statement of the path being more to the east. is this also incorrect to what Scott said? or is there some truth in that statement?
It contradicts everyone's testimony! It contradicts Anderson's testimony for sure!
Blevins is just a troll. Period. You literally cannot take anything he says as factual. Everyone including Gray that has had any personal experience with him says that!
Anderson's testimony is specific and detailed. Not only did they not know exactly where they were when he jumped, they weren't even sure he had jumped until Scott finally went back (against orders) and checked and quoting: "It appears our friend has left us" (they are near Reno)!
Anderson says they "discussed" the pulse/bump/oscillations for some minutes and on the basis of that discussion Rataczak then reported it ... after the fact! Their position for where the bump occurred was an ESTIMATE! Their time when they thought he (might have) jumped was an ESTIMATE!
I'm not sure where RMB got the quote he is pounding the boards with - some video of Rataczak? In Gray's book? He once said where the quote could be found but I forget where he stated, because frankly I don;t care, because there are plenty of Rataczak quotes which have authenticity and are backed up by other's people's testimony to go on... without relying on anything this Blevins says. (laugh)
Frankly folks: we are too good to be derailed by such nonsense, ie Blevins-speak.
If this posts I am having all kinds of problems keeping this website up and going tonight! Delays specialnotices, etc etc etc ... lets see if this posts at all...
-
The quote itself "We know where Cooper jumped. We just don't know where he landed" doesn't show up anywhere. if he claims Rataczak said this in an email, it contradicts what he has said in the past. ” Rataczak says. “I don’t think he made it out alive. I think he’s down there in the blackberry brambles someplace.”
He also says this:
There’s been a lot of talk, some recently, about former purser Ken Christiansen being D. B. Cooper.
He was fully vetted by the F.B.I., who determined he was not a person of interest.
-
The quote itself "We know where Cooper jumped. We just don't know where he landed" doesn't show up anywhere. if he claims Rataczak said this in an email, it contradicts what he has said in the past. ” Rataczak says. “I don’t think he made it out alive. I think he’s down there in the blackberry brambles someplace.”
He also says this:
There’s been a lot of talk, some recently, about former purser Ken Christiansen being D. B. Cooper.
He was fully vetted by the F.B.I., who determined he was not a person of interest.
Exactly. This plus what Kitt told me also puts the lie to the assertion: "The FBI (nor NWA) looked at NWA employees." I have no idea why people would let that slip without challenge. It's tantamount to saying the FBI and NWA were morons! Sluggo once stated a figure for formal suspects'/with files the FBI has. The number was over 1000 and may have been 1054? 1021? Something like that. The critical comment was: "and beyond that the FBI looked at thousands more!". NWA Historian Kitt says NWA did its own investigation also and looked at its own employees - conducted actual interviews. Blevins' assertion is simply wrong. What we don't know is how far wrong it is. Just think about this! It's takes a lot to contend neither the FBI nor NWA 'looked at NWA employees'? It's an astounding assertion. What it establishes is the public void in actual knowledge about the Cooper case. Why didn't Gray look into this and say anything about it? Once again it is obvious the public is missing many basic facts about the Cooper case. It's the public's knowledge about this case that is lacking; with people like writer RMB ready to fill in the void with total crap !
Once again I need to say: 99.999% of everything that shows up buried at Tina Bar is there due to hydrological actions, or it wouldn't be there at all. Why the Cooper money would be an exception is beyond me. The weight of Probability suggests the Cooper money also arrived at Tina Bar by hydrological action, or hydro-related action.
Maybe I should amend the above to say: There are people out there who do know facts about the Cooper case. What they know, however, is not part of the common 'Cooper case lexicon'. (and it isn't in the Wikipedia article on the DB Cooper case, especially with people like Blevins tampering with the Wikipedia page!)
-
It makes perfect sense for NWO to look into there own. how could someone assume it wasn't a mechanic, or a purser? they would be missing one of the corners in the square I've mentioned. what does the cops do when someone is found dead in a home. they look for an inside job. the same for an abducted child. I'm sure the cameras would stop rolling the second something was said they didn't like.
-
This seems to be another part Blevins fails to follow. we have them admitting the timing is off on the first plot of the jump. if the timing is further out of whack, it's only 2 minutes away from the Columbia!!!
Here is what Carr said, most of you already know. these two posts are comments made by Agent Carr on Dropzone.com.
A bit of new info, the concrete time of the jump was based on the crews communication with NWA flight operations. NWA flight operations was keeping a running log documenting each communication noting the time. I did a re-read of the NWA log, tower transmission and the flight crew interviews and discovered when the crew felt the pressure variance they were not on the phone with NWA. They called just after to report the incident. The person keeping the log must have not written the time he received the communication but the time the crew thought they felt the bump.
Another clue to the time is the ground radio teletype log. It my understanding that the teletype will automatically log the time with the communication. The crew typed a message which was logged at 8:12 and mentioned oscillations not a bump.
The crew referenced a call to Cooper at 8:05 PM when making a statement about the pressure change, stating the pressure bump occurred 5 to 10 minutes after this. They further stated that when they felt the pressure change they were not yet to Portland but definitely in the suburbs.
In reviewing the flight path the plane flew directly over Battleground WA, turn and flew a straight line to Salem OR. If you look at the map I posted, 8:11 PM was the determined to be the jump point which is listed as point A. Point S is 8:10 PM and Point F is 8:12. The plot was laid out with a +-1 minute delay in reporting.
From all of this and the location where the money was found, we need to extend the calulation to 8:13, 8:14 and 8:15. I am guessing this would put the jump location near Orchard WA.
Now, Carr also says this?
So the time reported when the crew mentioned the oscillations was when Cooper most likely started down the stairs. The further he got down the stairs the more air would be rushing through the cabin. The pressure bump, which would be when he jumped, occurred (according to Rataczak) 10 to 15 minutes after their last contact with Cooper at 8:05.
-
MYTH BUSTING IN PROGRESS:
This is what Cooper relayed to the crew through Mucklow:
(1) Fly to Mexico City non-stop, if you can't make it then anywhere in Mexico.
(2) Fly with landing gear and flaps down
(3) Do not fly above 10,000 feet
(4) Fly with the lights out in the cabin
(5) Do not land in the US for fuel or any other reason.
(6) No one aft of the first Class Curtain
(7) After takeoff the stewardess will be allowed to the cockpit.
(8) The rear door open and the stairs extended for takeoff.
Cooper did not request the flaps be set at 15 degrees.
Cooper never requested a speed.
Cooper never asked for the plane to speed up or slow down.
Cooper did not request flight updates from the crew at any time during the incident.
THE TIME LINE SHIFT
From re-reading the interviews and logs, the work going on here, the money (how and where it was found) and much thought on the subject, this is how the time line has shifted:
At 7:42 Cooper called to the cockpit and told them he could not get the stairs to open. The crew slowed the plane and the stairs opened a bit. (my thoughts here) So now Cooper is looking at the stairs twisting his head around like a dog hearing a high pitch noise trying to figure it out.
He soon gets it, "the stairs drop by gravity, if i walk out on them they drop, the further my weight gets out over the stairs, the lower they go." Having realized this Cooper finalizes whatever it is he needs to do and by 8:05 he is ready to go.
He now starts to slowly test out his theory by walking out a few feet on the stairs. As he does they drop a bit further, causing the opening in the rear of the craft to get larger. Because of this, the air pressure in the cabin starts to change. Rataczak sees the cabin pressure gauge oscillating at 8:10 to 8:12 and reports it to NWA flight ops.
For the next five to ten minutes Cooper gets it all figured out and jumps, creating the "bump" 5 to 10 minutes after the last contact at 8:05.
The oscillations and bump are two different events confused as one by the agents conducting interviews. This confusion led investigators to believe the 8:11 report by Rataczak was the jump.
-
7:42 all the way to 8:05 is a lot of time. Rataczak couldn't have seen the gauge in the co-pilots seat. is it possible Cooper was on the stairs at 8:12 and then jumped 5-10 minutes later? this would drop him in the river if he didn't pull? if you go by the new drop zone. it seems to appear he got away. I think they would have found his body in this area sooner or later?
Thoughts?
-
7:42 all the way to 8:05 is a lot of time. Rataczak couldn't have seen the gauge in the co-pilots seat. is it possible Cooper was on the stairs at 8:12 and then jumped 5-10 minutes later? this would drop him in the river if he didn't pull? if you go by the new drop zone. it seems to appear he got away. I think they would have found his body in this area sooner or later?
Thoughts?
It's obvious nobody wants to release information about this case and until that happens no real progress can be made. Why authorities are taking this stance is anyone's guess. At this late date it can't be just because this is an active case! This opens the door to every conspiracy theorist of every stripe to engage in prolonged narcissism of the type displayed daily at Dropzone. This scenario feeds conspiracy theory that says 'the FBI simply wants the case to die and go away'. Lot's of crazy things happened in the 60s and 70s - this is no exception!
-
When does anything in the case make sense anyway :) I think it makes them look worse by just letting it drag on. I've said in the past that they should turn it over to the US Marshal's office. I can only imagine some of the threads for Hoffa. conspiracies out the ass I'm sure.
-
Here is a short video of my simulator. I'm still working on my landings which have improved dramatically :) I also added a new plane. ERJ-140. and of course my newly painted Northwest Orient 727-100. the color isn't a match, but it works for me....Mark, take note of the landings. you will notice they don't go straight down lol.....had to say it.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQHnh5eJKvA
-
40 some odd years. Frustrating when authorities wont release all their info on cases this old. It is obvious to anyone with a half a brain that they aren't going to solve the case... and it seems they want to make sure no one else does either. I am more into investigating the zodiac case than this one. At least in that case there are some police reports that have been made available to the public. Most have not. It's disappointing.
7:42 all the way to 8:05 is a lot of time. Rataczak couldn't have seen the gauge in the co-pilots seat. is it possible Cooper was on the stairs at 8:12 and then jumped 5-10 minutes later? this would drop him in the river if he didn't pull? if you go by the new drop zone. it seems to appear he got away. I think they would have found his body in this area sooner or later?
Thoughts?
It's obvious nobody wants to release information about this case and until that happens no real progress can be made. Why authorities are taking this stance is anyone's guess. At this late date it can't be just because this is an active case! This opens the door to every conspiracy theorist of every stripe to engage in prolonged narcissism of the type displayed daily at Dropzone. This scenario feeds conspiracy theory that says 'the FBI simply wants the case to die and go away'. Lot's of crazy things happened in the 60s and 70s - this is no exception!
None of it makes any sense. it's to old of a story/crime to have any hold on it security wise. I doubt they would even prosecute him if they found him alive. a couple years would be a life sentence at this point and time.
-
When does anything in the case make sense anyway :) I think it makes them look worse by just letting it drag on. I've said in the past that they should turn it over to the US Marshal's office. I can only imagine some of the threads for Hoffa. conspiracies out the ass I'm sure.
When will drones enter the Cooper chase/debate !? I just had to say something about this. :)
-
Everything seems to get confusing even with people who have had access to the files.
Tom Kaye
"It tells you (the money) likely didn't come down 20 miles of the Washougal River," Kaye said. "Then it brings up the question of where did Cooper really jump. We have reason to believe the jump zone was farther south. If the money landed in the Columbia, that would be the easiest explanation for how it got to Tena Bar."
Larry Carr
The crew referenced a call to Cooper at 8:05 PM when making a statement about the pressure change, stating the pressure bump occurred 5 to 10 minutes after this. they further stated that when they felt the pressure changed they were not yet to Portland, but definitely in the suburbs.
Now, the suburbs of Portland are not in the area of 8:15. are they implying they crossed the river before they felt the bump? I thought the first pressure felt was at 8:10? or oscillation. the pressure bump according to Carr was 5-10 minutes after the 8:05 transmission. could they possibly be wrong and it was 5-10 minutes after the oscillation? that would put them over the suburbs of Portland?
-
One of the NWA personnel who was listening to the phone patch in Seattle gave a time of 8:18 PM for the airliner being at the 23 DME (nautical miles) position south of the present day Battleground VORTAC. The teletypewriter message about that location was listed as being sent on the teletypewriter circuit to Seattle at 8:22 PM. Since it required a finite time to "format" the message to be sent over the ARINC teletypewriter system, the 8:18 PM time for being at that location is probably correct.
This means that at 8:15 PM, the airliner would already be south of the Columbia River by several miles. At 8:10 PM, the airliner would still be several miles north of the Tina Bar area.
The above assumes the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side which is the only route that will provide meaningful correlations with the data.
-
Everything seems to get confusing even with people who have had access to the files.
Tom Kaye
"It tells you (the money) likely didn't come down 20 miles of the Washougal River," Kaye said. "Then it brings up the question of where did Cooper really jump. We have reason to believe the jump zone was farther south. If the money landed in the Columbia, that would be the easiest explanation for how it got to Tena Bar."
Larry Carr
The crew referenced a call to Cooper at 8:05 PM when making a statement about the pressure change, stating the pressure bump occurred 5 to 10 minutes after this. they further stated that when they felt the pressure changed they were not yet to Portland, but definitely in the suburbs.
Now, the suburbs of Portland are not in the area of 8:15. are they implying they crossed the river before they felt the bump? I thought the first pressure felt was at 8:10? or oscillation. the pressure bump according to Carr was 5-10 minutes after the 8:05 transmission. could they possibly be wrong and it was 5-10 minutes after the oscillation? that would put them over the suburbs of Portland?
Was it suburbs of Portland or 'suburbs of Vancouver" ! ?
-
Everything seems to get confusing even with people who have had access to the files.
Tom Kaye
"It tells you (the money) likely didn't come down 20 miles of the Washougal River," Kaye said. "Then it brings up the question of where did Cooper really jump. We have reason to believe the jump zone was farther south. If the money landed in the Columbia, that would be the easiest explanation for how it got to Tena Bar."
Larry Carr
The crew referenced a call to Cooper at 8:05 PM when making a statement about the pressure change, stating the pressure bump occurred 5 to 10 minutes after this. they further stated that when they felt the pressure changed they were not yet to Portland, but definitely in the suburbs.
Now, the suburbs of Portland are not in the area of 8:15. are they implying they crossed the river before they felt the bump? I thought the first pressure felt was at 8:10? or oscillation. the pressure bump according to Carr was 5-10 minutes after the 8:05 transmission. could they possibly be wrong and it was 5-10 minutes after the oscillation? that would put them over the suburbs of Portland?
Was it suburbs of Portland or 'suburbs of Vancouver" ! ?
well, that's all part of the confusing part 8)
-
One of the NWA personnel who was listening to the phone patch in Seattle gave a time of 8:18 PM for the airliner being at the 23 DME (nautical miles) position south of the present day Battleground VORTAC. The teletypewriter message about that location was listed as being sent on the teletypewriter circuit to Seattle at 8:22 PM. Since it required a finite time to "format" the message to be sent over the ARINC teletypewriter system, the 8:18 PM time for being at that location is probably correct.
This means that at 8:15 PM, the airliner would already be south of the Columbia River by several miles. At 8:10 PM, the airliner would still be several miles north of the Tina Bar area.
The above assumes the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side which is the only route that will provide meaningful correlations with the data.
I've been leaning more towards the fence of a timing issue over a flight path issue. I'm beginning to think the path could be correct, and the time frames are at error. lots of fumbling going on. nothing is clear cut stating this is exactly where the plane was at "time here". 8:10 the transcripts say he could of jumped here. then we find we have two different issues with the stairs causing a jump further south than first expected. each time this occurs we get closer to the water hazards. he might have jumped around PDX, lost the money, and went home? I don't know......
I have all day tomorrow to myself 8) I'm going to run some more flights and see what happens.
-
Everything seems to get confusing even with people who have had access to the files.
Tom Kaye
"It tells you (the money) likely didn't come down 20 miles of the Washougal River," Kaye said. "Then it brings up the question of where did Cooper really jump. We have reason to believe the jump zone was farther south. If the money landed in the Columbia, that would be the easiest explanation for how it got to Tena Bar."
Larry Carr
The crew referenced a call to Cooper at 8:05 PM when making a statement about the pressure change, stating the pressure bump occurred 5 to 10 minutes after this. they further stated that when they felt the pressure changed they were not yet to Portland, but definitely in the suburbs.
Now, the suburbs of Portland are not in the area of 8:15. are they implying they crossed the river before they felt the bump? I thought the first pressure felt was at 8:10? or oscillation. the pressure bump according to Carr was 5-10 minutes after the 8:05 transmission. could they possibly be wrong and it was 5-10 minutes after the oscillation? that would put them over the suburbs of Portland?
Was it suburbs of Portland or 'suburbs of Vancouver" ! ?
well, that's all part of the confusing part 8)
I think it should be "not in Portland yet" ........ "but in the suburbs of Vancouver". We discussed ad nauseum on DZ what "in the suburbs of Vancouver" meant. Sluggo decide Orchard qualified ... is that everyone else's recollection. ?
I can look this up. Rat also testified independently and spoke of being "in the suburbs of Vancouver". I mean .... going south to cross the Columbia there are no 'suburbs' of Portland, until you get past downtown Portland then into the suburbs.
-
One of the NWA personnel who was listening to the phone patch in Seattle gave a time of 8:18 PM for the airliner being at the 23 DME (nautical miles) position south of the present day Battleground VORTAC. The teletypewriter message about that location was listed as being sent on the teletypewriter circuit to Seattle at 8:22 PM. Since it required a finite time to "format" the message to be sent over the ARINC teletypewriter system, the 8:18 PM time for being at that location is probably correct.
This means that at 8:15 PM, the airliner would already be south of the Columbia River by several miles. At 8:10 PM, the airliner would still be several miles north of the Tina Bar area.
The above assumes the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side which is the only route that will provide meaningful correlations with the data.
I've been leaning more towards the fence of a timing issue over a flight path issue. I'm beginning to think the path could be correct, and the time frames are at error. lots of fumbling going on. nothing is clear cut stating this is exactly where the plane was at "time here". 8:10 the transcripts say he could of jumped here. then we find we have two different issues with the stairs causing a jump further south than first expected. each time this occurs we get closer to the water hazards. he might have jumped around PDX, lost the money, and went home? I don't know......
I have all day tomorrow to myself 8) I'm going to run some more flights and see what happens.
I think the timeline of the jump is early. If Andy is correct that there was indecision and nobody even communicated the 'bump and Cooper possibly leaving' until later, "after we discussed it Rat then called it in" .... then there is no question the assign times to the bump and possible jump are early. From 8: 12 all the way to possible 8:16 or 18.
There is no question in my mind that the Tina Bar money is a flow-in event. From somewhere. Somewhere close to Tina Bar, somewhere further upstream from Tina Bar but a flow-in event probably in the company of other debris.
Maybe during the first higher than normal water even of 1972. Even Tom thinks it's early. Or just maybe, with the dredging debris in 1974, then moved to the find location.
0% probability of plant and no evidence of plant while there is all kinds of evidence the find is compatible with hydrological placement.
Call CNN in Atlanta! That will give Dropzone and Blevins and Danny some publicity!
-
Agreed. I know it has been discussed about the low percentage of a splash down, but that was further north. lots & lots of water around as the clock ticks...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4DAg3_XyRM
-
If we agree that the time of the jump is incorrect, and further south, shouldn't we now also agree that the money could of made it to the Columbia, or in the Columbia? I'm going to email Tom and see what his thoughts are on the trail since even the FBI agree's the jump is further south.
It seems to open possibilities that Cooper could have survived, and the money didn't, or was separated from him. personally I don't think he made it. I think he might be in a spot that was never checked, or discovered. as time goes by the body slowly disappears into the surrounding area. I don't agree with Amazon stating a body could be seen decades later.
I would love to take $50 in one dollar bills, and put it in a bag like Cooper used and place it in the river., or $25 in the river, and $25 on the bank. 10 people donating $5 could reach this goal. getting someone to monitor it becomes the problem. I liked Tom's testing, but they were just snippets of currency. two nice bundles would be great!
The battle of Little Bighorn is a fine example of how mother nature hides things. if it wasn't for the brush fire they would of had no idea what clues it uncovered once the brush was removed. they were able to document the whole battle which ended up backing up everything the Indians have be stating for decades.
-
Interesting interview with Msgt. Wally Johnson. he describes the black box used on the 727. according to him both pressure anomalies would have been recorded. what ever happen to these records? Carr should have known this, or acknowledged they were on the box for record. I'm sure the time could be figured out between the two different issues with the pressure (oscillation/bump) did Washington keep these records, and another box was put back in the plane?
I posted the section about the black box, and the entire interview for download. he also describes the people in the photo with everyone involved with the drop test.
-
Here is a video I made from the files of the Washington Historical Society. Bill Rataczak explains the plane's configuration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5r6-39WYfQ
-
Thanks, Shut, for the vid on Bill. I was surprised to realize that that was the first time I've seen him in a video.
-
Thanks, Shut, for the vid on Bill. I was surprised to realize that that was the first time I've seen him in a video.
Yes, the glamour is there! Congrats on spotting it. Of course GLAMOUR PROVES NOTHING!
Can you reconcile the "cross bedded sands" to the clay-lump layer Palmer found and date them?
Rataczak doesn't mention that. No glamour in it!
-
Thanks, Shut, for the vid on Bill. I was surprised to realize that that was the first time I've seen him in a video.
Your welcome.....and it's in living color 8)
(http://www.classicthemes.com/images/LaramiePeacock1962.gif)
-
Georger, did you remove your post to edit? I come back from the store, and it was gone?
-
Yeah, G, where did it go? It was quite a comprehensive analysis of the soils at TB.
-
Yeah, G, where did it go? It was quite a comprehensive analysis of the soils at TB.
I didn't think anyone was interested. I may redo later and post it in the Tena Bar Money thread. Basically its an analysis of the Palmer report as it corresponds to Kaye's analysis.
Tom and others focus on the 'clay lump and sand' layer Palmer identified as being the dredge spoils from 1974. Above that layer, Palmer identifies a "cross bedded sand" layer which in the Palmer analysis may be the actual baseline against which he assigned all other strata. Each layer found represents a segment of time. The cross bedded layer would presumably represent all deposits, wave action, and erosion between Sept 1974 and the start of the 'upper active layer' which may start in 1978, after the severe drought of 1977. If Palmer is correct then the "cross bedded layer" can only correspond to water events between Sept 1974 and say Sept 1978. So the question arises: does the Columbia river height data at the Vancouver station between Sept 1974 and Sept 1978 support multiple cross-bedded deposition events (at Tina Bar) between Sept '74 and Sept '78, and generally I think it does. Palmer had access to those same Vancouver station records I do today. Those water event records seem to confirm the cross-bedded layer consisting of multiple high water events, which Palmer identified as layer "B". On that basis Palmer would be fully justified in claiming that the "clay lump and sand" layer "C" found below the cross bedded sands layer "B", was in fact the dredging sediments from 1974. Then on top of Layer "B" Palmer places the "upper active" layer representing deposits from say Sept 1978 to the current time February of 1980 - and it is in this topmost layer "A" the Ingram money was recovered.
Kaye arrives in 2008 and finds a severely eroded beachfront at Tina bar, Kay can see a clay layer exposed in the erosion cut, and Kaye believes that clay layer he is seeing predates 1974. Tom believes this is the very layer Palmer was looking at in 1980 and called the 'dredge spoils' layer, but it was not. Tom may be saying that the dredge spoils layer had all but washed away by 1980 and so there was no dredging layer to be found, and Palmer misidentified a deeper (pre 1971?) layer as being the 1974 dredge spoils 'clay and sand'. Quite frankly, it is difficult for me to believe Palmer would make such a basic mistake. Palmer was an expert in this area.
Tom would then assign Palmer's cross bedded sands layer 'C' as consisting of (a) remnants of the dredging spoils deposited in 1974 and post 1974-Sept 1978 sands laid down by multiple water events between the end of 1974 to say early 1978.
All of this matters because the dating of the layer in which Ingram money was found is crucial. The water records must agree with the strata found, in any event. And the Vancouver station records I have generally support the multiple water-deposition events which Palmer's cross bedded sands layer 'B' implies.
I can easily see how Palmer would have identified anything below layer 'B', especially anything containing clay, as the 1974 bottom dredging sediments which consists of both clay and coarse sand. But, the baseline is set in Palmer's mind once he see's the cross bedded layer 'B'. Stratum 'B' represents a definable period of time against which actual nearby river station records can be checked. Please recall, it was not just Palmer out a Tina Bar alone. He had backup and co-researchers working with him, some of who are named on Kaye's site. (a professional hydrologist for one).
So Palmer is not operating in complete darkness here.
Do water-weather records support the idea that all of the 1974 dredging spoils placed at Tina Bar had withered down to a non-existent thin layer by the time the cross bedded layer 'B' starts to be assembled at Tina Bar? No. There is nothing to support that contention. The best one could do is contend that cross bedded layer 'B' represents a portion of dredging spoils and post-dredging sands laid down between 8-74 and say 9-78 when we are sure the next cycle of deposition with the flood of 1978 begins (and deposits the upper active layer Palmer found).
This exercise illustrates the issues involved. But, water and weather records must correspond and account for whatever beach strata are found, because beach's just don't build themselves!. Beaches are a temporal story of deposition, erosion, water and wave action, et cetera. Beaches are a clock.
-
Yeah, G, where did it go? It was quite a comprehensive analysis of the soils at TB.
I didn't think anyone was interested. I may redo later and post it in the Tena Bar Money thread.
Yes, please post it again when you have time. everything you post is of value that I've seen. your presents, and experience is a must on this forum. I hardly ever get quick response times on my comments. don't feel bad ;D
-
Yeah, G, where did it go? It was quite a comprehensive analysis of the soils at TB.
I didn't think anyone was interested. I may redo later and post it in the Tena Bar Money thread.
Yes, please post it again when you have time. everything you post is of value that I've seen. your presents, and experience is a must on this forum. I hardly ever get quick response times on my comments. don't feel bad ;D
I added it to my last post above. Now I have to get running - tomorrow has already arrived here -
-
Thanks, Shut, for the vid on Bill. I was surprised to realize that that was the first time I've seen him in a video.
Here's the second Bruce :
http://www.nbcuniversalarchives.com/nbcuni/clip/5112499111_006.do
-
R99 has posted two critical posts which are a synopsis of the current debate, and critical to the FP debate; I hope he doesn't mind that I repose them here. TIA R99.
quote:
Robert99
The pilot who said he wanted to fly over the ocean could have purposely flown over the river (?)
The short answer is "yes", but the airliner was above several cloud layers and an overcast so that the river could not have been seen visually. In addition, the airliner was only over the river proper for a few miles (at more than three miles per minute groundspeed) so the probability of Cooper landing in water deliberately is quite low. The crew didn't know when he planned to jump or when he actually did jump.
In all probability, the airliner was just taking a short cut around the west side of Portland, to avoid flying over the city, when Cooper jumped. Somewhere around Toledo (or the Mayfield/Malay Intersection) the airliner left V-23 and flew direct to the area of the Canby Intersection which is on V-23 and 27 DME miles south of the present day Battleground VORTAC.
The above shortcut would mean that the airliner either overflew or passed very close to Tina Bar. Note that the Columbia River runs north, or a couple of degrees east of north, at Tina Bar. In any event, all of the chase aircraft and the helicopter that tried to sight the airliner were vectored to the west and southwest sides of Portland.
There is nothing to support a flight path on the east side of Portland or even east of Tina Bar. The people who claim the flight stayed on V-23 or east of it while in the Portland area are simply making that claim since they need Cooper to survive the hijacking to support their claims about their Cooper candidates.
Further, the topography of the Tina Bar area is so unique that additional statements can be made once the flight path has been pinned down. And we need the un-redacted Seattle ATC transcripts to do that.
Robert99
Jo, You don't understand how the Air Traffic Control system operates. On the flight to Reno, the Portland Airport would not be contacted by the airliner which was under direct control of the Seattle ATC Center. Portland was NOT involved.
It makes no difference what happened to any radio transcripts in Portland. The transcripts in question involved the Seattle ATC communications and not anything from Portland.
The FBI had transcripts of ALL relevant communications from both the Seattle ATC and Oakland ATC Centers within about a week of the hijacking. The Seattle transcripts were redacted by the FBI but they did not redact the Oakland transcripts.
Robert99
-
Blevins is missing some key points in the flight path debate, ands he is making assumptions which are not true. He says the FBI FP map is true because Larry Carr presented it, and Carr was a Cooper case agent!
(1) Carr passed out the fp map specifically to get people's evaluation and analysis, to judge the map's veracity! Not because the map was True, as Blevins states! Blevins has made a fundamental error of fact. Read the Dropzone thread 2009 -
(2) Carr DID NOT pass out the map because it is TRUE! Carr says that very clearly. Read the thread.
(3) Carr talked to Rataczak multiple times and still did not know if the FBI flight path map was true or not! Blevins keeps telling people to talk to Rataczak. Blevins should talk to Larry Carr! The thread is very clear on these points! Blevins should read the thread!
(4) RobertBlevins doesn't know anything about flight path maps or how pilots fly airplanes, or anything about the technical decisions that were made by pilots and others or why, on the evening of 11-24-71 !!
(5) Since Blevins literally doesn't know anything about this whole matter or why Carr even brought the flight path map out in the first place (for evaluation and analysis!), Blevins keeps yacking about the plane having been East vs West of I5, of all things. Nobody has bothered to tell Bobby Blevins that "I5" doesn't have a God damned thing to do with anything! I5 had nothing to do with the route #305 flew! But Blevins is stuck on "I5" for some weird reason. He might as well be stuck on "cows at the Fazio farm"! In addition Blevins can cite no reason whatever for what made the pilots fly one route versus another! Blevins is just blowing smoke in this whole debate.
(6) Blevins is stuck on "east vs west of I5". Or east vs west of Vancouver, or Portland. Blevins is 100% unaware evidently that this problem involves two variables at least, not just one. Position and Time! Not just position, east or west of I5 but the time of being at any given position! Blevns’ discussion of this whole matter is literally at the level of a Kindergartner trying to discuss and make pronouncemrnts about General Relativity! Beam Blevins up!
Blevins' posts on this whole subject are utter nonsense and meaningless.
He is missing the fact and history of why Larry Carr posted the map in the first place: to be evaluated and examined by experts, of which RobertMBlevins is not one!
-
I've been reading it. he just goes 100% what the FBI claims, or says until it conflicts with KC. Larry Carr admits on this video with the map and says "the believed flight path"...this clearly means that they are not positive of the path, or he wouldn't be stating that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLOgfkv4alk
-
I've been in the cockpit all evening. testing the speeds again. I amazed how things will change with passengers, and then without, or different temps will give different speeds. I'm going to be recording the first 40 minutes of the flight. the video will be rather large in size due to the uncompressed video. we are talking about 50 gigs of space. it records at a little over a gig a minute! then I have to compress them so they will be transferable to You Tube without having to wait 30+ hours to upload. I will be including what is said on the transcripts according to that time. this will take some time to put together, but should be interesting to watch...... 8)
I will also show any corrections needed in the transcripts during that time frame.
(http://www.x-plane.hu/kep/cikkek/727/020.jpg)
-
I've been reading it. he just goes 100% what the FBI claims, or says until it conflicts with KC. Larry Carr admits on this video with the map and says "the believed flight path"...this clearly means that they are not positive of the path, or he wouldn't be stating that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLOgfkv4alk
Correct! "Believed flight path". How could Blevins have missed this? He has missed a whole year of discussions by Carr and others on Dropzone 2009. Like missing a whole year of school.
Carr brought the map to Dropzone specifically to get evaluation and analysis, not to present it as thee true flight path of 305 on 11-24-71! That point is fundamental and true, whether Blevins likes it or not! All of that after
Carr personally talk to Bill Rataczak multiple times! Larry makes that very clear on the thread.
Blevins is totally out on a limb here, as usual. He's talking total nonsense. Blevins would have been better off had he cited Tom Kaye as the reason he-Blevins accepts the FBI flight path map; not Carr!.
It is also 100% clear Blevins doesn't have a technical grasp of the problem. He keeps citing "east vs west of I5" which has nothing to do with anything! I5 did not figure in anyone's thinking or actions when 305 flew a route going south. I5 is irrelevant. Moreover, it is not just position, but time & position. Carr discussed time as much if not more than position and everyone agreed the timeline was off, but by how much.
Remember it was Blevins who posted this piece of garbage attached he claims was a 'flight path Kenny drew'! People have told Blevins hundreds of times his picture is not a flight path at all - he just won't accept that because he doesn't even know what a flight path map is! The man is a natural born idiot.
You can't argue with Blevins. If I was R99 I would simply tell Blevins everything he has ever said on this whole problem is nonsense and irrelevant, and leave it at that. because Blevins is incapable of change except to turn around and claim: "I never said that" just to get himself out of the corner he has put himself in time after time after time for 4 long years. The man is an idiot.
-
I put it on DZ several times. he will only listen to what he can hear, which is about half of the story. best case, to worse case, and nothing in between.
-
I put it on DZ several times. he will only listen to what he can hear, which is about half of the story. best case, to worse case, and nothing in between.
Blevins keeps telling people to talk to Rataczak! He tells R99 and makes fun of him saying he should have talked to Rat in 2009! Wasn't it Blevins who was going to talk to Rataczak in 2010, and never did, or couldn't get a reply? He says Porteous talked to Rataczak and Blevins relies on that.
What Blevins is missing is that Carr himself talked to Rataczak multiple times in 2009 and still came out uncertain about the veracity of the FBI map, Blevins somehow knows is true!
R99 should tell Blevins: Go talk to Carr who has talked to Rataczak! :) :) :)
10:1 Blevins will read this here and try to deny it, or he will read it and ignore it hoping it goes away so he can continue to peddle his false portrait of Larry Carr and the whole Carr-Flight path discussion on Dropzone in 2009. It's amazing the things this guy does not know or chooses to ignore, and later claims never happened or exists, all so he can continue his Eulenspiegel!
-
The FBI had to come up with some sort of proposed flight path and jump spot in order to figure out where to start their search . But, even so, there is a wide range of confidence they could have in it from "We're pretty sure this is where and when he jumped" to "We can't be sure, but this is our best guess at this time". What Georger notes above about Carr talking to Rataczak and sharing it on the DZ forum for comment, leads me to think it might be the second one.
Or, maybe they originally thought they had a good idea of where he jumped. But, after finding no body, parachute, spare chute, brief case or money in the area -- and money turning up a little over seven years later a good distance away -- may have given the FBI some doubt.
Robert99 has done far more studying than me and I admit I don't understand all of it. I don't know why he puts so much effort into trying to convince RobertMBlevins on the flight path. RobertMBlevins has already made up his mind, and nothing short of a body turning up is going to change it.
-
The FBI had to come up with some sort of proposed flight path and jump spot in order to figure out where to start their search . But, even so, there is a wide range of confidence they could have in it from "We're pretty sure this is where and when he jumped" to "We can't be sure, but this is our best guess at this time". What Georger notes above about Carr talking to Rataczak and sharing it on the DZ forum for comment, leads me to think it might be the second one.
Or, maybe they originally thought they had a good idea of where he jumped. But, after finding no body, parachute, spare chute, brief case or money in the area -- and money turning up a little over seven years later a good distance away -- may have given the FBI some doubt.
Robert99 has done far more studying than me and I admit I don't understand all of it. I don't know why he puts so much effort into trying to convince RobertMBlevins on the flight path. RobertMBlevins has already made up his mind, and nothing short of a body turning up is going to change it.
Let me make a cogent reply when I can tomorrow - I think its important to bring up Himmeslbach's 1976 pree release which changed the drop zone further south from the original Search zone. But I want to be able to document H's statement and will do so tomorrow - - -
In 2009 after working months on the FP and drop zone at Dropzone, with Larry Carr present, Sluggo settled on the Orchard WA area as a likely drop zone... which ironically fit almost exactly H's statement from 1976! Sluggo of course was working completely independently. We laughed at the irony involved, but it lead to Sluggo getting an interview with H which he published at DZ during this period...
I need to check my files before posting further.
-
The FBI had to come up with some sort of proposed flight path and jump spot in order to figure out where to start their search . But, even so, there is a wide range of confidence they could have in it from "We're pretty sure this is where and when he jumped" to "We can't be sure, but this is our best guess at this time". What Georger notes above about Carr talking to Rataczak and sharing it on the DZ forum for comment, leads me to think it might be the second one.
Or, maybe they originally thought they had a good idea of where he jumped. But, after finding no body, parachute, spare chute, brief case or money in the area -- and money turning up a little over seven years later a good distance away -- may have given the FBI some doubt.
Robert99 has done far more studying than me and I admit I don't understand all of it. I don't know why he puts so much effort into trying to convince RobertMBlevins on the flight path. RobertMBlevins has already made up his mind, and nothing short of a body turning up is going to change it.
Where Cooper jumped and when he jumped varies according to the author, as noted in a Bruce Smith post below.
Where was 305? [In reply to]
Can't Post
________________________________________
I see there is a lot of talk about chatting with Rataczak to clarify where 305 was when Cooper jumped.
That might be useful, but I also think it would be worthwhile to review what has already been revealed by the principals.
1. Rataczak told me he did know where 305 was when DBC jumped. Later in our 70-minute phone conversation he said that 305 was east of V-23 by a couple miles due to the wind.
2. Himmelsbach told me that Rataczak told him that 305 was over the Washougal.
3. Mrs. Cooper says that Rataczak told her that he could see the lights of Vancouver to the right. Not sure what that means. It sounds like perfect Jo Weber haze. But it could very well be V-23-ish, too.
4. Calame and Rhodes say that Scott told the folks at Himms' retirement party in 1980 that 305 was west of V-23 and over Woodland, WA.
5. Larry says V-23 All the Way to Red Bluff, CA!
6. Marianne Lincoln of Shady Acres Airport in Spanaway, WA says that the transmission from Seattle Center she heard were reporting east of V-23 to Gresham and then up the Columbia River Gorge.
7. Multiple eye witnesses allegedly report that they saw a burning object descend from a low-flying aircraft just west of the I-5 bridge over the Columbia, just about the time that 305 passed over the area.
( BruceSmith on Sep 21, 2014, 1:39 AM)
Fact: nobody including SA Larry Carr seems to know who or what generated the socalled FBI FP Map which Larry presented via Sluggo in 2009. The origin of that map is a total mystery to me. In any event, we know the FBI was not in the business of generating 'flight path and drop zone maps' back in 1971 and that specifically included the Seattle and Portland offices of the FBI.
The first map called "FBI Search Map" was generated as a joint effort between engineers at NWA and computer techs at Ft. Lewis, Wa., according to SA Tom Manning. This map merely plots zones of probability according to the data available at the time, but proved empty when a massive searches were conducted on this basis. Pilot Wm Scott told officials he thought Cooper had bailed near Woodland, Wa., "about 25 miles north of Portland". Searches there were conducted on that basis.
With the statute of limitations ending in 1976, Ralph Himmelsbach at the Portland Office entered the picture to extend the case; he obtained a John Doe warrant and updated the press on the Cooper case. Himmelsbach now refers to a (new?) computer analysis and says, quote: "We are positive Cooper came down in a 24 square mile area 12 miles north of Portland". (In an independent analysis by Sluggo etal in 2009, Sluggo speculates Cooper may have bailed near Orchard, Wa.)
1980 arrives and the Ingram money is found. Himmelsbach specifically tells agents the money came down the Washougal based on hydrologist and other reports (Palmer etal). Himmelsbach now claims Cooper bailed near the Washougal River, and Rataczak suddenly chimes in saying: ' When Cooper bailed we were east of V23'. The Washougal Theory is thus born!
2009 arrives and SA Larry Carr surfaces with the previously unseen "FBI Map" in hand, but he isn't sure how valid the map is as a correct depiction of the flight path of 305, but if the map is an accurate depiction, when and where on this map did Cooper bail; that discussion is brought to Dropzone. The matter gets debated on Dropzone during 2009 with no firm conclusions during which time noted experts Robert99, Hominid, and Farflung all make significant contributions, the Washougal Theory is rejected, and several variants of the Carr FBI FP Map are suggested based on different people's analyses, and new interviews of ATC and 305 flight crew people who were involved at the time. The rendezvous of T33's with flight 305 below Portland near Lake Oswego is documented by R2, for the first time. Interviews of people who were personally involved with the flight reenactment commence over a period of months and are still ongoing!
I cant post whole newspaper articles here due to size... will have to post the others later ...
-
"4. Calame and Rhodes say that Scott told the folks at Himms' retirement party in 1980 that 305 was west of V-23 and over Woodland, WA."
This is what I asked a couple weeks ago about people claiming the plane flew over Woodland. just for giggles lets assume they were off on the plotting of the map, or where the plane was east, or west. if you take the same calculations and put them further west the same distance away from V23. things start to make more sense. the plane now fly's over Woodland, and also goes completely around Portland....
Just Saying.... 8)
-
"4. Calame and Rhodes say that Scott told the folks at Himms' retirement party in 1980 that 305 was west of V-23 and over Woodland, WA."
This is what I asked a couple weeks ago about people claiming the plane flew over Woodland. just for giggles lets assume they were off on the plotting of the map, or where the plane was east, or west. if you take the same calculations and put them further west the same distance away from V23. things start to make more sense. the plane now fly's over Woodland, and also goes completely around Portland....
Just Saying.... 8)
Pardon my ignorance, but how close would that flight path get to Tena Bar?
-
"4. Calame and Rhodes say that Scott told the folks at Himms' retirement party in 1980 that 305 was west of V-23 and over Woodland, WA."
This is what I asked a couple weeks ago about people claiming the plane flew over Woodland. just for giggles lets assume they were off on the plotting of the map, or where the plane was east, or west. if you take the same calculations and put them further west the same distance away from V23. things start to make more sense. the plane now fly's over Woodland, and also goes completely around Portland....
Just Saying.... 8)
Pardon my ignorance, but how close would that flight path get to Tena Bar?
still not close enough, probably 4 or 5 miles guessing...
-
A typo on the Rataczak comment that Georger re-printed from the DZ.
Initially, Bill Rataczak told me that he did NOT know where 305 was when Cooper jumped.
"It's an enigma," he added.
Later in our 70-minute conversation, Bill said that 305 had drifted in the wind a few miles east of V-23.
-
A typo on the Rataczak comment that Georger re-printed from the DZ.
Initially, Bill Rataczak told me that he did NOT know where 305 was when Cooper jumped.
"It's an enigma," he added.
Later in our 70-minute conversation, Bill said that 305 had drifted in the wind a few miles east of V-23.
drifted east at what location? they were on the east side of V23 a lot from Maylay to BTG area
-
All I heard was that they had "drifted east of V-23," presumably somewhere in the general vicinity of the jump zone.
The Big Question on Rataczak is how calculated are his comments. After our 70-minute conversation, he asked me for a copy of my work on Cooper, as he knew I had been doing a lot of writing. I sent him a 60-page treatise that was titled, "Why Can't the FBI Find DB Cooper," and it pointed out a lot of the inconsistencies of the Norjak investigation.
Not only did iI never hear from Rataczak again despite my many emails and phone calls, whenever anyone asks for my work to "get a better understanding of where you're coming from," as did Bill, I strongly suspect that they want to prepare a new kind of spin to their story.
If you only tell one story to ALL reporters, why would you need to know where anyone is coming from? Calame did this with me as well. He dodged me ever after.
-
"4. Calame and Rhodes say that Scott told the folks at Himms' retirement party in 1980 that 305 was west of V-23 and over Woodland, WA."
This is what I asked a couple weeks ago about people claiming the plane flew over Woodland. just for giggles lets assume they were off on the plotting of the map, or where the plane was east, or west. if you take the same calculations and put them further west the same distance away from V23. things start to make more sense. the plane now fly's over Woodland, and also goes completely around Portland....
Just Saying.... 8)
Somebody took Woodland seriously - there was a large search around Woodland! That is fact.
-
A typo on the Rataczak comment that Georger re-printed from the DZ.
Initially, Bill Rataczak told me that he did NOT know where 305 was when Cooper jumped.
"It's an enigma," he added.
Later in our 70-minute conversation, Bill said that 305 had drifted in the wind a few miles east of V-23.
This is the kind of thing that drives people crazy!
You need to tell Blevins that one reason Carr came to Dropzone was to get opinions regarding the quote: "believed flight path", ie FBI map! Blevins is telling people that Carr presented the FBI Map as the gospel - the opposite is true.
Blevins apparantly hasn;t read year 2009 in the Dropzone Thread! DuuH! Blevins is doing it again - putting words in people's mouths, this time Carr, just as he did with Kitt. It is hilarious he has supposedly written Kitt to ask Rataczak about the FBI flight path map? Blevins will never get a reply!
The whole issue is in the hands of the windbags, still!
>:(
-
So, why do you think that Rataczak gave me two incompatible answers on the FP, Georger?
Do you think it might be intentional?
I do.
BTW: Himmelsbach told me that he and Bill Rataczak have become best friends in the aftermath of the Cooper case. In fact, Bill called Himms while I was chatting with Ralph in his living room.
Coincidence? I wonder if Mrs. Himms called Billy when I sat down on those lovely turquoise leather couches....
..just sayin'.
-
G, do you know how to get ahold of Andy Anderson? His perspective might be helpful.
-
So, why do you think that Rataczak gave me two incompatible answers on the FP, Georger?
Do you think it might be intentional?
I do.
BTW: Himmelsbach told me that he and Bill Rataczak have become best friends in the aftermath of the Cooper case. In fact, Bill called Himms while I was chatting with Ralph in his living room.
Coincidence? I wonder if Mrs. Himms called Billy when I sat down on those lovely turquoise leather couches....
..just sayin'.
Yes. I am sure Rataczak is being selective in what he says to who -
I cant/wont comment on Anderson.
-
So, why do you think that Rataczak gave me two incompatible answers on the FP, Georger?
Do you think it might be intentional?
I do.
BTW: Himmelsbach told me that he and Bill Rataczak have become best friends in the aftermath of the Cooper case. In fact, Bill called Himms while I was chatting with Ralph in his living room.
Coincidence? I wonder if Mrs. Himms called Billy when I sat down on those lovely turquoise leather couches....
..just sayin'.
Yes. I am sure Rataczak is being selective in what he says to who -
I cant/wont comment on Anderson.
Didn't Rataczak have a rather horrendous accident on his pushbike that included a sizable whack to his head? I don't mean to be unkind, but it may not have done much for his memory.
-
So, why do you think that Rataczak gave me two incompatible answers on the FP, Georger?
Do you think it might be intentional?
I do.
BTW: Himmelsbach told me that he and Bill Rataczak have become best friends in the aftermath of the Cooper case. In fact, Bill called Himms while I was chatting with Ralph in his living room.
Coincidence? I wonder if Mrs. Himms called Billy when I sat down on those lovely turquoise leather couches....
..just sayin'.
Yes. I am sure Rataczak is being selective in what he says to who -
I cant/wont comment on Anderson.
Didn't Rataczak have a rather horrendous accident on his pushbike that included a sizable whack to his head? I don't mean to be unkind, but it may not have done much for his memory.
Yes. He was in grave condition for a long time, as I understand it. But he survived well after a long recovery.
-
Here is an excellent extended version of the video "First Flights 1963". it goes further than the first video catching an inside view of the prototype cockpit, to showing the manufacturing. it's a long video but it is shared with the 747. the first part most have seen, but it continues with new material.
The first 30 minutes are dedicated to the 727, no need to watch past that point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uni6HVfthKs
-
Carpet warehouse and Cooper expert RobertMBlevins says:
RobertMBlevins
Sep 24, 2014, 4:02 PM
Post #55608 of 55611 (95 views)
Re: [mrshutter45] Trip to WA 2010 & Carr! [In reply to] Quote:
'The FBI doesn't know where the map originated from. Carr even admits this...'
[Blevins reply]
"Most likely scenario is that it was created by Paul Soderlind and his team from NWA, using the available data from all the known sources. There is a picture out there on the internet somewhere (I may have it on one of our other computers still) that shows a similar map in the background. On a wall. It is one of the pictures taken during the Army search for Cooper."
Blevins has been repeating the same confusion for four+ years. ! :)
So there you have it folks. This is where the FBI Map presented by Carr came from! From Paul Soderlind and his team from NWA; date uncertain. And the Air Force was not involved! And, das photo Blevins is speaking of with the FBI (yellow) map in the background, he saw somewhere on the internet (I wonder where!), is attached below. "It is one of the pictures taken during the Army search for Cooper." The FBI map Carr presented is clearly visble in the photo Blevins mentions - yepper! See it? :)
BTW:
"Soderlind retired in 1973. He later became a consultant for Boeing, Embry-Riddle, the U.S. Air Force, and the Federal Aviation Administration, among others."
-
Actually I think Blevy might be right this time. I blew up this photo and believe that it's the path on the wall?
-
Actually I think Blevy might be right this time. I blew up this photo and believe that it's the path on the wall?
Those do not look like aeronautical charts to me. The FBI maps, all of them, are aeronautical charts with plots on them.
-
Actually I think Blevy might be right this time. I blew up this photo and believe that it's the path on the wall?
Have never seen that photo before ?
-
Actually I think Blevy might be right this time. I blew up this photo and believe that it's the path on the wall?
Those do not look like aeronautical charts to me. The FBI maps, all of them, are aeronautical charts with plots on them.
It looks pretty damn close to me? I can make out what appears to be the flight path. anyone else?
-
Actually I think Blevy might be right this time. I blew up this photo and believe that it's the path on the wall?
Those do not look like aeronautical charts to me. The FBI maps, all of them, are aeronautical charts with plots on them.
It looks pretty damn close to me? I can make out what appears to be the flight path. anyone else?
Do you know the date of the map in the middle? It has to be 1972 or earlier, but I don't see any recognizable features on it.
-
Actually I think Blevy might be right this time. I blew up this photo and believe that it's the path on the wall?
Those do not look like aeronautical charts to me. The FBI maps, all of them, are aeronautical charts with plots on them.
It looks pretty damn close to me? I can make out what appears to be the flight path. anyone else?
Do you know the date of the map in the middle? It has to be 1972 or earlier, but I don't see any recognizable features on it.
It's the map from the FBI website I believe. I've had it for a while. I turned up upright. the forum won't let me post a photo? have to see what is wrong. it's telling me it didn't pass security?
-
Let me try it again...here is the FBI map I have...I think this is the map Carr rolls out on the table in the video.
-
Actually I think Blevy might be right this time. I blew up this photo and believe that it's the path on the wall?
Those do not look like aeronautical charts to me. The FBI maps, all of them, are aeronautical charts with plots on them.
It looks pretty damn close to me? I can make out what appears to be the flight path. anyone else?
Do you know the date of the map in the middle? It has to be 1972 or earlier, but I don't see any recognizable features on it.
It's the map from the FBI website I believe. I've had it for a while. I turned up upright. the forum won't let me post a photo? have to see what is wrong. it's telling me it didn't pass security?
The large "control zone", which presumably is for Portland, is not consistent with the Portland control zone shown on the FBI charts.
ON SECOND VIEWING, maybe it is consistent with Portland. It is not a "control zone" but simply a boundary showing the base of the control area.
-
Actually I think Blevy might be right this time. I blew up this photo and believe that it's the path on the wall?
Those do not look like aeronautical charts to me. The FBI maps, all of them, are aeronautical charts with plots on them.
It looks pretty damn close to me? I can make out what appears to be the flight path. anyone else?
Do you know the date of the map in the middle? It has to be 1972 or earlier, but I don't see any recognizable features on it.
It's the map from the FBI website I believe. I've had it for a while. I turned up upright. the forum won't let me post a photo? have to see what is wrong. it's telling me it didn't pass security?
The large "control zone", which presumably is for Portland, is not consistent with the Portland control zone shown on the FBI charts.
Didn't you say there was aeronautical changes after the map was made?
-
Actually I think Blevy might be right this time. I blew up this photo and believe that it's the path on the wall?
Those do not look like aeronautical charts to me. The FBI maps, all of them, are aeronautical charts with plots on them.
It looks pretty damn close to me? I can make out what appears to be the flight path. anyone else?
Do you know the date of the map in the middle? It has to be 1972 or earlier, but I don't see any recognizable features on it.
It's the map from the FBI website I believe. I've had it for a while. I turned up upright. the forum won't let me post a photo? have to see what is wrong. it's telling me it didn't pass security?
The large "control zone", which presumably is for Portland, is not consistent with the Portland control zone shown on the FBI charts.
Didn't you say there was aeronautical changes after the map was made?
I have amended my last post to indicate that what I was looking at was apparently simply an indicator of the base of the control area (which relates to altitude and visibility).
Since this map is presumably on the wall of the people doing the search in early 1972, it could not be dated later than 1972. These aeronautical charts were updated ever six months in the 1972 era.
-
Here is a map from SkyVector. it appears they changed the "Control Area"
-
Here is another flight path map. it's from "historicalwings.com"
(http://fly.historicwings.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/HighFlight-DBCooper3-219x300.jpg)
An earlier best Estimate of the Flight Path of “Dan Cooper” on Northwest Orient Flight 305; Seattle is marked in yellow on top; overlaid onto a modern FAA sectional chart (2012) — best estimate of where he came down based on winds would be about 40 miles ENE of Portland International Airport (second large yellow area from the top as marked on this chart).
-
And one more of a search map. this is from Seattlepi....
-
Here is a map from SkyVector. it appears they changed the "Control Area"
Major changes have been made in controlled airspace and its representation on maps since 1971.
-
Here is another flight path map. it's from "historicalwings.com"
(http://fly.historicwings.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/HighFlight-DBCooper3-219x300.jpg)
An earlier best Estimate of the Flight Path of “Dan Cooper” on Northwest Orient Flight 305; Seattle is marked in yellow on top; overlaid onto a modern FAA sectional chart (2012) — best estimate of where he came down based on winds would be about 40 miles ENE of Portland International Airport (second large yellow area from the top as marked on this chart).
That "40 miles ENE of Portland International Airport" would put Cooper halfway to Pasco. That just doesn't work.
-
And one more of a search map. this is from Seattlepi....
I would be wary of that one (search map) from the PI.
The PI also posted this! Note position of Tina Bar.
-
I think this is the site where I got the FBI map from. the link doesn't seem to work going to the FBI anymore. they probably took the photo down..
http://www.wickenburgnews.com/news/coopermystery.htm
Here is another look at the photo with the map on the wall. is it possible the "No's" are on that map?
Also Georger, do you know who the agent is? I can't find the site where the photo came from..
-
I think this is the site where I got the FBI map from. the link doesn't seem to work going to the FBI anymore. they probably took the photo down..
http://www.wickenburgnews.com/news/coopermystery.htm
Here is another look at the photo with the map on the wall. is it possible the "No's" are on that map?
Also Georger, do you know who the agent is? I can't find the site where the photo came from..
That may be Tom Manning.
What is this PI map supposed to depict ? Anyone know?
-
I don't know unless they are just showing a map they used? Ariel is boxed off?
the caption to the photo reads: A map used in 1972 during the search for D.B. Cooper. (The Associated Press/provided by seattlepi.com file)
-
I don't know unless they are just showing a map they used? Ariel is boxed off?
the caption to the photo reads: A map used in 1972 during the search for D.B. Cooper. (The Associated Press/provided by seattlepi.com file)
What is the attachment limit here? I cant post any of the newspaper page photos I have here ???
-
I don't know unless they are just showing a map they used? Ariel is boxed off?
the caption to the photo reads: A map used in 1972 during the search for D.B. Cooper. (The Associated Press/provided by seattlepi.com file)
What is the attachment limit here? I cant post any of the newspaper page photos I have here ???
192 kb's. what size is your documents?
-
I don't know unless they are just showing a map they used? Ariel is boxed off?
the caption to the photo reads: A map used in 1972 during the search for D.B. Cooper. (The Associated Press/provided by seattlepi.com file)
What is the attachment limit here? I cant post any of the newspaper page photos I have here ???
192 kb's. what size is your documents?
The last one I tried to post was 200kb. Can the limit be increased?
-
yes, I'll increase it now.....
-
yes, I'll increase it now.....
let us know what its increased to ???
-
yes, I'll increase it now.....
let us know what its increased to ???
I set it at 200 kb's. it tells you at the bottom where you "choose file"
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip
Restrictions: 3 per post, maximum total size 668KB, maximum individual size 200KB
-
What is that "NO" on the flightpath plot released by the FBI?
(re. the duscussion under "clues, documents and evidence" (http://www.thedbcooperforum.com/index.php?topic=6.msg2272#msg2272))
It isn't "NO." It's a repaired "NB."
The full flightpath plot was made in three pieces which were then stuck together. Each piece was plotted on an aeronautical chart. The piece that had 44°N through 46°N was cut off along a constant-latitude line about 1/4 minute north of the 46°N line. This piece was then pasted down on top of the corresponding part of the piece that covered 46°N and northward. This covered up material that was on the latter (northern) piece of chart.
The material that was covered up is apparent from magnifying the 46°N vicinity of the higher resolution flightpath plot we've discussed some in the past. It includes part of a state name. It includes arrows for time annotations that had been written on the northern piece of chart. And, it includes the lower part of the "NB" that had been written on that piece of chart.
After the central chart piece was stuck on the more northern piece, someone replaced the part of the "B" that had been covered but did not replace the covered part of the "N." And the replaced part of the "B" was done with a narrower, less dense marker.
What about the meaning of "NB"?
The "B" means that the 1°x1° quadrangle in which "NB" appears is in a 1° wide band of latitude that is the second such band north of the latitude baseline (45°N) of zone DK. The "N" means that the quadrangle is in a 1° band of longitude that is the 13th band starting from the western baseline (135°W longitude) of that zone DK. To those who know the coordinate system, the "NB" means the 1°x1° quadrangle is the one lying between 46°N, 123°W and 47°N, 122°W. By convention the code was placed in the lower left corner of the quadrangle.
A couple of questions are obvious. What's that "zone DK"? And, why all the complexity? You can look right on the chart and see that the 1°x1° quadrangle lies between 46°N, 123°W and 47°N, 122°W. First question first.
This is all part of a thing called the "world geographic reference system," conventionally abbreviated "GEOREF." This obsolete system was used by the air force and army air force. It is pretty much equivalent to latitude and longitude except that it identifies areas, rather than points, and cannot be nearly as precise.
In the system, the longitudes of the world are divided into 24 15°-wide bands of longitude eastward from the 180° longitude meridian. These bands are assigned letters from A to Z, excluding I and O, starting at the band on the east side of 180° longitude.
Similarly, latitudes are divided into twelve 15° bands which are assigned letters A to M starting at the band adjacent to the south pole.
The intersections of the 15°-wide latitude bands and longitude bands creates zones which are 15°x15° quadrangles which are uniquely identified by the letter for the longitude zone followed by the letter for the latitude zone.
Using this system, the fourth longitude band (designated "D") would extend from 135°W to 120°W and would encompass the areas with which we are concerned. Latitude band J would be 30°N to 45°N and would encompass the areas of the flightpath south of about Salem, OR and latitude band K would be 45°N to 60°N and would encompass the areas north of Salem. Hence the areas south of Salem would be in 15°x15° quadrangle (zone) DJ and the areas to the north would be in zone DK.
This system also includes breaking each of the 15° bands (lat and lon) into 15 1°-wide bands. These then are assigned letters A to Q (skipping I and O) from the south and from the east. Because the longitudes between 123° and 122° are the 13th band, the longitude band is assigned letter "N," and this is the first letter of the identifications of all the 1°x1° quadrangles in the areas of the flightpath. The three quandrangles north of 45°N are DKNA, DKNB and DKNC. The system uses 2 letters to identify large quadrangles, plus 2 more letters to identify the smaller quadrangles within the large ones.
The three 1°x1° quadrangles south of 45°N are the 13th, 14th and 15th in the "N" longitude zone of 15°x15° quadrangle DJ, so they are DJNN, DJNP and DJNQ. The "NP" was not marked on the lower half of the complete flightpath plot, but the "NN" and "NQ" were. So the NN and NQ on the plot are not "in sequence" with the NA, NB and NC in the upper half of the plot because they are in a different 15°x15° quadrangle than the NA, NB and NC.
So, to the second question. Why put the notations on the chart?
The notations are conspicuous. They were put on the separate pieces before the pieces were put together and served to make it easy and quick for the people who put the pieces together to put them together in the right sequence. It was an assembly aid. Those people were accustomed to the GEOREF system. Up until about 1971 the quadrangle identifications had been preprinted on the airforce edition aero charts the people were accustomed to using. Those charts also included explanations of how to use the system to identify and reference 1-minute by 1-minute geographical areas.
-
What is that "NO" on the flightpath plot released by the FBI?
(re. the duscussion under "other documents and evidence" (http://www.thedbcooperforum.com/index.php?topic=6.msg2272#msg2272))
It isn't "NO." It's a repaired "NB."
The full flightpath plot was made in three pieces which were then stuck together. Each piece was plotted on an aeronautical chart. The piece that had 44°N through 46°N was cut off along a constant-latitude line about 1/4 minute north of the 46°N line. This piece was then pasted down on top of the corresponding part of the piece that covered 46°N and northward. This covered up material that was on the latter (northern) piece of chart.
The material that was covered up is apparent from magnifying the 46°N vicinity of the higher resolution flightpath plot we've discussed some in the past. It includes part of a state name. It includes arrows for time annotations that had been written on the northern piece of chart. And, it includes the lower part of the "NB" that had been written on that piece of chart.
After the central chart piece was stuck on the more northern piece, someone replaced the part of the "B" that had been covered but did not replace the covered part of the "N." And the replaced part of the "B" was done with a narrower, less dense marker.
What about the meaning of "NB"?
The "B" means that the 1°x1° quadrangle in which "NB" appears is in a 1° wide band of latitude that is the second such band north of the latitude baseline (45°N) of zone DK. The "N" means that the quadrangle is in a 1° band of longitude that is the 13th band starting from the western baseline (135°W longitude) of that zone DK. To those who know the coordinate system, the "NB" means the 1°x1° quadrangle is the one lying between 46°N, 123°W and 47°N, 122°W. By convention the code was placed in the lower left corner of the quadrangle.
A couple of questions are obvious. What's that "zone DK"? And, why all the complexity? You can look right on the chart and see that the 1°x1° quadrangle lies between 46°N, 123°W and 47°N, 122°W. First question first.
This is all part of a thing called the "world geographic reference system," conventionally abbreviated "GEOREF." This obsolete system was used by the air force and army air force. It is pretty much equivalent to latitude and longitude except that it identifies areas, rather than points, and cannot be nearly as precise.
In the system, the longitudes of the world are divided into 24 15°-wide bands of longitude eastward from the 180° longitude meridian. These bands are assigned letters from A to Z, excluding I and O, starting at the band on the east side of 180° longitude.
Similarly, latitudes are divided into twelve 15° bands which are assigned letters A to M starting at the band adjacent to the south pole.
The intersections of the 15°-wide latitude bands and longitude bands creates zones which are 15°x15° quadrangles which are uniquely identified by the letter for the longitude zone followed by the letter for the latitude zone.
Using this system, the fourth longitude band (designated "D") would extend from 135°W to 120°W and would encompass the areas with which we are concerned. Latitude band J would be 30°N to 45°N and would encompass the areas of the flightpath south of about Salem, OR and latitude band K would be 45°N to 60°N and would encompass the areas north of Salem. Hence the areas south of Salem would be in 15°x15° quadrangle (zone) DJ and the areas to the north would be in zone DK.
This system also includes breaking each of the 15° bands (lat and lon) into 15 1°-wide bands. These then are assigned letters A to Q (skipping I and O) from the south and from the east. Because the longitudes between 123° and 122° are the 13th band, the longitude band is assigned letter "N," and this is the first letter of the identifications of all the 1°x1° quadrangles in the areas of the flightpath. The three quandrangles north of 45°N are DKNA, DKNB and DKNC. The system uses 2 letters to identifies large quadrangles, plus 2 more letters to identify the smaller quadrangles within the large ones.
The three 1°x1° quadrangles south of 45°N are the 13th, 14th and 15th in the "N" longitude zone of 15°x15° quadrangle DJ, so they are DJNN, DJNP and DJNQ. The "NP" was not marked on the lower half of the complete flightpath plot, but the "NN" and "NQ" were. So the NN and NQ on the plot are not "in sequence" with the NA, NB and NC in the upper half of the plot because they are in a different 15°x15° quadrangle than the NA, NB and NC.
So, to the second question. Why put the notations on the chart?
The notations are conspicuous. They were put on the separate pieces before the pieces were put together and served to make it easy and quick for the people who put the pieces together to put them together in the right sequence. It was an assembly aid. Those people were accustomed to the GEOREF system. Up until about 1971 the quadrangle identifications had been preprinted on the airforce edition aero charts the people were accustomed to using. Those charts also included explanations of how to use the system to identify and reference 1-minute by 1-minute geographical areas.
Yes. It all makes sense, now. Thanks!
-
Nice report Hominid....as usual. thanks for clearing it up. didn't Jo claim she wrote "No" on the map 8)
(http://us.cdn4.123rf.com/168nwm/arcady31/arcady311206/arcady31120600002/13986246-gold-award-medal-with-ribbon-vector-illustration.jpg)
-
Nice report Hominid....as usual. thanks for clearing it up. didn't Jo claim she wrote "No" on the map 8)
Thanks. Haven't a clue re. her claiming it. Don't read much of what she writes. Too hard to figure out what she's trying to say.
-
Nice report Hominid....as usual. thanks for clearing it up. didn't Jo claim she wrote "No" on the map 8)
Thanks. Haven't a clue re. her claiming it. Don't read much of what she writes. Too hard to figure out what she's trying to say.
Jo DID claim that she wrote "NO" on the map. But that doesn't mean that she had even seen it before it turned up online here.
-
Nice report Hominid....as usual. thanks for clearing it up. didn't Jo claim she wrote "No" on the map 8)
Thanks. Haven't a clue re. her claiming it. Don't read much of what she writes. Too hard to figure out what she's trying to say.
Jo DID claim that she wrote "NO" on the map. But that doesn't mean that she had even seen it before it turned up online here.
I seriously doubt the FBI would allow someone to scribble on potential evidence, or something that could be used in Court. obviously the letters have been on there from the beginning. 8)
-
Nice report Hominid....as usual. thanks for clearing it up. didn't Jo claim she wrote "No" on the map 8)
Thanks. Haven't a clue re. her claiming it. Don't read much of what she writes. Too hard to figure out what she's trying to say.
Jo DID claim that she wrote "NO" on the map. But that doesn't mean that she had even seen it before it turned up online here.
I seriously doubt the FBI would allow someone to scribble on potential evidence, or something that could be used in Court. obviously the letters have been on there from the beginning. 8)
Hominid may have just uncovered the reason(s) that the FBI chart is nonsense. It looks like that chart is a montage of all the charts they could get their hands on and may have combined nautical miles, statute miles, meters, and who knows what else, in its creation.
Trying to understand that map is one of those "Abandon Hope" type of situations.
Goggle "US Army Map Reading and Land Navigation Handbook", which is FM 3-25-26, to learn more about all the unusual military type of map reference systems including GEOREF.
-
Nice report Hominid....as usual. thanks for clearing it up. didn't Jo claim she wrote "No" on the map 8)
(http://us.cdn4.123rf.com/168nwm/arcady31/arcady311206/arcady31120600002/13986246-gold-award-medal-with-ribbon-vector-illustration.jpg)
That's a good one! :) :) :) :) :) Like Hom I never can follow Jo Weber but she definitely said she knew 'who' had written "NO" on the chart and I think she said the "NO" referred to "NOT THE REAL FLIGHT MAP" or something to that effect. She obviously failed to see all the other "NX"'s below the "NO". Oh well. Typical Jo.
-
Nice report Hominid....as usual. thanks for clearing it up. didn't Jo claim she wrote "No" on the map 8)
Thanks. Haven't a clue re. her claiming it. Don't read much of what she writes. Too hard to figure out what she's trying to say.
Jo DID claim that she wrote "NO" on the map. But that doesn't mean that she had even seen it before it turned up online here.
Are you saying people's posts create Jo's next headline? :)
-
Nice report Hominid....as usual. thanks for clearing it up. didn't Jo claim she wrote "No" on the map 8)
Thanks. Haven't a clue re. her claiming it. Don't read much of what she writes. Too hard to figure out what she's trying to say.
Jo DID claim that she wrote "NO" on the map. But that doesn't mean that she had even seen it before it turned up online here.
Are you saying people's posts create Jo's next headline? :)
Yes, indeed! Just make a post that Batman was involved in the Cooper hijacking and Jo will weave him into one of her five page posts and include first hand stories of how Batman and Duane were pub-crawling buddies. And how Duane attended Robin's Bar Mitzvah.
-
Nice report Hominid....as usual. thanks for clearing it up. didn't Jo claim she wrote "No" on the map 8)
Thanks. Haven't a clue re. her claiming it. Don't read much of what she writes. Too hard to figure out what she's trying to say.
Jo DID claim that she wrote "NO" on the map. But that doesn't mean that she had even seen it before it turned up online here.
Are you saying people's posts create Jo's next headline? :)
Yes, indeed! Just make a post that Batman was involved in the Cooper hijacking and Jo will weave him into one of her five page posts and include first hand stories of how Batman and Duane were pub-crawling buddies. And how Duane attended Robin's Bar Mitzvah.
No one knows that better than Himmelsbach! He really stepped into it when he took Jo in.
-
So, why do you think that Rataczak gave me two incompatible answers on the FP, Georger?
Do you think it might be intentional?
I do.
BTW: Himmelsbach told me that he and Bill Rataczak have become best friends in the aftermath of the Cooper case. In fact, Bill called Himms while I was chatting with Ralph in his living room.
Coincidence? I wonder if Mrs. Himms called Billy when I sat down on those lovely turquoise leather couches....
..just sayin'.
Yes. I am sure Rataczak is being selective in what he says to who -
I cant/wont comment on Anderson.
Didn't Rataczak have a rather horrendous accident on his pushbike that included a sizable whack to his head? I don't mean to be unkind, but it may not have done much for his memory.
I spoke with Rataczak for 70 minutes on the phone in 2009 and after the accident, and he displayed no cognitive impairments whatsoever.
-
Blevins is playing his usual games with the flight path issue. Very simply it was the FBI, Larry Carr, (who came to us!) looking for advice about ... the flight path. Neither Cooper or any sign of him has ever been found, except for his money. The location of the money and the known flight path are quite divergent. It only makes sense that one would question the flight path and that is precisely what Carr and the FBI came to Dropzone to do ...... so Whiplash Blevins amid your claims of personal abuse and other Chicken Little stuff, don't try to change the history of Dropzone, and that's just for starters.
So you accept the FBI's flight path on faith, without knowing anything about it other than empty platitudes
and name-dropping, and people you don't know anything about either! Frankly, you speaking about the DB Cooper flight path is a lot like the horses' ass speaking about radar! Give the world a break Blevinaide, from your ignorant self abusive games.
Stop with the red herring: 'have you talked to Rataczak?'. You have not talked to Rataczak! :D
Stop with the straw man: "You should be talking to the FBI, not me!". Well Blevinaide, nobody is talking to you about anything looking for answers. It is you doing all the talking! People are merely answering trying to cope with your personal attacks you have repeated thousands of times since August 2010. The correct response would be: "GFY and STFU and go scrub a floor or clean carpet and stay the hell out of the Cooper debate and people's lives!!" ;D
Quick Test: You tell us what Cooper's last order was for flap settings just prior to his bailing out?
You tell us where flight #305 was at 8:20pm
You tell us where the T33's came from and how and where they were directed to intercept 305, by who?
:)
-
Let me try and answer for him since he returns that favor so many time in the past.
Some "pretty smart guys" made the flight path. 8)
Those same "smart guys" including members from NWO are too stupid to realize one of there own guys did this crime ;D
Followed by LOL, (*wink*) (*smiles*) and a lot of "are you kidding me (*laughs*)"
This is the same guy looking for truth, but wants to hold off the report to the FBI in order to push a questionable story about movie rights about the "KC Saga" the guy who wants to stall them, but only has until Sunday?
-
Let me try and answer for him since he returns that favor so many time in the past.
Some "pretty smart guys" made the flight path. 8)
Those same "smart guys" including members from NWO are too stupid to realize one of there own guys did this crime ;D
Followed by LOL, (*wink*) (*smiles*) and a lot of "are you kidding me (*laughs*)"
This is the same guy looking for truth, but wants to hold off the report to the FBI in order to push a questionable story about movie rights about the "KC Saga" the guy who wants to stall them, but only has until Sunday?
And his use of "pretty smart guys" comes directly from Tom Kaye@! They are Tom's words! Blevins is even stealing Tom line and using it as his own!!!
What a Smurf.
-
Let me try and answer for him since he returns that favor so many time in the past.
Some "pretty smart guys" made the flight path. 8)
Those same "smart guys" including members from NWO are too stupid to realize one of there own guys did this crime ;D
Followed by LOL, (*wink*) (*smiles*) and a lot of "are you kidding me (*laughs*)"
This is the same guy looking for truth, but wants to hold off the report to the FBI in order to push a questionable story about movie rights about the "KC Saga" the guy who wants to stall them, but only has until Sunday?
And his use of "pretty smart guys" comes directly from Tom Kaye@! They are Tom's words! Blevins is even stealing Tom line and using it as his own!!!
What a Smurf.
Blevins keeps dropping this canard -
As far as determining the flight path after the plane left Seattle, I think you can point to Paul Soderlind (pictures attached) for a lot of that. Rataczak names Soderlind and his team as a primary force in determining where Cooper jumped. Soderlind was probably the smartest guy who ever worked for NWA.
"Soderlind was probably the smartest guy who ever worked for NWA." :) :) :) :) :)
It's laughable and idiotic.
"Soderlind and his team."
Soderlind is now leading a TEAM of students and inferiors! ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
The USAF is now under Soderlind's command! Hupp one two three four ... right face! :) :) :) :) :)
Saint Soderlind, ruler of the Universe!
Wir werden weiter marschieren Soderlind
Wenn alles in Scherben fällt, Soderlind
Denn heute da hört uns Deutschland Soderlind
Und morgen die ganze Welt. das Soderlind
Ja Vol YA VOL MEIN kommandant.
Uber Alles Soderlind, ja vol!
Hupp two three four.
Herr Soderlind ist uber alles.
All according to Herr Blevins who has an infatuation with Soderlind! ;)
-
Ok, our fun is over with a 2 post per day maximum. let's try to keep things focused on this side of the board. yes, that includes me too. ;D ;D
-
Carr states this about the flight path:
"The map is an investigative tool calculated from several pieces of evidence. If one piece is slightly wrong it throws off the map, which could explain why nothing was found on the original search and the money was found where it was."
He also explains in a video that the map shows the path the plane took, or the alleged flight path. both comments leave questions about the path.
more to follow:
I am with you on the oscillation, when i read through the case file it seems as if the "pressure bump" and oscillation were one in the same. For me the finding of the money changes all of that. If there is no logical, verifiable piece of evidence or information that can point to the money ending up where it did by human hands, then it had to get there on its own from the environment. Since I can't find anything that says it was human, then it had to be environment. Because there is no way the money could have ended up where it did from
Page break....
the original search area, then the original dropzone was calculated wrong. Therefore, it stands to reason that the crew felt oscillations at 8:12 and the pressure bump a few minutes later. The second officer stated the last contact they had with Cooper was 8:05 and it was 5 to 10 minutes after that they felt the pressure change. I also don't think a trained air crew would mix up terms, an oscillation would be just that and a pressure change would be called a pressure change or bump. I think where things went wrong was during the testing. For some reason we were not to re-create oscillations only the pressure bump. At this point the terms must have been combined and believed to be one in the same.
-
Carr states this about the flight path:
"The map is an investigative tool calculated from several pieces of evidence. If one piece is slightly wrong it throws off the map, which could explain why nothing was found on the original search and the money was found where it was."
He also explains in a video that the map shows the path the plane took, or the alleged flight path. both comments leave questions about the path.
more to follow:
I am with you on the oscillation, when i read through the case file it seems as if the "pressure bump" and oscillation were one in the same. For me the finding of the money changes all of that. If there is no logical, verifiable piece of evidence or information that can point to the money ending up where it did by human hands, then it had to get there on its own from the environment. Since I can't find anything that says it was human, then it had to be environment. Because there is no way the money could have ended up where it did from
Page break....
the original search area, then the original dropzone was calculated wrong. Therefore, it stands to reason that the crew felt oscillations at 8:12 and the pressure bump a few minutes later. The second officer stated the last contact they had with Cooper was 8:05 and it was 5 to 10 minutes after that they felt the pressure change. I also don't think a trained air crew would mix up terms, an oscillation would be just that and a pressure change would be called a pressure change or bump. I think where things went wrong was during the testing. For some reason we were not to re-create oscillations only the pressure bump. At this point the terms must have been combined and believed to be one in the same.
Ckret never talked to Anderson, so far as I know. I hope I am not wrong about that. I hope I am not wrong about that because if Ckret had talked to Anderson (and he still could!), if the answers we have from Anderson are true, then the bump was not reported immediately with the bump happening but a number of minutes later, "after we discussed it for a few minutes then Rataczak called it in and we still weren't sure...". It's delays like that that add up in minutes at precisely the time when minutes in reporting, and assigning a time to the jump, is crucial. Three minutes? Five minutes? That brings the location of the jump further south of say Battleground, closer to the Columbia itself. And exploring issues like that was one of the key reason Ckret came to Dropzone at all. (which Blevins seems totally unaware of.)
-
Wild card question -
Were there any revolving beacons or lights (aviation or maritime) working in the vicinity of PDX or Vancouver or Portland on the night of the hijacking, when 305 passed through?
-
Wild card question -
Were there any revolving beacons or lights (aviation or maritime) working in the vicinity of PDX or Vancouver or Portland on the night of the hijacking, when 305 passed through?
A quick guess would be lights on the bridges for one. then of course PDX just to the east....
Pearson field airport close to I-5
-
I spotted a tower while flying at night. I took a screenshot of the sim, and Google street view. they are in the same location a little over a half a mile north of the Columbia on I-5 it has a blinking beacon (red)
I can drive on the roads too ;D
-
I spotted a tower while flying at night. I took a screenshot of the sim, and Google street view. they are in the same location a little over a half a mile north of the Columbia on I-5 it has a blinking beacon (red)
High things all over the country have blinking lights (red, if I'm remembering right). Example: AM radio antennas. It's to keep planes from crashing into them at night. This was true in the 1970 dark ages too.
-
I spotted a tower while flying at night. I took a screenshot of the sim, and Google street view. they are in the same location a little over a half a mile north of the Columbia on I-5 it has a blinking beacon (red)
High things all over the country have blinking lights (red, if I'm remembering right). Example: AM radio antennas. It's to keep planes from crashing into them at night. This was true in the 1970 dark ages too.
Correct, I was just answering G's question about lights in the area. you also have different intensities with different heights.
Were there any revolving beacons or lights (aviation or maritime)
-
I spotted a tower while flying at night. I took a screenshot of the sim, and Google street view. they are in the same location a little over a half a mile north of the Columbia on I-5 it has a blinking beacon (red)
High things all over the country have blinking lights (red, if I'm remembering right). Example: AM radio antennas. It's to keep planes from crashing into them at night. This was true in the 1970 dark ages too.
Correct, I was just answering G's question about lights in the area. you also have different intensities with different heights.
Were there any revolving beacons or lights (aviation or maritime)
Rataczak says he, they, could see the lights of Portland/Vancouver coming up - at 8:10. Some dispute this was possible due to cloud cover. Rotating beacons, like light houses, tend to be noticed from a distance due to the blinking on/off effect. It's likely Cooper looked around from the stairs at least prior to jumping. People have said the bright lights on the Lake Merwin dam might have been visible from a distance. Bright rotating and blinking beacons near PDX might have been visible? It's just a thought -
-
I spotted a tower while flying at night. I took a screenshot of the sim, and Google street view. they are in the same location a little over a half a mile north of the Columbia on I-5 it has a blinking beacon (red)
High things all over the country have blinking lights (red, if I'm remembering right). Example: AM radio antennas. It's to keep planes from crashing into them at night. This was true in the 1970 dark ages too.
Correct, I was just answering G's question about lights in the area. you also have different intensities with different heights.
Were there any revolving beacons or lights (aviation or maritime)
Rataczak says he, they, could see the lights of Portland/Vancouver coming up - at 8:10. Some dispute this was possible due to cloud cover. Rotating beacons, like light houses, tend to be noticed from a distance due to the blinking on/off effect. It's likely Cooper looked around from the stairs at least prior to jumping. People have said the bright lights on the Lake Merwin dam might have been visible from a distance. Bright rotating and blinking beacons near PDX might have been visible? It's just a thought -
Did Rataczak see lights on the ground or just the glow from Portland/Vancouver, which can be quite pronounced, through the clouds?
-
I spotted a tower while flying at night. I took a screenshot of the sim, and Google street view. they are in the same location a little over a half a mile north of the Columbia on I-5 it has a blinking beacon (red)
High things all over the country have blinking lights (red, if I'm remembering right). Example: AM radio antennas. It's to keep planes from crashing into them at night. This was true in the 1970 dark ages too.
Correct, I was just answering G's question about lights in the area. you also have different intensities with different heights.
Were there any revolving beacons or lights (aviation or maritime)
Rataczak says he, they, could see the lights of Portland/Vancouver coming up - at 8:10. Some dispute this was possible due to cloud cover. Rotating beacons, like light houses, tend to be noticed from a distance due to the blinking on/off effect. It's likely Cooper looked around from the stairs at least prior to jumping. People have said the bright lights on the Lake Merwin dam might have been visible from a distance. Bright rotating and blinking beacons near PDX might have been visible? It's just a thought -
Did Rataczak see lights on the ground or just the glow from Portland/Vancouver, which can be quite pronounced, through the clouds?
I will find the quote.
-
Rataczak says he, they, could see the lights of Portland/Vancouver coming up - at 8:10. Some dispute this was possible due to cloud cover. Rotating beacons, like light houses, tend to be noticed from a distance due to the blinking on/off effect. It's likely Cooper looked around from the stairs at least prior to jumping. People have said the bright lights on the Lake Merwin dam might have been visible from a distance. Bright rotating and blinking beacons near PDX might have been visible? It's just a thought -
There are a few things that should be understood about cloud cover information as it relates to flight 305 while it approached Portland.
The first is that the information we have applies strictly to a specific place at a specific time. That specific place was not the location of flight 305, and the specific time was not when the flight was nearing Vancouver and Portland.
The cloud cover information we have is about what portion of the sky could be seen (or not seen) from a cloud-cover observation site at PDX. This information also says what portion of the sky around PDX an airplane could be in such that the crew would be able to clearly see back to the cloud observation point at PDX. It's a reciprocal relationship.
The cloud coverage data doesn't apply exactly to what cloud coverage would be seen from a place other than PDX (e.g., Battle Ground). And it doesn't apply exactly to the question of what could be seen on the ground at places other than PDX. Applicability to places other than the PDX observation site is only approximate.
Also, the cloud coverage information we have was for 8pm and 9pm. Clouds aren't static. There was in fact a clearing trend. So the information we have applies only approximately for 8:13pm.
The second important thing to understand is that cloud coverage classified as "overcast" does not (and did not then) mean complete coverage. For some time now, the cloud coverage definitions are in terms of eighths of the sky that are covered. In 1971 the definitions were in terms of tenths, and "overcast" meant more than 9 tenths coverage. This could still leave a small part of the sky that would be visible from the PDX observation site. A plane could occasionally pass through small areas where it would be able to see PDX.
Finally, it is incorrect to characterize the cloud cover as being layers of scattered and broken cover AND an overcast. The fact is that the definitions (then and now) are in terms of cummulative cover. A cloud layer is classified as "broken" if that layer plus the layers below it block a certain amount of sky. An overcast in 1971 was a cloud layer that, along with all lower layers, blocked more than 9 tenths of the sky. For example, a layer blocking half the sky could be an overcast layer if the lower layers blocked a different half of the sky. Depending upon vertical spacing between layers, it would in such a case be possible for an airplane crew to see through a "hole" in one cloud layer, through the space between layers, then through a hole in a lower layer to see some point on the ground.
-
I have brought up the escape from Alcatraz before. I just watched the episode I've seen before, but I caught a few things I didn't the first time. the FBI handed over the case to the US Marshal's in the late 70's. it took them almost two years to give them all the files? a lot of the original files were stored at the National Archives in San Francisco.
This was where the Agent who is currently on the case discovered the buried files about a raft being found, and a car being stolen the next day. If you don't recall, the FBI claimed for years that no raft was found, and no crimes committed following the escape. Alcatraz was a Federal prison with the reputation of being escape proof. could the FBI be following the same guidelines with this case? the escape I can almost understand that they were under pressure not to look bad with the escape proof prison proving them wrong. did they quickly assume they all drown? why would pieces not related to the raft show up days later? and oar, there life vests, a packet of photo's, but not a single piece of a rather large raft? records also indicate a boat was close to the Island just after midnight. the engine cut off, and started moments later?
Here we have key pieces of evidence missing? the butts, the glass Cooper drank from. these are important to the crime, perhaps not so important in 1971, but if it took them two years to get all the files in order it could be from an organizing issue, to going over what to give the Marshall's office. it's almost like they meant to bury the key pieces in the archives hoping nobody would bother?
-
Ceiling of 5,000 feet, broken clouds at 3,500, scattered clouds at 1,500. Winds of 12 to 14 knots, light rain showers.
-
Rataczak says he, they, could see the lights of Portland/Vancouver coming up - at 8:10. Some dispute this was possible due to cloud cover. Rotating beacons, like light houses, tend to be noticed from a distance due to the blinking on/off effect. It's likely Cooper looked around from the stairs at least prior to jumping. People have said the bright lights on the Lake Merwin dam might have been visible from a distance. Bright rotating and blinking beacons near PDX might have been visible? It's just a thought -
There are a few things that should be understood about cloud cover information as it relates to flight 305 while it approached Portland.
The first is that the information we have applies strictly to a specific place at a specific time. That specific place was not the location of flight 305, and the specific time was not when the flight was nearing Vancouver and Portland.
The cloud cover information we have is about what portion of the sky could be seen (or not seen) from a cloud-cover observation site at PDX. This information also says what portion of the sky around PDX an airplane could be in such that the crew would be able to clearly see back to the cloud observation point at PDX. It's a reciprocal relationship.
The cloud coverage data doesn't apply exactly to what cloud coverage would be seen from a place other than PDX (e.g., Battle Ground). And it doesn't apply exactly to the question of what could be seen on the ground at places other than PDX. Applicability to places other than the PDX observation site is only approximate.
Also, the cloud coverage information we have was for 8pm and 9pm. Clouds aren't static. There was in fact a clearing trend. So the information we have applies only approximately for 8:13pm.
The second important thing to understand is that cloud coverage classified as "overcast" does not (and did not then) mean complete coverage. For some time now, the cloud coverage definitions are in terms of eighths of the sky that are covered. In 1971 the definitions were in terms of tenths, and "overcast" meant more than 9 tenths coverage. This could still leave a small part of the sky that would be visible from the PDX observation site. A plane could occasionally pass through small areas where it would be able to see PDX.
Finally, it is incorrect to characterize the cloud cover as being layers of scattered and broken cover AND an overcast. The fact is that the definitions (then and now) are in terms of cummulative cover. A cloud layer is classified as "broken" if that layer plus the layers below it block a certain amount of sky. An overcast in 1971 was a cloud layer that, along with all lower layers, blocked more than 9 tenths of the sky. For example, a layer blocking half the sky could be an overcast layer if the lower layers blocked a different half of the sky. Depending upon vertical spacing between layers, it would in such a case be possible for an airplane crew to see through a "hole" in one cloud layer, through the space between layers, then through a hole in a lower layer to see some point on the ground.
The description of a cloud layer applies only to that single cloud layer. The description of an overcast applies only to the single cloud layer that is described as an overcast and has nothing to do with any cloud layers that are below it or above it. An "overcast" itself would cover from 90 percent of the sky to 100 percent of the sky. Any cloud layers below the "overcast" would further obscure vision.
Weather information such as cloud layers and their height above the ground or sea level are not limited to ground observers alone but may also include pilot reports of the weather. Also, it should be remembered that the weather information reported in the hourly sequence reports is normally recorded at about 10 minutes before the hour in question.
The matter of observation of ground lights, such as airport beacons, is not as simple as it may appear. In the specific case of airport beacons, they are configured to be easier to observe at lower altitudes. That is, they are essentially two (or three) rotating flashlights pointed just above the horizon. They are not one or two big light bulbs flashing on and off. The end result is that if you are flying at 1000 feet over flat terrain you can see the airport beacons from 10 or 15 miles away. But your view of the beacon would be somewhat more restricted if you were at 10,000 feet and the same distance from it.
-
I think you have to keep in mind that Cooper doesn't have the flight plan, it's just a direction (Mexico City,) maybe he's done the flight before, that's a maybe, he agrees to Reno, doesn't seem to care that much *meh* same-ish direction, he wants to get out the aircraft, aft stair issues, his plan is general/simple, he rolls the dice (everyone argues the difficulty of the jump but it's easy when you have no choice) and bails, BUT when he hits the broken cloud layer then he could see a general idea of the river, highway, dam, whatever.
-
The description of a cloud layer applies only to that single cloud layer. The description of an overcast applies only to the single cloud layer that is described as an overcast and has nothing to do with any cloud layers that are below it or above it. An "overcast" itself would cover from 90 percent of the sky to 100 percent of the sky. Any cloud layers below the "overcast" would further obscure vision.
Following is from Section 2 of Aviation Weather Services Advisory Circular AC 00-45G, Change 1, published jointly by the National Weather Service and the FAA (emphasis added to make it clear enough for you):
"When more than one layer is reported, layers are in ascending order of height. For each layer above a lower layer or layers, the sky cover designator for that layer will be the total sky cover which includes that layer and all lower layers. In other words, the summation concept of cloud layers is used.
"Transparent" sky cover is clouds or obscuring phenomena aloft through which blue sky or higher sky cover is visible. As explained in Table 2-1, a scattered, broken, or overcast layer may be reported as "thin." To be classified as thin, a layer must be half or more transparent. Remember that sky cover of a layer includes all sky cover reported below that layer."
This is from a pretty current document, but the same was true in 1971. (But, what would the weather service or FAA know about it?)
-
The description of a cloud layer applies only to that single cloud layer. The description of an overcast applies only to the single cloud layer that is described as an overcast and has nothing to do with any cloud layers that are below it or above it. An "overcast" itself would cover from 90 percent of the sky to 100 percent of the sky. Any cloud layers below the "overcast" would further obscure vision.
Following is from Section 2 of Aviation Weather Services Advisory Circular AC 00-45G, Change 1, published jointly by the National Weather Service and the FAA (emphasis added to make it clear enough for you):
"When more than one layer is reported, layers are in ascending order of height. For each layer above a lower layer or layers, the sky cover designator for that layer will be the total sky cover which includes that layer and all lower layers. In other words, the summation concept of cloud layers is used.
"Transparent" sky cover is clouds or obscuring phenomena aloft through which blue sky or higher sky cover is visible. As explained in Table 2-1, a scattered, broken, or overcast layer may be reported as "thin." To be classified as thin, a layer must be half or more transparent. Remember that sky cover of a layer includes all sky cover reported below that layer."
This is from a pretty current document, but the same was true in 1971. (But, what would the weather service or FAA know about it?)
Seen from above, the issue is light scattering through whatever cloud cover exists. Commonly called a 'light dome'. (we measure the luminosity of light domes all the time when deciding where to place an optical system). What Rataczak supposedly said was they could see the light from 'the suburbs' of Portland/Vancouver? coming up. That may be a little more limited than a general light dome over the whole area of the twin cities. Until Rataczak specifies what he means its all speculation...
-
doesn't seem to care that much *meh* same-ish direction, he wants to get out the aircraft,
Ok, apologies for a brief off topic....but I just found this out and thought it was interesting. The word "meh" came from the Simpsons TV show.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/meh?s=t
-
Ceiling of 5,000 feet, broken clouds at 3,500, scattered clouds at 1,500. Winds of 12 to 14 knots, light rain showers.
You gave no clue as to why you posted this. We've seen it for several years. If I remember correctly, I think it came to DZ from agent Carr and I think it was Robert99 that first pointed out that the report is a bit defective. The problem is incorrect usage of "ceiling." Whoever originated it must have thought that "ceiling" and "overcast" are synonymous. Given that a "broken" layer is not specified as less than normal density, the "ceiling" would be the "broken" clouds at 3500 feet. In this report, "ceiling" should have been "overcast." If the report did come from Carr, he probably got it out of the case file and it may well have come from a special report NWA got at around the time of the Portland passing. Much of what Carr posted was never questioned about things like when, where, and where did it come from, largely because people would immediately post about something else so that discussions rarely focused. With "overcast" substituted for "ceiling" this report is pretty much like the special report NWA obtained for 9:17pm:
METAR KPDX 250517Z 250517 24012KT 06SM -SHRA SCT15 BKN35 OVC50
at 9:17pm: wind 12kt from 240°true (30° S of due west), visibility 6 stat miles, light rain showers, bottom of scattered layer still at 1500ft, bottom of broken layer now at 3500ft, & bottom of overcast layer still at 5000ft. No temperature in the report.
-
I think you have to keep in mind that Cooper doesn't have the flight plan, it's just a direction (Mexico City,) maybe he's done the flight before, that's a maybe, he agrees to Reno, doesn't seem to care that much *meh* same-ish direction, he wants to get out the aircraft, aft stair issues, his plan is general/simple, he rolls the dice (everyone argues the difficulty of the jump but it's easy when you have no choice) and bails, BUT when he hits the broken cloud layer then he could see a general idea of the river, highway, dam, whatever.
Professor Moriarty, please keep in mind that Cooper jumped at night through multiple cloud layers and it is very difficult to determine landmarks when you are tumbling head over heels, as Cooper was probably doing, even in the daytime under such conditions.
-
The description of a cloud layer applies only to that single cloud layer. The description of an overcast applies only to the single cloud layer that is described as an overcast and has nothing to do with any cloud layers that are below it or above it. An "overcast" itself would cover from 90 percent of the sky to 100 percent of the sky. Any cloud layers below the "overcast" would further obscure vision.
Following is from Section 2 of Aviation Weather Services Advisory Circular AC 00-45G, Change 1, published jointly by the National Weather Service and the FAA (emphasis added to make it clear enough for you):
"When more than one layer is reported, layers are in ascending order of height. For each layer above a lower layer or layers, the sky cover designator for that layer will be the total sky cover which includes that layer and all lower layers. In other words, the summation concept of cloud layers is used.
"Transparent" sky cover is clouds or obscuring phenomena aloft through which blue sky or higher sky cover is visible. As explained in Table 2-1, a scattered, broken, or overcast layer may be reported as "thin." To be classified as thin, a layer must be half or more transparent. Remember that sky cover of a layer includes all sky cover reported below that layer."
This is from a pretty current document, but the same was true in 1971. (But, what would the weather service or FAA know about it?)
Let me check into this further. I'll be back in due time.
In another post, you list NWA as having a special weather observation made at 9:17 PM (PST?). Do you know the purpose of this observation? This observation would be approximately one hour after the airliner passed through the area headed to Reno.
-
In another post, you list NWA as having a special weather observation made at 9:17 PM (PST?). Do you know the purpose of this observation? This observation would be approximately one hour after the airliner passed through the area headed to Reno.
I don't know. This was among the reports and forecasts agent Carr brought to DZ. Wasn't a real METAR like I showed it. I typed the METAR to facilitate input to a weather generator for a flight simulator. I can check on what other locations were in the printout if you like. That might give a clue. Maybe possibility of people getting out to search? There is no explanation of anything on the printout.
-
In another post, you list NWA as having a special weather observation made at 9:17 PM (PST?). Do you know the purpose of this observation? This observation would be approximately one hour after the airliner passed through the area headed to Reno.
I don't know. This was among the reports and forecasts agent Carr brought to DZ. Wasn't a real METAR like I showed it. I typed the METAR to facilitate input to a weather generator for a flight simulator. I can check on what other locations were in the printout if you like. That might give a clue. Maybe possibility of people getting out to search? There is no explanation of anything on the printout.
I'll keep your offer in mind but at present I don't know what it would be used for. Remember that the airliner was south of Portland by about 8:18PM PST, then there was the regular 9:00PM PST hourly sequence report, and then the special one at 9:17PM PST. Special reports are normally only made in the event of such things as an aircraft accident or something of that magnitude.
-
I don't know. This was among the reports and forecasts agent Carr brought to DZ. Wasn't a real METAR like I showed it. I typed the METAR to facilitate input to a weather generator for a flight simulator. I can check on what other locations were in the printout if you like. That might give a clue. Maybe possibility of people getting out to search? There is no explanation of anything on the printout.
I'll keep your offer in mind but at present I don't know what it would be used for. Remember that the airliner was south of Portland by about 8:18PM PST, then there was the regular 9:00PM PST hourly sequence report, and then the special one at 9:17PM PST. Special reports are normally only made in the event of such things as an aircraft accident or something of that magnitude.
Because of the times being after what we were interested in, I had never paid much attention to this particular report amongst those Carr posted. There is a handwritten "Terminal Forecast" at the top. There is no header on the top of the listing. The content appears very slightly similar to current Terminal Area Forecasts. The entries are "one liners" for each airport. Each airport entry appears to be a brief statement of current condition followed by forecast, but there is no clue as to the time for which the forecast would apply. The stations in the listing are:
Astoria, Redmond, PDX, Troutdale?, Baker, Salem, North Bend (OR), Medford, Klamath Falls, and three I can't make out.
-
The description of a cloud layer applies only to that single cloud layer. The description of an overcast applies only to the single cloud layer that is described as an overcast and has nothing to do with any cloud layers that are below it or above it. An "overcast" itself would cover from 90 percent of the sky to 100 percent of the sky. Any cloud layers below the "overcast" would further obscure vision.
Following is from Section 2 of Aviation Weather Services Advisory Circular AC 00-45G, Change 1, published jointly by the National Weather Service and the FAA (emphasis added to make it clear enough for you):
"When more than one layer is reported, layers are in ascending order of height. For each layer above a lower layer or layers, the sky cover designator for that layer will be the total sky cover which includes that layer and all lower layers. In other words, the summation concept of cloud layers is used.
"Transparent" sky cover is clouds or obscuring phenomena aloft through which blue sky or higher sky cover is visible. As explained in Table 2-1, a scattered, broken, or overcast layer may be reported as "thin." To be classified as thin, a layer must be half or more transparent. Remember that sky cover of a layer includes all sky cover reported below that layer."
This is from a pretty current document, but the same was true in 1971. (But, what would the weather service or FAA know about it?)
Hominid,
Reference is also made to your previous posts, and replies to them, on weather reporting.
Section 2, Aviation Weather Services Advisory Circular, AC 00-45G, Change 1, published July 29, 2010, is a three page section titled: Aviation Product Classification and Policy, and does NOT contain what you have quoted above.
The METAR format for weather reporting was NOT adopted in North America, which includes the United States of America, until June 1, 1996. Consequently, it has nothing to do with the weather reports from November 1971 or the Cooper hijacking period.
You joined the DZ Cooper thread on September 27, 2011 and on that same day I downloaded and printed out a programmed text (Teletype Sequence Reports AM-33), January 1970, from the US Army Primary Helicopter School, Fort Wolters, Texas. You and I exchanged a number of PMs in January and February, 2012 on DZ discussing this very report, which you should also have a copy of, and it says NOTHING about "cumulative" cloud cover.
And if my memory is correct, neither you nor I found any other documentation on weather reporting that was in effect on November 24, 1971.
So, how about citing chapter and verse for your claims about "cumulative" cloud reporting being valid on the date of the hijacking.
Robert99
-
I think you have to keep in mind that Cooper doesn't have the flight plan, it's just a direction (Mexico City,) maybe he's done the flight before, that's a maybe, he agrees to Reno, doesn't seem to care that much *meh* same-ish direction, he wants to get out the aircraft, aft stair issues, his plan is general/simple, he rolls the dice (everyone argues the difficulty of the jump but it's easy when you have no choice) and bails, BUT when he hits the broken cloud layer then he could see a general idea of the river, highway, dam, whatever.
Professor Moriarty, please keep in mind that Cooper jumped at night through multiple cloud layers and it is very difficult to determine landmarks when you are tumbling head over heels, as Cooper was probably doing, even in the daytime under such conditions.
funny :) :) :)
-
I just installed what is called "HD mesh" on my simulator. it is more accurate data with the ground textures, or objects. it now shows a detailed map of the Portland area. all the rivers and lakes are now visible that weren't there originally. the downfall is all my airports disappeared. I either have to re-install them, or find out what went wrong. I'll make a video flying over the tip pf Hayden island. you will clearly see Smith lake.
If we are to try and use this option. we need to move the flight path. we must show reasons for this move. it will cause a domino effect with the path. you can't just move it in one area to fit the need.
-
I just installed what is called "HD mesh" on my simulator. it is more accurate data with the ground textures, or objects. it now shows a detailed map of the Portland area. all the rivers and lakes are now visible that weren't there originally. the downfall is all my airports disappeared. I either have to re-install them, or find out what went wrong. I'll make a video flying over the tip pf Hayden island. you will clearly see Smith lake.
If we are to try and use this option. we need to move the flight path. we must show reasons for this move. it will cause a domino effect with the path. you can't just move it in one area to fit the need.
check Force Lake and the large gated off swampy marsh East of it next to I5,, should be reachable without altering path
-
will do.
-
Here is one I made yesterday. it's before the upgrade. Smith lake is not on my textures though....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBnATwX9V_o
-
Here is Cooper's point of view, again Smith lake not visible on this texture...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQTbwUXOoKw
-
The new video is currently uploading to You Tube. It's not the best. I don't have my movie software on this computer. I'm using Microsoft movie maker....
It's ready...faster than expected :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_aGB2m5ubk
-
Here is Cooper's point of view, again Smith lake not visible on this texture...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQTbwUXOoKw
That looks like Force Lake in your vid,, the swamp area is just East of it about 5x larger,, the flight path may have been slightly closer to I5 and still hit the waypoint coordinates as in the FBI map, Smith Lake seems too far in a no pull without really moving the flightpath
Force Lake in blue,, swamp.Marsh in red
swamp/marsh today..
https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.60388,-122.686219,3a,75y,200.42h,64.14t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1saAoDOiTp5P8Hx84FdJYPog!2e0
-
Have you used Google distance maps? it's pretty accurate. Force lake is small....
-
Have you used Google distance maps? it's pretty accurate. Force lake is small....
yes, it is small, 5-600 ft wide, the swamp east of it is quite large today, 1500-2000ft across,, IDK about the 70s..
the flight path on the FBI map looks to be virtually touching I5, the green dot is the swamp area,,
Anybody know what the x's in red pen mean on the map marked here in blue
Vanport Wetlands habitat area closed off no trespass
https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.60395,-122.686247,3a,15y,246.56h,82.61t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sn16MtVQDLOJQc0oLcM8W8Q!2e0
-
Have you used Google distance maps? it's pretty accurate. Force lake is small....
yes, it is small, 5-600 ft wide, the swamp east of it is quite large today, 1500-2000ft across,, IDK about the 70s..
the flight path on the FBI map looks to be virtually touching I5, the green dot is the swamp area,,
Anybody know what the x's in red pen mean on the map marked here in blue
Vanport Wetlands habitat area closed off no trespass
https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.60395,-122.686247,3a,15y,246.56h,82.61t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sn16MtVQDLOJQc0oLcM8W8Q!2e0
There are actually four of those red x marks. The fourth one is a bit to the left of the bottom end of the green arrow. If you draw a straight line through the left most ones and another straight line through the right most ones, and extending them to the north, those two straight lines will connect with the Malay Intersection on V23 near Toledo. And extending them to the south will result in their connecting with V-23 again near the Canby Intersection.
When the airliner was in the Portland area, the Seattle ATC controllers were involved in efforts to vector several different military aircraft to the airliner. All of those vector attempts were on the west and southwest sides of Portland. Consequently, these four red x marks were probably put there by the ATC controllers to pinpoint the airliner and chase aircraft locations during the attempts to vector them together.
-
In the same respect one could speculate a few things. how much radar data did they really rely on? now,according to one report Captain Scott had to re-configure the path. he claims they flew over the Woodland area. if you move the path the same distance on the other side of V-23 the plane is further away from Portland, and lines up with the red x's? the plane is also closer to the Woodland area? it's just a thought....
-
I posted a news report stating Scott had to re-configure the flight path. why would this be needed if they relied on radar? how much did they really know about the path?
-
I posted a news report stating Scott had to re-configure the flight path. why would this be needed if they relied on radar? how much did they really know about the path?
They should have known the flight path quite well. Remember that the Air Traffic Controllers were looking at the aircraft on radar and the precise accuracy depends on how far the aircraft was from a radar station. The radar being used by the ATC people was the same radar system they used ever day and that information was routinely recorded on tape as well as the voice communications.
-
I posted a news report stating Scott had to re-configure the flight path. why would this be needed if they relied on radar? how much did they really know about the path?
They should have known the flight path quite well. Remember that the Air Traffic Controllers were looking at the aircraft on radar and the precise accuracy depends on how far the aircraft was from a radar station. The radar being used by the ATC people was the same radar system they used ever day and that information was routinely recorded on tape as well as the voice communications.
I kind of figured that, but what makes Scott decide to re-calculate the path? that's like telling someone you took a different route than the GPS recorded in your car?
-
I posted a news report stating Scott had to re-configure the flight path. why would this be needed if they relied on radar? how much did they really know about the path?
They should have known the flight path quite well. Remember that the Air Traffic Controllers were looking at the aircraft on radar and the precise accuracy depends on how far the aircraft was from a radar station. The radar being used by the ATC people was the same radar system they used ever day and that information was routinely recorded on tape as well as the voice communications.
I kind of figured that, but what makes Scott decide to re-calculate the path? that's like telling someone you took a different route than the GPS recorded in your car?
After the money was found at Tina Bar, I think someone leaned on Scott to say that the airliner had "drifted" to the east of the earlier flight path in order to support the original jump area. This, of course, resulted in the development of the Washougal Wash Down Theory which has proven to be baseless.
-
Can anyone tell me exactly where Victor 23 is?
I understand it is an aerial flight corridor eight miles wide, but in the jump zone what are the boundaries?
As for the flight path, for Cooper to have landed in the Ariel area he must have jumped a few miles south and west to account for his drift back north and east in the winds. If Cooper landed in the Ariel-Amboy area that means he jumped south of Woodland and pretty close to the I-5.
No?
-
V-23 is the orange line running through the map attached. this map is what they used to give possible landing area's. odds are they didn't take into consideration that Cooper was on the stairs prior to jumping. the bump was felt later than the 8:10/12 mark. putting Cooper south of this location searched.
The 3 red lines are the possible flight path.
Amboy is to far off the present flight path. the chute was found right in the middle of point A & B. which is close to Ariel rather than Amboy.
-
I rushed the video so it might not be of use :'( anyway it from about 10,000 at about the 8:12 position. you can see Vancouver lake out the cockpit window, and out side you can see lake Merwin. pilots will catch my AOA pitching down. I was trying to maintain 10,000, but was a couple hundred above :P
Amboy is about 5.7 nautical miles from this point due east.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=774QWKuSI5Q
-
Can anyone tell me exactly where Victor 23 is?
I understand it is an aerial flight corridor eight miles wide, but in the jump zone what are the boundaries?
As for the flight path, for Cooper to have landed in the Ariel area he must have jumped a few miles south and west to account for his drift back north and east in the winds. If Cooper landed in the Ariel-Amboy area that means he jumped south of Woodland and pretty close to the I-5.
No?
Bruce you really amaze me at times. After all these years you weren't paying attention ? ........ If you still don't know where V-23 is, go look at Sluggo's website and search under /Victor 23/ at DZ .... and you will have the answer to your question .... in addition to having charts galore. Better get moving. The Final is next Friday! ;)
Maybe Bruce is not alone? :-\
-
That would be Vector-23 :P
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVq4_HhBK8Y
-
Let me re-phrase my question:
If Victor 23 is eight miles wide, what are it's western and eastern boundaries in the 8:13 pm time frame?
-
Let me re-phrase my question:
If Victor 23 is eight miles wide, what are it's western and eastern boundaries in the 8:13 pm time frame?
West would be just shy of I-5.....east is a little harder to get a fix on visual wise. Moulton Falls Park would be above the position. the plane flew about one mile west of Ariel if I'm correct.
-
Okay, now we're getting somewhere.
How do you know V-23's western perimeter was just shy of I-5 at 8:13? Any maps, etc?
-
Okay, now we're getting somewhere.
How do you know V-23's western perimeter was just shy of I-5 at 8:13? Any maps, etc?
Because ALL OF THE MAPS AND DIAGRAMS!!!! .... ARE ON DROPZONE OR SLUGGOS WEBSITE, as previously posted by a lot of people since 2008. It is now_2015, seven years later.
The maps are generally too big to post here so you will have to go visit these website and download them there.
Here is a section of one map given us by Farflung which shows V23E, V23, and V23W. Do you remember this? Every Victor airway s eight miles wide - four miles wide on each side of the 'center line'.
-
It's rather simple. the plane flew over Battleground around that time. go to Google distance maps and measure. I also measured it through the simulator. V-23 runs through Battleground. see attached maps. Robert99, does this sound correct?
Where are you going with this?
My maps are similar to what Georger added to his post....
-
It's rather simple. the plane flew over Battleground around that time. go to Google distance maps and measure. I also measured it through the simulator. V-23 runs through Battleground. see attached maps. Robert99, does this sound correct?
Where are you going with this?
My maps are similar to what Georger added to his post....
In 1971 (and going from north to south), V-23 did a dog-leg from the Seattle VORTAC (which was located between the parallel runways on the Seattle Airport) to the Mayfield Intersection (near Toledo and now named the Malay Intersection) and then to the Portland VORTAC (now named the Battlefield VORTAC). From there, V-23 went direct to the Eugene and then Medford VORTACS and continued south.
Also in 1971, a V-23E went direct from the Seattle VORTAC to the Portland VORTAC and then did a dog-leg to the Eugene VORTAC where it apparently ended. Today, the segment of V-23E between the Seattle and Portland (now Battleground) VORTACS is known as V-495 and it goes from the Portland VORTAC to the Newburg VORTAC and continues off to the southwest.
At the same time, there was a V-23W that started at the Portland (Battleground) VORTAC and went off to the southwest. It was apparently renamed V-495 when V-23E and V-23W were deleted.
Copies of maps L1 and L2, which contains the information that the crew of the hijacked airliner would have used on the flight from Seattle to Reno, are available on Sluggo's web page.
Also, I sent Fred Poynter at the WSHM all the original disks on those maps, but I don't know if he has actually put them online. But I don't want to see them again, actually I have printed copies of them which I use, due to all the hoops I had to be jumped through just to get that information.
So if Bruce wants to view the original map disks, perhaps he should pay Fred Poynter a visit. Otherwise, Sluggo's web page should be sufficient.
-
Here is another look at the supposed dropzone. it's from 10,000, you can see I-5 easily....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQbqwXrRMBU
-
Here is another look at the supposed dropzone. it's from 10,000, you can see I-5 easily....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQbqwXrRMBU
seeing nothing but labels?
-
Must be the resolution on your screen. the video is a little dark due to nite time mode, but you should be able to see it. click on the you tube logo (lower right) and watch it straight from You Tube on a larger video/mode/screen.
-
Saw the trailer on youtube Shutter, when can we expect the full 305 flight path?
-
Saw the trailer on youtube Shutter, when can we expect the full 305 flight path?
I'm hoping to start putting it all together soon. it's down to a time frame thingy. I'm going to record it in 3 separate portions, and the put it together. it's seems simple, but a lot will be involved. the best known recording program is called "Fraps". this eats a little over a gigabyte per minute of uncompressed video :o. I'm still undecided whether or not to record the entire route from Seattle to Portland with so much dead space in between the times on the transcripts. I have to get creative filling in the dead spots so nobody falls asleep :D
The present time frame of the video would be close to an hour. that's a lot of time to make it worth watching. I'm open to any idea's from all.......
The plane is presently in Rome :o I found a guy who paints X-Planes. he is putting the correct numbers on the plane (N467US) along with a Project 305 logo on the tail section. he's the one who made the Northwest livery you see on my plane now.
You found it pretty quick. I just posted it hours before you seen it :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUO6HzxhbEY
-
You found it pretty quick. I just posted it hours before you seen it :o
I don't sleep well.
The present time frame of the video would be close to an hour. that's a lot of time to make it worth watching. I'm open to any idea's from all.......
I had a couple of thoughts to help you fill time, you might think about adding text during the empty bits updating the known activities of Cooper at the time.
Also, I've been mulling this for a long time, but I like the idea of a podcast. Once you complete and release the whole project, the visuals of the product could be used in conjunction with audio from a podcast of some of the regular forum posters. Just a thought. There is so little good Cooper content on the net (at least, content that isn't in forum form).
-
Thanks for the reply.
I was thinking about the dead spots as well, but filling them in isn't really an issue as much as putting the right material up. this basically turns it into a actual program vs a flight path. it's a lot of work to get everything to fall into place. this is where I will need help. I'm game for a full blown show, but it will require a lot of work.
I like the podcast thingy. would I have to put it online first, or upload it from the computer? the actual path video?
-
I haven't done a podcast in seven years; I used to record it on my computer then save it to the web. I'm told it would be easy enough to take existing audio and overlay it with video using widely available software, but I've never done it. The process would probably be to use an online podcasting service like blogtalkradio to create the actual podcast, then go from there.
-
Is that a pre-recorded podcast, or live?
I did a quick search and found this...
To Create a Video Podcast:
Film your video.
Upload your video to your computer.
Using editing software, add special effects and graphics or correct any problems in the video.
Determine whether your video will be streaming or downloadable, and use a video encoder to format it in a manageable file size for online viewing.
Find a host for your video podcast. Make sure that the host can accommodate your video's bandwidth.
If your host does not provide an RSS feed for your video podcast, create one yourself.
Lastly, promote your video podcast just as you would a podcast.
The podcasts and video podcasts you find online range from the amateur to the streamlined and sophisticated. They are a testament to the accessibility of this technology for listeners and creators alike. Anyone can -- and clearly anyone will -- podcast.
-
It's something to play around with while you're completing your project. I have friends who do this sort of thing for money, I'll pester them for help.
-
It's something to play around with while you're completing your project. I have friends who do this sort of thing for money, I'll pester them for help.
Ok, see what you can find out.....Thanks
-
Here's where I'm going with my concern over the actual dimensions of V-23.
Rataczak told me, eventually, that he thought 305 was east of V-23 by a couple of miles when Cooper jumped. The maps say that the center of V-23 was over Battleground, and V-23 would only extend four miles to the east. Tack on a couple more miles from Rataczak and that puts 305 six or seven miles east of Battleground at 8:13. That doesn't get you into the Washougal much.
-
The Washougal Washdown theory is dead. It's a good example of people trying to force a conclusion based on poor interpretation of a small amount of evidence, then going through endless mental gymnastics to try to prove it.
-
Here's where I'm going with my concern over the actual dimensions of V-23.
Rataczak told me, eventually, that he thought 305 was east of V-23 by a couple of miles when Cooper jumped. The maps say that the center of V-23 was over Battleground, and V-23 would only extend four miles to the east. Tack on a couple more miles from Rataczak and that puts 305 six or seven miles east of Battleground at 8:13. That doesn't get you into the Washougal much.
Let's say he is accurate ? Then what does he mean by "east of V-23". Is he saying 'east of the center line of V23', or 'east of the 4 mile boundary on the east side of V23'? If it's the first then he is still inside the boundaries of V23. If it's the last then he is outside of V23, but still not in the Washougal.
He has made the remark: "I am the only living person who knows where we were when Cooper bailed". That remark is on record.
You do realise if Blevins is right then Rataczak had-has ptsd and all of his testimony is suspect ... based on Gray's quotes from Hancock, saying that Rat was "freaking out in the cockpit". :D
-
Just because Rataczak lot a little emotional in the cockpit, doesn't mean that we have to THROW out everything he said.
The only question I have it - can we believe him? What other pressures may be in play here.
-
Here's where I'm going with my concern over the actual dimensions of V-23.
Rataczak told me, eventually, that he thought 305 was east of V-23 by a couple of miles when Cooper jumped. The maps say that the center of V-23 was over Battleground, and V-23 would only extend four miles to the east. Tack on a couple more miles from Rataczak and that puts 305 six or seven miles east of Battleground at 8:13. That doesn't get you into the Washougal much.
Let's say he is accurate ? Then what does he mean by "east of V-23". Is he saying 'east of the center line of V23', or 'east of the 4 mile boundary on the east side of V23'? If it's the first then he is still inside the boundaries of V23. If it's the last then he is outside of V23, but still not in the Washougal.
He has made the remark: "I am the only living person who knows where we were when Cooper bailed". That remark is on record.
You do realise if Blevins is right then Rataczak had-has ptsd and all of his testimony is suspect ... based on Gray's quotes from Hancock, saying that Rat was "freaking out in the cockpit". :D
When I read Vincent Bugliosi's book on the JFK assassination, one of the chapters on conspiracy theories talked about how many of the people with conspiracy theories told entirely different stories right after the assassination and didn't change those stories until years and years later.
Didn't the FBI talk to Rataczak right after they landed in Reno? Wouldn't they have used that information to determine what area to search? I think there's good reason to believe the search area was wrong (mostly because they didn't find anything in the search area and Tina Bar was far from the search area), but Rataczak's remark years later sounds like someone teasing the press.
-
Just because Rataczak lot a little emotional in the cockpit, doesn't mean that we have to THROW out everything he said.
The only question I have it - can we believe him? What other pressures may be in play here.
That, is my major criticism of Gray's book. He drops items of information apparently gleaned from FBI files, then makes no effort to explain or connect the new 'revelations' so they have any value. Then, he states technical and personal information that is not just wrong, but crazy (and even smarmy)! In terms of truth and a better understanding, his book may have zero value!
He has given Blevins and others a lot to work with. I hope that was his intention. Sensationalism.
-
Here's where I'm going with my concern over the actual dimensions of V-23.
Rataczak told me, eventually, that he thought 305 was east of V-23 by a couple of miles when Cooper jumped. The maps say that the center of V-23 was over Battleground, and V-23 would only extend four miles to the east. Tack on a couple more miles from Rataczak and that puts 305 six or seven miles east of Battleground at 8:13. That doesn't get you into the Washougal much.
Let's say he is accurate ? Then what does he mean by "east of V-23". Is he saying 'east of the center line of V23', or 'east of the 4 mile boundary on the east side of V23'? If it's the first then he is still inside the boundaries of V23. If it's the last then he is outside of V23, but still not in the Washougal.
He has made the remark: "I am the only living person who knows where we were when Cooper bailed". That remark is on record.
You do realise if Blevins is right then Rataczak had-has ptsd and all of his testimony is suspect ... based on Gray's quotes from Hancock, saying that Rat was "freaking out in the cockpit". :D
When I read Vincent Bugliosi's book on the JFK assassination, one of the chapters on conspiracy theories talked about how many of the people with conspiracy theories told entirely different stories right after the assassination and didn't change those stories until years and years later.
Didn't the FBI talk to Rataczak right after they landed in Reno? Wouldn't they have used that information to determine what area to search? I think there's good reason to believe the search area was wrong (mostly because they didn't find anything in the search area and Tina Bar was far from the search area), but Rataczak's remark years later sounds like someone teasing the press.
Rataczak is basically within the time frame allowance and specific when he says "... and it was 5 to 10 minutes after (we had talked to Cooper) and we could see the lights of the suburbs of Portland/Vancouver? coming up..."
So they had a rough idea of where they were and the general time frame. They weren't anywhere in the Washougal and they sure as hell weren't north near Woodland or Lake Merwin. The problem is: when did he come to the realisation he states above? Immediately after landing at Reno, or later. We have literally no immediate testimony from the crew except for what the FBI is telling the public and doing in it's ground searches into 1972 .... and the NWA search map has surfaced in 1971/72.
Surely NWA debriefed their own pilots! Surely the 1971-72 NWA map is based in part on Rataczak's testimony soon after the hijacking and is a fundamental part of the NWA search map. Something happened to change minds between the end of 1972 and the next public statement by Himmeslbach in 1976 moving the dropzone to "12 miles north of Portland", which changes again in 1980 to "he landed near the Washougal"!
We have different people changing the dropzone through the years, depending on what events or fad was happening at the time.
One thing that makes me believe Rat's statement above is true-like saying, "we could see the lights of the suburbs coming up", is the simple fact that a short time later south of Portland R2 is talking to both 305 and the T33 pilot lining the two up for a rendevois near Lake Oswego south of Portland, in a fairly specific time frame which loosely agrees with 305 being just north of Vancouver just a few minutes earlier, almost exactly as Rataczak says they were.
This gives two points of reference, as it were, in a connected time frame - and the frames all seem to line up? I am sure R99 has an opinion about this. And I am sure the Controller that brought the two together is not lying.
-
I'm not throwing out what Rataczack says, I just think the "Cooper had to land in Washougal in order for the money to get to Tina Bar" meme made him say "I guess it was possible we were over there". That Rataczak talk on DVD from the NWA museum sold on ebay has Rataczak basically endorsing the FBI flight path (he jokes about how erratic his flying was). Watching that talk, it's hard not to like Rataczak. It's just important to remember he was at the controls of the aircraft, not drawing a map. It's also important to remember how awful human memory is, especially after so many years.
As long as I'm defending people, let me defend Geof Gray and his book. Gray's work is a piece of creative non-fiction (aka literary non-fiction). He wasn't trying to produce "the definitive Cooper book" but instead was trying to communicate both the fascinating mystery that is the case, as well as express the zeitgeist of the fanatics still following and investigating the case (i.e. us). Bottom line, Gray and his editors are first and foremost trying to sell a lot of books, not satiate the desires of the fanatics. We should be lucky to have a commercially funded book, remember, Tosaw, Himmelsbach and most of the other Cooper books are self-published.
-
I'm not throwing out what Rataczack says, I just think the "Cooper had to land in Washougal in order for the money to get to Tina Bar" meme made him say "I guess it was possible we were over there". That Rataczak talk on DVD from the NWA museum sold on ebay has Rataczak basically endorsing the FBI flight path (he jokes about how erratic his flying was). Watching that talk, it's hard not to like Rataczak. It's just important to remember he was at the controls of the aircraft, not drawing a map. It's also important to remember how awful human memory is, especially after so many years.
As long as I'm defending people, let me defend Geof Gray and his book. Gray's work is a piece of creative non-fiction (aka literary non-fiction). He wasn't trying to produce "the definitive Cooper book" but instead was trying to communicate both the fascinating mystery that is the case, as well as express the zeitgeist of the fanatics still following and investigating the case (i.e. us). Bottom line, Gray and his editors are first and foremost trying to sell a lot of books, not satiate the desires of the fanatics. We should be lucky to have a commercially funded book, remember, Tosaw, Himmelsbach and most of the other Cooper books are self-published.
Zeitgeist ? Gray and his editors are first and foremost trying to sell a lot of books. We should be lucky to have a commercially funded book.
A Cooper Hijacking Big Mac? :D :D :D
R2 and others who were handling the flight say the east route Washoual theory - never happened!
No official map or account shows the Washougal route happened.
No official person has ever endorsed the Washougal route officially ... and no map of one exists!
;)
One thing that makes me believe Rat's statement above is true-like saying, "we could see the lights of the suburbs coming up", is the simple fact that a short time later south of Portland R2 is talking to both 305 and the T33 pilot lining the two up for a rendevois near Lake Oswego south of Portland, in a fairly specific time frame which loosely agrees with 305 being just north of Vancouver just a few minutes earlier, almost exactly as Rataczak says they were.
This gives two points of reference, as it were, in a connected time frame - and the frames all seem to line up? I am sure R99 has an opinion about this. And I am sure the Controller that brought the two together is not lying.
These two factual events which are true, and a longer Washougal route, are empirically incompatible.
-
From Georger:
"That, is my major criticism of Gray's book. He drops items of information apparently gleaned from FBI files, then makes no effort to explain or connect the new 'revelations' so they have any value. Then, he states technical and personal information that is not just wrong, but crazy (and even smarmy)! In terms of truth and a better understanding, his book may have zero value!"
Da Cuz says:
I agree with you Georger. Geoffrey has a weakness - he doesn't share. As a result, his research and writing is not cross-pollinated, reviewed, or corrected through the heat of this forum and the DZ. His singularity can work against him.
Also, I don't trust his blind faith in the FBI documents. There are many factual errors in places, such as the parachute mess, and the snafu situation of who is sitting in Row 18. According to various FBI statements, Mitchell, Gregory and Cooper were all sitting in 18 C. On each other's laps??? C'mon!
As for Rataczak, initially he told me he didn't know where 305 was when Cooper jumped. Then he said they drifted to the east in the wind, but he didn't say east of what. Then he said they were east of V-23. Others say that Rataczak told them he was approaching the lights of Vancouver, putting him smack-dab in the middle of V-23 over Battleground. Adding to the problem, Himms is adamant about the Washougal, and he says, point-blank, that Rataczak told him that's where they were. Why didn't he just tell me the Real Story instead of beating around the bush? What's the big frigging deal? What are the pressures on these guys shifting the story this way and that?
Bottom Line: Did Rataczak deceive Himmelsbach? Or did Himmelsbach mis-interpret whatever Rataczak told him? Or is Himmelsbach deceiving me? Or is everyone just confused and wishes these questions would just go away???
-
From Georger:
"That, is my major criticism of Gray's book. He drops items of information apparently gleaned from FBI files, then makes no effort to explain or connect the new 'revelations' so they have any value. Then, he states technical and personal information that is not just wrong, but crazy (and even smarmy)! In terms of truth and a better understanding, his book may have zero value!"
Da Cuz says:
I agree with you Georger. Geoffrey has a weakness - he doesn't share. As a result, his research and writing is not cross-pollinated, reviewed, or corrected through the heat of this forum and the DZ. His singularity can work against him.
Also, I don't trust his blind faith in the FBI documents. There are many factual errors in places, such as the parachute mess, and the snafu situation of who is sitting in Row 18. According to various FBI statements, Mitchell, Gregory and Cooper were all sitting in 18 C. On each other's laps??? C'mon!
As for Rataczak, initially he told me he didn't know where 305 was when Cooper jumped. Then he said they drifted to the east in the wind, but he didn't say east of what. Then he said they were east of V-23. Others say that Rataczak told them he was approaching the lights of Vancouver, putting him smack-dab in the middle of V-23 over Battleground. Adding to the problem, Himms is adamant about the Washougal, and he says, point-blank, that Rataczak told him that's where they were. Why didn't he just tell me the Real Story instead of beating around the bush? What's the big frigging deal? What are the pressures on these guys shifting the story this way and that?
Bottom Line: Did Rataczak deceive Himmelsbach? Or did Himmelsbach mis-interpret whatever Rataczak told him? Or is Himmelsbach deceiving me? Or is everyone just confused and wishes these questions would just go away???
You are not the issue - the issue is the official history of the flight path and suspected dropzone.
Nobody seems to have found any official reference to the Washougal until shortly after the money find in Feb 1980, and then everyone is talking about the Washougal in official quarters. The Washougal is named in both the Palmer and Bradley reports commissioned by the FBI. Palmer was a geologist. Bradley was a hydrologist.
The FBI supplied background case information to both Bradley and Palmer. Bradley asked and was given an area where the FBI felt Cooper had jumped.
That area was defined as: ' an area in the State of Washington bounded by the Lewis River on the north, by the Clark County-Skamania County line on the east, and the Columbia River on the south.' No western boundary was set. Palmer was given the same information. No specific dropzone was given.
[edit] It might be worth noting that when Himmelsbach and Jerry Thomas teamed up to search the Washougal, JT talked to Rataczak and neither Rataczak or Himmelsbach, or anyone else, was able to give JT definitive guidance on where to search for Cooper near the Washougal, including whether north or south or anywhere else! Isn't it reasonable to assume that if the FBI had had a reasonable idea of where to look near the Washougal, based on anything concrete from the Air Force, Rataczak, etal ... the FBI would have had that area searched? Dozens of people have searched all over the Washougal over the years and all came up empty handed.
-
It's hard to say what they were doing in 1972 soon after the jump. the photo's below show them completely out of the jump zone searching. they are doing what appears to be a search east of the known flight path.
-
It's hard to say what they were doing in 1972 soon after the jump. the photo's below show them completely out of the jump zone searching. they are doing what appears to be a search east of the known flight path.
I am quite sure if the FBI had had confidence in a particular drop zone, they would have given that info to both Bradley and Palmer in 1980. They were asking these professionals to give their best estimate of how Cooper money might have arrived on Tina Bar - having precise drop zone data was vital to that task. Instead they are told to consider an area bounded by the Lewis River on the north, and the Columbia River on the south. That's a good sized piece of territory. :D Had someone narrowed this large swath down to the lower third, both Bradley and Palmer might have eliminated the Washougal and come up with a different answer? Because in fact, Bradley says something like:
'Several streams feed the Columbia upstream of the Fazio farm. I am eliminating them due to size, or the degree of slope, or location due to the scope of the large swath of territory specified and the forces needed to move a small package a long distance to the Columbia (as the FBI seems to want) from the northern area of the defined drop zone all the way to the Columbia. It is also unlikely that the described package would have passed through Lacamas Lake to the Columbia due to structural obstacles there that affect flow.'
Bradley is focused on large streams with sufficient volume and power to move a money package a long distance with certainty all the way to the Columbia, and then to Tina Bar, vs. a scenario which starts closer to the Columbia and closer to Tina Bar itself. Bradley worked within the parameters given him by the FBI.
We have this discussed all of this over and over at Dropzone and now here. The NWA-FBI Search Map is about as good an estimate of any 'drop zone' as it got, it seems. If Bradley and Palmer had been given different parameters I am convinced they would have focused on different solutions and answered accordingly. If they had been told: 'We suspect that Cooper bailed somewhere south of Battleground, closer to the Columbia, I suspect Bradley and Palmer would have looked for a different solution. Smaller feeder streams would have received more serious consideration, areas which are dry but fill up and flow during high water periods might have been considered. Topography as well as active streams would have been considered.
If the FBI had had good reason to say: 'We think 305 was clear over near the Washougal vs close to Battleground', then and only then would the Washougal have gained attention. If, Bradley had been told: '305 flew a straight line between Toledo and the tip of Hayden Island', then Bradley's focus would have changed to that looking for streams and flow opportunities which could supply money to the Fazio property from that flight path assumption.
The data people are given usually plays a role in the solutions people come up with.
-
I'm just a-ponderin'.
I'm also considering what retired FBI agent Gary Tallis said at the Portland Symposium in 2011. He said he was a rookie G-man in 1971 and assigned to the aerial search. He flew for two weeks as a spotter in a helicopter, and he said he spent at least a week looking far to the east, over the snow-covered foothills of the Cascades. I asked him if that included the Washougal basin and he said "Yes."
I know I am quick to suspect the Bureau of shenanigans, but I think it would be a lack of critical thinking not to ponder if the maps and info from the FBI are rigged. What if they found Cooper on the upper slopes? Or traces of his being there? Could Himms be correct?
Remember, as Calame said, "The longer this DB Cooper thing stays unsolved, the bigger the speculations become." Or words to that effect.
-
On the "Flight From Justice" video they had an undercover FBI agent (hidden from view) and he claims they had no idea where Cooper jumped.....
Just walked into the house, will catch up in a while. also have to download windows 7 onto this computer.....
-
I'm just a-ponderin'.
I'm also considering what retired FBI agent Gary Tallis said at the Portland Symposium in 2011. He said he was a rookie G-man in 1971 and assigned to the aerial search. He flew for two weeks as a spotter in a helicopter, and he said he spent at least a week looking far to the east, over the snow-covered foothills of the Cascades. I asked him if that included the Washougal basin and he said "Yes."
I know I am quick to suspect the Bureau of shenanigans, but I think it would be a lack of critical thinking not to ponder if the maps and info from the FBI are rigged. What if they found Cooper on the upper slopes? Or traces of his being there? Could Himms be correct?
Remember, as Calame said, "The longer this DB Cooper thing stays unsolved, the bigger the speculations become." Or words to that effect.
What you describe is in 1971-72.
By 1980 Bradley couldn't perform his job unless he knew what the FBI knew. The drop zone I described is exactly what they gave to Bradley, so far as I know it. So what you say fits within a general uncertainty??
But ........ at least we are discussing these matters, as best we can.
Like Shutter I have things going on here ... long hard day. I need some time to decompress.
-
I'm releasing the "Official Trailer" for the flight path video. many thanks to andrade1812 for helping with the script, and technical advice with the edit process. it took almost a week to put together, and about 12 edits to the video. this will be a "mini series' starting with a look at the Boeing 727, and it's functions inside, and out. following this will be a look at other possibilities in the flight path. basically east, and west. the final video will be of the flight path as it's seen on the FBI map. the transcripts will run with the flight.
Georger also viewed the video giving his input as well. thanks to both Georger, and andreade1812.
The date hasn't been set as of yet, but the process has started. it will be a lot of work, more than I've done with any video rendering before. I will be asking some of you questions along the way. I'm hoping to get the best known information for these video's in order to have something solid to work with, and use in the future. all the videos will be in 720, and 1080 HD formats.
Feel free to link the video to anyone you so desire.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3waV0APRscE
-
MORE!
-
Nice.. thanks.
-
RMB boastfully posts again quote Tom Kaye, who is a pilot:
RobertMBlevins
Feb 19, 2015, 11:35 PM
Post #57373 of 57373 (7 views)
Re: [RobertMBlevins] What the Citizen Sleuths Say About Flight Path [In reply to]
________________________________________
From the Citizen Sleuths, who were the only civilian team ever allowed to examine and study the Cooper evidence: (Important portions highlighted in bold)
'The FBI transcripts identify the towns of Toledo, Pigeon Springs, Ariel, Highland, Battle Ground and Vancouver as being either on or near the radar recorded flight path. This information coincides with the FBI map and does not support an overflight of Tena Bar or the Washougal River.
The placard was recovered at the location shown in Figure 2 which is near Toutle, and 20 miles north of the Ariel Washington jump zone. This location is almost directly under the FBI flight path. Giving the placard a free fall time of nine minutes and a south west cross wind of 18 knots, then the plane would have to been 2.68 miles from where the placard was recovered and 2.6 miles west of V23. This distance is well within the official 8 mile width for the Victor airway and is 4 miles east of the theoretical Tena Bar flight path. This data places a constraint on the planes position approximately six minutes before the jump and suggests flight #305 was on the original FBI flight path.
Anecdotally, the original air traffic controller that handled the Northwest Airlines flight north of Portland was interviewed directly over the phone. He volunteered that he was sure that Flight #305 never left the V23 airway the entire time he had them on radar...'
1. Kaye doesn't say one word about the drop-zone, drop-time, or timeline in the Transcript of the FBI map. He very carefully avoids that, the real issues!
2. Kaye's statement: "R2 was sure that Flight #305 never left the V23 airway the entire time he had them on radar..." leaves out one glaring fact, in R2's own words, quote: But I wasn't watching the radar the whole time and during the time 305 flew by Portland (on the west side). I was busy with the T33. And the people at Portland missed it too because they were busy with traffic."
So, Kaye's words "...the entire time he had them on radar".. is literal and deceiving, because it does not include the period where 305 flew by Portland! R2 doesn't know where 305 was! R2 was busy with the T33! When R2 next saw 305, 305 had already passed Portland and was south of Portland with a T33 in hot pursuit! And R2 continued to bring them together near Lake Oswego. The T33 had been launched from the Ntl Guard base at PDX in Portland.
3. Kaye omits other things R2 said! R2 also said, quoting: "... as far as I know 305 was flying right down the 'center line' of V23 and went straight across the Portland airport" ..... there was no meander west to avoid PDX!
The FBI map doesn't even show that!Why hasn't Kaye reported the whole truth of what R2 said to a number of researchers? There are other researchers on record too who have also talked to R2 not just once but multiple times - that is a fact!The caveat is: "I wasn't watching 305. I have assumed he was on the center line of Victor-23"!
So, the next time Mr. Blevins wants to quote Tom Kaye quoting R2, maybe Mr. Blevins should pick up the phone and talk to the Controller himself, after Blevins has talked to Rataczak which he is contemptuously advising others to do?
4. Blevins pollutes his post further by also saying: "Tom Kaye's team ...who were the only civilian team ever allowed to examine and study the Cooper evidence" ? Where did Blevins get that, from the Tooth Fairy?
Blevins and Tom Kaye need to tell the whole truth for a change, and allow people to make up their own minds.
:)
-
The above is more reason more documentation should apply. it's unfortunate they didn't keep very good records of this whole thing. I'm hearing Carr state "believed path, I'm hearing an undercover agent say they didn't know where he jumped. different stories between the pilots. it's an endless cluster of problems.
This is why I want to try an validate things. show other possibilities that are plausible. does anyone know if Dawson can be found, or if he is still alive. I can't find anything on the guy? are the traffic controllers anywhere to be found? Anderson is another key person for information. time is running out with getting any information from people involved in this!
Mr. Blevins likes to put things in bold, perhaps this will apply also ;D
5' 10" - 6'
Hair parted on left.
Olive, Latin appearance
What happened in the "green river murders" does not apply to this case. Cooper's description was based on witnesses being with him for hours, not minutes, or seconds. the description was compiled by "pretty smart guys" just like Paul Soderlind.
I think his "double standard" applies here nicely ;D
-
The above is more reason more documentation should apply. it's unfortunate they didn't keep very good records of this whole thing. I'm hearing Carr state "believed path, I'm hearing an undercover agent say they didn't know where he jumped. different stories between the pilots. it's an endless cluster of problems.
This is why I want to try an validate things. show other possibilities that are plausible. does anyone know if Dawson can be found, or if he is still alive. I can't find anything on the guy? are the traffic controllers anywhere to be found? Anderson is another key person for information. time is running out with getting any information from people involved in this!
Mr. Blevins likes to put things in bold, perhaps this will apply also ;D
5' 10" - 6'
Hair parted on left.
Olive, Latin appearance
What happened in the "green river murders" does not apply to this case. Cooper's description was based on witnesses being with him for hours, not minutes, or seconds. the description was compiled by "pretty smart guys" just like Paul Soderlind.
I think his "double standard" applies here nicely ;D
Back up!
When I wrote my post above last night, which centers on R2, I suddenly asked myself "WHY? is anyone having to write this?". I mean really! Who in hell do Kaye and Blevins think they are? God? The final word on the DB Cooper case?" Half the world has talked to R2 and knows what R2 said and thinks... everyone but Blevins, that is! Then I go to DZ today and see Blevins even added to his 'Tom Kaye and Soderlind are Gods' post last nite, saying:
Note to folks interested in the DB Cooper case: Suspect anyone who disregards the truth in favor of personalities, or who goes after anyone on a personal level who is also investigating the case. This indicates they have a personal agenda which supersedes and taints any real truth they may be trying to present.
(This post was edited by RobertMBlevins on Feb 20, 2015, 1:46 AM)
Whose does this WACKO at Auburn WA think he is? This is obviously quite personal with him. I hope he doesn't throw himself off the Tacoma Bridge or shoot people in a convenience store 'out of sympathy with' the FBI flight path map, Paul Soderlind's memory, and Polar Bears!?
Blevins is just another Andy! A pure propagandist with nothing to offer in the DB Cooper case!
DB Cooper case and Blevins Psycho-Billy drama mill.... closed!
This guy Blevins is plain f@@king nuts! :-\ :-\ :-\ ::) ::) ::) :P :-[ :-\ :-* :-* :-* :-* :'( :o :o :o
____________________________________________________________________________
There is money sitting on a sandbar about 4.7 miles downstream of Vancouver WA. A river connects that sandbar and *any* version of the 305 DB Cooper flight path you can come up with, real or imagined. Simon sayz: The river flows down stream of any possible intersection of the flight path and the river.
The very highest probability is: the money got to the sandbar by flowing water vs. being a plant or being brought there by polar bears. Simon sayz: 'flowing rivers have a habit of moving things, from point A to point B!
And psycho-billy propaganda and personal attacks from the Auburn Washington Nutcase, cannot improve or alter these basic facts of the cosmos!
This is a technical-historical problem involving mainly the Air Force and Soderlind who put together the first flight path accounts for #305. Mssrs. Tom and Kaye and Robert M Blevins weren't there and had no hand in this! Duuuh! Maybe that's the primary reason they don't have the answers now? But, they sure as hell don’t mind claiming they have the answers now, which is an even bigger surprise and an exercise in futility!
This is what usually happens when one person goes from running a mop in the Shipping and Delivery Dept. to issuing memos to Division Directors and then the CEO and the Board, then claiming he owns and runs the whole business while putting a flashing red light on the hood of his 'Little Subbie"! Some wacko like this arrives about every five years and makes it through the Personnel Dept and Quality Control!
:-*
-
The Blevins flight path?
Is there one? I doubt it. And I have never had the impression he is arguing acceptance of 'an' FBI flight path (which is east of V23?) because he needs to support KC, in some way? Blevins has never specified a dropzone for KC. In fact, so far as I know, Blevins has steered away from saying 'KC dropped here vs there'. That leaves open the option that KC could have dropped 'anywhere' and Blevins will attempt to accommodate that.
All that is at stake for Blevins is his ego. He took a stand supporting the FBI 'yellow' map. Now he is stuck supporting it. He will change his KC fiction to accommodate any flight path ! Just give him two hours to dream something up ... flight paths and facts are just an inconvenience Blevins tolerates and argues around, issuing bulletins to: Those interested in the DB Cooper case! It is baloney on it's face.
It probably comes as a surprise to Blevins that Tosaw wrote a book! That Tosaw actually talked and worked with Soderlind at all. That Soderlind even spoke to Tosaw. This marginalises the notion Blevins has been spouting that Soderlind was some kind of god who did 'all of the work on a flight 305 flight path'. Blevins has never mentioned the Air Force. Just the FBI web page, Tom Kaye's web page, and Soiderlind (God of all flight paths and NWA).
It probably came as a further disappointment for R99 to tell Blevins 'he' is the one who did the actual calculations for the placard Tom Kaye is using on his webpage! I am sure Blevins thought Tom Kaye did the calculations .. :D
I think what Blevins really wants is his own thread at Dropzone, where he is the Moderator and final authority. That way he could just perma-ban anyone he sees as an inconvenience. And he could have his own DB Cooperland Temple and rule the whole discussion, then advertise himself as an expert on the whole internet.
There is only One True Cooperland, and its name is Robert M Blevins. Worship at the Blevins of your choice!
-
Once again, I wish people would stick to the categories provided, if there is going to be a flow of conversation on a topic. I know! I'm a harsh taskmaster ... and I don't even run this website! :) :) Valuable posts are getting put in places where people can't respond; that's the point.
Two posts I'm bringing here:
MarkBennett
That appears to be the conversation. The original post on DZ is here:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4393509#4393509
Rataczak said he could see the lights of Vancouver and Portland coming into view. Jo surmised it was on the right because he sits on the right. However, as you say Robert99, that could be in front of the aircraft on either the right, the left or straight ahead. Rataczak said nothing on that point. It shows how a comment can be misconstrued over time.
Shutter
The plane starts turning westward past the 8:15 mark. he could easily seen through the front window of the cockpit s the sides.
I believe he also states the pressure bump was felt over the suburbs. that's a good distance away from the original jump point.
When Carr came to DZ he promoted discussion on the flight path. To what extent he was representing the FBI vs himself, I do not know. But he was interested in any technical remarks concerning the FBI's 'flight path'. He even released FBI docs to Sluggo for sharing with the public. The technical discussion of the FP that ensued was open and deep. Nothing was left off the table. It became clear that Larry was open to anything 'the best technical minds' could offer, and quite frankly it was during that period, that R99 appeared and posted his calculations to Sluggo at Sluggo's website. That was a marvelous period. It is also worth noting that others with strong credentials were working off to the side, and I won't name them except to say their contributions were substantial. During that period Tom Kaye's team was formed and began it's work. Real work was being done on core questions in the DB Cooper case, for the first time perhaps since 1980!
From all of the above, two key group beliefs have emerged. (a) those that hold with the original time stamps and the original projected dropzone for Cooper, vs. (b) a second group who believes there is flexibility in the time stamps such that Cooper could have jumped further south than originally thought, closer to the Columbia basin. This second group believes there is significant flexibility in the time stamps regardless of the flight path chosen, discounting an 'east-path near the Washougal'.
The second group is bolstered by several key facts and assumptions: (1) Himmelsbach and other agents announced in 1976 that the FBI's position on the dropzone had changed, and was now "12 miles north of Portland". That demonstrates unreliability in the previously forecast prime jump zone. (2) All flight paths intersect the Columbia River which flows right by Tina's Bar. (3) Cooper money was found on Tina's Bar in 1980. (4) The evidence of the money exhumed by the excavation in 1980 at Tina's Bar, supports the view that the Ingram money was not just a "plant" but a more complex natural phenomenon produced by Nature. The forensic facts found during the excavation exclude the possibility that 'the Ingram find was a single source man-made plant' that merely had been worked on by natural forces over time at Tina's Bar. We believe that the bulk of any new evidence that emerges will also support that interpretation.
In contrast, the first group of 'flight path-dropzone fundamentalists', produced only empty searches, an Amboy chute of uncertain stature, multiple conflicting stories about who and what derived one or more original flight path maps, a redacted Transcript of flight communications, and total uncertainty leading to endless speculations over who Dan Cooper was or was not, and total uncertainty about how Cooper money could have ever wound up at Tina's Bar further south on the Columbia river at all except via some unknown set of unpredictable circuitous circumstances, or as a plant by who knows who!
The difference between the two groups is chaos vs order.
;)
-
I'll run a video of the position discussed above from about the 8:16 time frame, and post it here in a while. I just got home from a long haul northbound....
Georger, you are correct about the categories.......keep me on my toes ;D ;D
-
This is approx. the 8:16 location. the views are from the co-pilots seat. I raised the view a little bit due to the 727's having a high panel. they typically have to stretch up a little for a good view out the front window. should be watched in HD for quality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9QcRR2j4EU
-
This is approx. the 8:16 location. the views are from the co-pilots seat. I raised the view a little bit due to the 727's having a high panel. they typically have to stretch up a little for a good view out the front window. shold be watched in HD for quality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9QcRR2j4EU
He had a good panoramic view.
-
He had a good panoramic view.
I put the video together rather quickly. I forgot to mention no volume :P
-
East of V23?
Both Smith and Blev keep saying R said "east of V23", at the jump time 8:11-13. And this puts 305 in the Washougal. And the FBI map is correct according to Blevins and Kaye. Have Blevins or Smith looked at a map lately!?
What are these people meaning when they keep saying "east of V23", to be in the Washougal? East of the center line of V23, or clear out of the envelope of V23, east outside of the east boundary of V23?
If the FBI map is correct, 305 was never "outside" of the east-side envelope of V23. And during the critical period 8:11-8:13 305 was in fact almost on the center line of V23! 305 was never completely outside of V23 anywhere! Especially during the critical jump time 8:11-13. And in both cases 305 is not ever in the Washougal drainage basin where any tributary feeds the Washougal River!
Blevins can't have it both ways saying the FBI map is True, then saying 305 was "east of V23 based on Rataczak" which the FBI map does not show!.
It is time for Smith and Blevins to start looking at some maps for a change and stop blowing smoke. This has become a fruitless enterprise.
See maps attached.
-
Excellent post Georger. people need to understand certain points about viewing the path, and calculating. you can't look at the map and just plot things by looking at it. assuming things will not cut it either. if people don't know exactly where V23 is, they can't come to any conclusions.
Fuel consumption would be wasted flying the path they believe. then you are flying over major population points, and more fuel wasted getting back onto V23.
-
Just as Robert99 has done in the past, anyone has a right to express possible routes the flight took, but calculations need to backup what you are implying. R99 has done this. he's working on things people haven't a clue about at this very moment. things like this take time, jumping to conclusions is not the answer. Bobby whines to R99 for not showing anything, but he fails once again to notice R99 has shown possibilities. Blevins likes short simple conclusions, but we all know where that got him with his botched investigative skills. we have a part time writer arguing with a known aeronautical engineer, a pilot, and a skydiver?
I'm not sold on anything path related, but I'm willing to listen to possibilities. :-\
-
Just as Robert99 has done in the past, anyone has a right to express possible routes the flight took, but calculations need to backup what you are implying. R99 has done this. he's working on things people haven't a clue about at this very moment. things like this take time, jumping to conclusions is not the answer. Bobby whines to R99 for not showing anything, but he fails once again to notice R99 has shown possibilities. Blevins likes short simple conclusions, but we all know where that got him with his botched investigative skills. we have a part time writer arguing with a known aeronautical engineer, a pilot, and a skydiver?
I'm not sold on anything path related, but I'm willing to listen to possibilities. :-\
Blevins and Smith have dispensed with any investigative skills. They are now delving in pure fiction ....... where facts just get in the way.
I hate to remind everyone but, this suspension of reality is the RULE at DZ, installed in order to keep Jo Weber going... and now Blevins. That Moderator himself was a "fiction" wannabe writer. Facts and truth get in way.
It is what it is and that's all that it is: to paraphrase Popeye.
Dat's All Folks!
;D
-
I don't say 305 was east of V-23. Rather, I say that Bill Rataczak told me 305 was east of V-23. I also write that BR told me he didn't know where he was.
Personally, after reading what is here, I'm thinking 305 was a lot further west than Bill alluded to. I-5-ish at least.
-
I don't say 305 was east of V-23. Rather, I say that Bill Rataczak told me 305 was east of V-23. I also write that BR told me he didn't know where he was.
Personally, after reading what is here, I'm thinking 305 was a lot further west than Bill alluded to. I-5-ish at least.
I think they were trying to fly V23 and generally were. I agree they probably would have avoided Portland going west or east around it, then on to Reno. I think Cooper saw the sky-glow of Vancouver-Portland coming up and bailed. When and where is the question. I think the money at Tina's Bar is like the placard. It indicates he landed in the Columbia Water shed but not east in the Washougal water shed. I think that is all anyone can say without more data. I wish we could have more information!
Please let us know if the news media up there covers Blevins' news release to the FBI. Or is it a total dud?
-
I don't say 305 was east of V-23. Rather, I say that Bill Rataczak told me 305 was east of V-23. I also write that BR told me he didn't know where he was.
Personally, after reading what is here, I'm thinking 305 was a lot further west than Bill alluded to. I-5-ish at least.
I think they were trying to fly V23 and generally were. I agree they probably would have avoided Portland going west or east around it, then on to Reno. I think Cooper saw the sky-glow of Vancouver-Portland coming up and bailed. When and where is the question. I think the money at Tina's Bar is like the placard. It indicates he landed in the Columbia Water shed and it is isn;t east in the Washougal basin. I think that is all anyone can say without more data. I wish we could have more information!
Please let us know if the news media up thee covers Blevins 'news release to the FBI'. Or is it a total dud?
During the past 4 years I remember reading a few things that I can't find at this time.
1) A teenage girl was at her family owned airport and listened to the chatter of the hi-jacking on her fathers radio. I think she said she heard the plane overhead when it passed.
2) One of the pilots wanted to dump Cooper in the ocean and he started to fly the plane to the west of their intended route.
Again, I am not sure if this is fact or fiction as I can't find the source. Georger, do you have any recollection of these two points?
-
I don't say 305 was east of V-23. Rather, I say that Bill Rataczak told me 305 was east of V-23. I also write that BR told me he didn't know where he was.
Personally, after reading what is here, I'm thinking 305 was a lot further west than Bill alluded to. I-5-ish at least.
I think they were trying to fly V23 and generally were. I agree they probably would have avoided Portland going west or east around it, then on to Reno. I think Cooper saw the sky-glow of Vancouver-Portland coming up and bailed. When and where is the question. I think the money at Tina's Bar is like the placard. It indicates he landed in the Columbia Water shed and it is isn;t east in the Washougal basin. I think that is all anyone can say without more data. I wish we could have more information!
Please let us know if the news media up thee covers Blevins 'news release to the FBI'. Or is it a total dud?
During the past 4 years I remember reading a few things that I can't find at this time.
1) A teenage girl was at her family owned airport and listened to the chatter of the hi-jacking on her fathers radio. I think she said she heard the plane overhead when it passed.
2) One of the pilots wanted to dump Cooper in the ocean and he started to fly the plane to the west of their intended route.
Again, I am not sure if this is fact or fiction as I can't find the source. Georger, do you have any recollection of these two points?
I think number 1 above originates with Jo Weber who claims it happened somewhere in the Portland area.
Number 2 above definitely happened. Co-pilot Rataczak came up with the idea and I think it is discussed in the Seattle ground radio transcripts. But he was over ruled and the flight did not fly over the Pacific at any point. Nevertheless, the flight crew was aware of the bomb potential and did not want to fly over populated areas when they could avoid them.
-
I'm not so sure they can hear the plane from that altitude, at least not from inside. the planes over my house are at about 2,000. I can hardly hear them inside.
-
I don't say 305 was east of V-23. Rather, I say that Bill Rataczak told me 305 was east of V-23. I also write that BR told me he didn't know where he was.
Personally, after reading what is here, I'm thinking 305 was a lot further west than Bill alluded to. I-5-ish at least.
I think they were trying to fly V23 and generally were. I agree they probably would have avoided Portland going west or east around it, then on to Reno. I think Cooper saw the sky-glow of Vancouver-Portland coming up and bailed. When and where is the question. I think the money at Tina's Bar is like the placard. It indicates he landed in the Columbia Water shed and it is isn;t east in the Washougal basin. I think that is all anyone can say without more data. I wish we could have more information!
Please let us know if the news media up thee covers Blevins 'news release to the FBI'. Or is it a total dud?
During the past 4 years I remember reading a few things that I can't find at this time.
1) A teenage girl was at her family owned airport and listened to the chatter of the hi-jacking on her fathers radio. I think she said she heard the plane overhead when it passed.
2) One of the pilots wanted to dump Cooper in the ocean and he started to fly the plane to the west of their intended route.
Again, I am not sure if this is fact or fiction as I can't find the source. Georger, do you have any recollection of these two points?
I do recall this and I am sure I can find the original account, with some time. Let me come back to this tonight....
Thanks Vicki..
G
-
I'm not so sure they can hear the plane from that altitude, at least not from inside. the planes over my house are at about 2,000. I can hardly hear them inside.
The girl/lady who listened to flight chatter on a radio at an airport:
I dont recall her hearing 305 go over overhead, but I could be wrong.
I do recall her description of the flight comms chatter and the discussion with BR wanting to dump Cooper in the ocean...
I do recall something about 305 being west off (something or someplace)?
I also recall posters at DZ being skeptical of this whole story.
Let's try and find the full account .....
(I came here to send Shutter a PM... you will have a PM shortly)
-
I'm not so sure they can hear the plane from that altitude, at least not from inside. the planes over my house are at about 2,000. I can hardly hear them inside.
The girl/lady who listened to flight chatter on a radio at an airport:
I dont recall her hearing 305 go over overhead, but I could be wrong.
I do recall her description of the flight comms chatter and the discussion with BR wanting to dump Cooper in the ocean...
I do recall something about 305 being west off (something or someplace)?
I also recall posters at DZ being skeptical of this whole story.
Let's try and find the full account .....
(I came here to send Shutter a PM... you will have a PM shortly)
I went ahead and searched the DZ. Farflung dissected the story/fallacy.
It can be found here:http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4131876#4131876
Google map: Location of Shady Acres Airport. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Shady+Acres+Airport-3b8/@47.1145484,-122.5187509,11z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x25b33be73621225e
-
That airport is close to V23. the map doesn't show where the plane was at that time frame. that would be around 8 minutes into the flight. it's close to McChord. the plane was at 7,000 feet at that time frame.
V-495 runs directly over it. (Shady Acres)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNP0GEeWvrQ
-
Marianne Scott Lincoln was the 14 year-old girl who told this story, and I broke it on the Mountain News in 2011 after she told me the tale in August.
She was quite adamant about what she told me. She said she listened on her family's radio in the hanger, and listened to the Seattle Center's side of the conversation. She never heard the cockpit, apparently.
Marianne started the conversation by overhearing me tell another person about my book on DB Cooper, and when I mentioned that the skyjacker wanted $200,000, Marianne jumped in and vociferously argued that Cooper had wanted $400,000 and that there was an argument over the radio. Eventually, the skyjacker was talked down to 200K.
Marianne was resolute about that.
She also said that she thought the plane was far east of V-23 and turned left at Gresham and headed up the Columbia River Gorge. She wasn't absolutely sure on that, but that was her basic recall.
Marianne never told me that she heard 305 pass overhead, even though Shady Acres airport is kind of under the flight path. The person who did tell me that she heard 305 that night was Dona Elliott, who said she heard it plain as day and estimated it was flying at 3-4,000 feet. Later, Dona told me it was raining so hard that she couldn't see across her street at her home in Amboy.
I see that Farflung had lots of trouble corroborating Marianne's story based on antenna heights and radio reception. I have no knowledge about that, and had a bit o' trouble following his arguments. Maybe I need another cup of coffee or more/less meds.....
As for dumping DB Cooper in the brink, Bill Rataczak told me that was his CLEAR intention, and was talked out of it by Paul Soderlind upon the orders of Donald Nyrop, who simply wanted his plane back without any fuss.
-
Dona Elliot is stating the plane flew over Amboy? 3, or 4,000 feet would be under the cloud cover.....
Was this inside, or outside, and this was heard over the heavy downpour?
-
As I recall, she was indoors. Me, Meyer and Blevs heard her say this. We were all sitting around talking, and she blurted this out. Blevs might even have it on his Ariel video. 2012?
-
Sounds more like a plane heading for PDX to land. how did these people know the plane was coming down from SEA into the area?
-
Marianne Scott Lincoln was the 14 year-old girl who told this story, and I broke it on the Mountain News in 2011 after she told me the tale in August.
She was quite adamant about what she told me. She said she listened on her family's radio in the hanger, and listened to the Seattle Center's side of the conversation. She never heard the cockpit, apparently.
Marianne started the conversation by overhearing me tell another person about my book on DB Cooper, and when I mentioned that the skyjacker wanted $200,000, Marianne jumped in and vociferously argued that Cooper had wanted $400,000 and that there was an argument over the radio. Eventually, the skyjacker was talked down to 200K.
Marianne was resolute about that.
She also said that she thought the plane was far east of V-23 and turned left at Gresham and headed up the Columbia River Gorge. She wasn't absolutely sure on that, but that was her basic recall.
Marianne never told me that she heard 305 pass overhead, even though Shady Acres airport is kind of under the flight path. The person who did tell me that she heard 305 that night was Dona Elliott, who said she heard it plain as day and estimated it was flying at 3-4,000 feet. Later, Dona told me it was raining so hard that she couldn't see across her street at her home in Amboy.
I see that Farflung had lots of trouble corroborating Marianne's story based on antenna heights and radio reception. I have no knowledge about that, and had a bit o' trouble following his arguments. Maybe I need another cup of coffee or more/less meds.....
As for dumping DB Cooper in the brink, Bill Rataczak told me that was his CLEAR intention, and was talked out of it by Paul Soderlind upon the orders of Donald Nyrop, who simply wanted his plane back without any fuss.
Question:
"far east of V-23 and turned left at Gresham and headed up the Columbia River Gorge. She wasn't absolutely sure on that, ... "
turned left at Gresham?
So how does 305 get back to Lake Oswego south of Portland at approx 8:20-22, to rendezvous with the T33 ?
If it turns left at Gresham and flies 'up the George' how does it get back going south to Reno?
Even if she heard one side of the comms, assuming she heard anything and didn't make the story up!, that is no guarantee she heard what she thought she heard, got every detail correct, etc etc. Some of the story holds togther; some doesn't.
I got a kick out of Farflungs analysis at the time. 377 joined in. :)
[edit] East of V23 means what-if-what? Where east of V23? Has ANYONE ever given anything to hang a hat on, 'east of Victor-23'? Miles? A place? A name? A vector? A hank of hair, a dog, a bone .... anything!?
RB presumably said: east of V-23" and the world comes running. Gold has been discovered east of V23! But, has anyone got any to show?
-
All I've got are stories, Georger. I collect them, and try to make sense of them.
If an eight year-old girl can provide the FBI with their most promising suspect, then who am I to say that a 14 year-old girl all grown up can't provide a little perspective too, especially when it jives with what Himmelsbach and Rataczak told me. Yes, they could all be zooming me for whatever reasons, and Himms has a pretty lousy track record for Cooper facts, but it is what it is.
-
All I've got are stories, Georger. I collect them, and try to make sense of them.
If an eight year-old girl can provide the FBI with their most promising suspect, then who am I to say that a 14 year-old girl all grown up can't provide a little perspective too, especially when it jives with what Himmelsbach and Rataczak told me. Yes, they could all be zooming me for whatever reasons, and Himms has a pretty lousy track record for Cooper facts, but it is what it is.
Have there ever been any other hijackings where the airplane was LOST? That only happens in Hollywood ? :)
BR's suggested solution of taking Coop out over the ocean seems to imply that Cooper can't see where he's at, isn't asking, isn't looking, etc ? Why would BR think that? Is this another example of BR "freaking out in the cockpit" ?
-
All I've got are stories, Georger. I collect them, and try to make sense of them.
If an eight year-old girl can provide the FBI with their most promising suspect, then who am I to say that a 14 year-old girl all grown up can't provide a little perspective too, especially when it jives with what Himmelsbach and Rataczak told me. Yes, they could all be zooming me for whatever reasons, and Himms has a pretty lousy track record for Cooper facts, but it is what it is.
Have there ever been any other hijackings where the airplane was LOST? That only happens in Hollywood ? :)
BR's suggested solution of taking Coop out over the ocean seems to imply that Cooper can't see where he's at, isn't asking, isn't looking, etc ? Why would BR think that? Is this another example of BR "freaking out in the cockpit" ?
Don't forget that there was an overcast at 5000 feet ASL. Rataczak wanted to climb above that overcast and then go out over the Pacific. Since Cooper would not have been able to see either the ground or ocean in the middle of the night, he would not have known where the airliner was located.
-
All I've got are stories, Georger. I collect them, and try to make sense of them.
If an eight year-old girl can provide the FBI with their most promising suspect, then who am I to say that a 14 year-old girl all grown up can't provide a little perspective too, especially when it jives with what Himmelsbach and Rataczak told me. Yes, they could all be zooming me for whatever reasons, and Himms has a pretty lousy track record for Cooper facts, but it is what it is.
Have there ever been any other hijackings where the airplane was LOST? That only happens in Hollywood ? :)
BR's suggested solution of taking Coop out over the ocean seems to imply that Cooper can't see where he's at, isn't asking, isn't looking, etc ? Why would BR think that? Is this another example of BR "freaking out in the cockpit" ?
Don't forget that there was an overcast at 5000 feet ASL. Rataczak wanted to climb above that overcast and then go out over the Pacific. Since Cooper would not have been able to see either the ground or ocean in the middle of the night, he would not have known where the airliner was located.
Yes. Of course if the bomb is real and get detonated then 305 debris is lost .... in the ocean. Better to stay over land, give a few reference points which will bolster the hijacker's sense of security ... and let him bail over a cow lot or .... a BIG RIVER!? When you can't have the ocean maybe a BIG RIVER is close substitute? ;) Maybe?
Full cooperation! Miss nothing! Enable the guy in every way. Lot's of hugs and kisses. Slow the plane, speed up the plane, climb, lower, anything he wants. Deploy the sky hooks and air brakes. Hover! Anything he wants and needs. Tina turns at the curtain and pines: "See ya later Big Guy. I love you Baby!". Cooper replies, "See ya later Babe. I will leave something for you at a place I know called "Tina's Bar". It's a beautiful place on the Columbia not too far from here. Now scoot! I have things to do!". A few last minutes comms: "slow, slow, steady steady.". Swoosh and out he goes. Money left at Tina's Bar ... as promised. Kenny can count on Tina - she will keep his secret - the reluctant gay guy wants to turn his life around and make the most out of his stamp collection. He and Tina can retire together .... near Gresham ... and raise chickens and holly hocks! It's too late for babies. Life is Harsh. But they will have their memories, and many walks together as the suns set over a thousand shared tears and smiles. Tina stops and thinks: "The psychiatrist predicted this would happen for Kenny and me!" :)
-
All I've got are stories, Georger. I collect them, and try to make sense of them.
If an eight year-old girl can provide the FBI with their most promising suspect, then who am I to say that a 14 year-old girl all grown up can't provide a little perspective too, especially when it jives with what Himmelsbach and Rataczak told me. Yes, they could all be zooming me for whatever reasons, and Himms has a pretty lousy track record for Cooper facts, but it is what it is.
Have there ever been any other hijackings where the airplane was LOST? That only happens in Hollywood ? :)
BR's suggested solution of taking Coop out over the ocean seems to imply that Cooper can't see where he's at, isn't asking, isn't looking, etc ? Why would BR think that? Is this another example of BR "freaking out in the cockpit" ?
Don't forget that there was an overcast at 5000 feet ASL. Rataczak wanted to climb above that overcast and then go out over the Pacific. Since Cooper would not have been able to see either the ground or ocean in the middle of the night, he would not have known where the airliner was located.
Yes. Of course if the bomb is real and get detonated then 305 debris is lost .... in the ocean. Better to stay over land, give a few reference points which will bolster the hijacker's sense of security ... and let him bail over a cow lot or .... a BIG RIVER!? When you can't have the ocean maybe a BIG RIVER is close substitute? ;) Maybe?
Full cooperation! Miss nothing! Enable the guy in every way. Lot's of hugs and kisses. Slow the plane, speed up the plane, climb, lower, anything he wants. Deploy the sky hooks and air brakes. Hover! Anything he wants and needs. Tina turns at the curtain and pines: "See ya later Big Guy. I love you Baby!". Cooper replies, "See ya later Babe. I will leave something for you at a place I know called "Tina's Bar". It's a beautiful place on the Columbia not too far from here. Now scoot! I have things to do!". A few last minutes comms: "slow, slow, steady steady.". Swoosh and out he goes. Money left at Tina's Bar ... as promised. Kenny can count on Tina - she will keep his secret - the reluctant gay guy wants to turn his life around and make the most out of his stamp collection. He and Tina can retire together .... near Gresham ... and raise chickens and holly hocks! It's too late for babies. Life is Harsh. But they will have their memories, and many walks together as the suns set over a thousand shared tears and smiles. Tina stops and thinks: "The psychiatrist predicted this would happen for Kenny and me!" :)
Interesting...sounds like a TV show...Wait! That was a TV show!
DB Cooper and Tina retire together was the story of an episode of leverage!
http://www.tv.com/news/leverage-the-db-cooper-job-review-flashback-heart-attack-29437/
-
The East path:
A major advocate of an East Path has been Jerry Thomas, who spent years searching areas of the Washougal, at the behest of his mentor SA Ralph Himmelsbach. Himmelsbach is on record as having said in 1976 that he thought DBC jumped somewhere about 12 miles north of Portland, east of V23, based on conversations Ralph had had with co-pilot Bill Rataczak.
In March 2009 'Sluggo' interviewed Ralph Himmelsbach and obtained the following responses, to two key issues:
(a) I then asked him how that chart was produced and who produced it. (referring to the FBI's flight path map on it's webpage) He replied, somewhat bluntly, I just don’t know. He speculated that it was the product of some ARTC engineers and some Northwest Airlines engineers, using radar and flight recorder information. [I got the sense that he had no faith in that document at all.].
(b) He said (without commenting on how he knew this) that as 305 approached PDX they could have been as much as 20 miles East of V-23. I asked for clarification, was he saying statute miles or nautical miles. His response was “statute miles.” I commented about, in light of that statement, Jerry Thomas’s search in and NE of Dougan Falls would not be so far-fetched. He said Jerry was definitely on target.
Note* Himmelsbach's position of Cooper's jump pushes the jump time to the 20:14-16 time-period.
See an attached map. Thanks to Shutter for help in preparing this map...
-
The east path solution has the following virtues:
A. It makes the DB Cooper case "go away"!
B. He died. He got his comeuppance!
C. Himmelsbach, Jerry Thomas, and Bill Rataczak are heroes!
D. Cooper Royalty 377, Airtwardo, Tom Kaye, and RobertMBlevins will come on board to get their share of rewards.
E. The money at Tina's Bar is explained.
F. DB Cooper was the unnamed child of Marilyn Monroe and JFK, raised by the Christiansen and Weber family!@
G. Jo Weber and RobertMBlevins now both go away!
-
The part I don't follow is how, and where did they leave V23 to get that far east?
-
The part I don't follow is how, and where did they leave V23 to get that far east?
Precisely! I dont know. I have asked and asked and asked ... all JT would ever say is: "its a secret". He claims Ralph has the info based on extensive work with Rataczak, he says. He says he has "seen" the radar tapes and knows where they are being stored (out east at a military base). When I asked "what do you mean by 'seen' the radar tapes _ do you mean the radar data?"... all he would say is: "Yes, the data. It's a secret. Trust me. It exists and Ralph has seen the data."
That is all I know. I am nothing more than a spectator in this whole thing.
-
What type of radar data? from the ATC I would guess. it couldn't be from the air force. that would be sage data. sage is history.
-
What type of radar data? from the ATC I would guess. it couldn't be from the air force. that would be sage data. sage is history.
The original tapes and some kind of paper printout, according to JT. He said included data from the Air Force - that, he said, is why it is being kept at a military base.
-
I don't know anything about the functions of the ATC. perhaps R99 can shed some light on this. Carr was asked about tapes, he claimed that he found nothing, but that was the air force reference though....
-
I don't know anything about the functions of the ATC. perhaps R99 can shed some light on this. Carr was asked about tapes, he claimed that he found nothing, but that was the air force reference though....
Again, some of the data is Air Force data. That is the reason, JT says, it is being kept at a military facility. And I dont know what "tapes" he's talking about. Air Force tapes? ATC tapes? Just "the radar tapes". But he says there is a printout which shows radar positions and times.
I could be wrong but I think this issue of the "tapes" and Air Force radar data is what Sluggo wanted to talk to Himmslesbach about next ... but I guess that never happened. ???
-
Sage was recorded on tapes, magnetic tapes, and cores. I guess they could still have ways to read them. why the secret though? what purpose does this serve?
-
Sage was recorded on tapes, magnetic tapes, and cores. I guess they could still have ways to read them. why the secret though? what purpose does this serve?
You will have to talk to JT. I have said everything I know and fact is I dont know (in specifics) what JT is talking about.
I could not even get out of him what "tapes" meant!
-
Is Ralph talking to anybody now?
-
In this video you will see what JT is talking about...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q4qz4_0vPQ
-
Is Ralph talking to anybody now?
I have no idea. What I do know is the T33 intercept near Oswego in the general time slot assigned to that, is real. And how you get from there back to being anywhere near Dougan Falls at supposedly 8:14-16 ... is beyond me. I also know everyone associated with the Troutdale Airport says 305 NEVER cross over there! And they say that with near outrage anyone would even suggest it! One official asked me point blank: "Who is this SOB that is saying 305 crossed here!?" I gave them Thomas' name.
I intentionally did not mention Himmelsbach because I have nothing to indicate H ever said 305 crossed at Troutdale.
But, I did give them Thomas' name because he has been the one saying it. They said they had never heard of 'Jerry Thomas'. They also said they were going to make inquiries and I then did give them Himmelsbach's name. The former airport manager said he remembered hearing that name ...
-
I would still like to hear what Ralph has to say about the path.
-
I would still like to hear what Ralph has to say about the path.
Well, keep in mind H's actual words to Sluggo are: "as 305 approached PDX they could have been as much as 20 miles East of V-23", not that they were.
As much as indicates a firm value is uncertain! If we assume Himmelsbach's whole 'certainty' is based on R's 'uncertainty' as to a firm position during say 8:14-16", then that by itself implies R doesn't even know@! And that is exactly what R has told other people. All references to "east of V23" attributed to BR have always been vague and nonspecific. You can bet if Rataczak had given Porteous/Blevins anything specific regarding "east of V23 near the Washougal", Blevins would have been "interviewing" in the Washougal! ;D ;D
Thomas has always said that Himms has better information than anyone else, and that is questionable. Fact is, Thomas is not the only person who spent a lot of time chasing the Washougal rumor. Lots of people have and some are on record having said: "There isn't anything there".!
We do know exactly where 305 was in the [~20:22 // ~20:19] time slot, depending on whose flight path timeline you use. That does not rely on Rataczak, Himmelsbach, Thomas, Solderlind, or even Blevins! We also know the money was found at Tina's Bar on the Columbia .... not on, or in, or near the Washougal River!
;D ;D ;D
Unless someone actually has 305 being near the Washougal, it is the same dead rumor it always was, and nothing more.
-
Ralph should have a good grip on the flight path since he's a pilot, and had access to all the known evidence.
-
Ralph should have a good grip on the flight path since he's a pilot, and had access to all the known evidence.
You would think so - Thomas insists Ralph is one of a few that knows the actual route.
There never will be proof. It's all speculation. That's his game.
-
The manager at the Troutdale Airport in 1971, told me 305 did NOT cross over the Troutdale airport, or cross the Columbia at Troutdale ... as Jerry Thomas has claimed. The manager was on duty at Troutdale the whole day of 11-24-71. He did not just make remarks based on memory; he looked up the whole schedule for the airport that day in order to bolster his personal memory. He also talked to others who were at the airport that day. He says he was told by FBI agents and other law enforcement personnel later, in addition to others involved on 11-24-71, that 305 crossed at Portland, on the west side of Portland.
He basically says, "we were monitoring that hijacking that day", and if 305 had been anywhere near here, or if the hijacker had supposedly landed anywhere near here, we would have known about that, and "We were never notified of anything and we would have been notified if that happened". Period! ::)
R2 says a Troutdale crossing "never happened". That fits with TK's position after talking to R2.
Historically, a "20miles east of V23" theory begins with money being found at Tina's Bar and Hydrologist Bradley's report. I would not be surprised to find out that Himmelsbach felt forced to this position, because of the Tina Bar find and the hydrologist's report. Because basically, if he is lacking concrete flight path information but he now has a hydrologist's report possibly connecting Tina's Bar with the Washougal, Himmelsbach may have felt he had no choice but to try and connect the Washougal with the 305 flight path. All it would take would be BR saying: 'Im not sure where we were but I think we were east of V23', and that could result in an east-path theory. The 20miles east theory 'is' a hydrological theory, not an avionics-mechanical theory supported by actual flight data. flight.
In order to get to the Washougal you must travel '20 miles east of' V23! Then the hydrologist's report connections with the 'flight path'! Consistency is important in public matters!
::)
-
Agent Carr:
"as for the radar tapes, I cannot find where the tapes were ever given to the Bureau. All of the analysis was done by the Air Force and they most likely had their own procedures for storage of such tapes that did not include giving them to the FBI."
Interesting JT seen tapes?
-
How much of this could be true from Carr if everyone agree's the jump was at 8:13?
"the original search area, then the original dropzone was calculated wrong.
Therefore, it stands to reason that the crew felt oscillations at 8:12 and the pressure bump a few minutes later. The second officer stated the last contact they had with Cooper was 8:05 and it was 5 to 10 minutes after that they felt the pressure change. I also don't think a trained air crew would mix up terms, an oscillation would be just that and a pressure change would be called a pressure change or bump.
I think where things went wrong was during the testing. For some reason we were not to re-create oscillations only the pressure bump. At this point the terms must have been combined and believed to be one and the same."
A later entry:
"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."
-
moved over from Tena Bar Money Find thread>
Online andrade1812
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 84
LinkedIn
View Profile
My Website
Email
Personal Message (Online)
Re: Tina Bar Money Find
« Reply #723 on: February 27, 2015, 11:45:52 PM »
Quote
My question thus remains, what kind of documentation is there of the 727 sled test? Is it all secondary sources or is there an actual report somewhere?
[reply]
Best asked of Tom Kaye or Geoff Gray who were allowed access at Seattle.
-
What type of FDR did 305 have? Wire or foil?
Where did it go for analysis? Some say Washington.
Where is the transcript summary of the FDR data - who has that?
;)
-
What type of FDR did 305 have? Wire or foil?
Where did it go for analysis? Some say Washington.
Where is the transcript summary of the FDR data - who has that?
;)
This video shows a Model FA-542 flight data recorder which was in an Eastern BOEING 727-100, N8168G,
FLIGHT 9701 that hit the landing lights at the end of the runway. it uses foil to record.
The Eastern incident occurred Dec 21, 1971. the video is an example, and not from Eastern.
They should have taken the cartridge out and kept it.!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlY5W7be5jU
-
What type of FDR did 305 have? Wire or foil?
Where did it go for analysis? Some say Washington.
Where is the transcript summary of the FDR data - who has that?
;)
This video shows a Model FA-542 flight data recorder which was in an Eastern BOEING 727-100, N8168G,
FLIGHT 9701 that hit the landing lights at the end of the runway. it uses foil to record.
The Eastern incident occurred Dec 21, 1971. the video is an example, and not from Eastern.
They should have taken the cartridge out and kept it.!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlY5W7be5jU
Interview notes -
Any chance the black box could have been changed on 305 without alerting Cooper, during the long delay while re-fueling at SEA, before take off? Wally says it was a wire type, not a foil type.
-
Any chance the black box could have been changed on 305 without alerting Cooper, during the long delay while on the ground at SEA, before take off?
What would be the reason for changing it? I don't know if it can be accessed from the outside.
-
This might be it....
http://www.kenblackbox.com/blackbox.htm
-
1962 had an A.R.L. (Aeronautical Research Laboratories) Flight Memory Recorder. this used a wire recorder seen in the photo with the red square..the box was black....
http://museumvictoria.com.au/collections/items/405748/arl-flight-memory-recorder-airborne-signal-monitor-1962
-
Any chance the black box could have been changed on 305 without alerting Cooper, during the long delay while on the ground at SEA, before take off?
What would be the reason for changing it? I don't know if it can be accessed from the outside.
well the reason would be to insert a type of FDR that is longer duration and has more data inputs for a more detailed calibration of any and all events that may be going to occur during this hijacking, not the least of which is any data that may help calibrate when Cooper jumps - that is the reason I would have considered this. They stalled the refueling for hours! The opportunity may have existed?
Wally says it was a wire type which conflicts with the Snowmman-377 conclusion that it was probably was a foil type of shorter duration with fewer data inputs. Wally says: "yes" when asked if the 305 black box measured "cabin pressure"! That should identify the bump to the second. With a time-position reference that defines the area where Cooper should be on the ground. Wally is virtually saying: we know exactly where and when Cooper bailed ... as I read his remarks. He is saying part of the information came from the black box in use on the plane.
The interview is of course from WSHM material ..
If Wally is correct, the time of Cooper bailing with respect to cabin pressures is known. All that is left is position and that should be available through cross reference to cockpit and ATC voice recording!
It's time vs. position. How you get to that, if Wally is correct, is FDR, radar, and voice cockpit and ATC recording. The three data sets define time vs. position. The cabin pressure data from the FDR is crucial, if Wally is correct.
It sounds to me like they were dead-certain they had Cooper's position. Wally even notes: *That is one of the reasons there was never a reward offered! Wally even adds: "They always picked them up within about ... the longest any of them went was, I believe was 48 hours. They thought they had Cooper's drop point nailed!
[edit] This also explains why they rushed to do a recreation asap. They wanted or needed a data set for comparison. This is a story of data sets. (reminds me of the movie "Longitude")
-
The foil type recorder has 400 hours of data. the wire recorder only has 4 hours, and then it overwrites the previous data.
According to the FBI's own statements, they didn't know exactly where he jumped. this is what's confusing since they had the data. you read the Air Force did the calculation, and then you have NWO stating they made the calculations. then I hear an undercover agent claim they had no idea where he jumped, and when you have that, you end up with a large search area.
They seem to be basing a lot on the radio transcripts. that's the main focus of a much larger search area.
Then to top it all off, we have Ralph, JT, Dawson, and others stating another route all together........
END MESSAGE....Head Spinning :o
-
I'm currently working on the dropzone area, or from Merwin to Portland. I'm getting a time of 6:42 seconds which is about the time stated on the map.
170 KIAS
195 +- KTGS
Temp 42 Degree's
TAT Reading -8 (Celsius not Fahrenheit)
Fuel Flow 4500-4800
Flaps 15 Degree's
Gear down
-
The foil type recorder has 400 hours of data. the wire recorder only has 4 hours, and then it overwrites the previous data.
According to the FBI's own statements, they didn't know exactly where he jumped. this is what's confusing since they had the data. you read the Air Force did the calculation, and then you have NWO stating they made the calculations. then I hear an undercover agent claim they had no idea where he jumped, and when you have that, you end up with a large search area.
They seem to be basing a lot on the radio transcripts. that's the main focus of a much larger search area.
Then to top it all off, we have Ralph, JT, Dawson, and others stating another route all together........
END MESSAGE....Head Spinning :o
I think you are correct: foil type 400 hrs. Wire type 4hrs. That agrees with a Carr post which refers to 4hrs of recording time. Now, did the FDR record cabin pressure or not. Wally says it did. ???
Given the former discussion at DZ I don't think anyone thought the FDR recorded cabin pressure. ?
But, Wally sounds confident they thought they had Cooper's jump point nailed. Kaye is equally confident the FBI path and drop point are correct.
-
Given the former discussion at DZ I don't think anyone thought the FDR recorded cabin pressure. ?
See attached photo.
-
This is from "Reflections Newsletter" with Rataczak.
His instructions: Cruise at ten thousand feet. Gear
down. Flaps 15 degrees. About 24 minutes out, 28
miles north of Portland, the second officer’s
annunciator panel indicated that the rear stairs had
been lowered. The crew did not know for sure that
their hijacker had jumped until they landed in Reno.
24 minutes out, 28 miles north of Portland?
http://www.nwahistory.org/newsletter/12_fall_newsletter_web.pdf
-
Given the former discussion at DZ I don't think anyone thought the FDR recorded cabin pressure. ?
See attached photo.
Wunderbar! where in hell did you get that!??? I guess that issue is settled? If this applies to the FDR on board 305 then Wally knows exactly what he's talking about, or reporting. There is no reason why Wally would make stuff up. The only issue with Wally would be his memory ... good find, sir!
-
Given the former discussion at DZ I don't think anyone thought the FDR recorded cabin pressure. ?
See attached photo.
Wunderbar! where in hell did you get that!??? I guess that issue is settled?
With the unpressurized cabin and the aft stairs popped, the cabin pressure will be "basically" the same as the ambient pressure which is shown on the altimeter as feet. And either the altimeter reading or the static pressure from the pitot tube that is hooked to the altimeter will be recorded.
-
This is from "Reflections Newsletter" with Rataczak.
His instructions: Cruise at ten thousand feet. Gear
down. Flaps 15 degrees. About 24 minutes out, 28
miles north of Portland, the second officer’s
annunciator panel indicated that the rear stairs had
been lowered. The crew did not know for sure that
their hijacker had jumped until they landed in Reno.
24 minutes out, 28 miles north of Portland?
http://www.nwahistory.org/newsletter/12_fall_newsletter_web.pdf
No mention of oscillations or bump or last communications with Cooper ~8:05.
-
This is from "Reflections Newsletter" with Rataczak.
His instructions: Cruise at ten thousand feet. Gear
down. Flaps 15 degrees. About 24 minutes out, 28
miles north of Portland, the second officer’s
annunciator panel indicated that the rear stairs had
been lowered. The crew did not know for sure that
their hijacker had jumped until they landed in Reno.
24 minutes out, 28 miles north of Portland?
http://www.nwahistory.org/newsletter/12_fall_newsletter_web.pdf
No mention of oscillations or bump or last communications with Cooper ~8:05.
Note that the 24 minutes and 28 miles from Portland don't agree. You could drive down I-5 faster than that, which is only about 65 MPH (which would be ground speed). I suggest that one or both of those numbers is incorrect.
-
This is from "Reflections Newsletter" with Rataczak.
His instructions: Cruise at ten thousand feet. Gear
down. Flaps 15 degrees. About 24 minutes out, 28
miles north of Portland, the second officer’s
annunciator panel indicated that the rear stairs had
been lowered. The crew did not know for sure that
their hijacker had jumped until they landed in Reno.
24 minutes out, 28 miles north of Portland?
http://www.nwahistory.org/newsletter/12_fall_newsletter_web.pdf
No mention of oscillations or bump or last communications with Cooper ~8:05.
Note that the 24 minutes and 28 miles from Portland don't agree. You could drive down I-5 faster than that, which is only about 65 MPH (which would be ground speed). I suggest that one or both of those numbers is incorrect.
You read my mind!
There are public presentations my friends at Rockwell refer to as "toilet paper presentations" - you could wipe your XXX with them. Surely in that NWA audience there were people wondering ???? What more can you say? You smile and shake hands and go home and have a few stiff drinks... you try to pick the pieces up the next day without offending anyone! and you pray the donation checks don't stop!!!
R99 what do you think of Wally's remarks?
-
This is from "Reflections Newsletter" with Rataczak.
His instructions: Cruise at ten thousand feet. Gear
down. Flaps 15 degrees. About 24 minutes out, 28
miles north of Portland, the second officer’s
annunciator panel indicated that the rear stairs had
been lowered. The crew did not know for sure that
their hijacker had jumped until they landed in Reno.
24 minutes out, 28 miles north of Portland?
http://www.nwahistory.org/newsletter/12_fall_newsletter_web.pdf
No mention of oscillations or bump or last communications with Cooper ~8:05.
Note that the 24 minutes and 28 miles from Portland don't agree. You could drive down I-5 faster than that, which is only about 65 MPH (which would be ground speed). I suggest that one or both of those numbers is incorrect.
You read my mind!
There are public presentations my friends at Rockwell refer to as "toilet paper presentations" - you could wipe your XXX with them. Surely in that NWA audience there were people wondering ???? What more can you say? You smile and shake hands and go home and have a few stiff drinks... you try to pick the pieces up the next day without offending anyone! and you pray the donation checks don't stop!!!
R99 what do you think of Wally's remarks?
First, just who is Wally? I don't see any identification for him. As far as the jump time goes, Soderlind insisted to Tosaw that it was 8:13 PM. And frankly, that time seems to be very accurate (to within a minute or so). However, Soderlind was plotting the first jump zone within a few minutes of that time and there is no indication of where he got the position information that he was using. And he had the jump zone finished long before the airliner even got to Reno. So Soderlind could not have used FDR data.
Soderlind probably got the information he used through the phone patch and teletype messages that were sent to MSP through the ARINC network (which is now owned by your friends at Rockwell). This brings up another problem. Fred Poynter and his staff at WSHM went through all the messages on that roll of teletype paper that was loaned to WSHM for a short period of time, and concluded that several messages were missing. That is, either the NWA people or the FBI "redacted" some of those teletype messages.
So when Soderlind drew up his second version of the drop zone, did he have access to the un-redacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the missing teletype messages? There is no conclusive answer to that, but he apparently came to the same conclusions about the 8:13 PM jump time and also that Cooper could have landed in the Columbia River.
But determining the aircraft's location at the jump time is the big problem. And from what I can see, that information is just not available at the present time.
-
This is from "Reflections Newsletter" with Rataczak.
His instructions: Cruise at ten thousand feet. Gear
down. Flaps 15 degrees. About 24 minutes out, 28
miles north of Portland, the second officer’s
annunciator panel indicated that the rear stairs had
been lowered. The crew did not know for sure that
their hijacker had jumped until they landed in Reno.
24 minutes out, 28 miles north of Portland?
http://www.nwahistory.org/newsletter/12_fall_newsletter_web.pdf
No mention of oscillations or bump or last communications with Cooper ~8:05.
Note that the 24 minutes and 28 miles from Portland don't agree. You could drive down I-5 faster than that, which is only about 65 MPH (which would be ground speed). I suggest that one or both of those numbers is incorrect.
You read my mind!
There are public presentations my friends at Rockwell refer to as "toilet paper presentations" - you could wipe your XXX with them. Surely in that NWA audience there were people wondering ???? What more can you say? You smile and shake hands and go home and have a few stiff drinks... you try to pick the pieces up the next day without offending anyone! and you pray the donation checks don't stop!!!
R99 what do you think of Wally's remarks?
First, just who is Wally? I don't see any identification for him. As far as the jump time goes, Soderlind insisted to Tosaw that it was 8:13 PM. And frankly, that time seems to be very accurate (to within a minute or so). However, Soderlind was plotting the first jump zone within a few minutes of that time and there is no indication of where he got the position information that he was using. And he had the jump zone finished long before the airliner even got to Reno. So Soderlind could not have used FDR data.
Soderlind probably got the information he used through the phone patch and teletype messages that were sent to MSP through the ARINC network (which is now owned by your friends at Rockwell). This brings up another problem. Fred Poynter and his staff at WSHM went through all the messages on that roll of teletype paper that was loaned to WSHM for a short period of time, and concluded that several messages were missing. That is, either the NWA people or the FBI "redacted" some of those teletype messages.
So when Soderlind drew up his second version of the drop zone, did he have access to the un-redacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the missing teletype messages? There is no conclusive answer to that, but he apparently came to the same conclusions about the 8:13 PM jump time and also that Cooper could have landed in the Columbia River.
But determining the aircraft's location at the jump time is the big problem. And from what I can see, that information is just not available at the present time.
Thanks. Wally was an Air Force 'flight examiner/load master' who was n the recreation flight. See attached -
The interview by WSHM.
-
Ralph states this on November 21, 1979
"Listening to the radio communications, recalls how the pilot mentioned during the flight from Seattle he thought Cooper had jumped because of a "low pressure bump" which also registered on the flight recorder at 8:11 PM"
The whole story is here....
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=860&dat=19791121&id=iHhUAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Zo8DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6841,3955667
The big question is what happened to the data from the flight recorder?
-
If Ralph claims to be listening to the radio communications, where is the statement of the "low pressure bump", only the oscillation is recorded on the transcripts that we can see?
These are critical questions I believe that need to be asked with Wally, and Ralph.
-
Sutter
Could it be that the FDR with only the last 4 hrs of recording and could have rewrote over the information on cabin pressure at the 8:12 time? That could explain why there seems to be no FDR data. The purpose of the FDR is to record the last 4 hours up to the time of the CRASH. We have no crash to turn the recorder off but it probably was turned off after the flight got to Reno and possibly had recorded over the 8:12 time and turned off later than the landing time in Reno.
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
-
The flight wasn't longer than 4 hours past that point. They did use this data by looking at the report on sluggo's site.....
They might of sent the data to Washington, I don't know.
-
The flight crew vacated the aircraft in Reno at 11:22 PM. Presumably, the flight recorder would have been turned off at that point. So with a four hour recording capacity, the entire flight from Seattle should be available on the recorder since the takeoff time in Seattle was approximately 7:35 PM.
The airliner was flown back to Seattle the next day (Thanksgiving Day). Under the existing circumstances (non-revenue flight, law enforcement implications, etc.), the flight recorder could probably be powered off by a circuit breaker for that flight. The aircraft itself underwent minor repairs to the aft stairs in Seattle and then returned to service on either the Friday or Saturday after Thanksgiving.
-
Ralph states this on November 21, 1979
"Listening to the radio communications, recalls how the pilot mentioned during the flight from Seattle he thought Cooper had jumped because of a "low pressure bump" which also registered on the flight recorder at 8:11 PM"
The whole story is here....
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=860&dat=19791121&id=iHhUAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Zo8DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6841,3955667
The big question is what happened to the data from the flight recorder?
And, where is the passage Ralph is referring to, in the Transcripts? At 8:11. Redacted?
-
Questions that linger......If they had the flight recorder, and was able to get the data off of it. why is FBI agents telling of a different path, and stating they didn't know where he jumped? nothing is making any sense.
If I'm correct the plane shut down some time after 11:21 pm. it's possible some of the data was over ran giving the reason for the late start with the FBI map? they asked for ground power at 11:21 so they could shut down. it doesn't specify when the power was hooked up. they show the path all the way down, except for the first 18 minutes, or so?
-
R99, I'm really having trouble at the 8:15 to 8:17 plots. I can't fly the plane the way they have it on the map. this is some heavy rolls, and the space isn't there to do in? you have to roll hard right to try and make the 8:16 plot, then another roll left to try and cross the Columbia. I'm guessing the plane is rolling left from 8:16 on past the Columbia. can you spot anything on the map that can verify my problem, or something I'm doing wrong?
-
R99, I'm really having trouble at the 8:15 to 8:17 plots. I can't fly the plane the way they have it on the map. this is some heavy rolls, and the space isn't there to do in? you have to roll hard right to try and make the 8:16 plot, then another roll left to try and cross the Columbia. I'm guessing the plane is rolling left from 8:16 on past the Columbia. can you spot anything on the map that can verify my problem, or something I'm doing wrong?
There is no solution to your problem. It is not you, it is simply that the flight path won't work.
-
It's similar to the S turn at Toledo/Maylay. that one can be done. I'm really having trouble getting it done in the 8:15-8:17 marks. this is a problem I didn't see coming.
-
It's similar to the S turn at Toledo/Maylay. that one can be done. I'm really having trouble getting it done in the 8:15-8:17 marks. this is a problem I didn't see coming.
Don't forget that there exists a copy of a teletype message sent through the ARINC teletype network which has a time hack of 8:22 PM PST to the effect that the airliner was 23 DME miles south of the Portland (now Battleground) VORTAC. And when the DME read 23 miles it meant that the airliner was somewhere between 23.00 and 23.99 miles south of that VORTAC. So there is a possible 1.00 nautical mile difference in the location. But since the airliner had a ground speed of 3 nautical miles per minute (and assuming it was flying directly away from the VORTAC), the DME would only show 23.XX for not more than 20 seconds.
And don't forget that the Seattle NWA's office records, now at the WSHM, show that at least one person claims the airliner was at the above point at 8:18 PM PST. This would be the time that the radio call to the ARINC ground station was made and that voice call could be received at Seattle and Minneapolis through the phone patch provided by ARINC. ARINC personnel have informed WSHM personnel and myself that there is a finite time between any voice radio call from the airliner and the time it takes to "format" that voice message and then to type it into their teletype system. So the 8:18 PM PST time for the voice radio call over the ARINC patch is believable. This refers to the way things operated in 1971.
There is no way that the airliner could have been at that DME point at 8:18 PM if it overflew the Portland VORTAC.
-
I have to reset the flight again, I was boggled as to why the plane was not running at a proper speed of 170 KIAS, and had to apply more power to make up. it had more drag than usual. that's when I took a look outside and noticed the spoilers were up! I must of hit the control on the yoke that deployed them. this reminds me of Eastern flight 401 when they bumped the yoke causing the auto-pilot to disengage.
Anyway, I've set my radio to 116.60 which is Battleground, and will fly to the Canby intersection for timing....(DME miles)
This shows once again, if the configuration is wrong it throws a wrench into the flight. 30 minutes lost.... :'(
-
Canby is 27 miles DME, so I'm looking for a time frame of about 5 minutes past the 8:17 plot, or crossing the Columbia to reach the 23 miles DME. I should have a little over 8 minutes of flight.
Correct?
-
I flew from Battleground to the Canby intersection. I flew the path the best I could through the problem area. I hit 23 miles DME in a time of 7 minutes, and 15 seconds. I reached the Canby intersection in 8 minutes, and 32 seconds.
Plane configuration is as follows
Flaps.....15 degree's
Gear......Down
Speed....171 KIAS
Groundspeed...196 (average)
Temp.....42 degree's
TAT.......-8 Celsius (17.6 Fahrenheit)
Fuel Flow....4600
-
I flew from Battleground to the Canby intersection. I flew the path the best I could through the problem area. I hit 23 miles DME in a time of 7 minutes, and 15 seconds. I reached the Canby intersection in 8 minutes, and 32 seconds.
Plane configuration is as follows
Flaps.....15 degree's
Gear......Down
Speed....171 KIAS
Groundspeed...196 (average)
Temp.....42 degree's
TAT.......-8 Celsius (17.6 Fahrenheit)
Fuel Flow....4600
I have done the calculations on a flight computer using the following assumptions:
KIAS - 170 Knots
KTAS - 194 Knots
Wind (10,000 feet) - Southwest (225 degrees true) at 25 Knots.
This gives a Ground Speed of 172 Knots on the V-23 segment southbound from the Portland (Battleground) VORTAC.
With that Ground Speed the airliner should have flown the 23 DME nautical mile distance in 8.0 minutes and the 27 DME nautical mile distance to Canby Intersection in 9.4 minutes.
Given the unknown actual wind conditions as well as the actual KIAS cruise speed, we are in close agreement.
Do you have your Ground Speed set in MPH or Knots?
-
Ground speed 172?
I see, knots, not MPH...
-
I didn't have the winds that high. I'm running it again.....225 30mph....
-
Ok, here are the new numbers....
KIAS..........172.9
KTAS..........197.6
KTGS.........176.8
MPH............199.0
Wind 225 degree's @ 30
Battleground to 23 miles DME 8:31 seconds
Canby Intersection 9:51 seconds
-
Here are the actual numbers that I see while flying....
-
Ok, here are the new numbers....
KIAS..........172.9
KTAS..........197.6
KTGS.........176.8
MPH............199.0
Wind 225 degree's @ 30
Battleground to 23 miles DME 8:31 seconds
Canby Intersection 9:51 seconds
Note that the "estimated" location at 8:14 PM is a mile or two east of the Portland (Battleground) VORTAC. And that the flight path in question is not direct but does a lot of wandering around which adds additional distance and time to the DME points we have been discussing. The numbers we have above indicates that it is questionable if the airliner could have been at the 23 DME point (even at 8:22 PM) if it overflew the Portland VORTAC, much less pass a mile or so to its east and then have to fly back west to compensate for that.
The numbers in the above posts are about as good as they are going to get until more accurate information on the airliner's actual locations and times becomes available. If that happy day ever arrives, the first thing to do is determine the ground speed for each segment possible.
Then in order to determine estimates of the actual cruise speed and wind direction and velocity, some assumptions will have to be made based on simple good judgment.
The information in the actual un-redacted transcripts will determine future steps in the analysis of the flight path.
-
I flew from BG southeastward for about 1.5 minutes, then rolled right (hard) leveled out for a short period, and then rolled left to re-connect with V23 following it down to Canby.....
-
I'm rather pleased with the numbers. it's telling me the system is functioning as one would hope a simulator would do. as I always state about X-Plane......It's as real as it gets!
-
I'm rather pleased with the numbers. it's telling me the system is functioning as one would hope a simulator would do. as I always state about X-Plane......It's as real as it gets!
It works really well when you can keep the plane in the air. :D
-
I'm rather pleased with the numbers. it's telling me the system is functioning as one would hope a simulator would do. as I always state about X-Plane......It's as real as it gets!
It works really well when you can keep the plane in the air. :D
Sadly, I think an NFL kicker has more airtime than you did ;D :D :D :D :D ;D
-
I ran the path from BG straight down V23 to Canby.
23 miles DME.........7:57
Canby Inters..........9.22
My KIAS was two knots slower (171.0)
KTAS......193.8
KTGS......166.4
MPH.......196.8
-
My plane is back from Rome ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbcO9V4qg44
-
I'm sure this may have already been answered probably multiple times in this thread, but where was the warning label found in regards to the "official" flight path?
-
Information is from Citizen Sleuths website.....
The placard was recovered at the location shown in Figure 2 which is near Toutle, and 20 miles north of the Ariel Washington jump zone. This location is almost directly under the FBI flight path. Giving the placard a free fall time of nine minutes and a south west cross wind of 18 knots, then the plane would have to been 2.68 miles from where the placard was recovered and 2.6 miles west of V23 [6]. This distance is well within the official 8 mile width for the Victor airway and is 4 miles east of the theoretical Tena Bar flight path. This data places a constraint on the planes position approximately six minutes before the jump and suggests flight #305 was on the original FBI flight path.
(http://www.citizensleuths.com/images/Pictures/Placard2_lrg.jpg)
-
Interesting stuff, thanks!
-
Information is from Citizen Sleuths website.....
The placard was recovered at the location shown in Figure 2 which is near Toutle, and 20 miles north of the Ariel Washington jump zone. This location is almost directly under the FBI flight path. Giving the placard a free fall time of nine minutes and a south west cross wind of 18 knots, then the plane would have to been 2.68 miles from where the placard was recovered and 2.6 miles west of V23 [6]. This distance is well within the official 8 mile width for the Victor airway and is 4 miles east of the theoretical Tena Bar flight path. This data places a constraint on the planes position approximately six minutes before the jump and suggests flight #305 was on the original FBI flight path.
(http://www.citizensleuths.com/images/Pictures/Placard2_lrg.jpg)
Shutter, I think the data you cited suggests that the airliner was NOT on the original FBI flight path contrary to the last sentence above.
-
I didn't really read much of it. I was looking for placard data for OMC. it does appear to say that. I'm going to his site to look at the rest of the page.
I'm guessing the green line is supposed to be V23? but it's not written that way...confusing :-\
Added: the green line is the tina bar theory, and the white line is the FBI flight path, along with the blue line being the Washougal theory.
Photo & information is from Citizen Sleuths.....com
(http://www.citizensleuths.com/images/Pictures/AllFlightPaths_sml.jpg)
-
Flying on the west side of V23 would make the red crosses line up....
-
Tom has a nice High resolution pic of the flight path. the red crosses can be seen all the way up to the start. do these represent the minute marks? it appears they do.
-
I sent Tom an email about the photo. he replied that the plane was showing the wind drift, and wasn't related to the flight path.
-
Robert99, do these cords sound right....
Maylay
N46.25.96 W122.45.57
Canby
N45.18.63 W122.45.95
-
Robert99, do these cords sound right....
Maylay
N46.25.96 W122.45.57
Canby
N45.18.63 W122.45.95
Shutter, following are the positions that I obtained from an online source some time ago (I don't have the exact reference available at this moment):
MALAY: 46 degrees, 25.37 minutes North Latitude; 122 degrees, 45.65 minutes West Longitude.
CANBY: 45 degrees, 18.63 minutes North Latitude; 122 degrees, 45.89 minutes West Longitude.
The format above is the same as used on recent Low Altitude IFR Charts. Please double check the format you used above.
Note that the Canby Intersection is just slightly WEST of the Malay Intersection. The distance is actually 0.25 minutes of Longitude further WEST. If this was at the Equator, Canby would be exactly 0.25 Nautical Miles further WEST. However, since the distance between Longitude lines is less in the Portland area, Canby is roughly 1000 feet (maybe less) WEST of Malay.
Moving along a Longitude line, the distance between Latitude lines in the Portland area (and ever where else) is exactly 60 Nautical Miles, or one minute of Latitude equals one Nautical Mile. So Canby is 66.74 Nautical Miles almost exactly straight SOUTH of Malay.
-
I got the numbers from Skyvector.
-
I would like to acknowledge the effort Robert99 has put into helping me "learn how to fly" I learn something every time I talk with him through PM's. I've come a long way. I remember not being able to line up with the runway, I'm reminded of the scene from "Airplane" where sweat (water) was rolling off the pilots head by the gallons while coming in for a landing ;D ;D :D
Hominid has also been a major contributor to the project.....
Thank You... both of you guys 8)
-
I would like to acknowledge the effort Robert99 has put into helping me "learn how to fly" I learn something every time I talk with him through PM's. I've come a long way. I remember not being able to line up with the runway, I'm reminded of the scene from "Airplane" where sweat (water) was rolling off the pilots head by the gallons while coming in for a landing ;D ;D :D
Hominid has also been a major contributor to the project.....
Thank You... both of you guys 8)
Any conclusions or thoughts about the published flight path yet?
-
I would like to acknowledge the effort Robert99 has put into helping me "learn how to fly" I learn something every time I talk with him through PM's. I've come a long way. I remember not being able to line up with the runway, I'm reminded of the scene from "Airplane" where sweat (water) was rolling off the pilots head by the gallons while coming in for a landing ;D ;D :D
Hominid has also been a major contributor to the project.....
Thank You... both of you guys 8)
Any conclusions or thoughts about the published flight path yet?
Not at the moment. right now I'm working on a video surrounding a different path, or theory. I've went back & forth on the FBI path, but will have a conclusion soon.
Work is slowing my progress down a bit. I've been working 7 days a week getting home at 6 - 6:30 pm. I should be able to relax a little by the middle of this coming week.
-
I flew from the Maylay intersection down to Canby. I arrived at 23 miles DME in 20:31 minutes, and crossed the Canby intersection at a time of 21:48 minutes. I passed Tina Bar at 13:27 which is 8 miles DME from Battleground. just shy of 8 miles. the clock was starting to turn to 8 miles. the wind blows me off course constantly......
-
I flew from the Maylay intersection down to Canby. I arrived at 23 miles DME in 20:31 minutes, and crossed the Canby intersection at a time of 21:48 minutes. I passed Tina Bar at 13:27 which is 8 miles DME from Battleground. just shy of 8 miles. the clock was starting to turn to 8 miles. the wind blows me off course constantly......
The FBI map has the airliner over the Memorial Airport at Toledo at 7:59 PM and about 1 or 2 NM Southwest of the Mayfield/Malay Intersection at 8:00 PM. The estimated jump time is given at about 8:12 PM plus or minus a minute or so. So you are in the right neighborhood.
In "real life", when the controller has the airliner fly between to different intersections such as from Malay to Canby, he would give the airliner's cockpit crew directions to fly a given "heading" which would include a correction for the wind from the southwest. And the controller would modify that heading as needed to keep the airliner on a straight line between those two intersections. It should be noted that the airliner had only VOR/DME and ADF radio equipment for navigation and would not be able to fly exactly between those two intersections using its own navigation capabilities.
In bypassing Portland on the west side, it is obvious that the controller wanted the airliner back on V-23 as soon as convenient. The Canby Intersection is about 77 Nautical Miles north of the Eugene VORTAC which is the next southbound VORTAC after BTG.
A question. When flying on a direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections, what is the radial, "bearing", or whatever, to the BTG VORTAC at the instant the DME from BTG rolls over to "23.0 Nautical Miles"? And what is the precise time from the Malay Intersection when this happens (20:31?)?
Also, what is the same information at the instant "23.9 Nautical Miles" rolls over to become "24.0 Nautical Miles"? There should be approximately a 20 second difference in these times.
-
I will have to do another run for what you are asking. I didn't check any bearings at those points. I just shut the flight down, or I could of reversed the flight for the data.
I'll have to put the distance readings back onto the screen. I removed those features while taking video of the plane. the cockpit doesn't give me any readings in tenths (DME counter/gauge/meter), but the data I put in the upper left corner of the screen does show tenths.
I don't have a Garmin in the 727, but I do have what is called Civa Navigation system, but I don't fully understand it. I haven't used it a lot.
The actual time from the two points was 21:48
(http://philippmuenzel.de/scr/727-200Adv_7.png)
-
I will have to do another run for what you are asking. I didn't check any bearings at those points. I just shut the flight down, or I could of reversed the flight for the data.
I'll have to put the distance readings back onto the screen. I removed those features while taking video of the plane. the cockpit doesn't give me any readings in tenths (DME counter/gauge/meter), but the data I put in the upper left corner of the screen does show tenths.
I don't have a Garmin in the 727, but I do have what is called Civa Navigation system, but I don't fully understand it. I haven't used it a lot.
The actual time from the two points was 21:48
If the airliner was at the Malay Intersection at 7:59 or 8:00 PM and at the Canby Intersection at either 8:20:48 or 8:21:48 PM, then this supports the idea that the airliner made the voice radio call that it was "23 DME south of Portland [VORTAC]" at 8:18 PM per the note in the NWA Seattle records and not at the 8:22 PM time hack on the teletype version of the message.
-
I will have to do another run for what you are asking. I didn't check any bearings at those points. I just shut the flight down, or I could of reversed the flight for the data.
I'll have to put the distance readings back onto the screen. I removed those features while taking video of the plane. the cockpit doesn't give me any readings in tenths (DME counter/gauge/meter), but the data I put in the upper left corner of the screen does show tenths.
I don't have a Garmin in the 727, but I do have what is called Civa Navigation system, but I don't fully understand it. I haven't used it a lot.
The actual time from the two points was 21:48
If the airliner was at the Malay Intersection at 7:59 or 8:00 PM and at the Canby Intersection at either 8:20:48 or 8:21:48 PM, then this supports the idea that the airliner made the voice radio call that it was "23 DME south of Portland [VORTAC]" at 8:18 PM per the note in the NWA Seattle records and not at the 8:22 PM time hack on the teletype version of the message.
That's interesting.
-
I'm having a heck of a time programming this damn Civa navigation system. I'm going to look at the software on my tablet, and see if I can plot the route from there.
-
R99, can Long. & Lat. be configured in the Garmin instead of airports?
-
R99, can Long. & Lat. be configured in the Garmin instead of airports?
You have got me on that. I don't know since I have never used a Garmin which is modern and I am not. But I will see if I can find out something about it.
-
R99, can Long. & Lat. be configured in the Garmin instead of airports?
You have got me on that. I don't know since I have never used a Garmin, which is modern and I am not. But I will see if I can find out something about it.
Shutter, I can't find anything online that would answer your question. But my guess is that you should be able to enter Longitude and Latitude in some manner. I presume that VORTACS and Intersections are entered using their names (for intersections) and three letter identifiers (for the VORTACS). There should be some means to enter the coordinates for an unnamed point. Are you sure you are using the correct format for the coordinates?
-
I'll try entering the names of the intersections and see what happens. it does the same as Google. once you start typing a letter, it tries to link up to what it thinks you want. I had airports on my mind and didn't think to do that.....
-
Ok, that seems to work. took a while, I forgot Maylay is now Mayfield. it couldn't find Maylay.
Now, this is a little different than the Garmin 500. I think this one is the 530. I can't activate the path, but I'm half way there though :P
Another learning curve to get around...
-
Ok, that seems to work. took a while, I forgot Maylay is now Mayfield. it couldn't find Maylay.
Now, this is a little different than the Garmin 500. I think this one is the 530. I can't activate the path, but I'm half way there though :P
Another learning curve to get around...
Funny! Would this help?
-
Ok, that seems to work. took a while, I forgot Maylay is now Mayfield. it couldn't find Maylay.
Now, this is a little different than the Garmin 500. I think this one is the 530. I can't activate the path, but I'm half way there though :P
Another learning curve to get around...
It is Malay (five letters) and I think all intersections now have five letter names.
-
That would do it......I found both intersections. I'm going to watch a You Tube tutorial on the 530...
-
Ok, I was able to some what set the GPS. I flew from Malay to Canby. it gave a "Desired Track" of 161 degrees......I ran right into the intersection.
I was in a King90 twin engine, so speed, and time was not the issue.
-
Ok, I was able to some what set the GPS. I flew from Malay to Canby. it gave a "Desired Track" of 161 degrees......I ran right into the intersection.
I was in a King90 twin engine, so speed, and time was not the issue.
Presumably, you were not plugging any winds aloft information into the system. So here is where that 161 degrees came from. As we have discussed previously, the Canby Intersection is a few hundred feet WEST of the Malay Intersection so the True Course between them would be 180 degrees or straight SOUTH for all practical purposes.
I have a several year old FAA Sectional Map of the Portland area and it gives the Magnetic Variation as 17:00 to 17:30 degrees EAST for that time. Today, that Magnetic Variation is probably up to around 19 degrees EAST.
So to determine the Magnetic Course (which is what you will see on your Heading Indicator on the GPS with no wind), the EAST Magnetic Variation of about 19 degrees must be subtracted from the 180 degrees True Course. The end result is your Heading Indicator will show 161 degrees Magnetic Course.
If the Magnetic Variation was WEST, then its value would have been added to the True Course value. It should also be noted that VORTACS "NORTH" is actually Magnetic North which is a wandering point somewhere North of Greenland. This all means that maps have to be updated regularly and that the radials from VORTACS change when the updates to Magnetic North are made.
-
I didn't set anything. I was just basically trying out the Garmin. as I was flying down by the Columbia I noticed it was about where I was flying in the previous flights, so I just kept it going to the end.
I'll set the wind, and temps on another run and also use the auto pilot, and watch it on my tablet while I surf the net. once I find out how to set the auto pilot on the C90 :o
I recorded a small part of the first flight. it's uploading now. I put the garmin up where it can be seen easily....
-
The C90 always wants to roll to the left?
You might want to enlarge the screen to see the Garmin a little better...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Srgo5Lt9PNw
-
The Garmin GPS is an amazing tool. I just wish it was on the 727 for testing purposes. I can program the Garmin in the C90, or Baron 58, and take off with my tablet on, and the plane will fly the course given. I set it for Seattle to Malay, and then to PDX. I just put the tablet in front of me by my computer, and continue to surf the net while watching the plane 5 feet away of the cockpit on my Samsung tablet. 8)
Once you set the Garmin, I just takeoff and reach the desired altitude, and pop on the auto pilot, and the altitude hold, and the plane flies all by itself.... :o the video above didn't have the auto pilot engaged. I just followed it's course telling me when I drifted off of the given course. you have to engage the auto pilot, and the "Nav" button for it to link to the Garmin, then push the "Alt" button to hold the altitude.,
The auto pilot works good in the 727, but wind will still cause it to drift off course....
-
The Garmin GPS is an amazing tool. I just wish it was on the 727 for testing purposes. I can program the Garmin in the C90, or Baron 58, and take off with my tablet on, and the plane will fly the course given. I set it for Seattle to Malay, and then to PDX. I just put the tablet in front of me by my computer, and continue to surf the net while watching the plane 5 feet away of the cockpit on my Samsung tablet. 8)
Once you set the Garmin, I just takeoff and reach the desired altitude, and pop on the auto pilot, and the altitude hold, and the plane flies all by itself.... :o the video above didn't have the auto pilot engaged. I just followed it's course telling me when I drifted off of the given course. you have to engage the auto pilot, and the "Nav" button for it to link to the Garmin, then push the "Alt" button to hold the altitude.,
The auto pilot works good in the 727, but wind will still cause it to drift off course....
Can't the auto pilot be set to track direct to a VORTAC or a Waypoint (such as an Intersection)?
-
The Garmin GPS is an amazing tool. I just wish it was on the 727 for testing purposes. I can program the Garmin in the C90, or Baron 58, and take off with my tablet on, and the plane will fly the course given. I set it for Seattle to Malay, and then to PDX. I just put the tablet in front of me by my computer, and continue to surf the net while watching the plane 5 feet away of the cockpit on my Samsung tablet. 8)
Once you set the Garmin, I just takeoff and reach the desired altitude, and pop on the auto pilot, and the altitude hold, and the plane flies all by itself.... :o the video above didn't have the auto pilot engaged. I just followed it's course telling me when I drifted off of the given course. you have to engage the auto pilot, and the "Nav" button for it to link to the Garmin, then push the "Alt" button to hold the altitude.,
The auto pilot works good in the 727, but wind will still cause it to drift off course....
Can't the auto pilot be set to track direct to a VORTAC or a Waypoint (such as an Intersection)?
I believe so, but will it track similar to GPS. I think it will with a VORTAC, but I'm not sure about a waypoint?
-
I have a PDF I downloaded a while back. here is what they say about the auto pilot....
The Autopilot (A/P) can control the aircraft in a climb, cruise decent and
approach phases of flight or as directed manually by the pilot via the control
knob. It may also be directed by signals from the VHF, GPS, and INS
navigation systems. It can also find and maintain a pre selected heading,
altitude, pitch attitude or operate in a split axis configuration.
It requires 115V AC for operation from the aircraft generators or an external
source. If using the latter you need to operate the ground test switch.
Electrical interlocks prevent selection or operation unless all the proper
conditions for correct functioning are satisfied.
I have been using it for a while, but I only engage it for a straight course. I use the control knob to turn with, which doesn't occur a lot till I pass Merwin lake.
-
I've figured most of the auto pilot out, but if I don't lock onto a vortac it still drifts off course. what I do like is setting the heading, and altitude. it keeps an accurate speed. when I engage 15 degree flaps, it stays at 171.6 KIAS with a fuel flow of about 4500. I'm not having to adjust the speed at all, and no need to mess with adjusting the altitude....
Correction to the above....it will fly a perfect line with a no wind situation when I dial in V-23 (178 degrees) from SEA to Toledo, but will drift if I hit it with a cross wind.
In the past I engage the auto pilot, but it was only flying straight from my last position. constant adjustments had to be made. I wasn't arming the auto pilot correctly. the HSI now works with the auto pilot where I can set the heading...
-
Here is an interesting article.....
Due to poor visibility, his descent went unnoticed by the United States Air Force F-106 jet fighters tracking the airliner. He was initally believed to have landed southeast of the town of Ariel by the edge of Lake Merwin, 30 miles north of Portland, Oregon. Later pilot information puts the jump location about 20 miles further west. This marker is at approximately that point.
http://wikimapia.org/5411605/DB-Cooper-jump-point
-
Here is an interesting article.....
Due to poor visibility, his descent went unnoticed by the United States Air Force F-106 jet fighters tracking the airliner. He was initally believed to have landed southeast of the town of Ariel by the edge of Lake Merwin, 30 miles north of Portland, Oregon. Later pilot information puts the jump location about 20 miles further west. This marker is at approximately that point.
http://wikimapia.org/5411605/DB-Cooper-jump-point
What later pilot information given by who to whom now given to us by Dude Shri Dude Monad ??? There are more experts on DB Cooper than there are Sallys and Heathers in the phone book!
-
Here is an interesting article.....
Due to poor visibility, his descent went unnoticed by the United States Air Force F-106 jet fighters tracking the airliner. He was initally believed to have landed southeast of the town of Ariel by the edge of Lake Merwin, 30 miles north of Portland, Oregon. Later pilot information puts the jump location about 20 miles further west. This marker is at approximately that point.
http://wikimapia.org/5411605/DB-Cooper-jump-point
What later pilot information given by who to whom now given to us by Dude Shri Dude Monad ???
Did you notice it seems to be the same site/style that gave cords to the Amboy chute?
-
Here is an interesting article.....
Due to poor visibility, his descent went unnoticed by the United States Air Force F-106 jet fighters tracking the airliner. He was initally believed to have landed southeast of the town of Ariel by the edge of Lake Merwin, 30 miles north of Portland, Oregon. Later pilot information puts the jump location about 20 miles further west. This marker is at approximately that point.
http://wikimapia.org/5411605/DB-Cooper-jump-point
What later pilot information given by who to whom now given to us by Dude Shri Dude Monad ???
Did you notice it seems to be the same site/style that gave cords to the Amboy chute?
Yes. Run by who? Is he Whoish?
-
Bob Knoss ;D :D ;) :)
-
Bob Knoss ;D :D ;) :)
here are his jump coordinates ... long way off any flight path. Check this yourself...
-
here are his jump coordinates ... long way off any flight path. Check this yourself...
I noticed right away, plus you can zoom out on that map they provided..it's just a couple miles further west than Knoss always claimed. you might as well just claim the path was somewhere over Egypt ;D :D
-
here are his jump coordinates ... long way off any flight path. Check this yourself...
I noticed right away, plus you can zoom out on that map they provided..it's just a couple miles further west than Knoss always claimed. you might as well just claim the path was somewhere over Egypt ;D :D
It will morph to Siberia!
-
What do people think about Cooper wanting out of the plane 5 minutes or so into the flight? are we to believe he wanted out early, or was he setting up for the jump. Rataczak then went to 30 degree's on the flaps to stabilize the plane, but this was eating more fuel, then minutes later went back to 15 degree's.
What would be the benefit of jumping this early into the flight? no, it wasn't to get to Bonney Lake ;D Bernie was waiting for him near Portland :P
Also at 8:52 they claim the last contact with Cooper was 55 minute ago? that's not 8:05? they seem to be very precise with this time.
-
What do people think about Cooper wanting out of the plane 5 minutes or so into the flight? are we to believe he wanted out early, or was he setting up for the jump. Rataczak then went to 30 degree's on the flaps to stabilize the plane, but this was eating more fuel, then minutes later went back to 15 degree's.
What would be the benefit of jumping this early into the flight? no, it wasn't to get to Bonney Lake ;D Bernie was waiting for him near Portland :P
This is a myth started by Ckret, imho, based on two fragments of evidence: (1) he wanted the door open and the stairs down at takeoff, (b) according to Hancock and the stews he examined the chutes and began putting one on 'like he had done it before' almost as soon as the chutes came on board, although there is nothing to substantiate that in the Transcripts or the Notes to verify the pilots were told 'he wants to bail asap after take off'. Ckret is the author of the Wanted to Jump Early Theory'.
In contrast to the above, at 7:54 pm there is a definite communication based on observation: "305 - Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him and thinks he will attempt a jump." Oscillations and the bump follow around 8:11-8:13 on the Transcript timeline.
Benefits to bailing early at Seattle? None. That would be the same as jumping right into the hands of the FBI and law enforcement. The plane is not configured for him to jump vs. the long involved procedure Cooper himself begins around 8:05pm asking the plane be slowed and stabilised etc ... so he can jump!
I dont see any evidence that he intended to bail early. I think this is all Ckret's opinion. Later there is concrete evidence he intends to jump, and he jumped then, and the crew reported it.
For me, all of this amounts to some people trying to force ideas on the case, and I don't know why that is. We also have 'someone' saying: "Some short time passed between the moment the airstairs-open indicator light came on up in the cockpit, and when the so-called 'pressure bump' occurred". I guess it depends on what you call a "short time". The Transcripts say the airstair light came on a 7:42 pm: "305 - We now have an aft stair lite on." Then a full 30 minutes later at 8:12 pm we have: "305: Getting some oscillations in the cabin. Must be doing something with the air stairs."
A short time later?
He intended to bail early just outside Seattle?
Maybe Cooper screwed up and hijacked the wrong airline and thought he was in Brazil? >:( They do say he had olive skin and Flo says he may have been Latin? Ela de Carioca and the Brazil Grill are just south of the Portland Itl Airport! Holly crap! Cooper thought he was in Brazil! There are endless permutations you can make out of a box of Crayons and a pile of blank paper and a hank of hair.
https://www.google.com/maps/search/Portland+Brazil/@45.5424364,-122.654422,11z/data=!3m1!4b1
;)
-
What do people think about Cooper wanting out of the plane 5 minutes or so into the flight? are we to believe he wanted out early, or was he setting up for the jump. Rataczak then went to 30 degree's on the flaps to stabilize the plane, but this was eating more fuel, then minutes later went back to 15 degree's.
What would be the benefit of jumping this early into the flight? no, it wasn't to get to Bonney Lake ;D Bernie was waiting for him near Portland :P
This is a myth started by Ckret, imho, based on two fragments of evidence: (1) he wanted the door open and the stairs down at takeoff, (b) according to Hancock and the stews he examined the chutes and began putting one on 'like he had done it before' almost as soon as the chutes came on board, although there is nothing to substantiate that in the Transcripts or the Notes to verify the pilots were told 'he wants to bail asap after take off'. Ckret is the author of the Wanted to Jump Early Theory'.
In contrast to the above, at 7:54 pm there is a definite communication based on observation: "305 - Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him and thinks he will attempt a jump." Oscillations and the bump follow around 8:11-8:13 on the Transcript timeline.
Benefits to bailing early at Seattle? None. That would be the same as jumping right into the hands of the FBI and law enforcement. The plane is not configured for him to jump vs. the long involved procedure Cooper himself begins around 8:05pm asking the plane be slowed and stabilised etc ... so he can jump!
I dont see any evidence that he intended to bail early. I think this is all Ckret's opinion. Later there is concrete evidence he intends to jump, and he jumped then, and the crew reported it.
For me, all of this amounts to some people trying to force ideas on the case, and I don't know why that is. We also have 'someone' saying: "Some short time passed between the moment the airstairs-open indicator light came on up in the cockpit, and when the so-called 'pressure bump' occurred". I guess it depends on what you call a "short time". The Transcripts say the airstair light came on a 7:42 pm: "305 - We now have an aft stair lite on." Then a full 30 minutes later at 8:12 pm we have: "305: Getting some oscillations in the cabin. Must be doing something with the air stairs."
A short time later?
He intended to bail early just outside Seattle?
Maybe Cooper screwed up and hijacked the wrong airline and thought he was in Brazil? >:( They do say he had olive skin and Flo says he may have been Latin? Ela de Carioca and the Brazil Grill are just south of the Portland Itl Airport! Holly crap! Cooper thought he was in Brazil!
https://www.google.com/maps/search/Portland+Brazil/@45.5424364,-122.654422,11z/data=!3m1!4b1
;)
The story about wanting to takeoff with the rear stairs unlocked first appears in Tosaw's 1985 book. So it wasn't developed by Ckret.
-
It's all basic speculation anyway we cut it, but one has to ask if Cooper had all of this knowledge about the plane, why did he open the stairs so early, or wanting the stairs down prior to take off? if you know how to use a gun, you don't fire it early?
-
What do people think about Cooper wanting out of the plane 5 minutes or so into the flight? are we to believe he wanted out early, or was he setting up for the jump. Rataczak then went to 30 degree's on the flaps to stabilize the plane, but this was eating more fuel, then minutes later went back to 15 degree's.
What would be the benefit of jumping this early into the flight? no, it wasn't to get to Bonney Lake ;D Bernie was waiting for him near Portland :P
This is a myth started by Ckret, imho, based on two fragments of evidence: (1) he wanted the door open and the stairs down at takeoff, (b) according to Hancock and the stews he examined the chutes and began putting one on 'like he had done it before' almost as soon as the chutes came on board, although there is nothing to substantiate that in the Transcripts or the Notes to verify the pilots were told 'he wants to bail asap after take off'. Ckret is the author of the Wanted to Jump Early Theory'.
In contrast to the above, at 7:54 pm there is a definite communication based on observation: "305 - Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him and thinks he will attempt a jump." Oscillations and the bump follow around 8:11-8:13 on the Transcript timeline.
Benefits to bailing early at Seattle? None. That would be the same as jumping right into the hands of the FBI and law enforcement. The plane is not configured for him to jump vs. the long involved procedure Cooper himself begins around 8:05pm asking the plane be slowed and stabilised etc ... so he can jump!
I dont see any evidence that he intended to bail early. I think this is all Ckret's opinion. Later there is concrete evidence he intends to jump, and he jumped then, and the crew reported it.
For me, all of this amounts to some people trying to force ideas on the case, and I don't know why that is. We also have 'someone' saying: "Some short time passed between the moment the airstairs-open indicator light came on up in the cockpit, and when the so-called 'pressure bump' occurred". I guess it depends on what you call a "short time". The Transcripts say the airstair light came on a 7:42 pm: "305 - We now have an aft stair lite on." Then a full 30 minutes later at 8:12 pm we have: "305: Getting some oscillations in the cabin. Must be doing something with the air stairs."
A short time later?
He intended to bail early just outside Seattle?
Maybe Cooper screwed up and hijacked the wrong airline and thought he was in Brazil? >:( They do say he had olive skin and Flo says he may have been Latin? Ela de Carioca and the Brazil Grill are just south of the Portland Itl Airport! Holly crap! Cooper thought he was in Brazil!
https://www.google.com/maps/search/Portland+Brazil/@45.5424364,-122.654422,11z/data=!3m1!4b1
;)
The story about wanting to takeoff with the rear stairs unlocked first appears in Tosaw's 1985 book. So it wasn't developed by Ckret.
You mean Tosaw says Cooper wanted to bail early at Seattle? ... in his book?
There is no automatic association between wanting the door open and the stair out at takeoff at Seattle and wanting to jump at Seattle ?
There are a whole slate of options here for why Cooper wanted the stairs out at takeoff at SEA. One option is he may have thought it could only be done "on the ground"! He may have been unsure the stairs could be put out once in flight?
-
The best solution to having the stairs down prior to take off would be the element of surprise, they wouldn't know exactly when he jumped. he probably wouldn't have known it would register on the engineer's panel. that's one way of looking at it?
-
The best solution to having the stairs down prior to take off would be the element of surprise, they wouldn't know exactly when he jumped. he probably wouldn't have known it would register on the engineer's panel. that's one way of looking at it?
That is your idea not Cooper's! We dont know for sure who Cooper was or what his knowledge was or sure. There is no manual on Cooper!
For all we know Cooper was a Brazilian fresh off the pampas lost in Portland OR USDA! There to sell horsemeat then suddenly needs cash and says: "I think I will hijackie an aeroplane! I have a grudge against those rich Ameriokans."
Does Tosaw say Cooper intended to bail at Seattle, in his book?
-
The best solution to having the stairs down prior to take off would be the element of surprise, they wouldn't know exactly when he jumped. he probably wouldn't have known it would register on the engineer's panel. that's one way of looking at it?
That is your idea not Cooper's! We dont know for sure who Cooper was or what his knowledge was or sure. There is no manual on Cooper!
For all we know Cooper was a Brazilian fresh off the pampas lost in Portland OR USDA! There to sell horsemeat then suddenly needs cash and says: "I think I will hijackie an aeroplane! I have a grudge against those rich Ameriokans."
Does Tosaw say Cooper intended to bail at Seattle, in his book?
It's possibility, just like any other....
-
The best solution to having the stairs down prior to take off would be the element of surprise, they wouldn't know exactly when he jumped. he probably wouldn't have known it would register on the engineer's panel. that's one way of looking at it?
That is your idea not Cooper's! We dont know for sure who Cooper was or what his knowledge was or sure. There is no manual on Cooper!
For all we know Cooper was a Brazilian fresh off the pampas lost in Portland OR USDA! There to sell horsemeat then suddenly needs cash and says: "I think I will hijackie an aeroplane! I have a grudge against those rich Ameriokans."
Does Tosaw say Cooper intended to bail at Seattle, in his book?
It's possibility, just like any other....
Does Tosaw say Cooper intended to bail at Seattle, in his book?
-
I don't know, R99 made that claim....
-
According to this article Ratacazak seems to imply that they did signal when he jumped. anyone know about this as fact?
"The F-106 drivers never saw him," Rataczak said. "It was blacker than the ace of spades out there. They just saw a flash of light from us and then he just vanished."
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Still-Wanted-After-All-These-Years-It-s-been-25-2959180.php
-
According to this article Ratacazak seems to imply that they did signal when he jumped. anyone know about this as fact?
"The F-106 drivers never saw him," Rataczak said. "It was blacker than the ace of spades out there. They just saw a flash of light from us and then he just vanished."
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Still-Wanted-After-All-These-Years-It-s-been-25-2959180.php
Tosaw's relates an argument between Cooper and Rataczak about taking off with the rear stairs down (but not locked down). Rataczak claimed that they could not take off with the stairs down and Cooper finally agreed to takeoff with them locked up. But Cooper then told Tina that he knew they could take off with the stairs down (but not locked). Basically, this was apparently a communications problem between Cooper and Rataczak who seemed to think that Cooper meant with the stairs locked down.
I have never seen anything previously about the airliner actually flashing their lights when Cooper jumped.
-
According to this article Ratacazak seems to imply that they did signal when he jumped. anyone know about this as fact?
"The F-106 drivers never saw him," Rataczak said. "It was blacker than the ace of spades out there. They just saw a flash of light from us and then he just vanished."
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Still-Wanted-After-All-These-Years-It-s-been-25-2959180.php
Tosaw's relates an argument between Cooper and Rataczak about taking off with the rear stairs down (but not locked down). Rataczak claimed that they could not take off with the stairs down and Cooper finally agreed to takeoff with them locked up. But Cooper then told Tina that he knew they could take off with the stairs down (but not locked). Basically, this was apparently a communications problem between Cooper and Rataczak who seemed to think that Cooper meant with the stairs locked down.
I have never seen anything previously about the airliner actually flashing their lights when Cooper jumped.
It's mentioned in the transcripts, but that's the only place I've seen this comment made until I read that article.
Did you find anything about Tosaw claiming Cooper wanted to jump early?
-
According to this article Ratacazak seems to imply that they did signal when he jumped. anyone know about this as fact?
"The F-106 drivers never saw him," Rataczak said. "It was blacker than the ace of spades out there. They just saw a flash of light from us and then he just vanished."
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Still-Wanted-After-All-These-Years-It-s-been-25-2959180.php
Tosaw's relates an argument between Cooper and Rataczak about taking off with the rear stairs down (but not locked down). Rataczak claimed that they could not take off with the stairs down and Cooper finally agreed to takeoff with them locked up. But Cooper then told Tina that he knew they could take off with the stairs down (but not locked). Basically, this was apparently a communications problem between Cooper and Rataczak who seemed to think that Cooper meant with the stairs locked down.
I have never seen anything previously about the airliner actually flashing their lights when Cooper jumped.
It's mentioned in the transcripts, but that's the only place I've seen this comment made until I read that article.
Did you find anything about Tosaw claiming Cooper wanted to jump early?
Whatever Tosaw says or does not say, Rataczak has never said he thought Cooper intended to bail early.
If Cooper planned to bail early why didn't he demand the knapsack he asked for ? Why didn't he solve the problem of the money early so he could bail early?
What was the point of all of his parameters for extended flight if he's going to bail as soon as they are off the ground? Why doesn't he issue parameters specific to bailing early if that is what he wants and needs?
He has the bomb! He can make them do any damned thing he wants them to do! If its important that he bail early and he tells Tina he knows the 727 can take off with stairs down .... why did he give in? He has the bomb! He can make them do any damned thing he wants them to do!
He's the guy in control - right? He's the guy with the superior knowledge - yes? Why is he letting a bunch of amateurs set conditions for him (the expert) when he knows what he wants and needs? Who is in control? Cooper or Rataczak! ??? ;D
Is he giving in on the knapsack and stairs et cetera because he doesn't want t hurt Rataczak's and Tina's feelings!?
What other myths can we make here? ;D
-
Whatever Tosaw says or does not say, Rataczak has never said he thought Cooper intended to bail early.
Georger, you asked twice if Tosaw said this. that's why I asked R99 again about the claim. I thought I would try and get some opinions about this. nothing more...
-
Whatever Tosaw says or does not say, Rataczak has never said he thought Cooper intended to bail early.
Georger, you asked twice if Tosaw said this. that's why I asked R99 again about the claim. I thought I would try and get some opinions about this. nothing more...
I have not seen anything anywhere that made a direct claim that Cooper or anyone else with direct knowledge stated that he wanted to jump early. That is basically an assumption as to why Cooper wanted the rear stairs unlocked and partially down for takeoff.
I think Tina is quoted by Tosaw as saying that Cooper gave in to Rataczak in order to get the plane in the air. He was in a hurry to get off the ground.
-
Whatever Tosaw says or does not say, Rataczak has never said he thought Cooper intended to bail early.
Georger, you asked twice if Tosaw said this. that's why I asked R99 again about the claim. I thought I would try and get some opinions about this. nothing more...
I have not seen anything anywhere that made a direct claim that Cooper or anyone else with direct knowledge stated that he wanted to jump early. That is basically an assumption as to why Cooper wanted the rear stairs unlocked and partially down for takeoff.
I think Tina is quoted by Tosaw as saying that Cooper gave in to Rataczak in order to get the plane in the air. He was in a hurry to get off the ground.
As I originally said, it is Ckret so far as I know, who made the claim about Cooper wanting to jump early near Seattle. Most people cite Ckret as making that claim.
The rest is interesting. I can see why he would want to get off the ground - less chance of being apprehended immediately.
Thanks.
-
This is the part of the transcripts I was talking about, but never heard anything about publicly until I read that article....
-
This is the part of the transcripts I was talking about, but never heard anything about publicly until I read that article....
It was mentioned and discussed a bit on DZ.
There is another passage where they are asked to go to the nearest airport after he bails ... also mentioned and discussed a little on DZ.
:)
-
This is the part of the transcripts I was talking about, but never heard anything about publicly until I read that article....
It was mentioned and discussed a bit on DZ.
There is another passage where they are asked to go to the nearest airport after he bails ... also mentioned and discussed a little on DZ.
:)
Makes one wonder why they flew all the way to Reno?
-
This is the part of the transcripts I was talking about, but never heard anything about publicly until I read that article....
It was mentioned and discussed a bit on DZ.
There is another passage where they are asked to go to the nearest airport after he bails ... also mentioned and discussed a little on DZ.
:)
Makes one wonder why they flew all the way to Reno?
They said they didn't know if he was gone. Just shy of landing at Reno (in the Transcript) Scott says "Im going back and have a look" ...
-
I like the pilots aboard McCoy's flight. they went right back checking to see if he landed. actually, there are two incidents of checking the back of the plane. it was also said during the beginning of the flight...
-
Whatever Tosaw says or does not say, Rataczak has never said he thought Cooper intended to bail early.
Georger, you asked twice if Tosaw said this. that's why I asked R99 again about the claim. I thought I would try and get some opinions about this. nothing more...
I have not seen anything anywhere that made a direct claim that Cooper or anyone else with direct knowledge stated that he wanted to jump early. That is basically an assumption as to why Cooper wanted the rear stairs unlocked and partially down for takeoff.
I think Tina is quoted by Tosaw as saying that Cooper gave in to Rataczak in order to get the plane in the air. He was in a hurry to get off the ground.
As I originally said, it is Ckret so far as I know, who made the claim about Cooper wanting to jump early near Seattle. Most people cite Ckret as making that claim.
The rest is interesting. I can see why he would want to get off the ground - less chance of being apprehended immediately.
Thanks.
Does anyone know if Ckret is not allowed to speak on the case any more? Or does he just choose not to on any public forum? When he was posting on DZ he was willing to answer questions.
I thought Ckret was done with any public comments on the case. The only exception was in the 2013 symposium in Tacoma. Geoff Gray said very coyly (if that is a word) that Larry Carr said he might appear. He didn't (as far as I know) and Gray wouldn't say why he'd suggest such a thing or if he was just speculating. It was an odd thing to say.
-
If not mistaken I don't think Carr is involved with the case anymore? Bruce, or Georger would probably answer this better...
-
If not mistaken I don't think Carr is involved with the case anymore? Bruce, or Georger would probably answer this better...
I dont know. Kaye might know.
-
Whatever Tosaw says or does not say, Rataczak has never said he thought Cooper intended to bail early.
Georger, you asked twice if Tosaw said this. that's why I asked R99 again about the claim. I thought I would try and get some opinions about this. nothing more...
I have not seen anything anywhere that made a direct claim that Cooper or anyone else with direct knowledge stated that he wanted to jump early. That is basically an assumption as to why Cooper wanted the rear stairs unlocked and partially down for takeoff.
I think Tina is quoted by Tosaw as saying that Cooper gave in to Rataczak in order to get the plane in the air. He was in a hurry to get off the ground.
Here is Ckret's post on this matter, that started the Plan A discussion:
Ckret
May 27, 2008, 7:04 PM
Post #1832 of 58140 (54115 views)
Re: [snowmman] Theory: Cooper didn't jump in the deep woods [In reply to]
________________________________________
From his actions and statements I think he wanted to jump just after wheels up. He had the chute on for takeoff and he wanted the stairs down and locked for takeoff.
When Cooper learned the stairs couldn't be down for takeoff he had to go to plan B, which he didn't have. Thinking on the fly put him jumping in an area he didn't plan for.
___________________________________________________________________
Here is Snow's followup:
snowmman
May 27, 2008, 9:17 PM
Post #1838 of 58140 (54081 views)
Plan B from Outer Space [In reply to]
________________________________________
Let's explore the Ckret Plan B theory.
(wanted to jump early, had to jump late)
So you're clueless, it's dark, you know you need to jump, you know you're a lot further from Seattle than you planned. You just flew from Portland, you know roughly how far it is.
You only have a rough idea of the time cause you didn't do time/distance/speed calcs at the reduced speed. McNally supposedly timed (had a calculator of some sort at his house). Cooper probably had a watch because he was so time-focused in his demands.
BUT: since you're in Plan B from Outer Space mode, don't you think Cooper waits till he sees some lights or something from Portland before he jumps? If you're in Plan B mode, why jump in the dark woods? There's no rush..why not wait till it seems safe.
See what I mean: ruling out a planned jump into the deep woods, makes us veer in specific directions, assuming Cooper is a rational actor. I think so far the data tells us he is, so we should always assume rational decisions given his current situation, knowledge and available information.
(This post was edited by snowmman on May 27, 2008, 9:23 PM)
-
Georger: Jo claims that Duane told her that DB came out of the woods at the North end of Lake Lacama (just to the East of Vancouver, WA) and when she asked him how did he know that? Duane answered "Maybe I was the ground man?". I think that is a good possibility as Duane knew too much about the caper to not have been involved. I also think Cossey could have been the other "Ground man" based on how he answered questions from me on the telephone. Anyway, the woods around Lake Lakama are not like a deep forest. They must have been using radio communications to locate DB and see him coming out of the woods and that pinpoints the area where DB landed.
Just a thought!
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00gmail.com
-
If not mistaken I don't think Carr is involved with the case anymore? Bruce, or Georger would probably answer this better...
I don't know what Larry Carr's role is in Norjak, if any. He has been unresponsive to me for years.
I sent him a PM at the DZ before he left Seattle, and he replied, saying to contact him through normal channels at his office. I did, and heard nothing back. Circa 2009.
Two years later, a comment from a "Ckret" was posted on a DBC piece at the Mountain News-WA. I emailed the poster but heard nothing back.
Galen says he thinks Larry follows the case, but is uncertain if he actively involved. Apparently Larry has stopped corresponding with Galen via email several years ago, circa 2010-2011.
This makes the work of the Citizen Sleuths Larry's most enduring legacy, and I'm surprised but pleased that Eng has allowed them to continue on his watch.
-
Georger: Jo claims that Duane told her that DB came out of the woods at the North end of Lake Lacama (just to the East of Vancouver, WA) and when she asked him how did he know that? Duane answered "Maybe I was the ground man?". I think that is a good possibility as Duane knew too much about the caper to not have been involved. I also think Cossey could have been the other "Ground man" based on how he answered questions from me on the telephone. Anyway, the woods around Lake Lakama are not like a deep forest. They must have been using radio communications to locate DB and see him coming out of the woods and that pinpoints the area where DB landed.
Just a thought!
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00gmail.com
All I know about Duane Weber, I got from Gray's Skyjack. I read the DZ forum, but I always skip Jo's (And RB's) posts. What is the "strong" case for Duane Weber? What did he know that shows he "knew too much"?
-
Georger: Jo claims that Duane told her that DB came out of the woods at the North end of Lake Lacama (just to the East of Vancouver, WA) and when she asked him how did he know that? Duane answered "Maybe I was the ground man?". I think that is a good possibility as Duane knew too much about the caper to not have been involved. I also think Cossey could have been the other "Ground man" based on how he answered questions from me on the telephone. Anyway, the woods around Lake Lakama are not like a deep forest. They must have been using radio communications to locate DB and see him coming out of the woods and that pinpoints the area where DB landed.
Just a thought!
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00gmail.com
All I know about Duane Weber, I got from Gray's Skyjack. I read the DZ forum, but I always skip Jo's (And RB's) posts. What is the "strong" case for Duane Weber? What did he know that shows he "knew too much"?
There is no case whatsoever for Duane Weber being Cooper. Jo Weber's posts about Duane Weber were pure fabrications. Jo even had the gall to take a story off the first page of the CIA's public web site and rewrite it playing Duane up as a heroic participant in that story. The really sad thing is that Jo never realized how silly her claims about Duane were.
-
Georger: Jo claims that Duane told her that DB came out of the woods at the North end of Lake Lacama (just to the East of Vancouver, WA) and when she asked him how did he know that? Duane answered "Maybe I was the ground man?". I think that is a good possibility as Duane knew too much about the caper to not have been involved. I also think Cossey could have been the other "Ground man" based on how he answered questions from me on the telephone. Anyway, the woods around Lake Lakama are not like a deep forest. They must have been using radio communications to locate DB and see him coming out of the woods and that pinpoints the area where DB landed.
Just a thought!
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00gmail.com
All I know about Duane Weber, I got from Gray's Skyjack. I read the DZ forum, but I always skip Jo's (And RB's) posts. What is the "strong" case for Duane Weber? What did he know that shows he "knew too much"?
We have nothing from Duane Weber. Everything is from Jo Weber@Homes4Uby Jo.
:D
-
Did Jo ever produce the Gunther book with Duane's margin notes? Or the plane ticket she talked about?
-
We have nothing from Duane Weber. Everything is from Jo Weber@Homes4Uby Jo.
That's what I always assumed.
-
Did Jo ever produce the Gunther book with Duane's margin notes? Or the plane ticket she talked about?
I think I remember Jo saying on DZ that she no longer thought Duane wrote the margin notes. This was a few years back. She also said at different times the following:
A. The plane ticket had no name on it.
B. The plane ticket said "Dan Cooper".
C. She could not remember if the ticket had a name on it.
-
Speaking of Jo, I got the distinct impression that Jo asked for the DZ to be shut down and Sangiro complied. Anyone else feel that way?
Also, Jo has sent me a couple emails since the end of the DZ, something about Fort Hood. I didn't read them too closely, and I wondering if she corresponded with anyone else. I don't think Duane is DBC, but I do like to keep tabs on the ol' girl - if for nothing else than to monitor the current wind velocity of the Vortex.
-
Jo, has sent me 5, or 6 emails in the last couple weeks. some were not related to Cooper....
-
R99, have you used Skyvectors flight plan system?
-
Speaking of Jo, I got the distinct impression that Jo asked for the DZ to be shut down and Sangiro complied. Anyone else feel that way?
Also, Jo has sent me a couple emails since the end of the DZ, something about Fort Hood. I didn't read them too closely, and I wondering if she corresponded with anyone else. I don't think Duane is DBC, but I do like to keep tabs on the ol' girl - if for nothing else than to monitor the current wind velocity of the Vortex.
Not sure how or where you would get that impression. Sangiro's statement speaks for itself and had a mountain of support/requests from skydivers to end the thread. Jo and Blevins and you were obviously 'the problem', in the end. Yous were the only one's there bickering for a year and a half! Everyone else was long gone. :D
Sangiro cites excessive PM's to the Mod ... that was probably Jo & Blevins who thought they owned the thread! Guess they found out the hard way. >:( ;D ;D ;D
Have a nice day.
-
R99, have you used Skyvectors flight plan system?
I have never used it and, in fact, have never heard of it before. What is it?
-
Just tried a run in the simulator. I made a rookie move and didn't use my checklist :'( got all the way to Toledo, and was ahead in the timing, then I realized I didn't set the weather.....half hour down the drain....
-
Just tried a run in the simulator. I made a rookie move and didn't use my checklist :'( got all the way to Toledo, and was ahead in the timing, then I realized I didn't set the weather.....half hour down the drain....
I and another had a similar 'screwup' with a piece of gear this weekend. Test all optical paint first before assuming it is alcohol resistant! Just a tiny area will tell. In my whole life Ive never seen alcohol based paint inside an optical assembly before, where alcohol based optical cleaners are going to be used? Well we have now! It's a Chinese made POS! We can recover from the mistake but we should have tested first. We are just sick about the screwup and should have tested first.... best intentions sometimes lead to trouble.
-
Just tried a run in the simulator. I made a rookie move and didn't use my checklist :'( got all the way to Toledo, and was ahead in the timing, then I realized I didn't set the weather.....half hour down the drain....
I and another had a similar 'screwup' with a piece of gear this weekend. Test all optical paint first before assuming it is alcohol resistant! Just a tiny area will tell. In my whole life Ive never seen alcohol based paint inside an optical assembly before, where alcohol based optical cleaners are going to be used? Well we have now! It's a Chinese made POS! We can recover from the mistake but we should have tested first. We are just sick about the screwup and should have tested first.... best intentions sometimes lead to trouble.
It's those little things that can cause a big problem. mine sounds a lot easier to fix. I can just start over...
-
was looking around the web, and came up on this.
--- Quote ---No one walks out of a 727 under 100 kts unless they are on the ground. I have over 6000 hrs. in all 3 seats of a 727 and have a FAA Check Airman Rating as a Captain and Flight Engineer. The 727 has pneumatic, electrically actuated outflow valves that close at 11,000 ft. in a decompression and the passenger oxygen masks deploy at 14,000 ft. It has an excellent manual control of the outflow valves as a back-up. There is absolutely no pressurization control issue with a bullet penetration in a 727 and I can attest that it will take considerable punishment in the air or on the ground.
--- End quote ---
Read the info on Coopers action. They were under 10,000 feet with the gear down and the airspeed was 100 knots and he was having them fly in that manner. They had been flying that way with the tail steps closed since they left the airport where he got the money and the chutes. Two military jets were shadowing them and a NG Trainer joined in the surveillance. Altitude and airspeed are pretty well documented. They didn't know that he was going out till the rear stairs opened and lowered which the pilot knew by the warning indicator. That's all in the published info off the report. He walked off the steps to freefall although he was never seen. It's a fact that he left the plane. Some of the money was recovered on the ground years later. Going off the rear of the 727 is probably the only way it could have been done. A side door exit at that speed would no doubt cause the jumper to hit the side of the plane and maybe the tail just due to the speed. Combat aircraft even in HALO jumps don't move that fast. Anyway, it doesn't matter, it was only of interest due to the Glasers development reason's.
-
What does that mean? I'm not sure.
-
"They were under 10,000 feet with the gear down and the airspeed was 100 knots and he was having them fly in that manner."
A few specs.....
Cruise Speed (knots): 515
Stall Speed (knots): 106
Range in Nautical Miles: 2400
Service Ceiling (feet): 33000
Rate of Climb (feet per minute): 2500
-
Georger, you asked about the simulator....sorry for the delay, but I've been going bonkers over here...I'm going to try a record the first leg, that's SeaTac, to Toledo. I'm hoping to have that leg done this weekend. work was finally cut back due to a disagreement on a lift we were using. all of the sudden they didn't want us using it? anyway, I have the whole weekend to try and get something positive with the sim.
The only section of concern is the last couple minutes after passing Battleground. I'm still learning this path.....it's almost like they were trying to shake him off the stairs..... :-\
-
Georger, you asked about the simulator....sorry for the delay, but I've been going bonkers over here...I'm going to try a record the first leg, that's SeaTac, to Toledo. I'm hoping to have that leg done this weekend. work was finally cut back due to a disagreement on a lift we were using. all of the sudden they didn't want us using it? anyway, I have the whole weekend to try and get something positive with the sim.
The only section of concern is the last couple minutes after passing Battleground. I'm still learning this path.....it's almost like they were trying to shake him off the stairs..... :-\
Your last part - Im not sure sure they weren't trying to 'accommodate his departure', to put it mildly. They definitely were doing everything he wanted to 'accommodate his departure'.
-
To all: The place that Jo Webber said that Duane said Cooper came out of the woods was at the North End of Lake Lacama (just East of Vancouver WA). When she asked him "how would you know that, he said maybe I was the ground man? Jo insists that Duane was Cooper but he did tell her he was the Ground Man which would agree with his knowledge of where Cooper came out of the woods. She has sent some photo's that we have seen before but it included one that shows Duane wearing a pearl tie clasp. See attached
Bob Sailshaw
-
Sailshaw, me and Georger concluded a while back that the white mark on that photo is a blotch. it's not part of the actual photo.
-
Sailshaw, me and Georger concluded a while back that the white mark on that photo is a blotch. it's not part of the actual photo.
More Jesus in the toast, or in this case 44 camels, 9 hippos, and 137 buffalo IN THE TOAST! ;) With a few misc Coopers tossed in for good measure! Never claim anything that isn't there! ;)
Meanwhile over at the 'Yeti and Vampires' Alternate site, Mr. Blevins is getting ready to get ready to prepare finally for his submission to (and meeting with) the FB & I now stretching years and years in the making! A full blown career of getting ready to get ready (making thousands of claims along the way), that is! The original submission is very long but the meeting has been truncated from hours (or days) to just 30,15, 10, 5 no 3 minutes! Get in and get out QUICK! The Sham Wow advertisement really shouldn't take more than a minute then back to the daily business of running the "Yeti & Vampires' Alternate website, which replaced the whole Dropzone forum?
It reminds one of what Tallulah Bankhead used to say:
If I had my life to live again. I'd make the same mistakes, only sooner.
:)
-
I'll admit, I actually watched Blevins' video. There isn't anything there we haven't read many times on DZ. Still, I wondered, too, why he has such trepidation about meeting with the FBI. If he thinks he has something, the FBI will take it , tell him thank you and that they'll get back to him if they need any further information. And, that will be that.
I'm sure the FBI gets "true believers" all the time on a variety of cases. They know how to deal with them.
-
I'll admit, I actually watched Blevins' video. There isn't anything there we haven't read many times on DZ. Still, I wondered, too, why he has such trepidation about meeting with the FBI. If he thinks he has something, the FBI will take it , tell him thank you and that they'll get back to him if they need any further information. And, that will be that.
I'm sure the FBI gets "true believers" all the time on a variety of cases. They know how to deal with them.
He is milking it it as long as he can. once he drops it/mails it/floats it, or how ever it gets there. that will be the end of it. I'll bet it's coming up on a year now.
-
I'll admit, I actually watched Blevins' video. There isn't anything there we haven't read many times on DZ. Still, I wondered, too, why he has such trepidation about meeting with the FBI. If he thinks he has something, the FBI will take it , tell him thank you and that they'll get back to him if they need any further information. And, that will be that.
I'm sure the FBI gets "true believers" all the time on a variety of cases. They know how to deal with them.
He is milking it it as long as he can. once he drops it/mails it/floats it, or how ever it gets there. that will be the end of it. I'll bet it's coming up on a year now.
His first 'promise' to meet with the FBI was over three years ago!
His reluctance is based on his own lack of confidence in what he has and has done since Aug 2010, and what he basically knows the Seattle FBI will do and not do (which he first articulated clear back in 2010).
8)
-
R99, does the Engineers panel show two lights for the stairs? one for the pressurized door, and the other for the stairs? that's one function my cockpit doesn't show....I'll look in my Continental flight manual and see if they list it?
-
I found it in my manual. apparently they have two lights. I also found the Cooper Vane....
-
I'm posting a comment made by Hominid back in 2011. it's about the weather, and the flight path. It's good information that I need in my testing......Hominid hasn't logged in for a long time? I'm a little concerned about him. I'll email him and see if he is ok. his last login was January 12, 2015
There have been some claims that the weather was very bad as Flight 305 came through the Vancouver-Portland area. Some of this has been in relation to someone in a helicopter at unspecified locations and times, but at 2500'. Some has been about the Columbia River Gorge (which extends many miles to the east along the river starting a few miles east of Portland and Vancouver, and is basically the border between Oregon and Washington in that area).
The claims are inconsistent with NWS data that has been reproduced at WeatherUnderground.com, but the weather data FBI agent Carr posted (then, Georger reposted) provides an opportunity to check about the claims using data that was actually produced by the predecesor to the National Weather Service on that night. The data includes reports of weather conditions for Portland International Airport (PDX), Troutdale airport, Toledo airport and The Dalles at 8pm (image 6b), 9pm (image 5b) and 9:17pm (part 1 of image 1b) PST. Troutdale is a little east of PDX practically at the mouth of the gorge. The Dalles is further east, actually in the gorge. Toledo is a few minutes north of the Vancouver plain.
PORTLAND AIRPORT
The maximum cloud coverage ("overcast") was at a base of 5000' for all three observations, from 8pm through 9:17pm. Over that time frame, the "broken" layer base rose from 2700' to 3100' to 3500' (all AGL). In other words, the layer that (with any lower layer) provided over .5 coverage was rising over the period. The sky was clearing below 3500' and a helo at 2500' AGL would have been below most of the cloud coverage the entire time.
Over that same time sequence, an 8pm "scattered" layer at 1500' AGL was gone at 9pm, but was then back at 9:17. In place of that scattered layer, a few "CUFRA" at 1500' were reported at the intermediate time (when the scattered layer had disappeared). I believe from this that the CUFRA was the remains of the scattered layer of clouds rather than clouds that were ripped away from larger clouds by winds, or formed by the higher clouds. That is, the scattered clouds had shrunk to almost nothing and were identified as CUFRA because of their appearance. A 2500' helo would be above this base in clear air or scattered clouds.
Also, the horizontal visibility (air "clear-ness") peaked at the intermediate observation time. It was 7 statute miles (SM) at 8pm, went up to 10SM at 9pm (when the low clouds were disappearing), then went back to 6SM at 9:17. Light showers were reported at each time.
The existence of the data for 8pm and 9pm in the data Carr posted gives us an opportunity to fill in between the 7pm and 10pm data from WeatherUnderground. Combining data from the sources shows that the wind speed went from 4.6mph at 7pm, to 11.5mph at 8pm, to 12.67mph at 9pm, to 11.5mph at 10pm. The wind speed went abruptly up from nearly dead calm between 7pm and 8pm, then stayed approximately constant for the next two hours.
Similarly, the wind direction changed from 130° (SE) at 7pm (when there was barely any wind) to 270° (W) at 8pm to 190° (S) at 9pm and to 200° (SSW) at 10pm. The abrupt change of the wind to west at 8pm, then back to SSW at 9pm is intriguing. (BTW: wind directions are plus or minus 5°.)
Note how some possibly significant transient weather data is missed by WeatherUnderground because of their giving data for only every third hour.
The wind direction for 7pm is basically meaningless because of the fact that the wind speed was so low. Winds often change direction frequently and erratically when their speeds are low. This is partly because the small perterbations in various directions are what remain when the sustained wind drops to near zero. The low wind has no "conviction." It's "indecisive."
Other than the 8pm west wind, I do not see change much different than the changes for earlier and later days. If you're looking at the WeatherUnderground page for PDX on 11/24/71, you can select to view data for the entire week at the top of the data table.)(Also see attached.)
However, the virtual dead calm from 4pm to 7pm is not present for days shortly before or after the 24th. What does that calm, followed by the abruptly higher speed and short-term west wind, imply for weather near Portland in the following hour? It looks like the 3 hours of calm was a calm before a weak windstorm, not a "calm before THE storm." But it may have just been a random situation of two 3-hourly observations in a row being the same.
TROUTDALE AIRPORT
From 8pm to 9pm to 9:17pm the base of the sky obscuring (overcast) cloud layer rose from 4000' to 6000' AGL. At 8pm no lower layer was reported. At 9pm a layer of "broken" clouds (over .5 coverage) developed at a little under 2200' AGL. It rose to 4000' AGL at 9:17, at which time a "scattered" layer had developed at 1500', the horizontal visibility had dropped to 7SM (from 10), and the wind direction had changed from 220° (SSW) to 270° (W). (wind directions ±5°) Over the period, wind speed had gone from 7kt to 21kt/24mph (9pm) to 12kt. Light showers at 8pm, very light at 9pm, and back to light at 9:17pm.
In general, showers and vertical visibility diminished and wind increased for the intermediate observation. Then the wind direction changed and the horizontal visibility dropped a bit. The cloud cover heights increased, but a lower coverage layer appeared. A 2500' helo could have been above a cloud base at any time after 8pm.
Generally mild weather at the mouth of the gorge, but the wind did pick up a bit after 8pm.
THE DALLES
Much of the info for 8pm (just below the line for Yakima "YKM") is illegible in the 8pm report. It appears that the wind was 9kt from 200°.
At 9pm there was a "scattered" cloud layer at 1500' and a "broken" layer at an estimated 6000' (AGL). Visibility was 15SM. 6kt wind from 310°. No precipitation was reported for 9pm, rain having begun at 8:04 and ended at 8:06 (2 minutes of rain).
At 9:17pm the scattered layer had risen to 2500' and the broken layer had fallen to 4000'. Light showers, wind 15kt (17mph) from 270° (W). The 9:17 report included "chance of light XC" (whatever that meant).
For the entire day, the WeatherUnderground site indicates that The Dalles got only .08" of rain.
In general, wind dropped and changed direction a bit at 9pm then went back some at 9:17. Cloud layer heights changed.
Mild weather at this point in the gorge, except that the wind did go up a bit at 9:17.
TOLEDO
Toledo was not on the 9:17 report in image 1b, as far as I could tell. At 8pm its report said 3000' AGL overcast (complete cover), 12SM visibility, very light showers, 5kt from 190°, and rain had begun at 7:35. At 9pm the report was 3000' scattered, 3400' measured ceiling/overcast, the same visibility, no rain, 6kt (virtually the same) from the same 190°, and rain had ended at 8:05.
Very mild conditions at both 8pm and 9pm a few miles north of Vancouver. A 2500' helo would have been under the cloud base.
-
To make a long story short, the weather was not a significant factor in the flight of NWA 305 from Seattle to Reno. The weather was actually improving as the airliner flew South.
The hijacked airliner was well south of Portland by 8:18PM PST. The time of 9:17PM is repeatedly mentioned in the previous post concerning the weather in the Portland area. The weather in Portland at that time had NO effect on the airliner since it was then about 200 miles South of Portland and near the Medford VORTAC.
With all due respect to people who are impressed by the Columbia River Gorge, if you want to see what a real gorge looks like you should visit the Southwestern part of the good old USA.
-
I just spent a half hour setting up the sim to record the first leg, got up in the air and was flying for almost 20 minutes when a power surge hit shutting my computer down :'( :'( :'( whats even more funny is I have a backup battery I got a couple weeks ago, but didn't hook it up yet.
-
I just ran the first flight test from start to finish (seattle to Portland)
Temp....43 degrees (ground)
Tat temp at 10,000 -8 transcripts read -7
Average speed 170
average ground speed 194
headwind most of the way 22 knots 180 degrees
I crossed the Columbia with a time of 41:15 minutes. I believe they crossed the river at 40 minutes. I have the flight recorded for replay, so I can find out where I was at any given time, and find out any error's (if any) can be found. I'm pretty sure I has 34:23 crossing the Lewis river. I think the map shows 33?
-
I just ran the first flight test from start to finish (seattle to Portland)
Temp....43 degrees (ground)
Tat temp at 10,000 -8 transcripts read -7
Average speed 170
average ground speed 194
headwind most of the way 22 knots 180 degrees
I crossed the Columbia with a time of 41:15 minutes. I believe they crossed the river at 40 minutes. I have the flight recorded for replay, so I can find out where I was at any given time, and find out any error's (if any) can be found. I'm pretty sure I has 34:23 crossing the Lewis river. I think the map shows 33?
+++ :)
-
Very cool, Shutter. I eagerly anticipate flying Flight 305.2!
-
well, I have to verify the timing, and then do several more runs of the same test to insure accuracy. the time difference was just past Toledo. I arrived at almost the same time as the map, but it skews from Toledo down to the crossing of the Columbia. if it's correct (not verified yet) then the timing is off.
I had everything set correctly, and maintained altitudes, and speeds, temps etc. I'm going to go over the data this evening...
-
R99, I'm having issues with ground speed, I get lower speeds with the winds everyone is factoring in. the issue starts after turning at Toledo. the ground speed drops to about 185 with winds at 27 @225 degree's. my KIAS also goes up to 180?
what could be my issue, I have everything set correctly, temps, speeds, fuel flow matches, but to correct I have to back off on the throttle, or hit the speed brakes? I'm running with the plane nearly empty cargo wise, and put some weight in for luggage. I'll have to check the exact weight prior to takeoff....
-
R99, I'm having issues with ground speed, I get lower speeds with the winds everyone is factoring in. the issue starts after turning at Toledo. the ground speed drops to about 185 with winds at 27 @225 degree's. my KIAS also goes up to 180?
what could be my issue, I have everything set correctly, temps, speeds, fuel flow matches, but to correct I have to back off on the throttle, or hit the speed brakes? I'm running with the plane nearly empty cargo wise, and put some weight in for luggage. I'll have to check the exact weight prior to takeoff....
Are you duplicating flap settings at the same times as in the Transcript?
-
R99, I'm having issues with ground speed, I get lower speeds with the winds everyone is factoring in. the issue starts after turning at Toledo. the ground speed drops to about 185 with winds at 27 @225 degree's. my KIAS also goes up to 180?
what could be my issue, I have everything set correctly, temps, speeds, fuel flow matches, but to correct I have to back off on the throttle, or hit the speed brakes? I'm running with the plane nearly empty cargo wise, and put some weight in for luggage. I'll have to check the exact weight prior to takeoff....
Are you duplicating flap settings at the same times as in the Transcript?
Yes, it's only at the start of the flight that the flaps go to 30 degree's, after that they stay at 15 all the way to Reno.
I just did another test. it might be my wind settings. I have the winds at ground level at around 9, then I jump up to 18 at 7,000, and finish the winds at 27 at 10,000. now, I removed the lower winds and I get the results back thet I always had? perhaps I'm not setting the weather up correctly on the sim?
-
R99, I'm having issues with ground speed, I get lower speeds with the winds everyone is factoring in. the issue starts after turning at Toledo. the ground speed drops to about 185 with winds at 27 @225 degree's. my KIAS also goes up to 180?
what could be my issue, I have everything set correctly, temps, speeds, fuel flow matches, but to correct I have to back off on the throttle, or hit the speed brakes? I'm running with the plane nearly empty cargo wise, and put some weight in for luggage. I'll have to check the exact weight prior to takeoff....
Okay!
The KIAS is read directly from the Airspeed Indicator. It is assumed that there is no pressure error in the airspeed system and no mechanical error in the Airspeed Indicator instrument (for airliners, these are excellent assumptions). The Airspeed Indicator should be showing 170 Knots Indicated Air Speed (KIAS), or very close to it since it was their target air speed at that point in the flight.
The TAS is the True Air Speed of the airliner with respect to the air mass through which it is flying. TAS has to be calculated. The Air Speed indicator is calibrated to read values for a "standard atmosphere" and those values must be corrected for non-standard values of atmospheric pressure and temperature. The ATC controllers passed the actual sea level atmospheric pressure (in the area they were flying at that specific time) to the NWA 305 crew frequently and the crew could determine the temperature outside the aircraft from instruments inside the cockpit. The TAS was about 194 Knots True Air Speed (KTAS).
The KIAS and KTAS have absolutely nothing to do with the wind velocity or its direction.
The ESTIMATED wind velocity of 27 Knots from 225 degrees True (with respect to the grid lines) is a good estimate of what NWA was actually experiencing in the Portland area.
ASSUMING that NWA was tracking down the centerline of V-23 from the Mayfield (now Malay) Intersection to the Portland (now Battleground) VORTAC, it would maintain a course (or track) of 170 degrees True (with respect to the grid lines).
Plugging the appropriate values from above into a pilot's hand computer, NWA 305 would have a 22 Knot crosswind component from the right and an 18 knot headwind component. To stay on the exact centerline of V-23, the airliner would have to "crab" slightly to the right. The 18 Knot headwind component is subtracted directly from the 194 Knot TAS to give a Ground Speed of 176 Knots.
In turning to the Southeast at the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection, the Ground Speed should increase slightly but there would be no changes whatsoever in the KIAS or KTAS. So the cause of your problem is not evident from your information.
Check that you have the wind values set correctly using the True Course system. Otherwise, there is no logical explanation as to why your KIAS is increasing by simply turning to the Southeast.
-
In this video I only set the winds at 10,000. if you look at the gauges everything reads correctly. I didn't point out the gauges, so it might be confusing to some on what is what.
The speed indicator is on the left beside the clock.
The TAT Total Air Temp gauge is to the right (red break lever pointing at it) it reads -9 transcripts state -7
then the screen moves to the left and you can see the fuel flow, and flap settings.....transcripts 15 degrees, 4500 fuel flow.
Suggest full screen for better view...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-vjvunurfs
-
Shutter, for unknown reasons, I cannot view this video using either IE-11 or Chrome. But the winds at 10,000 feet are the only ones that matter here.
-
Actually they are not on center of V23 from Malay to Portland. slightly east of center.
I'm shutting the system down, and restarting it. I loaded a new upgrade to Portland PDX, so possibly the system is not functioning correctly. the new airport is very detailed and took several minutes to upload. I might need to restart the whole thing to insure the system has reset properly......
-
The temps will set as one. I only have to input the ground temps and it will automatically calculate temps aloft. I wish it did this for winds as well.
Here are two screenshots of the video....this is the proper configurations I fly...
-
I found the issue with the video. I had it on private....you should be able to view it now?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-vjvunurfs&spfreload=10
-
Actually they are not on center of V23 from Malay to Portland. slightly east of center.
I'm shutting the system down, and restarting it. I loaded a new upgrade to Portland PDX, so possibly the system is not functioning correctly. the new airport is very detailed and took several minutes to upload. I might need to restart the whole thing to insure the system has reset properly......
I can now view the video on Chrome and the two pictures on IE-11.
If you turn more to the east than the centerline of V-23, then your ground speed should increase further but the KIAS and KTAS should not change simply because of the turn.
I have never heard of something that required the setting of the ground temperature which was then corrected automatically to the temperature at a given altitude. Even the Total Air Temperature shown on that gage must be corrected manually for aerodynamic heating. That is, the Outside Air Temperature will be less than the Total Air Temperature by an amount which is a function of the aircraft's airspeed.
-
How do you manually change the TAT?
When I first purchased X-plane. I noticed only one setting for temps. I called them asking about temps aloft. they told me they were automatically set to what you input the temps at?
-
How do you manually change the TAT?
When I first purchased X-plane. I noticed only one setting for temps. I called them asking about temps aloft. they told me they were automatically set to what you input the temps at?
You can't manually set the TAT. It measures a value that must be adjusted for the aerodynamic heating caused by the aircraft's speed to calculate the actual OAT. In the case of NWA 305, the TAT had to be reduced by several degrees (I forget how many) to get the value that the NWA performance engineers in Minneapolis needed for their calculations.
-
I set the temps at 42 degree's....the TAT reads -9
I reset the temps to 62 degree's, and the TAT reads 4 degree's celsius..
Hominid always told me not to even bother with the TAT readings.
-
I set the temps at 42 degree's....the TAT reads -9
I reset the temps to 62 degree's, and the TAT reads 4 degree's celsius..
Hominid always told me not to even bother with the TAT readings.
The Outside Air Temperature, which has to be calculated from the TAT readings in this case, is used in determining the True Air Speed.
-
I've shut the computer down since last nite. I'm going to run a couple checks, and then run another test. my main concern's will be KIAS, and KTAS.
It appears I have a problem with my throttle control as well. right in the sweet spot the speed will not hold steady. it rises, and falls. even after calibrating. I can manually apply thrust, or decrease through the keyboard keys F1, F2. this could be my problem with speed changes.
Lets see what happens....
-
I always found this post by Agent Carr interesting....
-
I always found this post by Agent Carr interesting....
As I always tried to tell Blevins - the quote indicates one reason the FBI came to Dropzone. To do a FP analysis - free! They were already aware of the options available (ie. amendments to the FP vis-a-vis the money find). Of course Ckret never made his (the FBI's) 'objectives' explicit in a formal way. Whose objectives did Ckret represent, if any, or was it just personal on Ckret's part?
Blevins always denied there was any formal concern for the FP involved, on the FBI's part. How would he know!? :( On the other hand, Ckret said many times 'I am at Dropzone out of my own personal interest' and one of his primary points of interest was _ the integrity of the FP and DZ.
So. Who believed what when in the Bureau? We have H's quoted interview from 1976 saying '...the new drop zone is now 12 mile north of Portland'. So, FP and DZ certainty was already being examined at least by some in the Bureau 4 years before the money find!
We lack primary sources of info that might confirm or deny particular FP/DZ issues irrespective of what the Bureau thinks or wants, or any of it's agents think or want! And Ckret never said: 'We know how the money got to Tina Bar'!
:)
-
I ran two tests last nite from Seattle to the Battleground Vortec (directly over it) the times were consistent with each other. the average speed was 170 KIAS--195 KTAS.
Test #1 ending with 37:06 minutes, or 8:14:06
Test #2 ending with 37:18 minutes, or 8:14:18
I'm working on my cinematic movie making skills. here is a video of the new KPDX. it's in HD, but you need to set the quality on the video. full screen is the best view rather than watching it on this forum.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w4QXnXVi_w&spfreload=10
-
I just ran a 3rd test from Seattle to Battleground.....
Test #3 ending with 37:23 minutes, or 8:14:23
-
Info re Don Kirlin and FAA clearance for 727 skydives:
From: http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/13.10/kirlin.html?pg=2&topic=kirlin&topic_set=
Once he sets his mind to a goal, he's relentless. He soloed his first plane at 16, instructed at 18, and began flying corporate jets three years later. He flew in the Navy, got twin bachelor degrees in business and clinical psychology, and then an MBA, all from the University of Northern Colorado, and moved on to US Airways. In 1993, he asked the FAA to let him parachute from the rear stairway of a Boeing 727, like the infamous skyjacker D. B. Cooper, who disappeared over the Cascades with $200,000 in 1971. Kirlin shrugs his shoulders and grins. "I just wanted to do it because the only other person to do it was Cooper," he says. The FAA said no, unless he could prove unequivocally it was safe. A year later, he presented 6,500 pages of documents to the agency. He remains to this day the only person authorized to operate jumps out of the rear door of a 727.
377
-
Interesting, I didn't know they regulated how the jumps were made. I figured they did for stunts, so i guess that was considered a stunt...
I still think the closest anyone came to recreating the jump was the stuntman for the movie "The pursuit Of DB Cooper' he actually jumped from the stairs. all the others had the stairs removed....
-
The pilots here know more than I do but I think planes that are modified for jumping have to get an STC, supplemental type certificate from the FAA. I have seen placards in jumpships that reference an FAA STC for "flight with door removed". Each type of plane needs its own STC.
Bruce ought to interview Don Kirlin. Kirlin might have seen interesting info when he got access to the Boeing 727 airdrop flight test archives. Don is an expert skydiver (I jumped with him at WFFC), 737 airline pilot, Navy fighter pilot etc. He is V E R Y savvy about all things aeronautical.
As an airline pilot, skydiver and the guy who forced the FAA to allow 727 sport jumps, he might bring a unique perspective to the DBC case.
377
-
Kirlin might have seen interesting info when he got access to the Boeing 727 airdrop flight test archives.
Yes, he seems to be a good candidate to speak with. I would also like to hear from McPheters again to find out exactly where he was on the beach, and how much he found.
-
How do I get in touch with Don Kirlin? Any numbers?
-
Don Kirlin's company:
http://air-usa.com/contact
377
-
Don Kirlin's company:
http://air-usa.com/contact
377
That's one :D
Hopefully we can get a hold of McPheters....
-
How do I get in touch with Don Kirlin? Any numbers?
Does anyone have any questions they would like Bruce to include if he gets a hold of Don?
-
Don Kirlin's company:
http://air-usa.com/contact
377
That's one :D
Hopefully we can get a hold of McPheters....
I spoke with McPheters several years ago by phone. He lives in Moses Lake, WA.
I have his contact information is anyone feels they would like to clarify anything with him.
-
SAGE RADAR
The following was posted on the "Death of Ted Mayfield" article at the Mountain News recently by a regular reader, DThurst, and I thought it is a succinct description of SAGE radar, how it works, and what contributions it might give us - or not - regarding the flight path and the presence of DB Cooper somewhere along it.
"SAGE would not have picked up a single person wearing a civilian parachute unless the parachute had a homing device incorporated in it or he was wearing suit of armor. As the system worked at the time, the SAGE computer at 25th NORAD Division at McChord taxes information from a number of different radar sites and presents it on a console at McChord. It is designed to track metal objects like airplanes and missiles which move laterally over terrain. A silk parachute and a human body would not move fast enough to be tracked. The "blip" on the radar would have been edited out of the computer display or dismissed as a bird or hot air balloon which NORAD does not track."
-
Don Kirlin's company:
http://air-usa.com/contact
377
That's one :D
Hopefully we can get a hold of McPheters....
I spoke with McPheters several years ago by phone. He lives in Moses Lake, WA.
I have his contact information is anyone feels they would like to clarify anything with him.
Its time to do it - we aint going to live forever! :D
-
Its time to do it - we aint going to live forever!
Questions needed
1) Where he was while searching the beach.
2) How many fragments were found, and the sizes.
3) Where did they go from Tina bar.
4) Who was in charge of evidence.
5)
6)
-
Himms was in charge.
Dorwin was the PIO at T-Bar, and took over the Norjak/Portland,OR gig from Ralph when RH retired two weeks later. Dorwin told me that he didn't handle any of the frag transfers, if my memory serves me correctly.
I asked Himms where the money frags went after his team retrieved them from the sand. I sent him a letter. Never heard back directly from Himms, but Jerry Thomas called me a short time later saying that Ralph had told him to tell me that "everything was sent to Seattle." I wrote Ron Nichols if that was true, since RN was the Norjak case agent in 1980. Ronnie has never responded to me. I have strongly encouraged LMNO to contact Nichols - I gave them his winter address in Palm Desert and his summer address in Seattle. They seemed to understand the importance of talking to Nichols and getting answers to these kinds of questions, particularly since I told them that the Citizens Sleuths told me specifically that they didn't see any money shards at all in the evidence room in Seattle.
I will dig up Mike's phone number shortly and call him with these questions. It's time for a follow up.
-
Himms was in charge.
Dorwin was the PIO at T-Bar, and took over the Norjak/Portland,OR gig from Ralph when RH retired two weeks later. Dorwin told me that he didn't handle any of the frag transfers, if my memory serves me correctly.
I asked Himms where the money frags went after his team retrieved them from the sand. I sent him a letter. Never heard back directly from Himms, but Jerry Thomas called me a short time later saying that Ralph had told him to tell me that "everything was sent to Seattle." I wrote Ron Nichols if that was true, since RN was the Norjak case agent in 1980. Ronnie has never responded to me. I have strongly encouraged LMNO to contact Nichols - I gave them his winter address in Palm Desert and his summer address in Seattle. They seemed to understand the importance of talking to Nichols and getting answers to these kinds of questions, particularly since I told them that the Citizens Sleuths told me specifically that they didn't see any money shards at all in the evidence room in Seattle.
I will dig up Mike's phone number shortly and call him with these questions. It's time for a follow up.
Seattle was in charge. All evidence collected went to Seattle.
Dorwin was only at the dig from about Noon of the first day into the evening and then part of the next day until around 3:00pm then had other things to do and was re-assigned - he was never at Tina Bar when Palmer was.
Dorwin refers to the plastic evidence envelopes they put frags' into as 'checque envelopes' - an envelope the size of a check. Multiple specimens found were placed in one envelope and according to Dorwin they ran out of envelopes and called in for more ...
-
I have a request for a simulation to be done. I was asked if a cockpit view from Ariel to the Columbia river can be made. I worked on it most of the day yesterday, and have the video loaded up on You Tube, but don't have any narration, or anything showing where the plane is at any given time. I didn't add any clouds due to not being able to see anything from the ground. the weather was put into the system.
I will be redoing the video so audio, and text will be seen and heard in order to make the video worth watching. I've discovered a major issue in the path's timing, but I'm currently running more testing to verify. a critical point was missing in my previous flights that I didn't think would cause an issue. I'll be using my female narrator so it will take a couple days to put together.
R99, I will have some questions for you regarding this area....
Shutter
-
I have a request for a simulation to be done. I was asked if a cockpit view from Ariel to the Columbia river can be made. I worked on it most of the day yesterday, and have the video loaded up on You Tube, but don't have any narration, or anything showing where the plane is at any given time. I didn't add any clouds due to not being able to see anything from the ground. the weather was put into the system.
I will be redoing the video so audio, and text will be seen and heard in order to make the video worth watching. I've discovered a major issue in the path's timing, but I'm currently running more testing to verify. a critical point was missing in my previous flights that I didn't think would cause an issue. I'll be using my female narrator so it will take a couple days to put together.
R99, I will have some questions for you regarding this area....
Shutter
Okay, but don't expect any magic solutions on a flight path or timing that includes Ariel. Those numbers just won't come out right regardless of what you do.
-
Okay, but don't expect any magic solutions on a flight path or timing that includes Ariel. Those numbers just won't come out right regardless of what you do.
That's what I'm trying to set straight. contrary to what some say. I'm trying to verify the map. if it doesn't jive, we can go from the point forward.
-
I have uploaded the video to You Tube. this is the cockpit view from Ariel to the Columbia river. watch in HD for best viewing :P
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc7N5VqdbD0
-
Cool!
Some questions:
When the video starts, it appears that urban-like lights can be seen immediately ahead. My take-away is that there was plenty of urban glow in the Ariel area. True?
The plane seemed to be flying very slowly. Did it really take nine minutes to fly from Ariel to the Columbia River?
-
Cool!
Some questions:
When the video starts, it appears that urban-like lights can be seen immediately ahead. My take-away is that there was plenty of urban glow in the Ariel area. True?
The plane seemed to be flying very slowly. Did it really take nine minutes to fly from Ariel to the Columbia River?
The map shows 7 minutes. I haven't verified this timing yet. it's still in the testing stage. keep in mind I have no cloud cover, and remember. the higher you are, the slower things appear. it would be a different story if I was to make a video from a couple hundred feet. the true speed would then appear.
I'll try and find some nite time cockpit views on You Tube to compare the simulation lights...
-
I have uploaded the video to You Tube. this is the cockpit view from Ariel to the Columbia river. watch in HD for best viewing :P
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc7N5VqdbD0
nice! :) :) :)
-
Does anyone know, and able to give the specific person or document, of when the Landing Zone of Ariel-Amboy was established?
I remember hearing or reading somewhere that it was a few hours after the oscillations, and confirmed when the plane landed in Reno without DBC on board. That puts the time of pin-pointing LZ-A at about 11-11:30 pm on November 24th.
But I can't find anything definitive on that determination. You gots?
-
Does anyone know, and able to give the specific person or document, of when the Landing Zone of Ariel-Amboy was established?
I remember hearing or reading somewhere that it was a few hours after the oscillations, and confirmed when the plane landed in Reno without DBC on board. That puts the time of pin-pointing LZ-A at about 11-11:30 pm on November 24th.
But I can't find anything definitive on that determination. You gots?
That's a central issue and a good question!
Who, what, and where called the (first) Drop (zones?) ? The folks at Minneapolis called Ariel pretty quickly (Soderlind)? Folks in (Seattle?) sent Himms etal in a helicopter up to the Woodland area to look for Cooper ? Then the NWA-FBI Search map gets spun out by ____? and guided by that search map the area(s) of ___ were searched on the ground.
Photos of the search coordination team clearly shows people using the NWA-FBI search map...
Then in 1976 I remind you Himms speaks out publicly saying the (new?) drop zone has been moved to "12 miles north of Portland" ... wherever in hell he was talking about!
-
I wanted to make sure the map I'm using is accurate along with any other maps I use. I positioned the plane directly over Battleground and brought up Google maps. the photo below shows how accurate the position was. I can also check it by Vor to Vor, but wanted to make sure this way as well...
-
I wanted to make sure the map I'm using is accurate along with any other maps I use. I positioned the plane directly over Battleground and brought up Google maps. the photo below shows how accurate the position was. I can also check it by Vor to Vor, but wanted to make sure this way as well...
VORs have a narrow "cone of silence" (or some such thing) extending vertically from the station. I think the cone is about three degrees wide. So at 10,000 feet, you are probably within that cone and are about as accurate as you can be with a VOR. In other words, you have hit your target.
-
Then in 1976 I remind you Himms speaks out publicly saying the (new?) drop zone has been moved to "12 miles north of Portland" ... wherever in hell he was talking about!
That's a very interesting statement. 12 miles north of downtown Portland puts you in Vancouver Lake and around the southern end of Caterpillar Island.
-
Then in 1976 I remind you Himms speaks out publicly saying the (new?) drop zone has been moved to "12 miles north of Portland" ... wherever in hell he was talking about!
That's a very interesting statement. 12 miles north of downtown Portland puts you in Vancouver Lake and around the southern end of Caterpillar Island.
Himms didn't say 'where' (on an east-west line, 12 miles north of Portland) he was talking about and reporters didn't bother to ask! Except for the several newspaper articles publishing his remarks, it changed nothing. People (officials) still continued to talk about Ariel, Merwin Lake, and by 1980 Himms himself and others were now playing with the idea the flight path might have been off by as much as 20 miles ... to the east!
8)
-
So where is Portland, eh? I guess we need to establish that before we start marking off the "12 miles north."
To me, and most locals I know, Portland starts at the Columbia River. When you cross into Oregon on I-5, you feel like you're entering Portland as well. PDX is off to your left, and you can see the planes on approach.
Hence, 12 miles north of Portland in the vernacular puts you into the Orchards/northern Vancouver area.
However, the drive into the heart of Portland takes forever! It's at least 10-12 miles before you start seeing the downtown buildings and stadium.
-
So where is Portland, eh? I guess we need to establish that before we start marking off the "12 miles north."
To me, and most locals I know, Portland starts at the Columbia River. When you cross into Oregon on I-5, you feel like you're entering Portland as well. PDX is off to your left, and you can see the planes on approach.
Hence, 12 miles north of Portland in the vernacular puts you into the Orchards/northern Vancouver area.
However, the drive into the heart of Portland takes forever! It's at least 10-12 miles before you start seeing the downtown buildings and stadium.
If you recall, Sluggo thought Orchards was a viable search zone. based to some extent on Himm's 1976 statement?
That is where Portland is!
-
Robt 99 wrote: "Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made."
Sounds like Jo's POOF stories might be real. ;)
377
-
Robt 99 wrote: "Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made."
Sounds like Jo's POOF stories might be real. ;)
377
Jo's poof stories are nonsense and will stay that way. I did send the original disks in question to WSHM and they apparently were able to open them. They are listed on WSHM's web page.
I live in an area that generates quite a bit of interest from the Chinese and Russians. A lot of booby trapped e-mails come my way from those two countries.
Consequently, I have some strong programs to work on that problem and that sometimes means I have difficulties with some of my other programs.
-
If you recall, Sluggo thought Orchards was a viable search zone. based to some extent on Himm's 1976 statement?
That is where Portland is!
At the 8:15 mark the flight is just north of Orchards. this is the 10 minute mark which the crew claims was where the bump was felt 5 - 10 minutes after the last contact at 8:05...
-
I haven't received any emails from Jo in a long time now....
-
Looking at a high resolution map of the flight path I noticed the plane doesn't fly directly over Battleground. it's east of BTG. it doesn't change much, but you don't see this on the other maps..
-
I haven't received any emails from Jo in a long time now....
Would you like me to forward the last one I received from Jo? ;)
-
I haven't received any emails from Jo in a long time now....
Would you like me to forward the last one I received from Jo? ;)
:P no thanks, I'm sure I'll get one now anyway ;D ;D ;D
-
I haven't received any emails from Jo in a long time now....
Would you like me to forward the last one I received from Jo? ;)
:P no thanks, I'm sure I'll get one now anyway ;D ;D ;D
If you actually gave Jo your personal e-mail address, then both of you deserve the consequences. ;D
-
Working through some problems relating to the jump, what evidence do we have that the oscillations and the pressure bump were distinct events? Is there actual flight data on this, or is there only the cockpit crew testimony?
-
I haven't received any emails from Jo in a long time now....
Would you like me to forward the last one I received from Jo? ;)
:P no thanks, I'm sure I'll get one now anyway ;D ;D ;D
If you actually gave Jo your personal e-mail address, then both of you deserve the consequences. ;D
The "consequences" turned out to be good for me. She sends a out mass mailings without blind recipients. ;D
-
A few years ago, Galen told me that when he last spoke with Larry Carr, Ckret believed that the exit point was much further south than originally thought. Galen said that Larry said "Orchards." That's the only reference I have to that location.
-
Jo Weber? Did I miss the party?
Mrs. Cooper left a message on my phone last night, saying that she wanted to know "what was happening," and that her computer wasn't working. It appears others have filled the gap that Jo was asking of me. Thanks to all!!!
-
Working through some problems relating to the jump, what evidence do we have that the oscillations and the pressure bump were distinct events? Is there actual flight data on this, or is there only the cockpit crew testimony?
The oscillation is noted in the transcripts, but this was when Cooper was on the stairs. the pressure bump was when the stairs came back up after Cooper jumped. this would be similar to slamming the door in a closed room and the curtains jump. theis is not noted in the transcripts, but was recreated during the testing by dropping sandbags. the flight data recorder would have picked this up, but it appears that this evidence is also lost.
-
I mapped the nautical miles between the Lewis river, and the Columbia river. the map shows 7 minutes to complete this leg of the path. my simulator is coming in at 8 minutes plus, and increasing as I get closer to the path.
From the Lewis river to the 8:12 location is approx. 6.022 NM
8:12 to 8:13 location is approx. 3.597 NM
8:13 to 8:14 location is approx. 3.151 NM
8:14 to 8:15 location is approx. 4.357 MN
8:15 to 8:16 location is approx. 3.534 NM
8:16 to 8:17 location is approx. 3.838 NM
This gives a total of 24.499 nautical miles explaining why it's taking me so long to get through this area...
-
I mapped the nautical miles between the Lewis river, and the Columbia river. the map shows 7 minutes to complete this leg of the path. my simulator is coming in at 8 minutes plus, and increasing as I get closer to the path.
From the Lewis river to the 8:12 location is approx. 6.022 NM
8:12 to 8:13 location is approx. 3.597 NM
8:13 to 8:14 location is approx. 3.151 NM
8:14 to 8:15 location is approx. 4.357 MN
8:15 to 8:16 location is approx. 3.534 NM
8:16 to 8:17 location is approx. 3.838 NM
This gives a total of 24.499 nautical miles explaining why it's taking me so long to get through this area...
You are just pointing out the fact that those times and distances are not accurate. From what I remember of the map and times, things are worse than you show above.
The aircraft actually had a ground speed (which is what is of interest here) of about 3.0 NM per minute. The original map indicates that the airliner, which was flying at constant speed, travelled 3.0 NM in one minute and then 6.0 NM in the very next minute. That is not possible while flying at a constant speed.
You show ground speeds varying from 3.151 to 4.357 NM per minute. Those numbers won't work either.
-
From the Lewis river to the 8:12 location is approx. 6.022 NM
8:12 to 8:13 location is approx. 3.597 NM
8:13 to 8:14 location is approx. 3.151 NM
8:14 to 8:15 location is approx. 4.357 MN
8:15 to 8:16 location is approx. 3.534 NM
8:16 to 8:17 location is approx. 3.838 NM
These are plotted numbers. I mapped them out checking the distance between the minute marks on the map. the distance between other points on the map before reaching the Lewis river are easy to plot since they are in a straight line from Malay to the Lewis river as an example, or from Ksea to Ed Carlson field (KTDO).
The main problem I'm having is at the 8:15 mark. once you pass this point you need to turn and continue approx. 3.5 NM and turn again heading for the Pearson field area. the plane doesn't turn on a dime, so it's hard to follow this part of the course.
The timing in this area exceeds 7 minutes. this puts the map in question with this area. the numbers above are not flight related, only plots from a map to check the distance.
-
From a [very early] post by R99:
Remember that if the airliner was bypassing Portland on the west side, as suggested by some of the maps and book narratives, it would basically fly over the Columbia River for several miles and would not be further west than the west side of the river as it passed Tina Bar.
What maps? what narratives? Are the ARINC printouts the only evidence for the western route?
The direct route from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection passes almost directly (within a few hundred feet) overhead of Tina Bar. The distance from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection is 67.0 nautical miles.
According to a note in the "FBI files" that are online and a copy of the ARINC teletypewriter print outs, the airliner reported at 8:22 PM PST that it was 23 DME miles south of the Portland (now Battleground) VORTAC. However, an individual from NWA gives the time of arrival of that voice message as 8:18 PM PST in Seattle which was phone-patched into the ARINC radio communications.
On the direct route from the Malay to Canby Intersections, this corresponds to a point that is 19 nautical miles south of Tina Bar. If the airliner had a ground speed of exactly 3.0 nautical miles per minute, this would put the airliner 6:20 (minutes:seconds) south of Tina Bar. This means that the airliner passed overhead of Tina bar at about 8:11:40 PM PST.
-
Ok, is it possible these guys calculated part of the flight path in a straight line? when I fly the two area's with twist turns in them I get a different time than the map shows. could they of been listening to the radio and plotting the course that way? if the radio in stating 23 miles DME from BTG, would they draw a straight line and calculate from that?
I just flew a straight line from BTG down to 23 miles DME and got a time of 8:20. this is minutes and not the 8:22 on the transcripts. that's the actual time stamp. when I do the twisty turns I can't reach 23 DME in 8 minutes.
-
From a [very early] post by R99:
Remember that if the airliner was bypassing Portland on the west side, as suggested by some of the maps and book narratives, it would basically fly over the Columbia River for several miles and would not be further west than the west side of the river as it passed Tina Bar.
What maps? what narratives? Are the ARINC printouts the only evidence for the western route?
The direct route from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection passes almost directly (within a few hundred feet) overhead of Tina Bar. The distance from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection is 67.0 nautical miles.
According to a note in the "FBI files" that are online and a copy of the ARINC teletypewriter print outs, the airliner reported at 8:22 PM PST that it was 23 DME miles south of the Portland (now Battleground) VORTAC. However, an individual from NWA gives the time of arrival of that voice message as 8:18 PM PST in Seattle which was phone-patched into the ARINC radio communications.
On the direct route from the Malay to Canby Intersections, this corresponds to a point that is 19 nautical miles south of Tina Bar. If the airliner had a ground speed of exactly 3.0 nautical miles per minute, this would put the airliner 6:20 (minutes:seconds) south of Tina Bar. This means that the airliner passed overhead of Tina bar at about 8:11:40 PM PST.
On the "FBI Map" that Shutter has been using, there are several red cross marks near the Canby Intersection that can be aligned to show that they are on a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections. These lines were apparently drawn by the FAA controller as he vectored the chase aircraft to the airliner.
Both Himmelsbach's and Tosaw's books state that the chase aircraft in the Portland area were vectored to the airliner on the west and southwest side of Portland. Also, Himmelsbach's chase helicopter stayed on the west and southwest side of Portland.
The ARINC print outs do not give a route in the Portland area except for that one DME distance. If a radial had also been listed, then it would have been a point and that would have given a good location. Keep in mind that the 23 DME number would probably show on the instrument for about 20-30 seconds since the airliner was not flying directly to or from the Portland VORTAC. In addition the time of 8:18 could be anywhere from 8:18:00 to 8:18:59 PM. So this point is not as accurately defined as you might think.
-
Ok, is it possible these guys calculated part of the flight path in a straight line? when I fly the two area's with twist turns in them I get a different time than the map shows. could they of been listening to the radio and plotting the course that way? if the radio in stating 23 miles DME from BTG, would they draw a straight line and calculate from that?
I just flew a straight line from BTG down to 23 miles DME and got a time of 8:20. this is minutes and not the 8:22 on the transcripts. that's the actual time stamp. when I do the twisty turns I can't reach 23 DME in 8 minutes.
Remember that there is nothing to confirm that the airliner ever overflew the Portland VORTAC. See the previous post for more on what that 23 DME distance means in this instance.
-
On the "FBI Map" that Shutter has been using, there are several red cross marks near the Canby Intersection that can be aligned to show that they are on a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections. These lines were apparently drawn by the FAA controller as he vectored the chase aircraft to the airliner.
The high resolution map I have the red crosses can be seen all the way up & down the path...
There is also a faded cross just below the Malay intersection...
-
From a [very early] post by R99:
Remember that if the airliner was bypassing Portland on the west side, as suggested by some of the maps and book narratives, it would basically fly over the Columbia River for several miles and would not be further west than the west side of the river as it passed Tina Bar.
Both Himmelsbach's and Tosaw's books state that the chase aircraft in the Portland area were vectored to the airliner on the west and southwest side of Portland. Also, Himmelsbach's chase helicopter stayed on the west and southwest side of Portland.
And who with what information, sent them there?
-
From a [very early] post by R99:
Remember that if the airliner was bypassing Portland on the west side, as suggested by some of the maps and book narratives, it would basically fly over the Columbia River for several miles and would not be further west than the west side of the river as it passed Tina Bar.
Both Himmelsbach's and Tosaw's books state that the chase aircraft in the Portland area were vectored to the airliner on the west and southwest side of Portland. Also, Himmelsbach's chase helicopter stayed on the west and southwest side of Portland.
And who with what information, sent them there?
The Seattle ATC Controller who was working the aircraft on the radios and watching them on his radar set.
-
On the "FBI Map" that Shutter has been using, there are several red cross marks near the Canby Intersection that can be aligned to show that they are on a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections. These lines were apparently drawn by the FAA controller as he vectored the chase aircraft to the airliner.
The high resolution map I have the red crosses can be seen all the way up & down the path...
There is also a faded cross just below the Malay intersection...
There are several small crosses along the ploted route, but I am referring specifically to the "stand alone" crosses that are about 8 miles west of the Portland Airport and then south of that area.
-
If the airliner took off from SEATAC at exactly 7:36:30 PM and arrived at the Malay Intersection at exactly 7:59:00 PM, it would have covered a distance of 64.0 nautical miles in exactly 22:30 minutes:seconds at an average ground speed of 2.84 miles per minute (about 171 knots). That is despite having about a 20 knot headwind component.
The airliner reported that it was leveling at 10,000 feet at 7:53:54 PM but did not give its location at that time. That is 17:24 minutes:seconds after takeoff and 5:06 minutes:seconds before arriving at the Malay Intersection. After leveling off, the airliner's ground speed would have been about 3 nautical miles per minute and from that, it can be estimated that the airliner was about 15 nautical miles north of the Malay Intersecton when it reached 10,000 feet.
I moved this from the Tina Bar thread....
The 7:59 plot is as the plane is turning at Toledo (KTDO) then 8:00 it had already passed the Malay intersection. I believe it's 61 nm to KTDO. we have speeds from 160, even lower according to George Harrison papers. then it goes to 170. also have a flap change in this leg. with a steady speed of 170, or 3 nm it would take a little over 20 minutes of flight to KTDO, but since we have speed changes, the timing drags.
-
There are several small crosses along the ploted route, but I am referring specifically to the "stand alone" crosses that are about 8 miles west of the Portland Airport and then south of that area.
I'm familiar with those crosses. I often wondered if they were on the wrong side of V-23. they line up when you reverse the path.
The path goes right around Portland and Vancouver....
-
To date, we have the following problems with the known flight path.
1) Plane takes off at 7:36
2) Reports 14 miles DME 7:40
3) Reports 19 miles DME 7:43
The plane fly's 14 miles in 4 minutes, and then 5 miles in 3 minutes?
Caution this area is still in the testing stages...
Lake Merwin Area
1) At the 8:10 to 8:17 area the timing is off.
2) The gaps are larger than 3 miles between the plots in this area.
3) According to the map the plane fly's 7 minutes.
4) After flying the simulator multiple times the times ranges from 8:20 - 8:35 minutes flight time, and not the 7 minutes the map shows.
23 miles DME
This time can not be made.
At this present time, I don't see any issue's with the Malay intersection. the plane simply fly's past this, and doesn't have much to do with the known flight path. it does have greater concern with what R99 is presently working on with a possible route taken that evening. it's plausible, and makes sense, but needs more backing. lets not confuse the two...
-
I'm going to run a series of tests today in the problem area. the area in question is after passing Battleground. it's mapped like the plane stopped, put it's blinker on, and then turned. :D
I've said in the past it's almost like they were trying to shake Cooper up with all the twisty turns going on. I don't see a valid reason for such moves? why not fly straight down like the rest of the map...
-
I'm going to run a series of tests today in the problem area. the area in question is after passing Battleground. it's mapped like the plane stopped, put it's blinker on, and then turned. :D
I've said in the past it's almost like they were trying to shake Cooper up with all the twisty turns going on. I don't see a valid reason for such moves? why not fly straight down like the rest of the map...
To determine the actual flight path using radar plots and times, the Seattle ATC people would be the only ones with the necessary information. Both the radar and radio tapes were automatically recorded by the Seattle ATC and that information was available to the FBI even if they didn't get or ask for all of it.
But it is highly unlikely that the flight paths shown on the various maps are of the hijacked airliner.
-
I'm going to run a series of tests today in the problem area. the area in question is after passing Battleground. it's mapped like the plane stopped, put it's blinker on, and then turned. :D
I've said in the past it's almost like they were trying to shake Cooper up with all the twisty turns going on. I don't see a valid reason for such moves? why not fly straight down like the rest of the map...
To determine the actual flight path using radar plots and times, the Seattle ATC people would be the only ones with the necessary information. Both the radar and radio tapes were automatically recorded by the Seattle ATC and that information was available to the FBI even if they didn't get or ask for all of it.
But it is highly unlikely that the flight paths shown on the various maps are of the hijacked airliner.
For some reason they fail to indicate anything about ATC involvement in making the path in the document below?
-
I'm going to run a series of tests today in the problem area. the area in question is after passing Battleground. it's mapped like the plane stopped, put it's blinker on, and then turned. :D
I've said in the past it's almost like they were trying to shake Cooper up with all the twisty turns going on. I don't see a valid reason for such moves? why not fly straight down like the rest of the map...
To determine the actual flight path using radar plots and times, the Seattle ATC people would be the only ones with the necessary information. Both the radar and radio tapes were automatically recorded by the Seattle ATC and that information was available to the FBI even if they didn't get or ask for all of it.
But it is highly unlikely that the flight paths shown on the various maps are of the hijacked airliner.
For some reason they fail to indicate anything about ATC involvement in making the path in the document below?
True.
Also, note that NWA "experts" seem to be involved in everything from the parachute landing area estimate to the meteorological information. And the radar information used appears to come from the USAF.
The FAA, Seattle ATC, and National Weather Service seem to have been frozen out of some aspects of the Cooper investigation. Those are the real people that the FBI should have been talking to.
It is probable that the Seattle ATC and the USAF at McChord AFB were using the same radar set for air traffic control purposes. No weapons system radar type information would have been of any particular use in this matter.
Perhaps the statement that the radar information came from a USAF Captain at McChord AFB only means that he was the one who handed the information to the FBI agent.
-
It appears they relied more on the military to tell them where the plane was. Carr stated he couldn't find any records, tapes of any kind, and also stated that he wasn't sure they ever had any of this info. once again, we are left with bits and pieces of what really occurred in making these assumptions of where he jumped, and where the plane was?
It appears that the map is the only surviving piece of evidence to go by. the flight data is missing, as well as any tapes, or records of how the map was constructed. I have a feeling that most of this is buried somewhere, similar to the handling of the Alcatraz escape.
-
It appears they relied more on the military to tell them where the plane was. Carr stated he couldn't find any records, tapes of any kind, and also stated that he wasn't sure they ever had any of this info. once again, we are left with bits and pieces of what really occurred in making these assumptions of where he jumped, and where the plane was?
It appears that the map is the only surviving piece of evidence to go by. the flight data is missing, as well as any tapes, or records of how the map was constructed. I have a feeling that most of this is buried somewhere, similar to the handling of the Alcatraz escape.
Remember that FOIA requests are only applicable for certain types of information. If you want to keep certain information out of sight, all you need to do is make sure it never gets into a file that can be accessed by an FOIA search.
And if keeping a file without out a number in a file cabinet that no one has a record of is not an option, then there will probably be an operative paper shredder nearby.
-
It appears they relied more on the military to tell them where the plane was. Carr stated he couldn't find any records, tapes of any kind, and also stated that he wasn't sure they ever had any of this info. once again, we are left with bits and pieces of what really occurred in making these assumptions of where he jumped, and where the plane was?
It appears that the map is the only surviving piece of evidence to go by. the flight data is missing, as well as any tapes, or records of how the map was constructed. I have a feeling that most of this is buried somewhere, similar to the handling of the Alcatraz escape.
The NWA/FBI Search Map (called FBI Search Map by Sluggo) defines the network of people involved. The Test photo further defines who was involved.
"The heavy dashed line C-D-E-S defines the airplanes probable ground track." Key word "probable".
We have no information about where or who the Yellow FBI map Carr gave us came from ...
Carr evidently was unable or unwilling to nail down the history of the yellow map - and mostly likely "unable" imho.
It seems reasonable to me that 'confidence in the reliability of the AF radar data' described in the NWA document would have been central in this work. We already know (from interviews) that the further south the airplane got toward Portland, the less reliable the AF radar data was. That fact, to the extent it was an active parameter at the time, may have skewed the NWA to favoring confidence in a northern drop point? The FBI Yellow Map with unattached red X's on the west side of Portland may be duplicating the uncertainty active at the time, when mapping options were being made and discussed at the time. We further know that this matter of confidence in a drop zone was still in flux as late as 1976 because of Himmelsbach's public statement in 1976. And in fact, this map describes 305's flight path as: the airplanes probable ground track, and nothing more. Key word = probable.
-
I guess I left out the transcripts. they are helpful, but also questionable :-\
-
I ran the section between Lake Merwin & the Columbia river again. this time I kept the lights on. this gives a better view of the outside surroundings. it's another 12 gigs of uncompressed video to break down and will take several hours to finalize, and post on You Tube....the timing was over 8 minutes...
-
It appears they relied more on the military to tell them where the plane was. Carr stated he couldn't find any records, tapes of any kind, and also stated that he wasn't sure they ever had any of this info. once again, we are left with bits and pieces of what really occurred in making these assumptions of where he jumped, and where the plane was?
It appears that the map is the only surviving piece of evidence to go by. the flight data is missing, as well as any tapes, or records of how the map was constructed. I have a feeling that most of this is buried somewhere, similar to the handling of the Alcatraz escape.
The NWA/FBI Search Map (called FBI Search Map by Sluggo) defines the network of people involved. The Test photo further defines who was involved.
"The heavy dashed line C-D-E-S defines the airplanes probable ground track." Key word "probable".
We have no information about where or who the Yellow FBI map Carr gave us came from ...
Carr evidently was unable or unwilling to nail down the history of the yellow map - and mostly likely "unable" imho.
The "NWA Communications Network tape recording" mentioned in your attachment, which was written by NWA personnel, was probably the ARINC voice tape recording, or maybe an NWA recording of those ARINC communications. It would not be comparable in accuracy, either of time or location, with the Seattle ATC recordings.
-
It appears they relied more on the military to tell them where the plane was. Carr stated he couldn't find any records, tapes of any kind, and also stated that he wasn't sure they ever had any of this info. once again, we are left with bits and pieces of what really occurred in making these assumptions of where he jumped, and where the plane was?
It appears that the map is the only surviving piece of evidence to go by. the flight data is missing, as well as any tapes, or records of how the map was constructed. I have a feeling that most of this is buried somewhere, similar to the handling of the Alcatraz escape.
The NWA/FBI Search Map (called FBI Search Map by Sluggo) defines the network of people involved. The Test photo further defines who was involved.
"The heavy dashed line C-D-E-S defines the airplanes probable ground track." Key word "probable".
We have no information about where or who the Yellow FBI map Carr gave us came from ...
Carr evidently was unable or unwilling to nail down the history of the yellow map - and mostly likely "unable" imho.
The "NWA Communications Network tape recording" mentioned in your attachment, which was written by NWA personnel, was probably the ARINC voice tape recording, or maybe an NWA recording of those ARINC communications. It would not be comparable in accuracy, either of time or location, with the Seattle ATC recordings.
Add to that the people telling H etc to 'fly up to here and look there' ! Who in hell were those people using what info provided to the searchers by who? It all adds up to more uncertainties and uncertainties.
The task at the time was to find Cooper, establish a viable search area, asap ... based on data being provided by ... somebodies? How were those people communicating ... with who .... probably using real time USAF radar data ?
Was the AF radar data accurate but being communicated poorly so as to add in significant error? Why and who sends H off toward Woodland when the NWA will come out soon specifying Ariel? Was NWA in charghe trying to engineer everything from Minneapolis and who exactly was the FBI listening to? How many voices in this choir at the time?
-
I made a daytime version of the area around the dropzone. it appears we can now verify that this part of the flight can not be flown in the 7 minute time frame that shows on the FBI flight path map. I also add a map on the side showing where the plane is at that moment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl7LIjY7DBQ
-
I made a daytime version of the area around the dropzone. it appears we can now verify that this part of the flight can not be flown in the 7 minute time frame that shows on the FBI flight path map. I also add a map on the side showing where the plane is at that moment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl7LIjY7DBQ
The question people are going to ask is: how valid is this simulation ? Is this an accurate simulation ... and an accurate simulation of what ? Robert99 can probably make some statistical assessment of that?
Very nice work Shutter.
-
The numbers help backup, or verify the flights....
-
LOVE that 727 tail logo Shutter! 8) 8) 8)
How are you at landing the plane? There were some early fatal 727 accidents when new-to-jets airline pilots let the sink rate get too high. On prop planes a throttle increase will blast air over the wing and give some nearly immediate lift. Not so in jets, you need to accelerate the heavy aircraft to increase lift and that takes time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_227
377
-
LOVE that 727 tail logo Shutter! 8) 8) 8)
How are you at landing the plane? There were some early fatal 727 accidents when new-to-jets airline pilots let the sink rate get too high. On prop planes a throttle increase will blast air over the wing and give some nearly immediate lift. Not so in jets, you need to accelerate the heavy aircraft to get lift and that takes time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_227
377
I was a nightmare on landing for a long time ;D I wasn't very good at lining up to the runway on approach, ended up landing in the grass many times, or coming in too fast, so I would do a touch & go to make it look like I knew what I was doing ;D ;D
The "tail detail" was done in France by a guy who paints planes for X-Plane. I had to wait about 2 months for him to get to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkOpHj6ps0o
-
This is from 2013. shows my handy work at landing. didn't have a clue :o this was also my old computer. it couldn't handle X-Plane. the frame rate is low in the video...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouwYH5x5_mI
-
The question people are going to ask is: how valid is this simulation ? Is this an accurate simulation ... and an accurate simulation of what ? Robert99 can probably make some statistical assessment of that?
If you take a look at the photo provided you will see I've set everything they way 305 was configured. you can't see it very good in the photo, but if you rerun the flight, you can see the settings.
A) Speed
B) Altitude
C) TAT (Total Air Temperature)
D) Engines..Bottom row show the fuel flow
E) Flaps
I've tested the plane for speed, and distance. the ground speed has been checked. I've flown from VOR to VOR.
I've checked the distance through Skyvector.
I've done just about everything I can think of to try and verify things done with the simulator. if anything, it can open the door to further testing.
In the video you see everything seems to be fine up till passing Battleground. I'm getting over 3 nautical miles between these marks, and that's shows in the simulation...
-
The question people are going to ask is: how valid is this simulation ? Is this an accurate simulation ... and an accurate simulation of what ? Robert99 can probably make some statistical assessment of that?
If you take a look at the photo provided you will see I've set everything they way 305 was configured. you can't see it very good in the photo, but if you rerun the flight, you can see the settings.
A) Speed
B) Altitude
C) TAT (Total Air Temperature)
D) Engines..Bottom row show the fuel flow
E) Flaps
I've tested the plane for speed, and distance. the ground speed has been checked. I've flown from VOR to VOR.
I've checked the distance through Skyvector.
I've done just about everything I can think of to try and verify things done with the simulator. if anything, it can open the door to further testing.
In the video you see everything seems to be fine up till passing Battleground. I'm getting over 3 nautical miles between these marks, and that's shows in the simulation...
+1 ;D
-
and an accurate simulation of what ?
It boils down to what is on the map that they include as evidence. I'm taking a portion of the path, and using there time frames, but also checking the distance. I've basically broke the path down into three parts, or legs. the first section is KSEA to the Toledo area. the second portion is from Toledo to the lake Merwin area. then finally, the Merwin to the Columbia river. since they have the times marked on the map, it makes it easy to break it down.
Since I'm using aviation maps in line with the simulator, it's easy to merge into an area to start the testing. the 7:59 position is on the turn at Toledo/Ed Carlson Memorial Field, and I just fly over the Lewis river at a certain point to start the clock at that position. I will continue to fly each part/leg marking the times until I'm satisfied I have each leg down, add them up and see what they show, then start running complete flights from KSEA to past KPDX to the Canby intersection.
Hope that answers it? ;D
-
LOVE that 727 tail logo Shutter! 8) 8) 8)
How are you at landing the plane? There were some early fatal 727 accidents when new-to-jets airline pilots let the sink rate get too high. On prop planes a throttle increase will blast air over the wing and give some nearly immediate lift. Not so in jets, you need to accelerate the heavy aircraft to increase lift and that takes time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_227
377
Me, too, Shutt.
How accurate is your portrayal of the landscape? It looks pretty flat and open pastures in V-23. A little more open and farm-y than I sense when I'm there, driving around.
-
Interesting read about the SAGE radar...
CPT John P DeWerth's Sage Memories - This is the first
in an ongoing series John will be sharing with us!
We were constant having "unknowns" in our sector NYADS. This was usually
the Navy with their carrier ops. Sometimes they would let us know most
of the time not. We used to have to track them down to find out. One day
we had an unknown pop up out of sector center proceeding straight North
at mach 3. We scrambled the interceptors to find out what was going on.
and when they got there, no one was seen. So they turned around an came
back home. We checked with the site programming folks. System
Development Corporation, and told them what had happened. One of the
programmers when chasing through the code and came to the conclusion
that the only way that might have happened was if we had an instruction
failure on the B register. He proceeded to write a 1 card diagnostic
which exercised the B register when run and sure enough it failed. which
when on to prove that things weren't always as they seemed.
Another time a USAF LTC came down from North Bay , Canada. He was
attached to the Atomic Energy Commission. He was on a fact finding
mission. I met with him and the programming site manager. He was
trying to find out if the maintenance folks could launch Bomarc
missiles. I said yes. And I proceeded to tell him how. The Senior
Director had a keyed console. The maintenance people had a console
which had a plug board to make it look like any other console in the
building so we could diagnose problems ahead of going to fix them.
that console DID NOT have a key. Going through the process of plugging
up our console to look like Air Surveillance, Identification, And Weapons
we could have launched a Bomarc. The LTC asked the site manager if that
was right and he said yes. That was not the answer he wanted to hear. I
guess maybe I was the only one who figured it out. I seems we were not
on the Human Reliability Program. No one had checked the maintenance
people to find out if any one had a screw loose. I don't know what the
ever did because I separated shortly after that.
On of the features of the AN/FSQ-7 was a speaker attached to a bit in
the accumulator. We listened to the program cycle and after a day or so
you consciously forgot about the noise but unconsciously you knew it was
there. You could be doing work, but the minute the sound changed. you'd
run to see what was up. That would be the time we'd switch over to the
standby machine
When I first got to the site my chief NCO gave me a tour of the second
floor and the computer room. One of the things in the computer room was
a Polaroid camera on a roll around stand. I asked what it was for and he
told me it was a piece of test equipment. I said you have to be kidding.
He said no. He said we used it to take pictures of the console lights.
It helps us to trouble shoot problems.
John P DeWerth
CPT USAF
-
Interesting read about the SAGE radar...
CPT John P DeWerth's Sage Memories - This is the first
in an ongoing series John will be sharing with us!
We were constant having "unknowns" in our sector NYADS. This was usually
the Navy with their carrier ops. Sometimes they would let us know most
of the time not. We used to have to track them down to find out. One day
we had an unknown pop up out of sector center proceeding straight North
at mach 3. We scrambled the interceptors to find out what was going on.
and when they got there, no one was seen. So they turned around an came
back home. We checked with the site programming folks. System
Development Corporation, and told them what had happened. One of the
programmers when chasing through the code and came to the conclusion
that the only way that might have happened was if we had an instruction
failure on the B register. He proceeded to write a 1 card diagnostic
which exercised the B register when run and sure enough it failed. which
when on to prove that things weren't always as they seemed.
Another time a USAF LTC came down from North Bay , Canada. He was
attached to the Atomic Energy Commission. He was on a fact finding
mission. I met with him and the programming site manager. He was
trying to find out if the maintenance folks could launch Bomarc
missiles. I said yes. And I proceeded to tell him how. The Senior
Director had a keyed console. The maintenance people had a console
which had a plug board to make it look like any other console in the
building so we could diagnose problems ahead of going to fix them.
that console DID NOT have a key. Going through the process of plugging
up our console to look like Air Surveillance, Identification, And Weapons
we could have launched a Bomarc. The LTC asked the site manager if that
was right and he said yes. That was not the answer he wanted to hear. I
guess maybe I was the only one who figured it out. I seems we were not
on the Human Reliability Program. No one had checked the maintenance
people to find out if any one had a screw loose. I don't know what the
ever did because I separated shortly after that.
On of the features of the AN/FSQ-7 was a speaker attached to a bit in
the accumulator. We listened to the program cycle and after a day or so
you consciously forgot about the noise but unconsciously you knew it was
there. You could be doing work, but the minute the sound changed. you'd
run to see what was up. That would be the time we'd switch over to the
standby machine
When I first got to the site my chief NCO gave me a tour of the second
floor and the computer room. One of the things in the computer room was
a Polaroid camera on a roll around stand. I asked what it was for and he
told me it was a piece of test equipment. I said you have to be kidding.
He said no. He said we used it to take pictures of the console lights.
It helps us to trouble shoot problems.
John P DeWerth
CPT USAF
Another facility I am aware of (back in the day) had Polaroid cameras that could be attached directly to radar screens, to give a permanent record of a screen _ there was no other way of preserving screen images. By today's standards technology back then was primitive. I wonder if any of this applies to the Cooper case? Ive never seen any post asking if there were Polaroid shots of the radar screen(s) ?
In research labs during this era Polaroid cameras that attached to oscilloscopes and other display screens were common. I personally have used them in this context (back in the 60s and 70s).
-
I found a picture of a Sage radar screen. whats interesting is it appears to have X's/crosses?
-
I found a picture of a Sage radar screen. whats interesting is it appears to have X's/crosses?
How large is that screen. Any photos of the console ... especially anything showing Polaroid camera attachments?
I wonder if the tapes they could make could be re-displayed?
I dont remember that we discussed any of these points on Dropzone but I could be wrong.
-
This is McChord in the photo
-
This is McChord in the photo
No visible camera mount on that console, but a large 4x5 format Polaroid on a wheely would capture a large portion of the screen. My guess is their technology allowed them to play back a tape and get a visual image on a monitor, but that's just a guess based on other systems of the time (IBM?) that had replay capability.
-
I emailed a gentleman who was a Sage radar operator back in Cooper's time. unlike some of the witnesses who come forward with clear minds about what happened that evening, Bruce seems to be normal. ;D
Dave,
44+ years is a long time to try and remember where you were and what you were doing on one particular day. At that time, I was stationed at the 761st Radar Sq. in North Bend, Or.
The SAGE system was state of the art, in its time, and I am sure the incident was tracked at SAGE 25th Air Division at McChord AFB which was the sector headquarters for NORAD. Our responsibility at the site would be to monitor and track direction and altitude of the aircraft. This would have all been done through the computer technology of the day.
I do not remember any talk of it within the ranks of my duty area. Upon separation from active duty in the USAF, I took an oath to not divulge any sensitive info. Although I am probably sure there is no sensitive issues here, I do still stand by that oath.
If there are any records available, I would think they would be housed at NORAD headquarters in Colorado. I wish I could be of more help, but I do not recall being on duty at the time.
Bruce .........
-
NORAD Public Affairs (719) 554-6889
General Inquiries (719) 554-6889
Media Relations (719) 554-6889
Community Relations (719) 556-4650 DSN 834
-
I emailed a gentleman who was a Sage radar operator back in Cooper's time. unlike some of the witnesses who come forward with clear minds about what happened that evening, Bruce seems to be normal. ;D
Dave,
44+ years is a long time to try and remember where you were and what you were doing on one particular day. At that time, I was stationed at the 761st Radar Sq. in North Bend, Or.
The SAGE system was state of the art, in its time, and I am sure the incident was tracked at SAGE 25th Air Division at McChord AFB which was the sector headquarters for NORAD. Our responsibility at the site would be to monitor and track direction and altitude of the aircraft. This would have all been done through the computer technology of the day.
I do not remember any talk of it within the ranks of my duty area. Upon separation from active duty in the USAF, I took an oath to not divulge any sensitive info. Although I am probably sure there is no sensitive issues here, I do still stand by that oath.
If there are any records available, I would think they would be housed at NORAD headquarters in Colorado. I wish I could be of more help, but I do not recall being on duty at the time.
Bruce .........
Here is a clear cut instance of a oath of confidentiality, as per our previous discussion that Rataczak may be under such a stipulation ?
-
I emailed a gentleman who was a Sage radar operator back in Cooper's time. unlike some of the witnesses who come forward with clear minds about what happened that evening, Bruce seems to be normal. ;D
Dave,
44+ years is a long time to try and remember where you were and what you were doing on one particular day. At that time, I was stationed at the 761st Radar Sq. in North Bend, Or.
The SAGE system was state of the art, in its time, and I am sure the incident was tracked at SAGE 25th Air Division at McChord AFB which was the sector headquarters for NORAD. Our responsibility at the site would be to monitor and track direction and altitude of the aircraft. This would have all been done through the computer technology of the day.
I do not remember any talk of it within the ranks of my duty area. Upon separation from active duty in the USAF, I took an oath to not divulge any sensitive info. Although I am probably sure there is no sensitive issues here, I do still stand by that oath.
If there are any records available, I would think they would be housed at NORAD headquarters in Colorado. I wish I could be of more help, but I do not recall being on duty at the time.
Bruce .........
Here is a clear cut instance of a oath of confidentiality, as per our previous discussion that Rataczak may be under such a stipulation ?
I don't know. you would think he would mention something like this. it would of been easier to mention this while being interviewed....take the quick and easy way out....maybe Northwest put pressure on them, I don't know.
-
I emailed a gentleman who was a Sage radar operator back in Cooper's time. unlike some of the witnesses who come forward with clear minds about what happened that evening, Bruce seems to be normal. ;D
Dave,
44+ years is a long time to try and remember where you were and what you were doing on one particular day. At that time, I was stationed at the 761st Radar Sq. in North Bend, Or.
The SAGE system was state of the art, in its time, and I am sure the incident was tracked at SAGE 25th Air Division at McChord AFB which was the sector headquarters for NORAD. Our responsibility at the site would be to monitor and track direction and altitude of the aircraft. This would have all been done through the computer technology of the day.
I do not remember any talk of it within the ranks of my duty area. Upon separation from active duty in the USAF, I took an oath to not divulge any sensitive info. Although I am probably sure there is no sensitive issues here, I do still stand by that oath.
If there are any records available, I would think they would be housed at NORAD headquarters in Colorado. I wish I could be of more help, but I do not recall being on duty at the time.
Bruce .........
Here is a clear cut instance of a oath of confidentiality, as per our previous discussion that Rataczak may be under such a stipulation ?
I don't know. you would think he would mention something like this. it would of been easier to mention this while being interviewed....take the quick and easy way out....maybe Northwest put pressure on them, I don't know.
It may have to do with confidentiality agreements vis-a-vis employment where FAA "incidents" are involved. The trigger for confidentiality, explained to me, is an "incident" and evidently the FAA has different levels of "Incident" ?
R99 should know about this if it is real ? I'm probably not stating this appropriately...
-
It may have to do with confidentiality agreements vis-a-vis employment where FAA "incidents" are involved. The trigger for confidentiality, explained to me, is an "incident" and evidently the FAA has different levels of "Incident" ?
R99 should know about this if it is real ? I'm probably not stating this appropriately...
To the best of my knowledge, there is no confidentiality agreement that would automatically kick in because of an "incident". But as 377 and other lawyers are my witnesses, no government organization or commercial enterprise wants its employees running their mouths about matters that could involve their public reputation or subject them to some form of legal sanction or civil liability.
Consequently, the first advice you usually get from you lawyer is to shut up and let him do all the talking. In the case of a government organization, the Public Information Officer would be the designated talker.
But the Cooper hijacking is a bit different since the talking that we are interested in was done over "public" air traffic control radio frequencies and could be, and was, heard by anyone with a VHF radio tuned to the correct frequency. Our present problem is just getting someone who did hear those transmissions, or saw the complete radio transcripts that we are interested in, to speak up.
-
Describes 35mm film use.
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1958/1958%20-%200655.PDF
377
-
Describes 35mm film use.
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1958/1958%20-%200655.PDF
377
That's right... we actually had one of these contraptions in a lab I worked in. What a pain in the ___! The boss wanted a running visual record of neuron nucleus micro-electrode penetrations where the resting potential of the neuron (cell) drops like a rock when the nucleus is penetrated, then of course he wanted a visual record (called a dose response curve) of the electrical potential in the nucleus itself as various drugs were administered to the bath the tissue was suspended in. The experiments were delicate and demanding enough lowering micro electrodes into tissue hoping to get inside an individual neuron .... now we have this $%$#@ 35mm camera to run also! Then we (meaning me!) had to process the film too ... and we were competing with the Germans etc looking for an early publication date(s) to sustain funding ... so everything was rushed and demanding. Yes. I can tell you about these 35mm cameras! ;)
-
Found this article about the early search - putting it here to get away from personal issues going on elsewhere.
Why is this important? It's important because its information related to who knew what when, who did what when, all related to confidence in the flight path in the early stages of the investigation as evidenced by the actual search(s) going on by various people. Someone had to be coordinating these searches. We apparently have no solid info about that in spite of many people writing books! :o
-
Found this article about the early search - putting it here to get away from personal issues going on elsewhere.
Why is this important? It's important because its information related to who knew what when, who did what when, all related to confidence in the flight path in the early stages of the investigation as evidenced by the actual search(s) going on by various people. Someone had to be coordinating these searches. We apparently have no solid info about that in spite of many people writing books! :o
Excepts from the article above written on Nov 30th (?) Assoc Press Woodland WA, indicate Boeing freely advised people the Boeing 727 could be jumped. Does this debunk the myth spread on forums that this was Top Secret ?
[ Woodland WA (Assoc Press): Thurs Nov 30, 1971. POLICE LEAVE SEARCH FOR BAIL-OUT HIJACKER TO FBI. ]
“FBI officials in Portland and Seattle say they will continue their pursuit of the man … but local law enforcement agencies have turned to other chores … said a spokesman for the Clark County Sherriff’s Dept on Monday Nov 27th.
Officials say they had concentrated their search around the Woodland because the jet liner’s flight recorder had indicated small shifts in the plane’s air position as it passed over the area.
A Boeing spokesperson said the 727 is the only commercial jet liner from which a person could bail out successfully. The passenger stairs lower vertically from the tail and “it would be a very safe drop away from the flaps and engines”, the (Boeing) spokesman said.
Scott said that ‘a cockpit indicator showed the rear boarding stairs were lowered at the time the crew last talked to the hijacker’ (near Woodland).
Clark County Under-Sherriff Tom McDowell summed it up at the end of the second day of searching on Friday ( Nov 30th ? ) “we’re looking either for a parachute or a hole in the ground."
-
Once Cooper had jumped it was pretty obvious that a 727 could drop something inflight via the rear stairs without or losing control or crashing.
Prior to that few knew. The flight manual says nothing. The crew didn't know nor did NWA ops. Boeing had to be called.
Not sure if it was truly classified info, but it was not widely known and certainly not publicized by Boeing prior to Coopers jump.
The Thailand SAT 727 jumps appear to have the stairs removed to facilitate fast sequential jumper exits or pallet drops.
377
-
Excepts from the article above written on Nov 30th (?) Assoc Press Woodland WA, indicate Boeing freely advised people the Boeing 727 could be jumped. Does this debunk the myth spread on forums that this was Top Secret ?
[ Woodland WA (Assoc Press): Thurs Nov 30, 1971. POLICE LEAVE SEARCH FOR BAIL-OUT HIJACKER TO FBI. ]
“FBI officials in Portland and Seattle say they will continue their pursuit of the man … but local law enforcement agencies have turned to other chores … said a spokesman for the Clark County Sherriff’s Dept on Monday Nov 27th.
Officials say they had concentrated their search around the Woodland because the jet liner’s flight recorder had indicated small shifts in the plane’s air position as it passed over the area.
A Boeing spokesperson said the 727 is the only commercial jet liner from which a person could bail out successfully. The passenger stairs lower vertically from the tail and “it would be a very safe drop away from the flaps and engines”, the (Boeing) spokesman said.
Scott said that ‘a cockpit indicator showed the rear boarding stairs were lowered at the time the crew last talked to the hijacker’ (near Woodland).
Clark County Under-Sherriff Tom McDowell summed it up at the end of the second day of searching on Friday ( Nov 30th ? ) “we’re looking either for a parachute or a hole in the ground."
Yes, who was coordinating? More importantly, who canceled the search on the Monday after Thanksgiving? Farrell? Or did it go higher? SAC Seattle?, whose name I don't know. Hoover?
Another strange bit - GG says the official termination was seven days after the skyjacking, which would put it a few days after Monday. At the Portland Symposium, he showed a copy of a FBI teletype message to DC claiming too much snow.
Does anyone know the name of the Seattle SAC? It's odd that it has never been publicized - not even at the WSHM exhibit.
BTW: The "second" day of the search would be Friday, November 26, not the 30th. But that was really McDowell's first day of searching, according to what he has told me.
BTW II: Himms misspelled McDowell's name in NORJAK. Ralph calls Tom, "McDonald." Himms does that kind of thing with frequency. Calls the pilot, Bill Radazak.
-
Once Cooper had jumped it was pretty obvious that a 727 could drop something inflight via the rear stairs without or losing control or crashing.
Prior to that few knew. The flight manual says nothing. The crew didn't know nor did NWA ops. Boeing had to be called.
Not sure if it was truly classified info, but it was not widely known and certainly not publicized by Boeing prior to Coopers jump.
The Thailand SAT 727 jumps appear to have the stairs removed to facilitate fast sequential jumper exits or pallet drops.
377
That's my view, as well.
-
A Boeing spokesperson said the 727 is the only commercial jet liner from which a person could bail out successfully.
A large number of subsequent hijackers and skydivers, including 377, have proven otherwise. 8)
-
Jet jump wasn't hard at all. Just go. The wind blast was strong but no huge deal. I was carrying $85 in negotiable US currency. Lived to tell the story.
One exit that was hard involved an ancient Schweizer 2 seat wooden glider, 1950s vintage. I couldn't fit in the seat with my gear on so they removed the canopy. Had to ride with my legs hanging over the side of the cockpit. On the ride up behind a crop duster tow plane, we hit some turbulence at about 500 feet. I started hearing loud groans, pops and cracking noises that scared the hell out of me. I thought about termites, dry rot and the owner joking that he had recently bought the glider for only $50. I prayed that we could get a few hundred feet higher before the wings came off. We released the tow cable at about 4500 feet and flew over a cornfield area to jump. When it came time to exit I had a hell of a time getting out of my scrunched in position as there was nothing above me to to grab onto. The glider pilot sitting behind me saw my difficulty and yelled: "I'm going to do some negative Gs, you will float up and then just roll out." It worked. I was very glad to get out of that matchstick airplane. It looked OK but those noises when it was stressed told me that its airframe structure was quite tired.
377
-
Maybe some of you got a note from Shutter - he is having internet issues right now and will be back asap ... if he isnt here already? So passing this on .... :)
-
Excepts from the article above written on Nov 30th (?) Assoc Press Woodland WA, indicate Boeing freely advised people the Boeing 727 could be jumped. Does this debunk the myth spread on forums that this was Top Secret ?
[ Woodland WA (Assoc Press): Thurs Nov 30, 1971. POLICE LEAVE SEARCH FOR BAIL-OUT HIJACKER TO FBI. ]
“FBI officials in Portland and Seattle say they will continue their pursuit of the man … but local law enforcement agencies have turned to other chores … said a spokesman for the Clark County Sherriff’s Dept on Monday Nov 27th.
Officials say they had concentrated their search around the Woodland because the jet liner’s flight recorder had indicated small shifts in the plane’s air position as it passed over the area.
A Boeing spokesperson said the 727 is the only commercial jet liner from which a person could bail out successfully. The passenger stairs lower vertically from the tail and “it would be a very safe drop away from the flaps and engines”, the (Boeing) spokesman said.
Scott said that ‘a cockpit indicator showed the rear boarding stairs were lowered at the time the crew last talked to the hijacker’ (near Woodland).
Clark County Under-Sherriff Tom McDowell summed it up at the end of the second day of searching on Friday ( Nov 30th ? ) “we’re looking either for a parachute or a hole in the ground."
Yes, who was coordinating? More importantly, who canceled the search on the Monday after Thanksgiving? Farrell? Or did it go higher? SAC Seattle?, whose name I don't know. Hoover?
Another strange bit - GG says the official termination was seven days after the skyjacking, which would put it a few days after Monday. At the Portland Symposium, he showed a copy of a FBI teletype message to DC claiming too much snow.
Does anyone know the name of the Seattle SAC? It's odd that it has never been publicized - not even at the WSHM exhibit.
BTW: The "second" day of the search would be Friday, November 26, not the 30th. But that was really McDowell's first day of searching, according to what he has told me.
BTW II: Himms misspelled McDowell's name in NORJAK. Ralph calls Tom, "McDonald." Himms does that kind of thing with frequency. Calls the pilot, Bill Radazak.
It's no criticism but my impression is this early period hasn't drawn much interest at forums. There are lose ends to be pieced together ...
-
Jet jump wasn't hard at all. Just go. The wind blast was strong but no huge deal. I was carrying $85 in negotiable US currency. Lived to tell the story.
One exit that was hard involved an ancient Schweizer 2 seat wooden glider, 1950s vintage. I couldn't fit in the seat with my gear on so they removed the canopy. Had to ride with my legs hanging over the side of the cockpit. On the ride up behind a crop duster tow plane, we hit some turbulence at about 500 feet. I started hearing loud groans, pops and cracking noises that scared the hell out of me. I thought about termites, dry rot and the owner joking that he had recently bought the glider for only $50. I prayed that we could get a few hundred feet higher before the wings came off. We released the tow cable at about 4500 feet and flew over a cornfield area to jump. When it came time to exit I had a hell of a time getting out of my scrunched in position as there was nothing above me to to grab onto. The glider pilot sitting behind me saw my difficulty and yelled: "I'm going to do some negative Gs, you will float up and then just roll out." It worked. I was very glad to get out of that matchstick airplane. It looked OK but those noises when it was stressed told me that its airframe structure was quite tired.
377
That must have been your first ride in a glider. If you have had experience in powered aircraft before your first glider flight, your initial impression will probably be how quite things are in the glider. And you can hear the wing skins of metal covered gliders do their oil canning routine plus you can hear the "bubbling" and transitioning of the air boundary layer adjacent to the glider skin.
In the late 1960s, I was headed from the Palmdale/Pearblossom, CA area to Bishop in a glider. At the time this matter happened, I was north of Mojave and over the Sierra Nevada Mountains on the west side of Owens Valley. I was quite high with respect to sea level, but only a couple of thousand feet above the mountains with a scatter layer of cumulus clouds not to far above me.
I happened to notice a contrail off to the east of the Owens Valley and could see an aircraft at high altitude headed south and really moving along. I also knew that there was an USAF high speed corridor where he was flying. After watching that high speed aircraft for a few seconds, I got back to my business.
Only a minute or two later, there was a tremendous boom and I almost jumped out of my skin (not to mention the glider as well). The only thing in a glider that could make a noise like that was the wing spar breaking and shedding the wings. Fortunately, within a couple of seconds I realized that the noise must have been a sonic boom from the aircraft I had seen off to the east.
After a fast check of the glider, I continued on my merry way up to Bishop and arrived there shortly before sunset.
-
I did another speed test checking distance per mile...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCBk8UgQxT4
-
Officials say they had concentrated their search around the Woodland because the jet liner’s flight recorder had indicated small shifts in the plane’s air position as it passed over the area.
As it passed over the area? I wish they would of gave more details in this. seems a lot of people heard, or had knowledge of the FDR...
-
Officials say they had concentrated their search around the Woodland because the jet liner’s flight recorder had indicated small shifts in the plane’s air position as it passed over the area.
As it passed over the area? I wish they would of gave more details in this. seems a lot of people heard, or had knowledge of the FDR...
Keep in mind that the FDR stayed with the airliner and did not arrive back in Seattle until the afternoon of Thanksgiving Day. So the LE people were already zeroing in on Woodland before they had access to the FDR. This means that other things also pointed to the Woodland area.
-
Officials say they had concentrated their search around the Woodland because the jet liner’s flight recorder had indicated small shifts in the plane’s air position as it passed over the area.
As it passed over the area? I wish they would of gave more details in this. seems a lot of people heard, or had knowledge of the FDR...
Keep in mind that the FDR stayed with the airliner and did not arrive back in Seattle until the afternoon of Thanksgiving Day. So the LE people were already zeroing in on Woodland before they had access to the FDR. This means that other things also pointed to the Woodland area.
I was surprised by reference to the FDR also. So far as I know the FDR had nothing to do plotting the dropzone. The FDR isn't even mentioned as a working variable in the official cover letter to the NWA-FBI Search Map; other factors are listed and mentioned. I also believe, from correlative evidence, that Woodland had been identified ... maybe by as early a 8:30pm before the plane was even near Reno.
-
Les Earnest is well known to digital cognoscenti for his contributions to artificial intelligence, robotics and the Internet, but few know of his warning that inadvertent erections could start a nuclear war:
In the 1950s I helped design the SAGE [Semi-Automatic Ground Environment] air defense system … when we reviewed the BOMARC [Missile] launch control system, one of our engineers noticed a rather serious defect: if the launch command system was tested, … the “test” switch was then returned to “operate” without individually resetting the control systems in each missile that had been tested, they would all immediately erect and launch! Needless to say, that “feature” was modified rather soon after we mentioned it to Boeing. …
The SAGE system used land lines to transmit launch commands to the missile site and these lines were duplexed for reliability. … However on examination we discovered that if both lines were bad at the same time, the system would … amplify whatever noise was there and interpret it as a stream of random bits. … Fortunately, we were able to show that getting a complete set of acceptable guidance commands within this time was extremely improbable, so this failure mode did not present a nuclear safety threat. The official name of the first BOMARC model was IM-99A, so I wrote a report about this problem titled Inadvertent erection of the IM-99A.
Les concludes that:
SAGE was a gigantic fraud on taxpayers in that it was a “peacetime defense system” that would malfunction under an actual attack, much like France’s Maginot Line did in World War 2. … SAGE thus gave rise to a corrupt military-industrial-political establishment that has produced a string of largely useless command-control and weapons projects such as President Reagan’s phony “Star Wars” defense program and the current ongoing deployment of anti-missile systems that don’t work. But that is another story.
Whether or not one agrees with Les’ assessment of missile defense, in the Alice-in-Wonderland world of nuclear strategy, some supposed safeguards have the potential to turn around and bite us. A short clip from Peter Sellers’ classic movie Dr. Strangelove makes that point all too well. In this scene, the president has just been informed that a rogue general is in the process of starting World War III:
-
Les Earnest is well known to digital cognoscenti for his contributions to artificial intelligence, robotics and the Internet, but few know of his warning that inadvertent erections could start a nuclear war:
In the 1950s I helped design the SAGE [Semi-Automatic Ground Environment] air defense system … when we reviewed the BOMARC [Missile] launch control system, one of our engineers noticed a rather serious defect: if the launch command system was tested, … the “test” switch was then returned to “operate” without individually resetting the control systems in each missile that had been tested, they would all immediately erect and launch! Needless to say, that “feature” was modified rather soon after we mentioned it to Boeing. …
The SAGE system used land lines to transmit launch commands to the missile site and these lines were duplexed for reliability. … However on examination we discovered that if both lines were bad at the same time, the system would … amplify whatever noise was there and interpret it as a stream of random bits. … Fortunately, we were able to show that getting a complete set of acceptable guidance commands within this time was extremely improbable, so this failure mode did not present a nuclear safety threat. The official name of the first BOMARC model was IM-99A, so I wrote a report about this problem titled Inadvertent erection of the IM-99A.
Les concludes that:
SAGE was a gigantic fraud on taxpayers in that it was a “peacetime defense system” that would malfunction under an actual attack, much like France’s Maginot Line did in World War 2. … SAGE thus gave rise to a corrupt military-industrial-political establishment that has produced a string of largely useless command-control and weapons projects such as President Reagan’s phony “Star Wars” defense program and the current ongoing deployment of anti-missile systems that don’t work. But that is another story.
Whether or not one agrees with Les’ assessment of missile defense, in the Alice-in-Wonderland world of nuclear strategy, some supposed safeguards have the potential to turn around and bite us. A short clip from Peter Sellers’ classic movie Dr. Strangelove makes that point all too well. In this scene, the president has just been informed that a rogue general is in the process of starting World War III:
In my opinion, SAGE and any other such system was not involved in the Cooper hijacking and would not even have been useful.
The only radar data that would be useful in the Cooper matter is the information that the FAA air traffic controllers saw on their screens and used by them to control air traffic.
-
Les Earnest is well known to digital cognoscenti for his contributions to artificial intelligence, robotics and the Internet, but few know of his warning that inadvertent erections could start a nuclear war:
In the 1950s I helped design the SAGE [Semi-Automatic Ground Environment] air defense system … when we reviewed the BOMARC [Missile] launch control system, one of our engineers noticed a rather serious defect: if the launch command system was tested, … the “test” switch was then returned to “operate” without individually resetting the control systems in each missile that had been tested, they would all immediately erect and launch! Needless to say, that “feature” was modified rather soon after we mentioned it to Boeing. …
The SAGE system used land lines to transmit launch commands to the missile site and these lines were duplexed for reliability. … However on examination we discovered that if both lines were bad at the same time, the system would … amplify whatever noise was there and interpret it as a stream of random bits. … Fortunately, we were able to show that getting a complete set of acceptable guidance commands within this time was extremely improbable, so this failure mode did not present a nuclear safety threat. The official name of the first BOMARC model was IM-99A, so I wrote a report about this problem titled Inadvertent erection of the IM-99A.
Les concludes that:
SAGE was a gigantic fraud on taxpayers in that it was a “peacetime defense system” that would malfunction under an actual attack, much like France’s Maginot Line did in World War 2. … SAGE thus gave rise to a corrupt military-industrial-political establishment that has produced a string of largely useless command-control and weapons projects such as President Reagan’s phony “Star Wars” defense program and the current ongoing deployment of anti-missile systems that don’t work. But that is another story.
Whether or not one agrees with Les’ assessment of missile defense, in the Alice-in-Wonderland world of nuclear strategy, some supposed safeguards have the potential to turn around and bite us. A short clip from Peter Sellers’ classic movie Dr. Strangelove makes that point all too well. In this scene, the president has just been informed that a rogue general is in the process of starting World War III:
nice presentation! its the old philosophical dilemma: what is noise vs signal, and what does a 'device-person' act on in the stream of noise vs signal to survive and live another day, in a hostile universe. To whatever extent this represents an actual problem in the real world, past or present, the Greeks first pointed out this important dilemma over "uncertainty". Darwin's (Mendelian) theory of Natural Selection offers one solution namely - that 'systems learn over time and only systems that learn, survive and are fit, and their genes get passed on while the rest leave the active gene pool'. (It turns out that is not quite true as a practical matter). In a 1959 seminar at U Chicago (Argonne Labs) Oppenheimer guessed that the 'fundamental particles' were survivors of a very hostile-competitive early universe who had to set up systems for distinguishing noise vs. signal, or else there would be no order of any kind in the universe ... but a purely random cosmic soup of disorganization. Oppenheimer wondered if the fundamental laws of nature were the result of a process of Natural Selection where competing forces result in a sorting process the end result of which over time is an 'ordered set of rules and laws' which govern how a universe can exist, or not. The fact there is so little anti-matter in our universe is one example ...
The question is: was SAGE data used at all ??? The attached lists what data was used -
-
The question is: was SAGE data used at all!
It causes questions more than answers IMO. Carr states that the map was made by the military, but how? I emailed another person who is familiar with the sage. I asked him how a map could be made, or if one could. (answer pending on a response)
The F-106's didn't seem to track 305, so did the Sage even work accurately without this link? R99 seems to believe it wasn't used. it's possible they only monitored the whole thing?
-
I wonder what was first? the landing zone map, or the whole flight path map? McChord is mentioned as the radar provider with the possible location of the jump.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xK88TC7Slo
-
The question is: was SAGE data used at all!
It causes questions more than answers IMO. Carr states that the map was made by the military, but how? I emailed another person who is familiar with the sage. I asked him how a map could be made, or if one could. (answer pending on a response)
The F-106's didn't seem to track 305, so did the Sage even work accurately without this link? R99 seems to believe it wasn't used. it's possible they only monitored the whole thing?
The radar used by the FAA for air traffic control purposes was probably located on McChord AFB property and jointly used by the FAA, USAF, and maybe other government organizations. In fact, at least some of the FAA controllers, especially the enroute controllers, may have been located at McChord also.
And at least some, if not all, of the controllers in the McChord tower would have been military personnel. Others could have been FAA or USAF employed civilians.
So when the FBI says they got the radar information from a USAF Captain at McChord, it is entirely possible that he was giving them the very information that the FAA had used. Nevertheless, there are big problems with that information. Such as, is it really the information for flight 305?
-
So when the FBI says they got the radar information from a USAF Captain at McChord, it is entirely possible that he was giving them the very information that the FAA had used.
That makes sense. it's possible they monitored the flight on the sage. I would assume they would also have the same system for daily flights.
I received an email response about the sage memory..
The primary short term memory of the Sage system was that newly invented, expensive, core memorywith was a magnetic drum - drums have very limited memory which I understand was used to record the very recent past and and enable some flight history on present situation maps. The only long term machine storage of situations in that era was likely magnetic tapes.
Recording a series of situations or situation maps to magnetic tape on a regular basis was likely not used??
Possibly a recorded series of situations or situation maps could be used as a training/critique aid ??
Would such have been done on law enforcement request, on short notice ?? ? ?? I rather doubt it ??
-Ed Thelen
-
Continued email
The AN/FSQ-7 SAGE computer had magnetic core memory, which was persistent, even when the computer was powered down. However, upon startup, that memory was usually reset and then reloaded from magnetic tape. Magnetic drums were used for short-term memory, and the data stored there was also persistent and had to be erased or overwritten.
Generally speaking, the core memory was mostly used to store instructions and temporary data values, the magnetic drums held some instructions and history information, and magnetic tapes were either program storage (used to initiate and while running) or history information about tracks for later analysis.
Radar history was kept on a special purpose magnetic drum, which kept several minutes of past radar blips and presented them in sequence to indicate aircraft tracks. Track information was also kept on drums, but it was more fleeting in nature—only the current values were available there. Depending on what the settings were, track data was written to magnetic tapes for review if necessary.
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
David E. Casteel
Former! SAGE Computer Maintenance Officer
-
So, I think it's safe to assume that the Sage radar probably had nothing to do with the the flight path. as R99 stated they probably used the same system set up for civilian radar use.
-
http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/cdnc?a=d&d=DS19711201.2.25&srpos=6&e=-------en--20--1--txt-txIN-%22db+cooper%22-------1
Dec 1, 1971
No Word On Hijacker
WOODLAND, Wash. (UPI)The temporary headquarters in the search for a hijacker who parachuted from a jetliner a week ago, with $200,000 ransom, has been closed. The FBI and Clark County Sheriff's deputies ended six days of scouring a 15-square mile area around Woodland, Wash., Tuesday without a trace of the man who called himself “D.B. Cooper.” He bailed out of a Northwest Airlines plane between Seattle and Reno, Nev. “There's nothing new, and we’ve taken our men off unless something else turns up,” said I Sheriff Eugene Cotton. The FBI would say only “the I investigation is continuing.” An onboard computer in the Boeing 727 plane had indicated the hijacker, who collected the ransom money in Seattle when he released the plane’s passengers, probably jumped from the rear stairwell of the plane over Woodland. Cotton said his men were continuing to “check out every lead” but so far they've drawn a blank.
http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/cdnc?a=d&d=DS19711129.2.14&srpos=7&e=-------en--20--1--txt-txIN-%22db+cooper%22-------1
Nov 29, 1971
Hijacker's Cash May Get Soggy
WOODLAND, Wash. (UPI)If “D.B. Cooper,” the skydiving hijacker is alive and well in the woods near here, it’s a safe bet to say he’s holding 10,000 soggy $2O bills. Rain came to this area Sunday in buckets. During the day the storm clouds broke for a moment and Woodland’s police chief-pilot, Joe May, was able ho make one flight up the Lewis River gorge to check out another in a series of false leads, a “parachute” in a tree turned out to be a tin roof on a hillside. The FBI agent in charge of field work here, Tom Manning, took his radio off the hook and ■ spent Sunday dodging reporters ( and doing old-fashioned leg work—checking leads, stopping at airports and interviewing resident after resident in the area of the search, which enters its fifth day today. A Northwest Airlines 727 jetliner was hijacked between Portland, Ore. and Seattle Wednesday night. Saying he had a bomb, a soft-spoken, I middle-aged hijacker forced the Diane to land in Seattle w r here he left off all the passengers, collected $200,000 ransom and four parachutes and said he wanted to go to Mexico. Somewhere between Seattle and Reno. Nev., where the plane was to refuel, “D.B. Cooper” bailed out with the money. “We’ve taken radar reports, it’s all been computerized and we feel he’s in this area,” Manning said from his Woodland headquarters. The estimate was based on the plane’s in-flight recorder, which showed when the hiiacker lowered the 727’s rear steps and a “slight change in altitude” three minutes later, indicating he had jumped. Manning’s field work was augmented by teams of other agents. The number of other agents out was unknown to anvone but the FBI. however ; (here were a lot of new faces for breakfast at what ha? become unofficial search headquarters. Woodland’s Oak Tree restaurant. The terrain in the search area is what hiking schools would term “difficult.” Northern Clark County and southern Cowlitz County comprise an area crisscrossed with logging roads, some rural highways and most of the adjacent acreage is covered with towering second growth douglas fir.
http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/cdnc?a=d&d=DS19711126.2.5&srpos=10&e=-------en--20--1--txt-txIN-%22db+cooper%22-------1
Nov 26, 1971
FBI Searching For Hijacker
WOODLAND. Wash. (UPI) - FBI agents and police fanned out In the Cascade foothills today searching for the daring hijacker who parachuted into the wilderness with $200,000 ransom. “If he is in the area ... we’ll dig him out of the woodwork somehow,” an FBI spokesman promised. The FBI decided Thursday to set up search headquarters here for a “D.B. Cooper,”who pulled off the bizarre Thanksgiving Eve hijacking and parachuting and disappeared with the ransom. A Northwest Airlines Boeing 727 was hijacked late Wednesday with 42 persons aboard on a flight from Portland, Ore., to Seattle, Wash. The methodical hijacker allowed the 36 passengers to disembark after he received the ransom and four parachutes. The hijacker, described as middleaged and “very relaxed,” disappeared as the plane flew on from SeattleTacoma International Airport to Reno. Nev. The FBI said the search was being concentrated in the Cowlitz-Clark County area in southern Washington as a result of information provided by the crew and “strictly conjecture on our part." An FBI spokesman said the 75-square mile area was selected because the crew' reported a slight shift in the plane’s balance while over this farmland region.
-
Continued email
The AN/FSQ-7 SAGE computer had magnetic core memory, which was persistent, even when the computer was powered down. However, upon startup, that memory was usually reset and then reloaded from magnetic tape. Magnetic drums were used for short-term memory, and the data stored there was also persistent and had to be erased or overwritten.
Generally speaking, the core memory was mostly used to store instructions and temporary data values, the magnetic drums held some instructions and history information, and magnetic tapes were either program storage (used to initiate and while running) or history information about tracks for later analysis.
Radar history was kept on a special purpose magnetic drum, which kept several minutes of past radar blips and presented them in sequence to indicate aircraft tracks. Track information was also kept on drums, but it was more fleeting in nature—only the current values were available there. Depending on what the settings were, track data was written to magnetic tapes for review if necessary.
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
David E. Casteel
Former! SAGE Computer Maintenance Officer
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
The first line of the all-important FBI NWA-FBI search map would seem to be in conflict with the above, in your email - we have noted this before!
-
Shutter wrote: The F-106's didn't seem to track 305, so did the Sage even work accurately without this link? R99 seems to believe it wasn't used. it's possible they only monitored the whole thing?
I worked for the company that made the MA1 system
for the F 106. When it worked it gave phenomenal performance allowing SAGE to control the aircraft autopilot to make a target intercept. It had persistent reliability problems that were really never fully fixed despite numerous mods, ECOs, patches etc. if it had been working no way would the NWA 727 have escaped the 106s. The intercept failure doesn't mean SAGE wasn't painting targets. There were many weak links including the data link between SAGE and the 106, the MA1 electronics on the 106, etc.
http://www.f-106deltadart.com/sage_system.htm
377
-
Good find, Fly, on the newspaper reports above.
So, Manning was dodging reporters by Sunday. I know the type. Just not cut out for modern-day LE. They long for the 1880s, or maybe Chicago, 1923. Give me a gun and a bad guy, and get out of my way...
Your reports confirm that the ground search was shut down by Monday. In fact, according to Himms, the federal manpower was shifted on Monday to scouring Victor 23 from Seattle to Reno. RH and the Portland crew had all of Oregon. Sacramento handled the Oregon border to Reno, and the Seattle FO handled Sea-Tac and south. All of it from the air with helos and fixed-wing.
As for the size of the ground search, your media reports also confirm that it was quite variable and indeterminate - 15 sq miles? 75 sq miles? Pick a number. Who went looking for DBC? And where? And for how long? All these questions are still pretty iffy.
Lots of media reports say the grounds around Woodland were searched heavily, but the specifics are totally up in the air. FBI? WSP? County Deps? Volunteers? The best that I can find is that Manning and a few FBI stayed around Woodland from Friday AM to Monday AM to operate a comm center. Most feds went to PDX. RH went in the air in his plane part of the time, and then spent the rest of his time at the Portland FO to manage leads, Q&A, etc.
10-20 Clark County Deps went into the woods around Ariel and Amboy, accompanied by vols. I have no idea where the WSP was. I should call them and ask.
As for SAGE, Tom Kaye spoke very authoritatively about the flight path in Portland in 2011, and specifically stated that he consulted the original SAGE transcripts and "maps." But he didn't show us any documents, just a real pretty power-point and graphics.
Speaking about press coverage, nowadays the cops talk for the cameras. Print journalists are irrelevant. The "good" PIOs, like Det. Ed Troyer of the Pierce County SD, are very schooled and skilled in front of the cameras. Many are not, like the Sheriff down in Roseburg, Oregon on the mass shooting a month or so ago. But they all have mentors and media coaches, helping them know exactly what to say, and what NOT to say.
-
Good find, Fly, on the newspaper reports above.
So, Manning was dodging reporters by Sunday. I know the type. Just not cut out for modern-day LE. They long for the 1880s, or maybe Chicago, 1923. Give me a gun and a bad guy, and get out of my way...
Your reports confirm that the ground search was shut down by Monday. In fact, according to Himms, the federal manpower was shifted on Monday to scouring Victor 23 from Seattle to Reno. RH and the Portland crew had all of Oregon. Sacramento handled the Oregon border to Reno, and the Seattle FO handled Sea-Tac and south. All of it from the air with helos and fixed-wing.
As for the size of the ground search, your media reports also confirm that it was quite variable and indeterminate - 15 sq miles? 75 sq miles? Pick a number. Who went looking for DBC? And where? And for how long? All these questions are still pretty iffy.
Lots of media reports say the grounds around Woodland were searched heavily, but the specifics are totally up in the air. FBI? WSP? County Deps? Volunteers? The best that I can find is that Manning and a few FBI stayed around Woodland from Friday AM to Monday AM to operate a comm center. Most feds went to PDX. RH went in the air in his plane part of the time, and then spent the rest of his time at the Portland FO to manage leads, Q&A, etc.
10-20 Clark County Deps went into the woods around Ariel and Amboy, accompanied by vols. I have no idea where the WSP was. I should call them and ask.
As for SAGE, Tom Kaye spoke very authoritatively about the flight path in Portland in 2011, and specifically stated that he consulted the original SAGE transcripts and "maps." But he didn't show us any documents, just a real pretty power-point and graphics.
Speaking about press coverage, nowadays the cops talk for the cameras. Print journalists are irrelevant. The "good" PIOs, like Det. Ed Troyer of the Pierce County SD, are very schooled and skilled in front of the cameras. Many are not, like the Sheriff down in Roseburg, Oregon on the mass shooting a month or so ago. But they all have mentors and media coaches, helping them know exactly what to say, and what NOT to say.
As for SAGE, Tom Kaye spoke very authoritatively about the flight path in Portland in 2011, and specifically stated that he consulted the original SAGE transcripts and "maps." But he didn't show us any documents, just a real pretty power-point and graphics.
I think you have posted this before ... at DZ?
I'm just astounded every time you post it, because for one thing Kaye has never uttered one word about this, on or off his website, to corroborate what you are saying?
You and Kaye seem to have information that nobody else has and could only dream of having! Lucky Kaye, and Lucky you! Did Agent Carr get to see what Kaye saw and has?
Why doesn't Kaye mention this on his website, or did I miss it?
;D
-
Georger, you seem to forget easily that I am a journalist. As such, I am not is the habit of asking my sources why they are not posting information in places where you can find it.
Tom Kaye spoke about SAGE while he was standing in front of 300 people, several reports from the Oregonian and the Seattle Times, and a bank of TV cameras.
Yes, I have posted my comments about Tom Kaye in several places, most notably my book. BTW, have you read it? I have also posted on Tom at the DZ. Also on the Mountain News-WA.
-
Georger, you seem to forget easily that I am a journalist. As such, I am not is the habit of asking my sources why they are not posting information in places where you can find it.
Tom Kaye spoke about SAGE while he was standing in front of 300 people, several reports from the Oregonian and the Seattle Times, and a bank of TV cameras.
Yes, I have posted my comments about Tom Kaye in several places, most notably my book. BTW, have you read it? I have also posted on Tom at the DZ. Also on the Mountain News-WA.
I dont keep up with your Revelations - anywhere but here. I groan when I have to here!
If Kaye has seen the documents you reports this is BIG NEWS to a number of people. R99 should take note! Shutter likewise.
Maybe you only 'thot' you heard Tom say what you are saying he said, but failed to post anywhere else? The only place he could have seen these coveted documents is at the FBI?
-
Continued email
The AN/FSQ-7 SAGE computer had magnetic core memory, which was persistent, even when the computer was powered down. However, upon startup, that memory was usually reset and then reloaded from magnetic tape. Magnetic drums were used for short-term memory, and the data stored there was also persistent and had to be erased or overwritten.
Generally speaking, the core memory was mostly used to store instructions and temporary data values, the magnetic drums held some instructions and history information, and magnetic tapes were either program storage (used to initiate and while running) or history information about tracks for later analysis.
Radar history was kept on a special purpose magnetic drum, which kept several minutes of past radar blips and presented them in sequence to indicate aircraft tracks. Track information was also kept on drums, but it was more fleeting in nature—only the current values were available there. Depending on what the settings were, track data was written to magnetic tapes for review if necessary.
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
David E. Casteel
Former! SAGE Computer Maintenance Officer
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
The first line of the all-important FBI NWA-FBI search map would seem to be in conflict with the above, in your email - we have noted this before!
The radar at McChord AFB was probably jointly used by the FAA for air traffic control purposes and both USAF and civilian FAA personnel would quite likely have been involved in the operation. The fact that a USAF officer is the one that handed the information to the FBI does not suggest that it came from the SAGE radar operation, wherever it was located.
-
What is the deal with the Placard,, I just found this article claiming that it could have come from the re-enactment?
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19790119&id=1PJVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BuIDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6711,4908345&hl=en
"could have dropped off any passing 727"
"The FBI said Thursday" "could have dropped from a plane during a re-enactement"
"posted next to the rear exits of 727s"
"posted on the outside"
"Ray Mathis, FBI spokesman in Seattle, said the hijacked plane was used in a simulation of the hijacking, and, "we noticed the decal was missing after that, but not before."
"those placards have ben known to fall off on the runway," added a Boeing spokesman.
-
Continued email
The AN/FSQ-7 SAGE computer had magnetic core memory, which was persistent, even when the computer was powered down. However, upon startup, that memory was usually reset and then reloaded from magnetic tape. Magnetic drums were used for short-term memory, and the data stored there was also persistent and had to be erased or overwritten.
Generally speaking, the core memory was mostly used to store instructions and temporary data values, the magnetic drums held some instructions and history information, and magnetic tapes were either program storage (used to initiate and while running) or history information about tracks for later analysis.
Radar history was kept on a special purpose magnetic drum, which kept several minutes of past radar blips and presented them in sequence to indicate aircraft tracks. Track information was also kept on drums, but it was more fleeting in nature—only the current values were available there. Depending on what the settings were, track data was written to magnetic tapes for review if necessary.
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
David E. Casteel
Former! SAGE Computer Maintenance Officer
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
The first line of the all-important FBI NWA-FBI search map would seem to be in conflict with the above, in your email - we have noted this before!
The radar at McChord AFB was probably jointly used by the FAA for air traffic control purposes and both USAF and civilian FAA personnel would quite likely have been involved in the operation. The fact that a USAF officer is the one that handed the information to the FBI does not suggest that it came from the SAGE radar operation, wherever it was located.
R99, what do you make of Smith's statement - were you aware of this? :
"As for SAGE, Tom Kaye spoke very authoritatively about the flight path in Portland in 2011, and specifically stated that he consulted the original SAGE transcripts and "maps." But he didn't show us any documents, just a real pretty power-point and graphics."
Exactly what documents is Smith claiming Tom has ?
Specifically what "original SAGE transcripts and maps" is Smith-Kaye talking about?
-
What is the deal with the Placard,, I just found this article claiming that it could have come from the re-enactment?
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19790119&id=1PJVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BuIDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6711,4908345&hl=en
"could have dropped off any passing 727"
"The FBI said Thursday" "could have dropped from a plane during a re-enactement"
"posted next to the rear exits of 727s"
"posted on the outside"
"Ray Mathis, FBI spokesman in Seattle, said the hijacked plane was used in a simulation of the hijacking, and, "we noticed the decal was missing after that, but not before."
"those placards have ben known to fall off on the runway," added a Boeing spokesman.
HMMMM... Maybe it was from the Norjack plane but not the Norjack flight.
I'd have expected the FBI to have taken numerous interior and exterior photos of the door area and stairway after the Norjack flight landed and before the re-enactment.
377
-
What is the deal with the Placard,, I just found this article claiming that it could have come from the re-enactment?
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19790119&id=1PJVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BuIDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6711,4908345&hl=en
"could have dropped off any passing 727"
"The FBI said Thursday" "could have dropped from a plane during a re-enactement"
"posted next to the rear exits of 727s"
"posted on the outside"
"Ray Mathis, FBI spokesman in Seattle, said the hijacked plane was used in a simulation of the hijacking, and, "we noticed the decal was missing after that, but not before."
"those placards have ben known to fall off on the runway," added a Boeing spokesman.
HMMMM... Maybe it was from the Norjack plane but not the Norjack flight.
I'd have expected the FBI to have taken numerous interior and exterior photos of the door area and stairway after the Norjack flight landed and before the re-enactment.
377
and we know that was done. some of the photos have been posted.
-
Continued email
The AN/FSQ-7 SAGE computer had magnetic core memory, which was persistent, even when the computer was powered down. However, upon startup, that memory was usually reset and then reloaded from magnetic tape. Magnetic drums were used for short-term memory, and the data stored there was also persistent and had to be erased or overwritten.
Generally speaking, the core memory was mostly used to store instructions and temporary data values, the magnetic drums held some instructions and history information, and magnetic tapes were either program storage (used to initiate and while running) or history information about tracks for later analysis.
Radar history was kept on a special purpose magnetic drum, which kept several minutes of past radar blips and presented them in sequence to indicate aircraft tracks. Track information was also kept on drums, but it was more fleeting in nature—only the current values were available there. Depending on what the settings were, track data was written to magnetic tapes for review if necessary.
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
David E. Casteel
Former! SAGE Computer Maintenance Officer
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
The first line of the all-important FBI NWA-FBI search map would seem to be in conflict with the above, in your email - we have noted this before!
The radar at McChord AFB was probably jointly used by the FAA for air traffic control purposes and both USAF and civilian FAA personnel would quite likely have been involved in the operation. The fact that a USAF officer is the one that handed the information to the FBI does not suggest that it came from the SAGE radar operation, wherever it was located.
R99, what do you make of Smith's statement - were you aware of this? :
"As for SAGE, Tom Kaye spoke very authoritatively about the flight path in Portland in 2011, and specifically stated that he consulted the original SAGE transcripts and "maps." But he didn't show us any documents, just a real pretty power-point and graphics."
Exactly what documents is Smith claiming Tom has ?
Specifically what "original SAGE transcripts and maps" is Smith-Kaye talking about?
I don't know where Bruce got Tom's statement. Does Tom have a security clearance? JT has stated on DZ that the SAGE information was highly classified. Frankly, I doubt if there are any SAGE transcripts and/or maps.
But the McChord radar, if it is the one the FAA was using (and it probably was), would be something like a weather radar display from a fixed location. The FAA/USAF would then mark the airways and other airspace of interest to them on their various displays so that they could determine the location of a given aircraft with respect to the ground based on its radar returns.
The center controllers would then use this information in their communications with specific aircraft. At times, the controllers would use such statements as, "NWA 305 I show you on Victor 23, 11 DME miles north of the Fort Jones VORTAC".
Since the FAA radar information has been carefully plotted and flight checked, it is the most useful and accurate information for determining the flight path.
-
Continued email
The AN/FSQ-7 SAGE computer had magnetic core memory, which was persistent, even when the computer was powered down. However, upon startup, that memory was usually reset and then reloaded from magnetic tape. Magnetic drums were used for short-term memory, and the data stored there was also persistent and had to be erased or overwritten.
Generally speaking, the core memory was mostly used to store instructions and temporary data values, the magnetic drums held some instructions and history information, and magnetic tapes were either program storage (used to initiate and while running) or history information about tracks for later analysis.
Radar history was kept on a special purpose magnetic drum, which kept several minutes of past radar blips and presented them in sequence to indicate aircraft tracks. Track information was also kept on drums, but it was more fleeting in nature—only the current values were available there. Depending on what the settings were, track data was written to magnetic tapes for review if necessary.
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
David E. Casteel
Former! SAGE Computer Maintenance Officer
As far as I know, none of the SAGE data would have been immediately available to law enforcement, and probably not even some time later. It is possible that some could have been requested for a specific situation, but there were no communications set up to permit that on a regular basis.
The first line of the all-important FBI NWA-FBI search map would seem to be in conflict with the above, in your email - we have noted this before!
The radar at McChord AFB was probably jointly used by the FAA for air traffic control purposes and both USAF and civilian FAA personnel would quite likely have been involved in the operation. The fact that a USAF officer is the one that handed the information to the FBI does not suggest that it came from the SAGE radar operation, wherever it was located.
R99, what do you make of Smith's statement - were you aware of this? :
"As for SAGE, Tom Kaye spoke very authoritatively about the flight path in Portland in 2011, and specifically stated that he consulted the original SAGE transcripts and "maps." But he didn't show us any documents, just a real pretty power-point and graphics."
Exactly what documents is Smith claiming Tom has ?
Specifically what "original SAGE transcripts and maps" is Smith-Kaye talking about?
I don't know where Bruce got Tom's statement. Does Tom have a security clearance? JT has stated on DZ that the SAGE information was highly classified. Frankly, I doubt if there are any SAGE transcripts and/or maps.
But the McChord radar, if it is the one the FAA was using (and it probably was), would be something like a weather radar display from a fixed location. The FAA/USAF would then mark the airways and other airspace of interest to them on their various displays so that they could determine the location of a given aircraft with respect to the ground based on its radar returns.
The center controllers would then use this information in their communications with specific aircraft. At times, the controllers would use such statements as, "NWA 305 I show you on Victor 23, 11 DME miles north of the Fort Jones VORTAC".
Since the FAA radar information has been carefully plotted and flight checked, it is the most useful and accurate information for determining the flight path.
Well, Smith's claim aside, Tom says nothing about seeing or reviewing any of the documents Smith's lists Tom seeing and working with. This is easily checked by reviewing the resources Kaye lists working with in his flight path analysis, on his website here: http://www.citizensleuths.com/flightpath.html
In fact, Kaye as much as says on his website that 'we lack these same documents', 'wouldn't it be nice to have these documents', and 'only a review of the missing documents, or better evidence, will resolve central issues about the flight path' ... then Tom goes on to accept the FBI flight path as legitimate based on FBI documents he personally reviewed at Seattle, ... and that is where the matter stands, to date. If Tom told Smith something different it behooves Tom to clear the matter up.
If Kaye mentioned the documents Smith claims in some public talk her gave, .... I don't know. I wasn't there.
Kaye never mentioned on Dropzone any of the materials Smith references Kaye working with. Kaye himself doesn't reference such materials anywhere that I can find.
I have to conclude Smith doesn't know what he is talking about, or he is confusing statements Kaye made, pending further verification hopefully from Kaye himself ... which very likely will never happen here! ;) ;)
It's just another day in Smithland.
::)
-
I'm reviewing my notes from Tom's presentation in Portland, November 2011. A couple of things:
1. Tom said that "Larry had released transcripts," re: flight path that had never been released before.
2. I have no specific notation that Tm specifically had access to or consulted with SAGE transcripts, but that is my clear recollection.
3. Tom discussed the "FBI map" in detail, but said it was "not corroborated."
4. This flight path he named the "#1 flight path," and said it was "supported by radar from Sea-Tac and McChord."
Tom's presentation had several dimensions to it. First was to praise Larry Carr and his outreach to the public. Second was his discussion of SAGE radar and the flight path. Next was his speculation that DB Cooper paid some guy he nicknamed "Bubba" to drive him to PDX on T-Day morning, paying with the three bundolas that the driver buried eventually at T-Bar.
-
I'm reviewing my notes from Tom's presentation in Portland, November 2011. A couple of things:
1. Tom said that "Larry had released transcripts," re: flight path that had never been released before.
2. I have no specific notation that Tm specifically had access to or consulted with SAGE transcripts, but that is my clear recollection.
3. Tom discussed the "FBI map" in detail, but said it was "not corroborated."
4. This flight path he named the "#1 flight path," and said it was "supported by radar from Sea-Tac and McChord."
Tom's presentation had several dimensions to it. First was to praise Larry Carr and his outreach to the public. Second was his discussion of SAGE radar and the flight path. Next was his speculation that DB Cooper paid some guy he nicknamed "Bubba" to drive him to PDX on T-Day morning, paying with the three bundolas that the driver buried eventually at T-Bar.
So, when you say ""As for SAGE, Tom Kaye spoke very authoritatively about the flight path in Portland in 2011, and specifically stated that he consulted the original SAGE transcripts and "maps." But he didn't show us any documents, just a real pretty power-point and graphics." ...
... you have no evidence at all that Tom "specifically stated that he consulted the original SAGE transcripts and "maps." And what you are actually talking about is the same old documents we all have, which Tom refers to on his site, and there is nothing NEW at all in what you are referring to.
Some of the problem is terminology - nomenclature - with different people using different terminology for the same docs we all are familiar with. Pretty soon its like a Tower of Babel and no two people can speak the same language.
:) :)
-
It may be true that I have no corroborative evidence about what Tom said about SAGE, but I sure have clear recollections that he had access to original SAGE materials and used them to form the basis of his theories on the flight path. Be that as it may, I am surprised to hear that Tom has not voiced that perspective in other forums, such as his web site or the Citizen Sleuths. So, I will have to review them.
-
Tom and the Flight Path
In light of the fact that my recollections of Tom's pronouncements on the flight path and the availability of the SAGE transcripts might be off, I reviewed what I actually wrote in my book, which follows. It is also ready to go into the 2nd Edition, as I don't see any reason to change anything. It doesn't mention SAGE specifically, only Tom's belief that the "FBI" flight path is the most probable one to consider.
Chapter 10
Analysis of the flight path, clothing, and weather
The flip side of the parachute examination is: where did Cooper land, even if he died upon impact? The key to answering that question is knowing where was Flight 305 when Cooper exited the plane, and for that we need precise information on the flight path and the time of the jump. Surprisingly these issues are not fully resolved, which begs another question why not? Is it due simply to the turgidity of bureaucracy? Or is there a cover-up?
Tom Kaye, the leader of the Citizen Sleuth team, attempted to clarify these issues at the 2011 Symposium using never-before released FBI documents, including radar maps, which he said had provided 100% coverage of the landing zones. Kaye said the maps he consulted were an amalgam of radar transcripts from McChord Air Base in Tacoma and the FAA’s Seattle Center, but he did not display any of the original data. He also stated that these advanced radar systems would have cost about $70 billion in today’s money.
In addition, Kaye accepted the claim that elk hunter Carroll Hicks found Flight 305’s instructional placard for deploying the airstairs near Silver Lake, Washington, and thus places 305 smack dab in V-23. Kaye also acknowledged that the placard most likely drifted about 2.5 miles eastward in the wind, but said it was still within V-23.
Graphically, the flight pathway that Kaye presented appears to be a zig-zag, generally heading southward, but why 305 didn't fly a straight line is unknown. Nonetheless, Kaye said that after Silver Lake, 305 then passed over nearby Toledo, Pigeon Springs, Ariel, Highland and Battleground, Washington, finally crossing the Columbia in the western Portland metro area.
Kaye accepted the general assumption that Cooper jumped somewhere near Battleground and drifted northeast to Ariel, but he challenged the conventional wisdom on the type of landscape within LZ-A. For years most people assumed that Cooper landed in a dense and dangerous forest, but Kaye reviewed topographical maps of the area and found there were very few sections that would be considered heavily forested or “wilderness” at the time of the skyjacking. “There were no ‘death woods’ in 1971,” he declared, characterizing the landing area as a mix of trees, hills and farm fields, and filled with light from homes and developed areas. In fact, Kaye described LZ-A as decent spot to land because it was a benign agricultural area. Kaye added that there would be a lot of ambient light from the houses, stores, and street lights in the area, all of which would have bounced off of the clouds as well.
“There was no snow,” he stated, casting further doubt on the FBI's decision to suspend the initial ground search. Earlier in the symposium, Geoffrey Gray had shown FBI documents claiming the LZ had too much snow and the ground search needed to be postponed until April.
Additionally, Kaye delivered more details on the cloud cover, saying two cloud layers existed—one of “broken clouds” at 3,000 feet, and a second “overcast” condition of at least 85% cloud cover at 5,000 feet. Hence, Kaye said that Cooper could not see the ground from an elevation of 10,000 feet, nor could anyone on the ground see Cooper bail.
As for flying east of Victor 23 over the Washougal, as espoused by Himmelsbach and Rataczak, Kaye said that he had not found any credible evidence to support this assertion. In addition, Kaye rejected the hypothesis that the money floated down to Tina Bar. “There was no natural means to move the money to Tina Bar,” he said, stunning the Portland audience. He also suggested that the money was delivered to the beach by human hands.
Kaye speculated that Cooper had landed successfully and walked out of the LZ. Then, he postulated, Cooper met some guy and paid him for a ride to Portland Airport using a few bundles of ransom money. Afterwards, Kaye posited, the driver buried the money at Tina Bar out of a pique of guilt and fear.
However, few audience members believed Kaye then or now, and the issue of how the money got to Tina Bar remains wide open.
-
What is the deal with the Placard,, I just found this article claiming that it could have come from the re-enactment?
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19790119&id=1PJVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BuIDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6711,4908345&hl=en
"could have dropped off any passing 727"
"The FBI said Thursday" "could have dropped from a plane during a re-enactement"
"posted next to the rear exits of 727s"
"posted on the outside"
"Ray Mathis, FBI spokesman in Seattle, said the hijacked plane was used in a simulation of the hijacking, and, "we noticed the decal was missing after that, but not before."
"those placards have ben known to fall off on the runway," added a Boeing spokesman.
To add, in another article the Sheriff completely contradicts the FBI statement.. saying that they knew within two days of the "hijack" that the Placard was missing.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19790118&id=0_JVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BuIDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6626,4574493&hl=en
There is no reason for the Sheriff to lie,, so there are only two possibilities,,
There are two Placards, one inside and one outside, maybe the sheriff was referring to the outside one missing initially, there seems to be confusion between the two, a Boeing spokesman said they find them on the runway all the time,, maybe the outside ones not the inside ones.
Or,
the FBI statement is intentionally misleading.. WHY??
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjXB1Y9kISg
-
Graphically, the flight pathway that Kaye presented appears to be a zig-zag, generally heading southward, but why 305 didn't fly a straight line is unknown. Nonetheless, Kaye said that after Silver Lake, 305 then passed over nearby Toledo, Pigeon Springs, Ariel, Highland and Battleground, Washington, finally crossing the Columbia in the western Portland metro area.
Actually, Toledo would be the first area noted. then Silver Lake which is south of Toledo.
305 was on V-23, but not "smack dab" on it.....
-
Graphically, the flight pathway that Kaye presented appears to be a zig-zag, generally heading southward, but why 305 didn't fly a straight line is unknown. Nonetheless, Kaye said that after Silver Lake, 305 then passed over nearby Toledo, Pigeon Springs, Ariel, Highland and Battleground, Washington, finally crossing the Columbia in the western Portland metro area.
Actually, Toledo would be the first area noted. then Silver Lake which is south of Toledo.
305 was on V-23, but not "smack dab" on it.....
Then Salt Lake City, Edmunton, Chicago, San Francisco, Des Moines, Indianapolis, Buffalo, Quebec City, Amarillo, and finally landed at Reno in 1975! What a trip it was! ;D ;D ;D
-
Graphically, the flight pathway that Kaye presented appears to be a zig-zag, generally heading southward, but why 305 didn't fly a straight line is unknown. Nonetheless, Kaye said that after Silver Lake, 305 then passed over nearby Toledo, Pigeon Springs, Ariel, Highland and Battleground, Washington, finally crossing the Columbia in the western Portland metro area.
Actually, Toledo would be the first area noted. then Silver Lake which is south of Toledo.
305 was on V-23, but not "smack dab" on it.....
Then Salt Lake City, Edmunton, Chicago, San Francisco, Des Moines, Indianapolis, Buffalo, Quebec City, Amarillo, and finally landed at Reno in 1975! What a trip it was! ;D ;D ;D
I think there is general agreement by everyone on this thread that nothing in the FBI files actually makes a strong case, or maybe even a weak one, for any specific flight path in the Portland area.
That is interesting to me since someone would have to go out of their way to avoid making a case of one kind or another.
-
I moved the discussion to the proper thread...
I'll give some thought to preparing a more elaborate explanation of all this. And if Shutter is agreeable, maybe we can also move some other things from the DZ site to here.
Go ahead and post whatever you wish. this site falls under "educational, news etc. so, using material from another site should not be a problem. just make sure credit is given with the information provided.
This is a touchy subject (T-bar) since we have a well known flight path, but we have found problems with the path, and the transcripts.
1) Several minutes into the flight the transcripts have a timing issue.
2) The area from Merwin lake to the Columbia have a 2 minute gap.
3) Parts of the transcripts appear to be left out.
4) Timing issue from Battleground to the Canby intersection.
I'm sure there is more, but I just woke up about a half hour ago ;D (very long hard week)
Now, the things above don't mean the flight path is in the wrong location, but it does present a problem with validation. I back 99's theory, and agree it has some merit, but I'm not ready to move the path without some hard evidence to back it up. finding the original transcripts seems to be the key to unlocking and understanding the path.
The Merwin lake area clearly has a problem, it could be a simple human error, or a complete guess as to it's location on the map. the FBI states the map is "the believed flight path" that's not very positive in my opinion.
-
I moved the discussion to the proper thread...
I'll give some thought to preparing a more elaborate explanation of all this. And if Shutter is agreeable, maybe we can also move some other things from the DZ site to here.
Go ahead and post whatever you wish. this site falls under "educational, news etc. so, using material from another site should not be a problem. just make sure credit is given with the information provided.
This is a touchy subject (T-bar) since we have a well known flight path, but we have found problems with the path, and the transcripts.
1) Several minutes into the flight the transcripts have a timing issue.
2) The area from Merwin lake to the Columbia have a 2 minute gap.
3) Parts of the transcripts appear to be left out.
4) Timing issue from Battleground to the Canby intersection.
I'm sure there is more, but I just woke up about a half hour ago ;D (very long hard week)
Now, the things above don't mean the flight path is in the wrong location, but it does present a problem with validation. I back 99's theory, and agree it has some merit, but I'm not ready to move the path without some hard evidence to back it up. finding the original transcripts seems to be the key to unlocking and understanding the path.
The Merwin lake area clearly has a problem, it could be a simple human error, or a complete guess as to it's location on the map. the FBI states the map is "the believed flight path" that's not very positive in my opinion.
I'll add my comments here -
I dont see that Cooper has to die in any of these scenarios. All he has to do is lose some of the money from the container bag, if he bailed close enough to Tina Bar to have hydrology transport the money onto the sandbar. Or, if he bailed near Ariel then its almost required that he survived and walked to the area that feeds Tina Bar and lost some of the money near there. I think the odds are that Cooper survived wherever he bailed. But, the condition of the money after nine years and the fact of bundles still grouped together and intact, favors the idea that the money was lost somewhere close enough to Tina Bar that hydrology could move the bundles over time, not too far. Aside from Robert99's reservations about the flight path ' on aeronautical grounds', the rest of 99's thesis rests on the feeling that the money did not travel too far from 1971-1980 to be found where it was found in 1980, and I think there are strong grounds to suspect that 'proximity' is a key factor in Cooper money being found where it was found ... on a sandbar close by.
If R99 can prove that the flight path is wrong, then we are definitely talking about moving the flight path west closer to Tina Bar. In the meantime we have to look at other facts of the case and two of those facts are (a) the condition of the money, (b) the fact of intact bundles at one location, and (c) the fact that artifacts or money has never been found at any other location in spite of many-many people looking over the years. This evidence frames the options available to consider and rejects and whole universe of other options. One of the options excluded, for example, is that you will ever find Cooper money buried anywhere around Ariel, WA!
Likewise, the zone where Cooper money was found on Tina Bar is fed ONLY from a finite number of directions under a finite set of conditions. Tina Bar is not Rome - all roads do not lead to Tina Bar!
;)
-
(b) the fact of intact bundles at one location,
I'd like to think the bundles were already fused together before the final resting place. others like to believe three loose bundles fell into place...
-
(b) the fact of intact bundles at one location,
I'd like to think the bundles were already fused together before the final resting place. others like to believe three loose bundles fell into place...
A couple things, Shut:
1. Do you think the bundles were buried under pressure, so as to "fuse" together, such that they crumbled into chunks when attempts were made to peel the bills apart?
2. Do you think they were buried under pressure somewhere else, prior to the T-Bar discovery site?
-
...I dont see that Cooper has to die in any of these scenarios. All he has to do is lose some of the money from the container bag, if he bailed close enough to Tina Bar to have hydrology transport the money onto the sandbar. Or, if he bailed near Ariel then its almost required that he survived and walked to the area that feeds Tina Bar and lost some of the money near there. I think the odds are that Cooper survived wherever he bailed. But, the condition of the money after nine years and the fact of bundles still grouped together and intact, favors the idea that the money was lost somewhere close enough to Tina Bar that hydrology could move the bundles over time, not too far. Aside from Robert99's reservations about the flight path ' on aeronautical grounds', the rest of 99's thesis rests on the feeling that the money did not travel too far from 1971-1980 to be found where it was found in 1980, and I think there are strong grounds to suspect that 'proximity' is a key factor in Cooper money being found where it was found ... on a sandbar close by....
Thank you, Georger. I find it useful to separate the different issues, ie: the three bundles, Cooper, and the survivability of the getaway.
1. The money: how did it become compacted? How did the Tres Bundolas end up at the discovery site at T-Bar? Were they somewhere else, prior to traveling to T-Bar? Where is the rest of the money - did whatever happened to the Tres Bundolas also happen to the other bundles? Or if not, why not? Can any of these questions be addressed from the evidence we have?
2. What is the relationship between Cooper and the Tres Bundolas? Did they all crater together? Or are they separate entities and have different stories? What do the Tres Bundolas tell us about DB Cooper, if anything?
-
(b) the fact of intact bundles at one location,
I'd like to think the bundles were already fused together before the final resting place. others like to believe three loose bundles fell into place...
A couple things, Shut:
1. Do you think the bundles were buried under pressure, so as to "fuse" together, such that they crumbled into chunks when attempts were made to peel the bills apart?
2. Do you think they were buried under pressure somewhere else, prior to the T-Bar discovery site?
I don't think it was a mater of a lot of pressure. Cooper tied the bag, I assume tight. the money would eventually bond together with time out in the elements. when you look at the photo of the money on the table, it appears to be blocks of bills. some how the bag broke open, and the money escaped. how it did this, I haven't a clue, or a good enough answer as proof. the bills could have went through the dredge, but that's if we really had a debris field. the money could of landed nearby as 99 claims. the whole problem comes down to the flight path, or the timing of the jump is off.
Carr states this..
consistent with being submerged in water and that sand recovered off the money was consistent with silt from the Columbia. From what I have read in the files the best theory I can come up with is that Cooper tied the money bag into a tight enough bundle that it stayed sealed for several years.
He continues with the following...
What I think that means is the bag had to have landed at the beach with all of the money inside. While on the beach or just at the waters edge the bag finally snagged something that broke it open. Once open, several bundles fell from the bag and stayed on the beach. Due to the flow of water, the bag, along with the rest of the money drifted off in the Columbia.
-
...I dont see that Cooper has to die in any of these scenarios. All he has to do is lose some of the money from the container bag, if he bailed close enough to Tina Bar to have hydrology transport the money onto the sandbar. Or, if he bailed near Ariel then its almost required that he survived and walked to the area that feeds Tina Bar and lost some of the money near there. I think the odds are that Cooper survived wherever he bailed. But, the condition of the money after nine years and the fact of bundles still grouped together and intact, favors the idea that the money was lost somewhere close enough to Tina Bar that hydrology could move the bundles over time, not too far. Aside from Robert99's reservations about the flight path ' on aeronautical grounds', the rest of 99's thesis rests on the feeling that the money did not travel too far from 1971-1980 to be found where it was found in 1980, and I think there are strong grounds to suspect that 'proximity' is a key factor in Cooper money being found where it was found ... on a sandbar close by....
Thank you, Georger. I find it useful to separate the different issues, ie: the three bundles, Cooper, and the survivability of the getaway.
1. The money: how did it become compacted? How did the Tres Bundolas end up at the discovery site at T-Bar? Were they somewhere else, prior to traveling to T-Bar? Where is the rest of the money - did whatever happened to the Tres Bundolas also happen to the other bundles? Or if not, why not? Can any of these questions be addressed from the evidence we have?
2. What is the relationship between Cooper and the Tres Bundolas? Did they all crater together? Or are they separate entities and have different stories? What do the Tres Bundolas tell us about DB Cooper, if anything?
1. The money: how did it become compacted?
Who has ever said the bundles were "compacted" ? I think you are confusing 'fused' with 'compacted'. However if the money was brought up with the dredging spoils it conceivably would have been under tons of earth or some portion thereof.
Tom Kaye was asked if his bills showed any sign of compaction, pressure, impact, etc and Kaye said "no". Moreover, Alan Stone, Kaye's partner, is a material's expert who specialises in deformation, stress, and destruction science. Apparently Kaye was speaking for Alan also.
As for the rest you can find it all at Dropzone.
-
Georger wrote: "Likewise, the zone where Cooper money was found on Tina Bar is fed ONLY from a finite number of directions under a finite set of conditions. Tina Bar is not Rome - all roads do not lead to Tina Bar!"
In the Cooper Votex all roads do converge. 😉
377
-
If the bills were not stuck together previously, or during the find, how did the PCGS find more serial numbers?
If you were examining single bills how could you tell if they were stuck together, or compressed, or not compressed?
I believe Brian used the term "petrified"
The numbers were hidden in layers of notes and note fragments stuck together for decades, and those numbers now have been reported by PCGS Currency President, Jason Bradford, to the Seattle-based FBI agent overseeing the case. In a letter to FBI Special Agent Larry Carr, Bradford wrote: “Earlier this month, members of our team examined two dozen environmentally-damaged $20 denomination Federal Reserve Notes and dozens of fragments submitted to us for certification by Brian Ingram of Mena, Arkansas. As you know, Mr. Ingram was the then-eight year old boy in 1980 who discovered some of the cash given in 1971 as ransom to a skyjacker known as ‘D. B. Cooper’ or ‘Dan Cooper.’”
-
Georger wrote: "Likewise, the zone where Cooper money was found on Tina Bar is fed ONLY from a finite number of directions under a finite set of conditions. Tina Bar is not Rome - all roads do not lead to Tina Bar!"
In the Cooper Votex all roads do converge. 😉
377
Obviously! :o
-
If the bills were not stuck together previously, or during the find, how did the PCGS find more serial numbers?
If you were examining single bills how could you tell if they were stuck together, or compressed, or not compressed?
I believe Brian used the term "petrified"
The numbers were hidden in layers of notes and note fragments stuck together for decades, and those numbers now have been reported by PCGS Currency President, Jason Bradford, to the Seattle-based FBI agent overseeing the case. In a letter to FBI Special Agent Larry Carr, Bradford wrote: “Earlier this month, members of our team examined two dozen environmentally-damaged $20 denomination Federal Reserve Notes and dozens of fragments submitted to us for certification by Brian Ingram of Mena, Arkansas. As you know, Mr. Ingram was the then-eight year old boy in 1980 who discovered some of the cash given in 1971 as ransom to a skyjacker known as ‘D. B. Cooper’ or ‘Dan Cooper.’”
The term 'cemented' was also used.
I dont know what Smith's problem with this is - all he has to do is READ past posts, however he evidently doesn;t believe past posts by various people, so, perhaps Smith needs to interview the money! Mind meld and remote see to penetrate through the veil of the money find to sort true facts from false facts, which only an agenda with a bias can do!.
Again: Tom and Alan were asked if there were any signs of impact, compression, burning, etc etc etc and the guys said "NO!". Tom even remarked to me how "smooth/undisturbed the surfaces of the bills are".
The money was found in sand. There was sediment in between the bills. The FBI even analysed that sediment. The FBI issued several reports on their analyses (plural).
The best we can say is "the bundles the Ingrams found did not look like they had been hit by a train traveling at Mach-10!"
The one thing we perhaps can say safely is the bundles had spent enough time in Nature that sediment had infiltrated between the bills. Both the Ingrams and the FBI found sediment between the bills. Paper swells when wet and sediment in a flow can work their way into open spaces over time. There is nothing profound about that outside of the fact that process takes time, it requires water, it requires moving sediment particles, and so forth. These sediments work their way into the fibers of the paper and act almost like a glue, when dried. When that happens repeatedly over time ... viola! Things get stuck together. It's called the "Simple Simon Effect"! Now if there had been no sediments found in between clean bills stacked together, then there would be cause for surprise ... and we might be talking about money that was recently planted, but that is not the case with the Cooper found money.
:)
[edit] The core issue at stake at Tina Bar is the "age" of the layers where the money was found. Without that basic knowledge it's very difficult to nail down when or how the money arrived. Beyond that it is obvious the whole analysis of the Tina Bar money find has been corrupted by a conflict between personalities.
-
35 serial numbers were missed by the FBI. It makes you wonder how much testing they did to the bills.
After matching serial numbers with the FBI’s previously published list of ransom notes, we were able to carefully separate the submitted notes and fragments that had been affixed together for decades. In some cases, portions of as many as four notes were stuck together due to their apparent long exposure to water and various weather conditions. We also were able to piece together portions of several separate fragments, sort of like a bank note jig-saw puzzle, to make a complete serial number.”
When you look at the bills on the table with the FBI, it looks like they broke off into separate piles. when and where were the bills broken up into individual bills?
This leaves a grand total of $6,500..Now, the insurance company got a large amount of bills. I wonder how many bills are unaccounted for in that portion?
-
35 serial numbers were missed by the FBI. It makes you wonder how much testing they did to the bills.
After matching serial numbers with the FBI’s previously published list of ransom notes, we were able to carefully separate the submitted notes and fragments that had been affixed together for decades. In some cases, portions of as many as four notes were stuck together due to their apparent long exposure to water and various weather conditions. We also were able to piece together portions of several separate fragments, sort of like a bank note jig-saw puzzle, to make a complete serial number.”
When you look at the bills on the table with the FBI, it looks like they broke off into separate piles. when and where were the bills broken up into individual bills?
This leaves a grand total of $6,500..Now, the insurance company got a large amount of bills. I wonder how many bills are unaccounted for in that portion?
Those piles you see at the news conference were the exact groups the Ingrams had separated and brought in, plus a few extraneous bills not shown four of which the Ingrams held back and had to turn in several days later. That's not my interpretation - that is what the FBI transcript says.
I think separating this mass of paper money was more difficult than is generally assumed. The FBI did some separating - I know that for a fact. But the forensic people felt they had answered the basic questions asked of them, attention turned to finger printing the money which was a primary goal and useless, and they let it go at that. None of that surprises me. They probably thought the basic questions had been answered and so they deferred any greater analysis until later ... which turned out to be never so far as I know. Their analysis wasn't so much flawed as just incomplete (as judged by today's standards). They did look for sediments and anything else between the groups of bills and typed what they found; that by itself is more than a cursory analysis. They knew they were probably missing serial numbers, but they also knew there wasn't a whole lot more than $5800 in the total group ... and not a whole lot more. The excavation hadn't turned up more bundles anywhere; they probably felt confident there wasn't a lot more to be found at the Tina Bar site. And all of this is taking time and on the budget, 9 years after Cooper had slipped away and the case was cold! Had the excavation found any artifacts or biological materials this excavation would take taken a different turn ... Schreuder has commented about that in depth. It was a 'pay as you go' and they just weren't turning up anything new or exciting to warrant a fuller (more expensive) investigation. That's how I understand it.
-
It seems to be illogical for the bundles to arrive in the same spot. It also appears the Ingrams never said how many rubber bands came off, or anything related to the amount of bundles. Carr thinks it was 4, or "multiple" as he stated. then you have other agents claiming of clumps.
Decades later, more serial numbers surface. they also claimed it was due to time in the elements.
Just like everything else Tena bar related...it's very confusing to come to any conclusions...
-
It seems to be illogical for the bundles to arrive in the same spot. . . . . .
Not if the bundles were still protected by the bag to some extent when they moved downstream and lodged temporarily at Tina Bar.
-
It seems to be illogical for the bundles to arrive in the same spot. . . . . .
Not if the bundles were still protected by the bag to some extent when they moved downstream and lodged temporarily at Tina Bar.
True, to some extent...the bag would have went through weathering as well, and the contents. should of slowed the aging process down considerably, but I'm guessing the bills would start bonding....
I find it hard to believe multiple bundles arrived together, and positioned themselves in order, or close to a nice pile. all heads up and facing the same? kind of odd...
-
(b) the fact of intact bundles at one location,
I'd like to think the bundles were already fused together before the final resting place. others like to believe three loose bundles fell into place...
The probability of single lose bundles recombining some distance from their source is = 0.
A cemented bundle could travel, or roll, be pushed along...? Several in the FBI cited the rounded (worn) edges of the Ingram bundles and concluded the aggregate bundle had rolled (along the bottom of the Columbia?). That idea didn't gain too much traction. Then Agent ____ spoke up and suggested the money might have been transported in a block of ice. ;) Of course the dredging in 1974 puts the money right where it was found, if you set Kaye's endless objections aside. A bag solves a lot of problems too (many possible scenarios) ................... but from where, when?
The fact the bills were cemented, as it were, was probably one factor that allowed that found bundles to survive as long as they did in nature. A semi-cemented block of money would be more resistant to outside forces and invasion by bacteria not to mention the fact that some of the chemicals that are in the paper to begin with are there are to resist bacteria invasion and hard physical handling over time. Paper money is pretty hardy stuff. Blocks of paper money have been known to slow down bullets...
-
It seems to be illogical for the bundles to arrive in the same spot. . . . . .
Not if the bundles were still protected by the bag to some extent when they moved downstream and lodged temporarily at Tina Bar.
True, to some extent...the bag would have went through weathering as well, and the contents. should of slowed the aging process down considerably, but I'm guessing the bills would start bonding....
I find it hard to believe multiple bundles arrived together, and positioned themselves in order, or close to a nice pile. all heads up and facing the same? kind of odd...
If you are referring to the bundle shown by Tom Kaye, it indicates "rotation" of the bills in a given bundle where the bundle had to be exposed to a current for a period of time to cause that rotation.
-
(b) the fact of intact bundles at one location,
I'd like to think the bundles were already fused together before the final resting place. others like to believe three loose bundles fell into place...
A couple things, Shut:
1. Do you think the bundles were buried under pressure, so as to "fuse" together, such that they crumbled into chunks when attempts were made to peel the bills apart?
2. Do you think they were buried under pressure somewhere else, prior to the T-Bar discovery site?
Have you ever glued paper together with flour paste ... recently? Suggest you try it and instead of flour paste think 'clay sediments' plus all the emulsifiers that are in money paper to begin with! Add a little Portland cement and you could lay brick with that stuff! ;)
Dr. Feyman.
-
It seems to be illogical for the bundles to arrive in the same spot. It also appears the Ingrams never said how many rubber bands came off, or anything related to the amount of bundles. Carr thinks it was 4, or "multiple" as he stated. then you have other agents claiming of clumps.
Decades later, more serial numbers surface. they also claimed it was due to time in the elements.
Just like everything else Tena bar related...it's very confusing to come to any conclusions...
I think the basic principle of physics and chemistry is understood. Don't forget this is not just raw paper - this is cotton fibre 'cloth' coated with a titanium dioxide emulsifier and other agents which when wetted and infiltrated by clay minerals/particles and other biological 'goo' makes a very nice paste. You could glue your dog to the doghouse with that stuff! The fact this money survived in nature for nine years testifies to the success of the paper chemistry in resisting decay, invasion, and wear exhibited in the Columbia environment. ;D
-
The confusing part is the fact of trying to figure out what happened. Tom still has bills in testing. he said they still don't look like the money find. then we have a plausible theory from 99. we also have the possibility the money was transported by dredge. then the unpopular plant theory.
I've read a lot about money. water shouldn't have much affect on it. pinpointing the reason for it's appearance seems to be a problem.
-
The confusing part is the fact of trying to figure out what happened. Tom still has bills in testing. he said they still don't look like the money find. then we have a plausible theory from 99. we also have the possibility the money was transported by dredge. then the unpopular plant theory.
I've read a lot about money. water shouldn't have much affect on it. pinpointing the reason for it's appearance seems to be a problem.
Tom still has bills in testing. he said they still don't look like the money find.
Excuse me while I recover my wits!
:o
-
The confusing part is the fact of trying to figure out what happened. Tom still has bills in testing. he said they still don't look like the money find. then we have a plausible theory from 99. we also have the possibility the money was transported by dredge. then the unpopular plant theory.
I've read a lot about money. water shouldn't have much affect on it. pinpointing the reason for it's appearance seems to be a problem.
Tom still has bills in testing. he said they still don't look like the money find.
Quite obviously, Tom's bills have not gone through the same process the Cooper money went through, prior to discovery!
Pending new-better evidence we don't know a lot more than when we started. We have clarified the options, in all likelihood. The subject will continue to be debated and speculated about, probably forever.
:)
-
I forgot this was on our site....
Info supplied by Hominid
The attachment shows a representation of the "pressure bump" and, below that, what the "cabin climb rate" guage indications could be if the pressure pulse were long in relation to the leakage time of the guage. The curve is the indication over the time frame of the pressure pulse, and the circles show what the guage indication would look like at different points in time.
The positive and negative indications of the guage could have been larger or smaller than shown. They could even have banged up against the max limits on the right side of the guage. The whole sequence could have occurred very quickly, in which case it would seem that the needle jumped down instantly then back up instantly, then back to zero. If it occurred more slowly, this would seem more like a typical (albeit 1-cycle) "oscillation."
The response to the pressure bump could easily have been "the oscillation" except for the bump or ear popping not being mentioned along with the oscillations in the logged communications, or the later timing of the bump not corresponding to the logged time of the "oscillations," or nobody ever saying they were the same thing.
-
Good post Shutter. Those aneroid RATE instruments are extraordinarily sensitive. If I slam my front door, a rate of climb indicator on a shelf 15 feet way reacts very visibly. My living room is hardly a pressure vessel with just a single opening, there are leaks everywhere. The altimeter doesn't budge.
377
-
I was thinking about getting an indicator for kicks. it actually works sitting on the shelf? that's cool.
-
Ok, so, many believe the jump time is accurate if not mistaken, or to the 8:15 position, but could be further west?
My main concern is how could they be that far off on the flight path. I'll admit it doesn't make sense around the jump time with the plane shifting east and west of V23.
Why all the turns once they crossed the Lewis river?
Why not fly the plane right down the center of the Columbia away from the main population?
Why did they bank hard while crossing the Columbia?
Why do we have x's unaccounted for on the map just past the Columbia?
Attention Bobby....nobody is trying to move the path. this is a discussion forum. people discuss things, so that doesn't mean they are applying that discussion to become FACT....one has to look at all angles, regardless to what they have said in the past. show the the radar data, or the flight recorder data to back up what they are claiming. remember, the FBI states it as the "believed flight path" I've heard an agent who was there state they had no idea where he jumped!
-
Ok, so, many believe the jump time is accurate if not mistaken, or to the 8:15 position, but could be further west?
My main concern is how could they be that far off on the flight path. I'll admit it doesn't make sense around the jump time with the plane shifting east and west of V23.
Why all the turns once they crossed the Lewis river?
Why not fly the plane right down the center of the Columbia away from the main population?
Why did they bank hard while crossing the Columbia?
Why do we have x's unaccounted for on the map just past the Columbia?
Attention Bobby....nobody is trying to move the path. this is a discussion forum. people discuss things, so that doesn't mean they are applying that discussion to become FACT....one has to look at all angles, regardless to what they have said in the past. show the the radar data, or the flight recorder data to back up what they are claiming. remember, the FBI states it as the "believed flight path" I've heard an agent who was there state they had no idea where he jumped!
To me the greatest uncertainty is in the vertical axis which is TIME. But that is precisely what the NWA search map "says", and depicts. They were uncertain exactly when Cooper jumped in the 8:08-8:15 time frame. That is exactly what the search map says. They placed the greatest probability at 8:11 which is where the Line A-B starts.
This NWA map was serious. It was a serious professional attempt to identify where and when Cooper jumped based on the best data and technology available to them. But, it "is" a probability chart and no more. It depicts the accuracy of the data they had to work with. (If Blevins sees something magical or Holy in that ... then Blevins does not know how to read the English language or read a map and know what he's seeing! Recall he also has a grapgic which is claims for years is a flight path. Farf jumped him on that numerous times. Bobby never saw the light and never will because he doesn't know the difference.)
Bobby is as Bobby does. He is 6 years into his game. Nothing will change. Nothing can change. Bobby is Bobby. :))
-
I just find it hard for the map to be so far off (east & west)...they did take the data from the plane, they were tracked by McChord, so how could the path be so far west of it's know position. unless they intentionally did this, which I have doubts.
As mentioned before, a lot of it makes sense, but moving it that far seems to be a stretch...????????
-
I just find it hard for the map to be so far off (east & west)...they did take the data from the plane, they were tracked by McChord, so how could the path be so far west of it's know position. unless they intentionally did this, which I have doubts.
As mentioned before, a lot of it makes sense, but moving it that far seems to be a stretch...????????
R2 said (in all his interviews) that 305 was right down the center of V23 nearly the whole time, right over PDX! The map doesnt show that! Then R2 said well maybe they did veer to the west to miss PDX? R2 said he was busy at the time and wasnt watching because he was watching and talking to people about a T33 that had taken off from PDX to intercept 305, and R2 says he then looked and 305 had crossed the Columbia and R2 brought the T33 and 305 together south of PDX near Lake Oswego ... just as shown on the map! Keep in mind this all during the communications blackout in the Transcript.. which ends at 8:20?
-
It's on V23 within its perimeters most of the way. straight down V23, not according to the map. it's several miles east of V23 coming down from Toledo, and zips back & forth in the jump zone reconnecting to V23 several times. it meets up once again (centerline) just after crossing the Columbia...
-
I just find it hard for the map to be so far off (east & west)...they did take the data from the plane, they were tracked by McChord, so how could the path be so far west of it's know position. unless they intentionally did this, which I have doubts.
As mentioned before, a lot of it makes sense, but moving it that far seems to be a stretch...????????
R2 said (in all his interviews) that 305 was right down the center of V23 nearly the whole time, right over PDX! The map doesnt show that! Then R2 said well maybe they did veer to the west to miss PDX? R2 said he was busy at the time and wasnt watching because he was watching and talking to people about a T33 that had taken off from PDX to intercept 305, and R2 says he then looked and 305 had crossed the Columbia and R2 brought the T33 and 305 together south of PDX near Lake Oswego ... just as shown on the map! Keep in mind this all during the communications blackout in the Transcript.. which ends at 8:20?
If R2 says that the T-33 joined up with the airliner near Lake Oswego no later than 8:20, then that is almost exactly the correct time - to the minute - that the airliner would have been at the Canby Intersection and thus rejoining V-23 for the rest of the trip south.
-
I just find it hard for the map to be so far off (east & west)...they did take the data from the plane, they were tracked by McChord, so how could the path be so far west of it's know position. unless they intentionally did this, which I have doubts.
As mentioned before, a lot of it makes sense, but moving it that far seems to be a stretch...????????
R2 said (in all his interviews) that 305 was right down the center of V23 nearly the whole time, right over PDX! The map doesnt show that! Then R2 said well maybe they did veer to the west to miss PDX? R2 said he was busy at the time and wasnt watching because he was watching and talking to people about a T33 that had taken off from PDX to intercept 305, and R2 says he then looked and 305 had crossed the Columbia and R2 brought the T33 and 305 together south of PDX near Lake Oswego ... just as shown on the map! Keep in mind this all during the communications blackout in the Transcript.. which ends at 8:20?
If R2 says that the T-33 joined up with the airliner near Lake Oswego no later than 8:20, then that is almost exactly the correct time - to the minute - that the airliner would have been at the Canby Intersection and thus rejoining V-23 for the rest of the trip south.
That is what R2 said. R99 and I both talked to him. The location is correct. R2 didn't recall the exact time.
-
I just find it hard for the map to be so far off (east & west)...they did take the data from the plane, they were tracked by McChord, so how could the path be so far west of it's know position. unless they intentionally did this, which I have doubts.
As mentioned before, a lot of it makes sense, but moving it that far seems to be a stretch...????????
R2 said (in all his interviews) that 305 was right down the center of V23 nearly the whole time, right over PDX! The map doesnt show that! Then R2 said well maybe they did veer to the west to miss PDX? R2 said he was busy at the time and wasnt watching because he was watching and talking to people about a T33 that had taken off from PDX to intercept 305, and R2 says he then looked and 305 had crossed the Columbia and R2 brought the T33 and 305 together south of PDX near Lake Oswego ... just as shown on the map! Keep in mind this all during the communications blackout in the Transcript.. which ends at 8:20?
If R2 says that the T-33 joined up with the airliner near Lake Oswego no later than 8:20, then that is almost exactly the correct time - to the minute - that the airliner would have been at the Canby Intersection and thus rejoining V-23 for the rest of the trip south.
That is what R2 said. R99 and I both talked to him. The location is correct. R2 didn't recall the exact time.
Georger, I wasn't in on the actual conversation with you and R2 although you sent me information on that conversation a long time ago (apparently very shortly after it took place).
I have just finished reading the Ckret posts that WSHM has compiled. And here is something that needs to be emphasized repeatedly. The time hack at the bottom of the ARINC teletype messages is the time that the message was sent over the ARINC teletype.
The actual time that the message was received by voice radio from the airliner was several minutes earlier since the radio communication had to be "formatted" and then typed into the ARINC teletype system.
Presumably, the voice messages that NWA people in MSP and SEA received in real time over the ARINC radio phone patch made their way to those same offices a few minutes later as teletype messages. They were all listening to the same radio transmissions from the airliner. The George Harrison papers would have the brief "notes" made by the people listening to the voice phone patch.
Does anyone know of a NWA employee in the MSP office whose last name started with the letter "R" and who would have been listening to those radio messages?
-
I just find it hard for the map to be so far off (east & west)...they did take the data from the plane, they were tracked by McChord, so how could the path be so far west of it's know position. unless they intentionally did this, which I have doubts.
As mentioned before, a lot of it makes sense, but moving it that far seems to be a stretch...????????
R2 said (in all his interviews) that 305 was right down the center of V23 nearly the whole time, right over PDX! The map doesnt show that! Then R2 said well maybe they did veer to the west to miss PDX? R2 said he was busy at the time and wasnt watching because he was watching and talking to people about a T33 that had taken off from PDX to intercept 305, and R2 says he then looked and 305 had crossed the Columbia and R2 brought the T33 and 305 together south of PDX near Lake Oswego ... just as shown on the map! Keep in mind this all during the communications blackout in the Transcript.. which ends at 8:20?
If R2 says that the T-33 joined up with the airliner near Lake Oswego no later than 8:20, then that is almost exactly the correct time - to the minute - that the airliner would have been at the Canby Intersection and thus rejoining V-23 for the rest of the trip south.
That is what R2 said. R99 and I both talked to him. The location is correct. R2 didn't recall the exact time.
Georger, I wasn't in on the actual conversation with you and R2 although you sent me information on that conversation a long time ago (apparently very shortly after it took place).
I have just finished reading the Ckret posts that WSHM has compiled. And here is something that needs to be emphasized repeatedly. The time hack at the bottom of the ARINC teletype messages is the time that the message was sent over the ARINC teletype.
The actual time that the message was received by voice radio from the airliner was several minutes earlier since the radio communication had to be "formatted" and then typed into the ARINC teletype system.
Presumably, the voice messages that NWA people in MSP and SEA received in real time over the ARINC radio phone patch made their way to those same offices a few minutes later as teletype messages. They were all listening to the same radio transmissions from the airliner. The George Harrison papers would have the brief "notes" made by the people listening to the voice phone patch.
Does anyone know of a NWA employee in the MSP office whose last name started with the letter "R" and who would have been listening to those radio messages?
I thought you talked to R2? Didnt I give you his contact? I asked him if he would talk to you and he said "fine".
?
Who was it at DZ that replied to me saying: "he told me the same thing" when I mentioned R2 had said so far as he knew 305 had flown right down the center of V23 ... and crossed right over PDX on V23 ? Wasn't that you? Could that have been Hominid if it wasn't you?
-
Forum Rules of Etiquette:
1. All individuals referenced in a post must be identifiable. Hence, WTF is "R2?"
2. I thought I was in charge of giving posters cute nicknames. Shutter, has a change been made here? Just askin'.
-Yours truly: aka Prince Bruce, The Big B, LottaBS, Gawd Almighty, etc.
-
I just find it hard for the map to be so far off (east & west)...they did take the data from the plane, they were tracked by McChord, so how could the path be so far west of it's know position. unless they intentionally did this, which I have doubts.
As mentioned before, a lot of it makes sense, but moving it that far seems to be a stretch...????????
R2 said (in all his interviews) that 305 was right down the center of V23 nearly the whole time, right over PDX! The map doesnt show that! Then R2 said well maybe they did veer to the west to miss PDX? R2 said he was busy at the time and wasnt watching because he was watching and talking to people about a T33 that had taken off from PDX to intercept 305, and R2 says he then looked and 305 had crossed the Columbia and R2 brought the T33 and 305 together south of PDX near Lake Oswego ... just as shown on the map! Keep in mind this all during the communications blackout in the Transcript.. which ends at 8:20?
If R2 says that the T-33 joined up with the airliner near Lake Oswego no later than 8:20, then that is almost exactly the correct time - to the minute - that the airliner would have been at the Canby Intersection and thus rejoining V-23 for the rest of the trip south.
That is what R2 said. R99 and I both talked to him. The location is correct. R2 didn't recall the exact time.
Georger, I wasn't in on the actual conversation with you and R2 although you sent me information on that conversation a long time ago (apparently very shortly after it took place).
I have just finished reading the Ckret posts that WSHM has compiled. And here is something that needs to be emphasized repeatedly. The time hack at the bottom of the ARINC teletype messages is the time that the message was sent over the ARINC teletype.
The actual time that the message was received by voice radio from the airliner was several minutes earlier since the radio communication had to be "formatted" and then typed into the ARINC teletype system.
Presumably, the voice messages that NWA people in MSP and SEA received in real time over the ARINC radio phone patch made their way to those same offices a few minutes later as teletype messages. They were all listening to the same radio transmissions from the airliner. The George Harrison papers would have the brief "notes" made by the people listening to the voice phone patch.
Does anyone know of a NWA employee in the MSP office whose last name started with the letter "R" and who would have been listening to those radio messages?
I thought you talked to R2? Didnt I give you his contact? I asked him if he would talk to you and he said "fine".
?
Who was it at DZ that replied to me saying: "he told me the same thing" when I mentioned R2 had said so far as he knew 305 had flown right down the center of V23 ... and crossed right over PDX on V23 ? Wasn't that you? Could that have been Hominid if it wasn't you?
Check with Hominid.
-
Forum Rules of Etiquette:
1. All individuals referenced in a post must be identifiable. Hence, WTF is "R2?"
2. I thought I was in charge of giving posters cute nicknames. Shutter, has a change been made here? Just askin'.
-Yours truly: aka Prince Bruce, The Big B, LottaBS, Gawd Almighty, etc.
R2 (no D2 involved) was the Seattle Air Traffic Control Center's controller who worked the airliner while it was in the Portland area. The other Seattle ATCC controllers who worked the airliner between Seattle and the Fort Jones VORTAC in Northern California (where it was handed off to the Oakland ATCC) are listed on the certification page signed by Osterkamp, who was the Chief of the Seattle ATCC.
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
Yes. They represent what R2 was doing when the airliner was in that area.
There are six red X's. The western three are on a direct line between the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection and the Canby Intersection. They would represent the location of the airliner at a given time as it bypassed Portland on the western side.
The other three red X's on the eastern side of that line represent the location of the aircraft that R2 was vectoring to join up with the airliner. Or to put it another way, those red X's represent the flight path of the airliner and the chase aircraft that was trying to join up with it.
You can ignore the other so-called flight paths since they are pure nonsense. 8)
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
Yes. They represent what R2 was doing when the airliner was in that area.
There are six red X's. The western three are on a direct line between the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection and the Canby Intersection. They would represent the location of the airliner at a given time as it bypassed Portland on the western side.
The other three red X's on the eastern side of that line represent the location of the aircraft that R2 was vectoring to join up with the airliner. Or to put it another way, those red X's represent the flight path of the airliner and the chase aircraft that was trying to join up with it.
You can ignore the other so-called flight paths since they are pure nonsense. 8)
It seems that way to me also. Those are the functions those X's appear to be serving. This map may never have been intended to be a final-accurate flight path map, but a provisional graphic attempting to depict 'multiple' events in the record of that night?
This map may have been an attempt to blend the NWA search map with other data, ie historical records. That could explain why Agent Carr and the FBI brought this map forward ... to be discussed and pulled apart. There could be another more accurate (actual) final flight path map we have never seen. Or, This map may be as far as the accuracy of their data allowed them to go and there never was a "final flight path map" ? Carr may have been looking for a 'final flight path map' as much as we are! :)
I have asked before: what is the date this map came into existence?
>:D The devil is in the details.
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
Yes. They represent what R2 was doing when the airliner was in that area.
There are six red X's. The western three are on a direct line between the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection and the Canby Intersection. They would represent the location of the airliner at a given time as it bypassed Portland on the western side.
The other three red X's on the eastern side of that line represent the location of the aircraft that R2 was vectoring to join up with the airliner. Or to put it another way, those red X's represent the flight path of the airliner and the chase aircraft that was trying to join up with it.
You can ignore the other so-called flight paths since they are pure nonsense. 8)
It seems that way to me also. Those are the functions those X's appear to be serving. This map may never have been intended to be a final-accurate flight path map, but a provisional graphic attempting to depict 'multiple' events in the record of that night?
This map may have been an attempt to blend the NWA search map with other data, ie historical records. That could explain why Agent Carr and the FBI brought this map forward ... to be discussed and pulled apart. There could be another more accurate (actual) final flight path map we have never seen. Or, This map may be as far as the accuracy of their data allowed them to go and there never was a "final flight path map" ? Carr may have been looking for a 'final flight path map' as much as we are! :)
I have asked before: what is the date this map came into existence?
>:D The devil is in the details.
One of those maps (the one that includes the red dots) shows Mount St. Helens in the upper right hand corner with a height of 9677 feet.
Present day Seattle aeronautical charts show Mount St. Helens with a height of 8365 feet.
And Mount St. Helens blew its stack a couple of months after the money was found at Tina Bar in February 1980.
Ergo, the map was prepared before Mount St. Helens erupted, assuming that the FBI didn't just use an out of date map to plot their flight paths.
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
Yes. They represent what R2 was doing when the airliner was in that area.
There are six red X's. The western three are on a direct line between the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection and the Canby Intersection. They would represent the location of the airliner at a given time as it bypassed Portland on the western side.
The other three red X's on the eastern side of that line represent the location of the aircraft that R2 was vectoring to join up with the airliner. Or to put it another way, those red X's represent the flight path of the airliner and the chase aircraft that was trying to join up with it.
You can ignore the other so-called flight paths since they are pure nonsense. 8)
It seems that way to me also. Those are the functions those X's appear to be serving. This map may never have been intended to be a final-accurate flight path map, but a provisional graphic attempting to depict 'multiple' events in the record of that night?
This map may have been an attempt to blend the NWA search map with other data, ie historical records. That could explain why Agent Carr and the FBI brought this map forward ... to be discussed and pulled apart. There could be another more accurate (actual) final flight path map we have never seen. Or, This map may be as far as the accuracy of their data allowed them to go and there never was a "final flight path map" ? Carr may have been looking for a 'final flight path map' as much as we are! :)
I have asked before: what is the date this map came into existence?
>:D The devil is in the details.
One of those maps (the one that includes the red dots) shows Mount St. Helens in the upper right hand corner with a height of 9677 feet.
Present day Seattle aeronautical charts show Mount St. Helens with a height of 8365 feet.
And Mount St. Helens blew its stack a couple of months after the money was found at Tina Bar in February 1980.
Ergo, the map was prepared before Mount St. Helens erupted, assuming that the FBI didn't just use an out of date map to plot their flight paths.
good observation.
Here's another work graphic. This graphic was saved from a private work group a number of years ago. It purports to show the path the T33 took before a rendezvous with 305 near Lake Oswego, time uncertain. Note the time 7:50 assigned to the first red cross. This time was purported to be "an estimate" assigned to the red X by one of the Controllers.
Comments?
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
Yes. They represent what R2 was doing when the airliner was in that area.
There are six red X's. The western three are on a direct line between the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection and the Canby Intersection. They would represent the location of the airliner at a given time as it bypassed Portland on the western side.
The other three red X's on the eastern side of that line represent the location of the aircraft that R2 was vectoring to join up with the airliner. Or to put it another way, those red X's represent the flight path of the airliner and the chase aircraft that was trying to join up with it.
You can ignore the other so-called flight paths since they are pure nonsense. 8)
It seems that way to me also. Those are the functions those X's appear to be serving. This map may never have been intended to be a final-accurate flight path map, but a provisional graphic attempting to depict 'multiple' events in the record of that night?
This map may have been an attempt to blend the NWA search map with other data, ie historical records. That could explain why Agent Carr and the FBI brought this map forward ... to be discussed and pulled apart. There could be another more accurate (actual) final flight path map we have never seen. Or, This map may be as far as the accuracy of their data allowed them to go and there never was a "final flight path map" ? Carr may have been looking for a 'final flight path map' as much as we are! :)
I have asked before: what is the date this map came into existence?
>:D The devil is in the details.
One of those maps (the one that includes the red dots) shows Mount St. Helens in the upper right hand corner with a height of 9677 feet.
Present day Seattle aeronautical charts show Mount St. Helens with a height of 8365 feet.
And Mount St. Helens blew its stack a couple of months after the money was found at Tina Bar in February 1980.
Ergo, the map was prepared before Mount St. Helens erupted, assuming that the FBI didn't just use an out of date map to plot their flight paths.
good observation.
Here's another work graphic. This graphic was saved from a private work group a number of years ago. It purports to show the path the T33 took before a rendezvous with 305 near Lake Oswego, time uncertain. Note the time 7:50 assigned to the first red cross. This time was purported to be "an estimate" assigned to the red X by one of the Controllers.
Comments?
According to Himmelsbach's book, page 47, the T-33 took off to the west from the Portland Airport at 7:50 PM. At that time, the airliner was still way north of the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection. And the airliner didn't get to the "23 DME south of Portland" point until 8:18 PM, 28 minutes later. Further, the "23 DME" point is actually several nautical miles south of Lake Oswego.
That thin blue line that someone has added, running south from a couple of the X marks, doesn't make any sense. It does not point to a navigational aid as far as I can tell and does not cross V-23. Its purpose is unknown.
The only thing that I personally get from this chart is that someone agrees that the X marks represent the location of one or more aircraft at some time point.
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
Yes. They represent what R2 was doing when the airliner was in that area.
There are six red X's. The western three are on a direct line between the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection and the Canby Intersection. They would represent the location of the airliner at a given time as it bypassed Portland on the western side.
The other three red X's on the eastern side of that line represent the location of the aircraft that R2 was vectoring to join up with the airliner. Or to put it another way, those red X's represent the flight path of the airliner and the chase aircraft that was trying to join up with it.
You can ignore the other so-called flight paths since they are pure nonsense. 8)
It seems that way to me also. Those are the functions those X's appear to be serving. This map may never have been intended to be a final-accurate flight path map, but a provisional graphic attempting to depict 'multiple' events in the record of that night?
This map may have been an attempt to blend the NWA search map with other data, ie historical records. That could explain why Agent Carr and the FBI brought this map forward ... to be discussed and pulled apart. There could be another more accurate (actual) final flight path map we have never seen. Or, This map may be as far as the accuracy of their data allowed them to go and there never was a "final flight path map" ? Carr may have been looking for a 'final flight path map' as much as we are! :)
I have asked before: what is the date this map came into existence?
>:D The devil is in the details.
One of those maps (the one that includes the red dots) shows Mount St. Helens in the upper right hand corner with a height of 9677 feet.
Present day Seattle aeronautical charts show Mount St. Helens with a height of 8365 feet.
And Mount St. Helens blew its stack a couple of months after the money was found at Tina Bar in February 1980.
Ergo, the map was prepared before Mount St. Helens erupted, assuming that the FBI didn't just use an out of date map to plot their flight paths.
good observation.
Here's another work graphic. This graphic was saved from a private work group a number of years ago. It purports to show the path the T33 took before a rendezvous with 305 near Lake Oswego, time uncertain. Note the time 7:50 assigned to the first red cross. This time was purported to be "an estimate" assigned to the red X by one of the Controllers.
Comments?
According to Himmelsbach's book, page 47, the T-33 took off to the west from the Portland Airport at 7:50 PM. At that time, the airliner was still way north of the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection. And the airliner didn't get to the "23 DME south of Portland" point until 8:18 PM, 28 minutes later. Further, the "23 DME" point is actually several nautical miles south of Lake Oswego.
That thin blue line that someone has added, running south from a couple of the X marks, doesn't make any sense. It does not point to a navigational aid as far as I can tell and does not cross V-23. Its purpose is unknown.
The only thing that I personally get from this chart is that someone agrees that the X marks represent the location of one or more aircraft at some time point.
Robert99,
Is there anything on this map that would lead you to conclude the flight path was west of V-23? We don't know what the X's mean, right?
-
Is it possible they simply made a mistake while plotting the course? they do line up with the path. it makes more sense that they would go around, or bypass Portland though...
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
Yes. They represent what R2 was doing when the airliner was in that area.
There are six red X's. The western three are on a direct line between the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection and the Canby Intersection. They would represent the location of the airliner at a given time as it bypassed Portland on the western side.
The other three red X's on the eastern side of that line represent the location of the aircraft that R2 was vectoring to join up with the airliner. Or to put it another way, those red X's represent the flight path of the airliner and the chase aircraft that was trying to join up with it.
You can ignore the other so-called flight paths since they are pure nonsense. 8)
It seems that way to me also. Those are the functions those X's appear to be serving. This map may never have been intended to be a final-accurate flight path map, but a provisional graphic attempting to depict 'multiple' events in the record of that night?
This map may have been an attempt to blend the NWA search map with other data, ie historical records. That could explain why Agent Carr and the FBI brought this map forward ... to be discussed and pulled apart. There could be another more accurate (actual) final flight path map we have never seen. Or, This map may be as far as the accuracy of their data allowed them to go and there never was a "final flight path map" ? Carr may have been looking for a 'final flight path map' as much as we are! :)
I have asked before: what is the date this map came into existence?
>:D The devil is in the details.
One of those maps (the one that includes the red dots) shows Mount St. Helens in the upper right hand corner with a height of 9677 feet.
Present day Seattle aeronautical charts show Mount St. Helens with a height of 8365 feet.
And Mount St. Helens blew its stack a couple of months after the money was found at Tina Bar in February 1980.
Ergo, the map was prepared before Mount St. Helens erupted, assuming that the FBI didn't just use an out of date map to plot their flight paths.
good observation.
Here's another work graphic. This graphic was saved from a private work group a number of years ago. It purports to show the path the T33 took before a rendezvous with 305 near Lake Oswego, time uncertain. Note the time 7:50 assigned to the first red cross. This time was purported to be "an estimate" assigned to the red X by one of the Controllers.
Comments?
According to Himmelsbach's book, page 47, the T-33 took off to the west from the Portland Airport at 7:50 PM. At that time, the airliner was still way north of the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection. And the airliner didn't get to the "23 DME south of Portland" point until 8:18 PM, 28 minutes later. Further, the "23 DME" point is actually several nautical miles south of Lake Oswego.
That thin blue line that someone has added, running south from a couple of the X marks, doesn't make any sense. It does not point to a navigational aid as far as I can tell and does not cross V-23. Its purpose is unknown.
The only thing that I personally get from this chart is that someone agrees that the X marks represent the location of one or more aircraft at some time point.
Robert99,
Is there anything on this map that would lead you to conclude the flight path was west of V-23? We don't know what the X's mean, right?
Mark,
Read the first part (above) of this very message. The meaning of the Xs has also been discussed at length previously on this thread and on DZ for a period of several years.
My suggestion is that you print out the map that has all six Xs on it, get yourself a long ruler, and check things out for yourself. In doing so, be sure to use the mileage scale that has been added to that map.
Also, check out Himmelsbach's book for which direction his helicopter headed after it took off as well as why all the chase aircraft were directed to the west side of Portland. You might also check with Georger for additional information he has that is related to the above.
-
Is it possible they simply made a mistake while plotting the course? they do line up with the path. it makes more sense that they would go around, or bypass Portland though...
All I can say is that no airliner, operating under the conditions that the NWA aircraft was operating that evening, is going to fly a segmented flight path around Portland as shown on that map.
-
Is it possible they simply made a mistake while plotting the course? they do line up with the path. it makes more sense that they would go around, or bypass Portland though...
All I can say is that no airliner, operating under the conditions that the NWA aircraft was operating that evening, is going to fly a segmented flight path around Portland as shown on that map.
Was there any rules/laws about flying over populated area's with a danger to the area below the plane?
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
Yes. They represent what R2 was doing when the airliner was in that area.
There are six red X's. The western three are on a direct line between the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection and the Canby Intersection. They would represent the location of the airliner at a given time as it bypassed Portland on the western side.
The other three red X's on the eastern side of that line represent the location of the aircraft that R2 was vectoring to join up with the airliner. Or to put it another way, those red X's represent the flight path of the airliner and the chase aircraft that was trying to join up with it.
You can ignore the other so-called flight paths since they are pure nonsense. 8)
It seems that way to me also. Those are the functions those X's appear to be serving. This map may never have been intended to be a final-accurate flight path map, but a provisional graphic attempting to depict 'multiple' events in the record of that night?
This map may have been an attempt to blend the NWA search map with other data, ie historical records. That could explain why Agent Carr and the FBI brought this map forward ... to be discussed and pulled apart. There could be another more accurate (actual) final flight path map we have never seen. Or, This map may be as far as the accuracy of their data allowed them to go and there never was a "final flight path map" ? Carr may have been looking for a 'final flight path map' as much as we are! :)
I have asked before: what is the date this map came into existence?
>:D The devil is in the details.
One of those maps (the one that includes the red dots) shows Mount St. Helens in the upper right hand corner with a height of 9677 feet.
Present day Seattle aeronautical charts show Mount St. Helens with a height of 8365 feet.
And Mount St. Helens blew its stack a couple of months after the money was found at Tina Bar in February 1980.
Ergo, the map was prepared before Mount St. Helens erupted, assuming that the FBI didn't just use an out of date map to plot their flight paths.
good observation.
Here's another work graphic. This graphic was saved from a private work group a number of years ago. It purports to show the path the T33 took before a rendezvous with 305 near Lake Oswego, time uncertain. Note the time 7:50 assigned to the first red cross. This time was purported to be "an estimate" assigned to the red X by one of the Controllers.
Comments?
According to Himmelsbach's book, page 47, the T-33 took off to the west from the Portland Airport at 7:50 PM. At that time, the airliner was still way north of the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection. And the airliner didn't get to the "23 DME south of Portland" point until 8:18 PM, 28 minutes later. Further, the "23 DME" point is actually several nautical miles south of Lake Oswego.
That thin blue line that someone has added, running south from a couple of the X marks, doesn't make any sense. It does not point to a navigational aid as far as I can tell and does not cross V-23. Its purpose is unknown.
The only thing that I personally get from this chart is that someone agrees that the X marks represent the location of one or more aircraft at some time point.
ok the 7:50 now makes sense... thanks R99.
-
any further thoughts on the red X's west of the flight path? :))
Yes. They represent what R2 was doing when the airliner was in that area.
There are six red X's. The western three are on a direct line between the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection and the Canby Intersection. They would represent the location of the airliner at a given time as it bypassed Portland on the western side.
The other three red X's on the eastern side of that line represent the location of the aircraft that R2 was vectoring to join up with the airliner. Or to put it another way, those red X's represent the flight path of the airliner and the chase aircraft that was trying to join up with it.
You can ignore the other so-called flight paths since they are pure nonsense. 8)
It seems that way to me also. Those are the functions those X's appear to be serving. This map may never have been intended to be a final-accurate flight path map, but a provisional graphic attempting to depict 'multiple' events in the record of that night?
This map may have been an attempt to blend the NWA search map with other data, ie historical records. That could explain why Agent Carr and the FBI brought this map forward ... to be discussed and pulled apart. There could be another more accurate (actual) final flight path map we have never seen. Or, This map may be as far as the accuracy of their data allowed them to go and there never was a "final flight path map" ? Carr may have been looking for a 'final flight path map' as much as we are! :)
I have asked before: what is the date this map came into existence?
>:D The devil is in the details.
One of those maps (the one that includes the red dots) shows Mount St. Helens in the upper right hand corner with a height of 9677 feet.
Present day Seattle aeronautical charts show Mount St. Helens with a height of 8365 feet.
And Mount St. Helens blew its stack a couple of months after the money was found at Tina Bar in February 1980.
Ergo, the map was prepared before Mount St. Helens erupted, assuming that the FBI didn't just use an out of date map to plot their flight paths.
good observation.
Here's another work graphic. This graphic was saved from a private work group a number of years ago. It purports to show the path the T33 took before a rendezvous with 305 near Lake Oswego, time uncertain. Note the time 7:50 assigned to the first red cross. This time was purported to be "an estimate" assigned to the red X by one of the Controllers.
Comments?
According to Himmelsbach's book, page 47, the T-33 took off to the west from the Portland Airport at 7:50 PM. At that time, the airliner was still way north of the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection. And the airliner didn't get to the "23 DME south of Portland" point until 8:18 PM, 28 minutes later. Further, the "23 DME" point is actually several nautical miles south of Lake Oswego.
That thin blue line that someone has added, running south from a couple of the X marks, doesn't make any sense. It does not point to a navigational aid as far as I can tell and does not cross V-23. Its purpose is unknown.
The only thing that I personally get from this chart is that someone agrees that the X marks represent the location of one or more aircraft at some time point.
Robert99,
Is there anything on this map that would lead you to conclude the flight path was west of V-23? We don't know what the X's mean, right?
Mark,
Read the first part (above) of this very message. The meaning of the Xs has also been discussed at length previously on this thread and on DZ for a period of several years.
My suggestion is that you print out the map that has all six Xs on it, get yourself a long ruler, and check things out for yourself. In doing so, be sure to use the mileage scale that has been added to that map.
Also, check out Himmelsbach's book for which direction his helicopter headed after it took off as well as why all the chase aircraft were directed to the west side of Portland. You might also check with Georger for additional information he has that is related to the above.
I agree with all of this +1 :)
-
Is it possible they simply made a mistake while plotting the course? they do line up with the path. it makes more sense that they would go around, or bypass Portland though...
All I can say is that no airliner, operating under the conditions that the NWA aircraft was operating that evening, is going to fly a segmented flight path around Portland as shown on that map.
Was there any rules/laws about flying over populated area's with a danger to the area below the plane?
Actually, there used to be rules about dropping things from aircraft that would endanger people or property on the ground. But even if there isn't a specific rule as you mentioned, there is probably going to be a "catch all" rule that would apply if the actions were serious enough.
Since Cooper wasn't in the cockpit and holding a gun to the heads of the flight crew, I would suppose that the flight crew would be legally responsible for the airliner's flight path. Even the FAA has a specific rule stating that the pilot(s) is the final authority as to the operation of his aircraft.
But if someone was holding a gun to the pilot(s) head, I think that would be an extenuating factor. And if the pilot(s) killed Cooper, it is unlikely that any charges would be made against them.
-
Is it possible they simply made a mistake while plotting the course? they do line up with the path. it makes more sense that they would go around, or bypass Portland though...
All I can say is that no airliner, operating under the conditions that the NWA aircraft was operating that evening, is going to fly a segmented flight path around Portland as shown on that map.
Was there any rules/laws about flying over populated area's with a danger to the area below the plane?
Actually, there used to be rules about dropping things from aircraft that would endanger people or property on the ground. But even if there isn't a specific rule as you mentioned, there is probably going to be a "catch all" rule that would apply if the actions were serious enough.
Since Cooper wasn't in the cockpit and holding a gun to the heads of the flight crew, I would suppose that the flight crew would be legally responsible for the airliner's flight path. Even the FAA has a specific rule stating that the pilot(s) is the final authority as to the operation of his aircraft.
But if someone was holding a gun to the pilot(s) head, I think that would be an extenuating factor. And if the pilot(s) killed Cooper, it is unlikely that any charges would be made against them.
Ive never read where Rataczak was asked if they were ordered to go around PDX ? Evidently people interviewing him never thought to ask. Of course the heart of the flight path is right in the middle of any question of that nature.
When I talked to the former manager of the Troutdale airport he was specific: "we were told they went around Portland on the west side, to avoid Portland". I asked who told him that. He replied: "officials". I was talking to him at all because of the Thomas report that the flight was over the Washougal and crossed the Columbia over the Troutdale airport. The manager's reply to that was: "4%#@ING BULLSHIT. Who says that!?".
-
Is it possible they simply made a mistake while plotting the course? they do line up with the path. it makes more sense that they would go around, or bypass Portland though...
All I can say is that no airliner, operating under the conditions that the NWA aircraft was operating that evening, is going to fly a segmented flight path around Portland as shown on that map.
Was there any rules/laws about flying over populated area's with a danger to the area below the plane?
Actually, there used to be rules about dropping things from aircraft that would endanger people or property on the ground. But even if there isn't a specific rule as you mentioned, there is probably going to be a "catch all" rule that would apply if the actions were serious enough.
Since Cooper wasn't in the cockpit and holding a gun to the heads of the flight crew, I would suppose that the flight crew would be legally responsible for the airliner's flight path. Even the FAA has a specific rule stating that the pilot(s) is the final authority as to the operation of his aircraft.
But if someone was holding a gun to the pilot(s) head, I think that would be an extenuating factor. And if the pilot(s) killed Cooper, it is unlikely that any charges would be made against them.
Ive never read where Rataczak was asked if they were ordered to go around PDX ? Evidently people interviewing him never thought to ask. Of course the heart of the flight path is right in the middle of any question of that nature.
When I talked to the former manager of the Troutdale airport he was specific: "we were told they went around Portland on the west side, to avoid Portland". I asked who told him that. He replied: "officials". I was talking to him at all because of the Thomas report that the flight was over the Washougal and crossed the Columbia over the Troutdale airport. The manager's reply to that was: "4%#@ING BULLSHIT. Who says that!?".
Assuming that the airliner was flying from the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection, northwest of Portland, direct to the Canby Intersection, south of Portland, its True Course (with respect to the grid lines) would be about 178 degrees or almost exactly straight south.
For most of the time between those two intersections, the aircraft would be off V-23 but still in controlled airspace. And between those two intersections it would be flying headings assigned to it by the Seattle ATC controllers (R2 in this case). Once back on V-23 near the Canby Intersection, the airliner would be told to resume normal navigation and would no longer receive headings to fly from the controllers.
-
Is it possible they simply made a mistake while plotting the course? they do line up with the path. it makes more sense that they would go around, or bypass Portland though...
All I can say is that no airliner, operating under the conditions that the NWA aircraft was operating that evening, is going to fly a segmented flight path around Portland as shown on that map.
Was there any rules/laws about flying over populated area's with a danger to the area below the plane?
Actually, there used to be rules about dropping things from aircraft that would endanger people or property on the ground. But even if there isn't a specific rule as you mentioned, there is probably going to be a "catch all" rule that would apply if the actions were serious enough.
Since Cooper wasn't in the cockpit and holding a gun to the heads of the flight crew, I would suppose that the flight crew would be legally responsible for the airliner's flight path. Even the FAA has a specific rule stating that the pilot(s) is the final authority as to the operation of his aircraft.
But if someone was holding a gun to the pilot(s) head, I think that would be an extenuating factor. And if the pilot(s) killed Cooper, it is unlikely that any charges would be made against them.
Ive never read where Rataczak was asked if they were ordered to go around PDX ? Evidently people interviewing him never thought to ask. Of course the heart of the flight path is right in the middle of any question of that nature.
When I talked to the former manager of the Troutdale airport he was specific: "we were told they went around Portland on the west side, to avoid Portland". I asked who told him that. He replied: "officials". I was talking to him at all because of the Thomas report that the flight was over the Washougal and crossed the Columbia over the Troutdale airport. The manager's reply to that was: "4%#@ING BULLSHIT. Who says that!?".
Assuming that the airliner was flying from the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection, northwest of Portland, direct to the Canby Intersection, south of Portland, its True Course (with respect to the grid lines) would be about 178 degrees or almost exactly straight south.
For most of the time between those two intersections, the aircraft would be off V-23 but still in controlled airspace. And between those two intersections it would be flying headings assigned to it by the Seattle ATC controllers (R2 in this case). Once back on V-23 near the Canby Intersection, the airliner would be told to resume normal navigation and would no longer receive headings to fly from the controllers.
Then the obvious question is: why would the 'smart guys' at NWA think otherwise, or think anything else? Did they have actual data that indicated another route, flight comms that indicate another route ... ? Their map shows something else happening according to their version of the flight path.
-
Is it possible they simply made a mistake while plotting the course? they do line up with the path. it makes more sense that they would go around, or bypass Portland though...
All I can say is that no airliner, operating under the conditions that the NWA aircraft was operating that evening, is going to fly a segmented flight path around Portland as shown on that map.
Was there any rules/laws about flying over populated area's with a danger to the area below the plane?
Actually, there used to be rules about dropping things from aircraft that would endanger people or property on the ground. But even if there isn't a specific rule as you mentioned, there is probably going to be a "catch all" rule that would apply if the actions were serious enough.
Since Cooper wasn't in the cockpit and holding a gun to the heads of the flight crew, I would suppose that the flight crew would be legally responsible for the airliner's flight path. Even the FAA has a specific rule stating that the pilot(s) is the final authority as to the operation of his aircraft.
But if someone was holding a gun to the pilot(s) head, I think that would be an extenuating factor. And if the pilot(s) killed Cooper, it is unlikely that any charges would be made against them.
Ive never read where Rataczak was asked if they were ordered to go around PDX ? Evidently people interviewing him never thought to ask. Of course the heart of the flight path is right in the middle of any question of that nature.
When I talked to the former manager of the Troutdale airport he was specific: "we were told they went around Portland on the west side, to avoid Portland". I asked who told him that. He replied: "officials". I was talking to him at all because of the Thomas report that the flight was over the Washougal and crossed the Columbia over the Troutdale airport. The manager's reply to that was: "4%#@ING BULLSHIT. Who says that!?".
Assuming that the airliner was flying from the Mayfield (Malay) Intersection, northwest of Portland, direct to the Canby Intersection, south of Portland, its True Course (with respect to the grid lines) would be about 178 degrees or almost exactly straight south.
For most of the time between those two intersections, the aircraft would be off V-23 but still in controlled airspace. And between those two intersections it would be flying headings assigned to it by the Seattle ATC controllers (R2 in this case). Once back on V-23 near the Canby Intersection, the airliner would be told to resume normal navigation and would no longer receive headings to fly from the controllers.
Then the obvious question is: why would the 'smart guys' at NWA think otherwise, or think anything else? Did they have actual data that indicated another route, flight comms that indicate another route ... ? Their map shows something else happening according to their version of the flight path.
There is definitely a cover-up as to what was in the original Seattle ATC voice communications recording during the flight south. And the FAA is not going to say why.
-
Is it possible they simply made a mistake while plotting the course? they do line up with the path. it makes more sense that they would go around, or bypass Portland though...
All I can say is that no airliner, operating under the conditions that the NWA aircraft was operating that evening, is going to fly a segmented flight path around Portland as shown on that map.
Was there any rules/laws about flying over populated area's with a danger to the area below the plane?
Actually, there used to be rules about dropping things from aircraft that would endanger people or property on the ground. But even if there isn't a specific rule as you mentioned, there is probably going to be a "catch all" rule that would apply if the actions were serious enough.
Normally pilot in command is responsible for anything dropped from their aircraft. This has been used to hold pilot liable for non FAA cleared pirate jumps into events where jumpers caused injury or damage. Makes pilots wary of dropping jumpers over anything but a chart marked DZ unless the jump has been cleared.
FAR Sec. 91.15 — Dropping objects.
No pilot in command of a civil aircraft may allow any object to be dropped from that aircraft in flight that creates a hazard to persons or property. However, this section does not prohibit the dropping of any object if reasonable precautions are taken to avoid injury or damage to persons or property.
Since Cooper wasn't in the cockpit and holding a gun to the heads of the flight crew, I would suppose that the flight crew would be legally responsible for the airliner's flight path. Even the FAA has a specific rule stating that the pilot(s) is the final authority as to the operation of his aircraft.
But if someone was holding a gun to the pilot(s) head, I think that would be an extenuating factor. And if the pilot(s) killed Cooper, it is unlikely that any charges would be made against them.
Definitely self defense if they shot Cooper. Charges highly unlikely. His bomb was an imminent threat to life. Deadly force justified.
377
-
For those who have been following the flight path discussions/arguments for the past several years, I think I can safely say that the problem is now resolved. No doubt the arguments won't be.
Nevertheless, after a long weekend of number crunching and quite a bit of luck in figuring out where some of the problems were, I hope to start posting later today on how everything fits together in the flight path, the jump, how the money got to Tina Bar, and why the Cooper hijacking was just a two-bit crime committed by an inept individual who got lucky for several hours one afternoon.
My wish is to put all of these posts online at the same time. And if I can figure out what Shutter was telling me a while back, they should be online in a day or two.
But to repeat, this has been a real good weekend.
Robert99
-
Bring it on, looking forward to reading the material C:-)
-
Robert99 wrote: "Nevertheless, after a long weekend of number crunching and quite a bit of luck in figuring out where some of the problems were, I hope to start posting later today on how everything fits together in the flight path, the jump, how the money got to Tina Bar, and why the Cooper hijacking was just a two-bit crime committed by an inept individual who got lucky for several hours one afternoon."
Really looking forward to seeing your flight path analysis.
But how do you conclude from flight path data that Cooper was inept?
If it was indeed a "two-bit crime committed by an inept individual" we might have to reconsider Duane Weber as a prime suspect. ;)
377
-
But how do you conclude from flight path data that Cooper was inept?
Not surviving might be a clue? O0
-
Robert99 wrote: "Nevertheless, after a long weekend of number crunching and quite a bit of luck in figuring out where some of the problems were, I hope to start posting later today on how everything fits together in the flight path, the jump, how the money got to Tina Bar, and why the Cooper hijacking was just a two-bit crime committed by an inept individual who got lucky for several hours one afternoon."
If it was indeed a "two-bit crime committed by an inept individual" we might have to reconsider Duane Weber as a prime suspect. ;)
377
Nah. I think you're still giving Duane too much credit. Inept individuals would be offended at your including Duane in their ranks. :D
-
I feel multiple emails coming from Jo this evening..... C:-)
-
Has anyone heard of the plane flying directly over La Center?
-
Has anyone heard of the plane flying directly over La Center?
I think the "In Search Of" episode mentions La Center. I'm not aware of any other sources...
-
Has anyone heard of the plane flying directly over La Center?
I think the "In Search Of" episode mentions La Center. I'm not aware of any other sources...
Something was sent to me by a good source, but I'm still working on what it is....I know where it came from, but trying to figure it out....
-
Has anyone heard of the plane flying directly over La Center?
No but the original FBI-NWA search map was printed on a La Center Quadrangle chart.
-
I don't know if this has been posted before, but here's an interesting article on SAGE:
http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/sage-the-secret-project-to-protect-the-u-s-with-the-biggest-computer-in-the-world
(hyperlink button aint working, for whatever reason...)
-
Rataczak Redux
Anybody upset that Bill Rataczak changed his story on the History Channel, again?
Big Time, this time, saying that they were flying over terrain that had 5,000-foot elevation. That can only mean he was far east of V-23 and zooming over the far slopes of Mt. St Helens and the other Cascadian peaks.
I can respect a man saying that he is tired and wants to put a 45-year old story to bed. But when he starts dropping big hints about the truth being different than what everyone had been believing, well, Billy, ya gotta take my phone call. To clam up again is just irresponsible.
Yes, I know that Bill and Tina are being nominated for sainthood after their heart-felt interview on the History Channel - I wept along with Bill - but his comments need investigation, and Tina owes me, well if not an apology, than an explanation. 11 slammed doors is not proper behavior for a saint. Or even a nun. Or even an ex-nun.
-
Rataczak Redux
Anybody upset that Bill Rataczak changed his story on the History Channel, again?
Big Time, this time, saying that they were flying over terrain that had 5,000-foot elevation. That can only mean he was far east of V-23 and zooming over the far slopes of Mt. St Helens and the other Cascadian peaks.
I can respect a man saying that he is tired and wants to put a 45-year old story to bed. But when he starts dropping big hints about the truth being different than what everyone had been believing, well, Billy, ya gotta take my phone call. To clam up again is just irresponsible.
Yes, I know that Bill and Tina are being nominated for sainthood after their heart-felt interview on the History Channel - I wept along with Bill - but his comments need investigation, and Tina owes me, well if not an apology, than an explanation. 11 slammed doors is not proper behavior for a saint. Or even a nun. Or even an ex-nun.
Eleven slammed doors? Bruce, do you know what a "hint" is? ::)
-
Rataczak Redux
Anybody upset that Bill Rataczak changed his story on the History Channel, again?
Big Time, this time, saying that they were flying over terrain that had 5,000-foot elevation. That can only mean he was far east of V-23 and zooming over the far slopes of Mt. St Helens and the other Cascadian peaks.
I can respect a man saying that he is tired and wants to put a 45-year old story to bed. But when he starts dropping big hints about the truth being different than what everyone had been believing, well, Billy, ya gotta take my phone call. To clam up again is just irresponsible.
Yes, I know that Bill and Tina are being nominated for sainthood after their heart-felt interview on the History Channel - I wept along with Bill - but his comments need investigation, and Tina owes me, well if not an apology, than an explanation. 11 slammed doors is not proper behavior for a saint. Or even a nun. Or even an ex-nun.
Maybe R99 can comment on Bill's (new?) account ?
Maybe it was a back-ass way of Bill trying to say: 'we were only at 5000 ft not 10, 000 ft ...'? That conflicts with the flight comms. Who knows why he said what he said! :)) It just adds more complexity to an already complex mystery.
-
Does anyone happen to know when the crew actually realized they had enough fuel to make it to Reno? Wouldn't this affect what path they took?
-
Does anyone happen to know when the crew actually realized they had enough fuel to make it to Reno? Wouldn't this affect what path they took?
According to the "FBI Notes", the airline crew was advised at 8:10 PM that the "range to Reno now looked good" and gives the same time as "May be the best estimate of when he [Cooper] exited airplane". And the same time would be almost directly overhead of Tina Bar, in my ever humble opinion.
The airliner was level at 10,000 feet MSL from just north of the Malay Intersection (northwest of Portland) to a point between the Fort Jones VORTAC and the Red Bluffs VORTAC in northern California, at which point it began a climb to 11,000 feet and stayed at that altitude until near Reno.
Between SEATAC and the Red Bluffs VORTAC, the MEA [Minimum Enroute Altitude] is also 10,000 feet MSL. MEA is the minimum altitude that is necessary to receive all navigational stations that determine the airway. To be more precise, the MEA is actually 10,000 feet MSL only between the Medford (now Rogue Valley) VORTAC and the Red Bluffs VORTAC. The MEA is less than that between Medford and Seattle.
While Cooper never mentioned any route south, he did specify that the airliner was not to go above 10,000 feet. And Cooper did not hang around for the airliner to get to Medford.
-
Rataczak Redux
Anybody upset that Bill Rataczak changed his story on the History Channel, again?
Big Time, this time, saying that they were flying over terrain that had 5,000-foot elevation. That can only mean he was far east of V-23 and zooming over the far slopes of Mt. St Helens and the other Cascadian peaks.
I can respect a man saying that he is tired and wants to put a 45-year old story to bed. But when he starts dropping big hints about the truth being different than what everyone had been believing, well, Billy, ya gotta take my phone call. To clam up again is just irresponsible.
Yes, I know that Bill and Tina are being nominated for sainthood after their heart-felt interview on the History Channel - I wept along with Bill - but his comments need investigation, and Tina owes me, well if not an apology, than an explanation. 11 slammed doors is not proper behavior for a saint. Or even a nun. Or even an ex-nun.
Maybe R99 can comment on Bill's (new?) account ?
Maybe it was a back-ass way of Bill trying to say: 'we were only at 5000 ft not 10, 000 ft ...'? That conflicts with the flight comms. Who knows why he said what he said! :)) It just adds more complexity to an already complex mystery.
The airliner crew reached 10,000 feet just north of the Malay Intersection. They then, without exception, always reported being level at 10,000 feet until they started a climb to 11,000 feet between the Fort Jones and Red Bluffs VORTACs in northern California. They needed the additional altitude to get over the mountains between Red Bluffs and Reno.
-
Thank you sir for your response(s). I am wondering what options they actually had when leaving Seattle? flaps at 15 degrees no higher than 10000 ft. altitude stairs down ordered to head south not knowing how this would affect their fuel consumption Seems like Reno was their only viable option . Does this make sense? Were they limited to where they could find airstrips capable of handling a 727's landing? And once they decided on Reno wouldn't they take the shortest possible route? Wouldn't this also put them closer to Tina bar?
-
Rataczak Redux
Anybody upset that Bill Rataczak changed his story on the History Channel, again?
Big Time, this time, saying that they were flying over terrain that had 5,000-foot elevation. That can only mean he was far east of V-23 and zooming over the far slopes of Mt. St Helens and the other Cascadian peaks.
I can respect a man saying that he is tired and wants to put a 45-year old story to bed. But when he starts dropping big hints about the truth being different than what everyone had been believing, well, Billy, ya gotta take my phone call. To clam up again is just irresponsible.
Yes, I know that Bill and Tina are being nominated for sainthood after their heart-felt interview on the History Channel - I wept along with Bill - but his comments need investigation, and Tina owes me, well if not an apology, than an explanation. 11 slammed doors is not proper behavior for a saint. Or even a nun. Or even an ex-nun.
Maybe R99 can comment on Bill's (new?) account ?
Maybe it was a back-ass way of Bill trying to say: 'we were only at 5000 ft not 10, 000 ft ...'? That conflicts with the flight comms. Who knows why he said what he said! :)) It just adds more complexity to an already complex mystery.
Bill was quite explicit about their elevation, and the fact that Cooper only had 5,000 feet of skydiving space before he hit Terra Firma.
Remember, the local search in Ariel was terminated on Monday, Nov 29, but was continued for another two weeks or so in the areas eastwards, over the snow fields of the Cascadian foothills and slopes, according to FBI agent Gary Tallis. Tallis is the guy who went for the helo ride with Fuentes in the HC docu.
I spoke with Tallis at the 2011 Symposium, and then again on several occasions during the writing of my book. I have never seen any other mention of him outside of my accounts until the HC docu. I have to assume that LMNO was able to contact him from the list of 20-30 Norjak principals that I gave them in the summer of 2015 that included Tallis' name.
So, maybe the feds knew very well that the LZ was east of Ariel.
-
Eleven slammed doors? Bruce, do you know what a "hint" is? ::)
Exactly what do you think Tina was hinting at? When I met her at her front door in Springfield in 2011, Tina slammed her front door three times in a period of 4-5 minutes. What got her so angry? Once is a hint. Two is disgust. What is #3?
Fear?
-
Tina's Front Door Etiquette
Upon closer examination, it's not 11 slammed doors. It's only three, plus a bunch of walk-aways, door closures, and phone hang-ups.
Here's the list:
The 11 Slammed Doors/ Phone Hang-ups:
1. Springfield, Oregon, August 2011, Tina, “You need to leave now.”
2. Springfield, Oregon, August 2011, Tina, three minutes later. BAM!
3. Springfield, Oregon, August 2011, Tina, one minute after #2. BAM and a Dead-Bolt.
4. Dr. ET, Dec. 2010, Philly Hospital Office, Can we talk? “No.”
5. Cousin Arlene, 2010, Christmas time, all the lights went out.
6. Shelton, WA, Lee Dormuth, Feb. 2011, “I want nothing to do with it.”
7. Shelton, WA, Lee Dormuth, April 2011, “I have nothing to do with it.”
8. Carmel of Maria Regina, Sister Teresa, Feb. 2011, “I am going back to my prayers.”
9. Phone invitation, 2015, Tina, “I'm not interested. Click.”
10. Phone query on “permanent trauma,” Dr. ET, 2009, “...we need to respect her privacy. Goodbye.”
11. Phone conversation with FA Leslie, 2012, “I knew Tina as a wonderful, sweet person. That's all I want to say. Click.”
-
Eleven slammed doors? Bruce, do you know what a "hint" is? ::)
Exactly what do you think Tina was hinting at? When I met her at her front door in Springfield in 2011, Tina slammed her front door three times in a period of 4-5 minutes. What got her so angry? Once is a hint. Two is disgust. What is #3?
Fear?
I think Tina has a very fine threshold. she didn't want to talk about the case. I don't think everyone has the same views about the hijacking. do you think Tina would help promote the Ariel Tavern, or show up? I don't think she would approve of them celebrating the event. I don't have a problem with it, but I wasn't a witness to the crime.
Tina could be similar to some celebrities. some of them who had sitcoms years ago don't like to talk about the show, or any involvement with the show. some get upset when the show is brought up. while we have fond memories of these shows, some of them look at it as just another job...
-
Thank you sir for your response(s). I am wondering what options they actually had when leaving Seattle? flaps at 15 degrees no higher than 10000 ft. altitude stairs down ordered to head south not knowing how this would affect their fuel consumption Seems like Reno was their only viable option . Does this make sense? Were they limited to where they could find airstrips capable of handling a 727's landing? And once they decided on Reno wouldn't they take the shortest possible route? Wouldn't this also put them closer to Tina bar?
All the calculations were done to insure they would make it to Reno, if you look in the transcripts they mention that the plane wouldn't make the trip if the continued with 30 degree flaps. the best clear route was V-23 with limited obstructions along the way. if fuel ever became an issue during the flight, they would of known in advance, and divert to the closest airport.
-
Thank you sir for your response(s). I am wondering what options they actually had when leaving Seattle? flaps at 15 degrees no higher than 10000 ft. altitude stairs down ordered to head south not knowing how this would affect their fuel consumption Seems like Reno was their only viable option . Does this make sense? Were they limited to where they could find airstrips capable of handling a 727's landing? And once they decided on Reno wouldn't they take the shortest possible route? Wouldn't this also put them closer to Tina bar?
All the calculations were done to insure they would make it to Reno, if you look in the transcripts they mention that the plane wouldn't make the trip if the continued with 30 degree flaps. the best clear route was V-23 with limited obstructions along the way. if fuel ever became an issue during the flight, they would of known in advance, and divert to the closest airport.
Exactly. And if they took the short cut and flew directly from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, they would pass almost directly overhead of Tina Bar. In fact, they would pass straight down the Columbia River at Tina Bar and approximately along the Oregon shore, or less than 1000 feet west of Tina Bar. Keep this in mind and I will get back to writing about the landing zone in a couple of days.
-
Tina's Front Door Etiquette
Upon closer examination, it's not 11 slammed doors. It's only three, plus a bunch of walk-aways, door closures, and phone hang-ups.
Here's the list:
The 11 Slammed Doors/ Phone Hang-ups:
1. Springfield, Oregon, August 2011, Tina, “You need to leave now.”
2. Springfield, Oregon, August 2011, Tina, three minutes later. BAM!
3. Springfield, Oregon, August 2011, Tina, one minute after #2. BAM and a Dead-Bolt.
4. Dr. ET, Dec. 2010, Philly Hospital Office, Can we talk? “No.”
5. Cousin Arlene, 2010, Christmas time, all the lights went out.
6. Shelton, WA, Lee Dormuth, Feb. 2011, “I want nothing to do with it.”
7. Shelton, WA, Lee Dormuth, April 2011, “I have nothing to do with it.”
8. Carmel of Maria Regina, Sister Teresa, Feb. 2011, “I am going back to my prayers.”
9. Phone invitation, 2015, Tina, “I'm not interested. Click.”
10. Phone query on “permanent trauma,” Dr. ET, 2009, “...we need to respect her privacy. Goodbye.”
11. Phone conversation with FA Leslie, 2012, “I knew Tina as a wonderful, sweet person. That's all I want to say. Click.”
Tina's Front Door Etiquette ?
You have lost all perspective on this! You're lucky you werent the recipient of a restraining order. I can see why people want you banned from Ariel .... in fact from the whole Cooper case.
And you question Tina's Front Door Etiquette? You're in the same category as Blevins and Jo Weber. You probably have done a lot of damage to others trying to do legitimate research into the DB Cooper case!
You spent years building a case for Tina being a basket case and incompetent (no memory left!) only to find out in front of millions of viewers, she isn't! All based on your personal problem with rejection by Tina. If that isn't a case for bias on your part I don't know what is! But now you don't even have the grace or integrity to back off!! Smith, you need a trip to the barn with Grandpa and a 2x4! >:D
You classify people who dont want to talk to you as being demented - when its you who are the problem. Moreover, Ive said before that all of your work reflects this 'uncertainty'. I guess its Bruce against the world.
O0
-
Tina's memory loss
I am not the one claiming that Tina suffered chronic memory impairment in the 1970s and 1980s. I am saying that other have said that, including Bill Rataczak and Russ Calame.
Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Remember, Calame wrote that Tina would never be called to be a witness in the event that DB Cooper was brought to trial due to her cognitive impairments. I'm just trying to understand how that circumstance came to be.
-
Bruce wrote: Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Taking Bruce literally ( ;))... maybe the FBI substituted a ringer for Tina on the History Channel production?
I'm still intrigued by Tina's use of psych tech terms, "psychotic ideation" etc. She basically said Cooper showed no obvious signs of mental illness.
Tina was so articulate and poised. So was Mary Jane. Not so for Marla.
And speaking of Marla, what was she talking about when she said something about a "computer somehow knew that the hijacker was an alcoholic? or something like that...
377
-
Bruce wrote: Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Taking Bruce literally ( ;))... maybe the FBI substituted a ringer for Tina on the History Channel production?
I'm still intrigued by Tina's use of psych tech terms, "psychotic ideation" etc. She basically said Cooper showed no obvious signs of mental illness.
Tina was so articulate and poised. So was Mary Jane. Not so for Marla.
And speaking of Marla, what was she talking about when she said something about a "computer somehow knew that the hijacker was an alcoholic? or something like that...
377
Fuentes talks about Marla's story that it starts with A-B-C-D, which make sense and eventually leads to W-X-Y-Z which are nutty. That particular part is a real reach and fits in the W-X-Y-Z category.
It's a reference to something in Himmelsbach's book. This is the relevant snippet from her book. Hope I'm within the copyright laws in posting it.
"Northwest’s Sea-Tac Operations Manager, Al Lee has been instructed to wear plain clothes, rather than his uniform, when he meets flight 305 with the ransom money and the parachutes. The airline does not want to take the risk that the hijacker might mistakenly think Al is a cop because of his uniform.
"At the time of this transmission, the passenger’s identity (or rather the false name he gave when he purchased his ticket) has not been determined. And yet, “a mysterious” communication comes from Northwest’s headquarters to the cockpit and SeaTac: “The passenger who boarded the plane in Portland had a previous arrest for drunkenness.” Himmelsbach weakly explains
this “mysterious communication” this way: “Law enforcement computers were working on the case!”
"Even after all I knew, I couldn’t believe my eyes. For one thing, what a silly ass explanation: “Law enforcement computers were working on the case!” Even if the false name of the hijacker was known, which it (supposedly) was NOT at the time of this transmission, how did this “law enforcement computer” determine that particular individual had been arrested for anything ever? All the hijacker gave to purchase his ticket was twenty bucks and a fictitious name: “Dan Cooper,” which the airline employee wrote on the ticket. Today there are twenty-nine white page listings for Dan Cooper in the state of Oregon alone. I wonder how many there were in 1971 who had been arrested for… wait for it… Drunkenness.
"Not DUI. Not drunk driving. Not public drunk. Drunkenness. The same term used to describe my Uncle’s arrest record. Northwest headquarters somehow had this information. Whoever sent that transmission must have known who was hijacking the plane before it left the ground."
-
Bruce wrote: Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Taking Bruce literally ( ;))... maybe the FBI substituted a ringer for Tina on the History Channel production?
I'm still intrigued by Tina's use of psych tech terms, "psychotic ideation" etc. She basically said Cooper showed no obvious signs of mental illness.
Tina was so articulate and poised. So was Mary Jane. Not so for Marla.
And speaking of Marla, what was she talking about when she said something about a "computer somehow knew that the hijacker was an alcoholic? or something like that...
377
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideation_(creative_process)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideation
...
-
Bruce wrote: Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Taking Bruce literally ( ;))... maybe the FBI substituted a ringer for Tina on the History Channel production?
I'm still intrigued by Tina's use of psych tech terms, "psychotic ideation" etc. She basically said Cooper showed no obvious signs of mental illness.
Tina was so articulate and poised. So was Mary Jane. Not so for Marla.
And speaking of Marla, what was she talking about when she said something about a "computer somehow knew that the hijacker was an alcoholic? or something like that...
377
Maral said:
"It was the FBI who sewed his parachutes (plural) shut, somehow, the computer knew the hijacker was arrested for drunkenness...it didn't make any sense to me, but it did make sense...it's just smoking mirrors"
I believe the other Cooper on board had a record for drunk driving, and I believe she has been reading the DZ, and some of Bob Knoss mixed into it. he claimed the chutes were sewn shut on purpose by the FBI, or Rataczak.....
-
Bruce wrote: Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Taking Bruce literally ( ;))... maybe the FBI substituted a ringer for Tina on the History Channel production?
I'm still intrigued by Tina's use of psych tech terms, "psychotic ideation" etc. She basically said Cooper showed no obvious signs of mental illness.
Tina was so articulate and poised. So was Mary Jane. Not so for Marla.
And speaking of Marla, what was she talking about when she said something about a "computer somehow knew that the hijacker was an alcoholic? or something like that...
377
Fuentes talks about Marla's story that it starts with A-B-C-D, which make sense and eventually leads to W-X-Y-Z which are nutty. That particular part is a real reach and fits in the W-X-Y-Z category.
It's a reference to something in Himmelsbach's book. This is the relevant snippet from her book. Hope I'm within the copyright laws in posting it.
"Northwest’s Sea-Tac Operations Manager, Al Lee has been instructed to wear plain clothes, rather than his uniform, when he meets flight 305 with the ransom money and the parachutes. The airline does not want to take the risk that the hijacker might mistakenly think Al is a cop because of his uniform.
"At the time of this transmission, the passenger’s identity (or rather the false name he gave when he purchased his ticket) has not been determined. And yet, “a mysterious” communication comes from Northwest’s headquarters to the cockpit and SeaTac: “The passenger who boarded the plane in Portland had a previous arrest for drunkenness.” Himmelsbach weakly explains
this “mysterious communication” this way: “Law enforcement computers were working on the case!”
"Even after all I knew, I couldn’t believe my eyes. For one thing, what a silly ass explanation: “Law enforcement computers were working on the case!” Even if the false name of the hijacker was known, which it (supposedly) was NOT at the time of this transmission, how did this “law enforcement computer” determine that particular individual had been arrested for anything ever? All the hijacker gave to purchase his ticket was twenty bucks and a fictitious name: “Dan Cooper,” which the airline employee wrote on the ticket. Today there are twenty-nine white page listings for Dan Cooper in the state of Oregon alone. I wonder how many there were in 1971 who had been arrested for… wait for it… Drunkenness.
"Not DUI. Not drunk driving. Not public drunk. Drunkenness. The same term used to describe my Uncle’s arrest record. Northwest headquarters somehow had this information. Whoever sent that transmission must have known who was hijacking the plane before it left the ground."
There is a lotta "ideation" going on in all of this! C:-)
-
Tina's memory loss
I am not the one claiming that Tina suffered chronic memory impairment in the 1970s and 1980s. I am saying that other have said that, including Bill Rataczak and Russ Calame.
Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Remember, Calame wrote that Tina would never be called to be a witness in the event that DB Cooper was brought to trial due to her cognitive impairments. I'm just trying to understand how that circumstance came to be.
There is a lotta "ideation" going on in all of this! C:-)
-
Bruce wrote: Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Taking Bruce literally ( ;))... maybe the FBI substituted a ringer for Tina on the History Channel production?
I'm still intrigued by Tina's use of psych tech terms, "psychotic ideation" etc. She basically said Cooper showed no obvious signs of mental illness.
Tina was so articulate and poised. So was Mary Jane. Not so for Marla.
And speaking of Marla, what was she talking about when she said something about a "computer somehow knew that the hijacker was an alcoholic? or something like that...
377
Maral said:
"It was the FBI who sewed his parachutes (plural) shut, somehow, the computer knew the hijacker was arrested for drunkenness...it didn't make any sense to me, but it did make sense...it's just smoking mirrors"
I believe the other Cooper on board had a record for drunk driving, and I believe she has been reading the DZ, and some of Bob Knoss mixed into it. he claimed the chutes were sewn shut on purpose by the FBI, or Rataczak.....
There is a lotta "ideation" going on in all of this! C:-) Mah'la gets things confused. >:D Woo-woo have the fairies arrived with nightglow yet?
"Ideation" is a technical term, used in professional diagnostic circles ... taught in medical schools, used by social workers and in psychiatric diagnostics. Marla is on the other side of the rainbow! :-*
-
She went on to explain that the reports of the jump had been misreported. The weather was bad on the night of November 24th but D.B. Cooper told the pilot at what speed, altitude and direction to fly. L.D. Cooper worked as a surveyor and knew this area very well. It has been reported that D.B. Cooper jumped over a very heavily wooded area when, in all actuality, he jumped over farmland and had planned his jump to put himself inside of a six mile area which was only seven miles from the home of L.D. Cooper. The parachute that was requested by D.B. Cooper was not steerable which would make his drop dependent solely on the wind to carry his direction.
Confused? yes, what skills would a surveyor have at 10,000 feet? if he jumped over "farmland" I'm guessing it was flat, and open, and yet he was all bloody from the jump? then they never went back for the money, and I assume the farmer kept the money O0
Then the farmer planted the money....all makes sense now...
-
Bruce wrote: Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Taking Bruce literally ( ;))... maybe the FBI substituted a ringer for Tina on the History Channel production?
I'm still intrigued by Tina's use of psych tech terms, "psychotic ideation" etc. She basically said Cooper showed no obvious signs of mental illness.
Tina was so articulate and poised. So was Mary Jane. Not so for Marla.
And speaking of Marla, what was she talking about when she said something about a "computer somehow knew that the hijacker was an alcoholic? or something like that...
377
Maral said:
"It was the FBI who sewed his parachutes (plural) shut, somehow, the computer knew the hijacker was arrested for drunkenness...it didn't make any sense to me, but it did make sense...it's just smoking mirrors"
I believe the other Cooper on board had a record for drunk driving, and I believe she has been reading the DZ, and some of Bob Knoss mixed into it. he claimed the chutes were sewn shut on purpose by the FBI, or Rataczak.....
There is a lotta "ideation" going on in all of this! C:-) Mah'la gets things confused. >:D Woo-woo have the fairies arrived with nightglow yet?
How many of those with favored Cooper suspects fit this category? They often have ONE piece of information, and that alone convinces him or her they've found Cooper. Then, they concoct a whole story with lots of details to fill in the rest. When it's all done, they have a complete story, but when you step back, they still really only have that one piece of information and the rest is just made up.
That definitely fits Marla, but Jo and Robert Blevins did exactly the same thing.
-
She went on to explain that the reports of the jump had been misreported. The weather was bad on the night of November 24th but D.B. Cooper told the pilot at what speed, altitude and direction to fly. L.D. Cooper worked as a surveyor and knew this area very well. It has been reported that D.B. Cooper jumped over a very heavily wooded area when, in all actuality, he jumped over farmland and had planned his jump to put himself inside of a six mile area which was only seven miles from the home of L.D. Cooper. The parachute that was requested by D.B. Cooper was not steerable which would make his drop dependent solely on the wind to carry his direction.
Confused? yes, what skills would a surveyor have at 10,000 feet? if he jumped over "farmland" I'm guessing it was flat, and open, and yet he was all bloody from the jump? then they never went back for the money, and I assume the farmer kept the money O0
That doesn't make sense either...Dewey was supposedly excited "We did it. We just have to go back for the money".
Who in their right mind would go back looking for the money when the FBI is out looking in the same place? And, if the money were easy to find, somebody would probably find first.
-
She went on to explain that the reports of the jump had been misreported. The weather was bad on the night of November 24th but D.B. Cooper told the pilot at what speed, altitude and direction to fly. L.D. Cooper worked as a surveyor and knew this area very well. It has been reported that D.B. Cooper jumped over a very heavily wooded area when, in all actuality, he jumped over farmland and had planned his jump to put himself inside of a six mile area which was only seven miles from the home of L.D. Cooper. The parachute that was requested by D.B. Cooper was not steerable which would make his drop dependent solely on the wind to carry his direction.
Confused? yes, what skills would a surveyor have at 10,000 feet? if he jumped over "farmland" I'm guessing it was flat, and open, and yet he was all bloody from the jump? then they never went back for the money, and I assume the farmer kept the money O0
Very likely Marla's story is an invention - based on a family rumor or rumors, and nothing more. She rushed her story to press trying to adjust to the changing Cooper $ market. Marla is a bird on a mission and nothing more. Period. What's all the controversy and analysis about? :))
-
She went on to explain that the reports of the jump had been misreported. The weather was bad on the night of November 24th but D.B. Cooper told the pilot at what speed, altitude and direction to fly. L.D. Cooper worked as a surveyor and knew this area very well. It has been reported that D.B. Cooper jumped over a very heavily wooded area when, in all actuality, he jumped over farmland and had planned his jump to put himself inside of a six mile area which was only seven miles from the home of L.D. Cooper. The parachute that was requested by D.B. Cooper was not steerable which would make his drop dependent solely on the wind to carry his direction.
Confused? yes, what skills would a surveyor have at 10,000 feet? if he jumped over "farmland" I'm guessing it was flat, and open, and yet he was all bloody from the jump? then they never went back for the money, and I assume the farmer kept the money O0
That doesn't make sense either...Dewey was supposedly excited "We did it. We just have to go back for the money".
Who in their right mind would go back looking for the money when the FBI is out looking in the same place? And, if the money were easy to find, somebody would probably find first.
Yes, so how did the money get to Tena Bar? they never went back? where exactly is she stating LD lived in 1971? supposedly 6 miles from the LZ...did she really think that it was her uncle who they showed living in Vancouver at the time. that turned out to be another LD....
-
The perils of sewing packed parachutes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_de_Gayardon
He was at the time of his death arguably the worlds most famous skydiver. He did some sewing on his rig after it was packed and accidentally sewed it shut. He fell to his death unable to deploy either chute.
Dummy training rigs at DZs are dangerous unless SUPER clearly marked. Too easy for someone in a hurry to put one on and board the plane.
377
-
She went on to explain that the reports of the jump had been misreported. The weather was bad on the night of November 24th but D.B. Cooper told the pilot at what speed, altitude and direction to fly. L.D. Cooper worked as a surveyor and knew this area very well. It has been reported that D.B. Cooper jumped over a very heavily wooded area when, in all actuality, he jumped over farmland and had planned his jump to put himself inside of a six mile area which was only seven miles from the home of L.D. Cooper. The parachute that was requested by D.B. Cooper was not steerable which would make his drop dependent solely on the wind to carry his direction.
Confused? yes, what skills would a surveyor have at 10,000 feet? if he jumped over "farmland" I'm guessing it was flat, and open, and yet he was all bloody from the jump? then they never went back for the money, and I assume the farmer kept the money O0
That doesn't make sense either...Dewey was supposedly excited "We did it. We just have to go back for the money".
Who in their right mind would go back looking for the money when the FBI is out looking in the same place? And, if the money were easy to find, somebody would probably find first.
Yes, so how did the money get to Tena Bar? they never went back? where exactly is she stating LD lived in 1971? supposedly 6 miles from the LZ...did she really think that it was her uncle who they showed living in Vancouver at the time. that turned out to be another LD....
That's exactly what I was trying to say before. Marla only knows a couple of things for sure -- she saw her uncle bloody and her father telling her that her uncles were skyjackers and some other details related to those things. Everything else -- the landing spot, the location of the money, the government involvement -- it was all made up.
-
That's exactly what I was trying to say before. Marla only knows a couple of things for sure -- she saw her uncle bloody and her father telling her that her uncles were skyjackers and some other details related to those things. Everything else -- the landing spot, the location of the money, the government involvement -- it was all made up.
I just don't believe she is being honest about anything. I will give Blevins credit for a few things here. he found the Facebook quote from her brother not wanting anything to do with her story, and I believe she changed her name back to Cooper just prior to going public. her brother seems to know exactly whats going on...
LD was not hiding as she claimed. I wouldn't be surprised if she has dozens of photo's of him. keep in mind that it's well known that it's been stated that Cooper would probably be injured in the jump. that doesn't mean he has to be for a fact.
it's all smoke and mirrors, just as she put it herself. Cooper using his last name is about as bad as working for Northwest airlines 20 years after the crime. it's all for sale, but I'm not buying it... C:-)
-
Bruce wrote: Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Taking Bruce literally ( ;))... maybe the FBI substituted a ringer for Tina on the History Channel production?
I'm still intrigued by Tina's use of psych tech terms, "psychotic ideation" etc. She basically said Cooper showed no obvious signs of mental illness.
Tina was so articulate and poised. So was Mary Jane. Not so for Marla.
And speaking of Marla, what was she talking about when she said something about a "computer somehow knew that the hijacker was an alcoholic? or something like that...
377
Was the Tina we saw on the HC an imposter? I don't know, but frankly, sometimes I wonder if she was. I know that I often wondered if the Tina pictured in the 2012 Eugene Weekly news article was an imposter because she looked 30 pounds heavier in her pix than I remember her at her front door in 2011. But I only saw her for a few seconds before she closed the door the first time.
Galen has spent a lot more time with Tina over the years, directly or indirectly, and he told me that the Tina in the EW pix is the Tina he has seen. I haven't talked with him since the broadcast of the HC docu, so I don't know what his view is of that situation.
But, at this point I generally feel that the Tina we saw in the HC docu is the Tina Mucklow I met. What is different is the Tina from the docu - calm, warm, thoughtful - versus the Tina whom I experienced slamming doors and hanging up the phone. I don't have a satisfactory answer when I try to reconcile those extremes in behavior.
Currently, I wonder is she was coached, or prepped in some manner for the interview.
Another sticking point for me is the unresolved issue of her memory impairment that hangs in the air. Bill Rataczak told me that Richard Tosaw told him back in the 1980s that Tina's memory was wiped clean, like from a "white board."
Okay. Is anyone going to explain that? Tina? Bill? HC? LMNO?
If it's PTSD, then why isn't anyone talking about that as a criminal impact from the skyjacking?
-
Rataczak and his 5,000 above terrain:
If Rataczak is correct and he was flying only 5,000 above the terrain but was at 10,000 elevation, he was flying about five-six miles west of the Mt. St Helens summit, which in 1971 was 9,600 feet. That puts him at least 20-24 miles east of Amboy, so he was far afield from V-23. He would have been even east of the Washougal!
Goat Mountain is 4,965 feet and is about five miles sw of the summit. Little Huckleberry Mountain, 4,781, is due west of MSH and about 24 miles east of Amboy.
-
Rataczak and his 5,000 above terrain:
If Rataczak is correct and he was flying only 5,000 above the terrain but was at 10,000 elevation, he was flying about five-six miles west of the Mt. St Helens summit, which in 1971 was 9,600 feet. That puts him at least 20-24 miles east of Amboy, so he was far afield from V-23. He would have been even east of the Washougal!
Goat Mountain is 4,965 feet and is about five miles sw of the summit. Little Huckleberry Mountain, 4,781, is due west of MSH and about 24 miles east of Amboy.
he doesn't mention where this occurred. the real question is, why is he stating Cooper couldn't get the stairs down, and worried about ice on the wings. according to the transcripts this all occurred very early into the flight, so why is he stating ice on the wings when Cooper had problems with the stairs?
As the plane heads south the mountain range rises.
-
Ice on the wings...
Low, slow, dirty (flaps, gear, stairs)... if you started picking up ice you had better add some speed pronto. Ice accumulation would almost certainly increase your stall speed due to reducing wing lift.
Agree Capt. Shutter?
When I jumped from the DC-9-21 in 2006, the captain wouldn't give us the very slow (but above stall) exit speed we requested. He didn't want to be anywhere close to stall speed with exiting jumpers shifting his CG aft. Due to the high exit speed we had 85 serially departing jumpers spread over quite a distance. I BARELY made it back to the DZ.
Damn that was a fun time. I miss the World Free Fall Convention terribly. It was like Burning Man but skydiver themed. All night insanity and all day jumping for 10 days in August. Unlimited free beer after the last lift landed. Jello shots. Mind altering substances. Live bands. Eye candy galore. You could get a tattoo at 2 AM. Bartering of goods and services.
Jet, WW 2 bombers, balloons, glider, helos, biplanes and all kinds of aircraft to jump from. The jets were a 727 and DC 9 but they never appeared together in the same year.
The organizer, Don Kirlin, flew his Czech L 39 jet fighter trainer around (safely) buzzing the DZ and making noise. He unfortunately never flew his Mig 29 at the event.
Don knows more about Boeing's 727 airdrop program than anyone outside of the company.
I reminisce...
377
-
Ice on the wings...
Low, slow, dirty (flaps, gear, stairs)... if you started picking up ice you had better add some speed pronto. Ice accumulation would almost certainly increase your stall speed due to reducing wing lift.
I don't think the stairs had any issues with the aerodynamics what so ever. when the stairs were hanging by gravity, they were barely open, and the outer frame was rounded to reflect wind shear.
Ice wasn't mentioned until 9:28 "airframe icing"...the crew was "slightly concerned" and activated the anti-icing.
I believe Bill has the times confused. 6 minutes into the flight Cooper was having trouble getting the stairs down. they slowed the plane down to just above the bug. this was also at 7,000 feet, and extremely doubtful any icing had started yet...
-
Bill is not specific in what type of airframe build up is occurring?
To start the lesson, I will describe what airframe icing is. Airframe icing is the build up of ice on the airframe surface. A common mistaken belief is that airframe icing only accumulates on the leading edges of the wing and tailplane. This is grossly inaccurate. Airframe icing can also build up on the propeller, windscreen, aerials and air intakes. However it can be especially dangerous when formed on the leading edges of the wing, tail-planes or over the air intakes.
-
Ice on the wings...
Low, slow, dirty (flaps, gear, stairs)... if you started picking up ice you had better add some speed pronto. Ice accumulation would almost certainly increase your stall speed due to reducing wing lift.
I don't think the stairs had any issues with the aerodynamics what so ever. when the stairs were hanging by gravity, they were barely open, and the outer frame was rounded to reflect wind shear.
Ice wasn't mentioned until 9:28 "airframe icing"...the crew was "slightly concerned" and activated the anti-icing.
I believe Bill has the times confused. 6 minutes into the flight Cooper was having trouble getting the stairs down. they slowed the plane down to just above the bug. this was also at 7,000 feet, and extremely doubtful any icing had started yet...
The slightly deployed stairs would cause only minor aerodynamic changes as Shutter points out. The flaps wouldn't be a major problem either but the deployed landing gear would require considerable additional thrust to compensate for its drag.
Airliners such as the 727 would have had electrical de-icing on the wing leading edges, the empennage leading edges, and the engine nacelles leading edges. The Kruger flaps on the leading edge of the main wings may have complicated the de-icing to some extent. But de-icing the leading edges may mean simply that the resulting water flows further back on the wing and freezes again at a location where there are no de-icers. The one thing that needs a lot of attention is the leading edges of the engine nacelles since if ice forms there and chunks break off and go through the turbine engines, the engine can be heavily damaged.
The main icing problem that I have heard about in recent decades involves executive type T-tail aircraft. If the aircraft is parked in light freezing rain or such for even a relatively brief period of time, ice may form on the top of the horizontal stabilizer. This would not necessarily be observable from ground level. But if ice does form there and is not removed, the aircraft may not have sufficient longitudinal control power to get the nose wheel off the runway and rotate to a take-off attitude. The end result is that the aircraft stays on the runway until it goes off the end and then hits something. I am aware of several fatal accidents that happened under such conditions.
-
Airliners such as the 727 would have had electrical de-icing on the wing leading edges,
Located on the overhead controls...
-
Bruce wrote: Also, I am saying that the Tina that we all saw and loved on TV is not the same person I met in 2011.
Taking Bruce literally ( ;))... maybe the FBI substituted a ringer for Tina on the History Channel production?
I'm still intrigued by Tina's use of psych tech terms, "psychotic ideation" etc. She basically said Cooper showed no obvious signs of mental illness.
Tina was so articulate and poised. So was Mary Jane. Not so for Marla.
And speaking of Marla, what was she talking about when she said something about a "computer somehow knew that the hijacker was an alcoholic? or something like that...
377
Was the Tina we saw on the HC an imposter? I don't know, but frankly, sometimes I wonder if she was. I know that I often wondered if the Tina pictured in the 2012 Eugene Weekly news article was an imposter because she looked 30 pounds heavier in her pix than I remember her at her front door in 2011. But I only saw her for a few seconds before she closed the door the first time.
Galen has spent a lot more time with Tina over the years, directly or indirectly, and he told me that the Tina in the EW pix is the Tina he has seen. I haven't talked with him since the broadcast of the HC docu, so I don't know what his view is of that situation.
But, at this point I generally feel that the Tina we saw in the HC docu is the Tina Mucklow I met. What is different is the Tina from the docu - calm, warm, thoughtful - versus the Tina whom I experienced slamming doors and hanging up the phone. I don't have a satisfactory answer when I try to reconcile those extremes in behavior.
Currently, I wonder is she was coached, or prepped in some manner for the interview.
Another sticking point for me is the unresolved issue of her memory impairment that hangs in the air. Bill Rataczak told me that Richard Tosaw told him back in the 1980s that Tina's memory was wiped clean, like from a "white board."
Okay. Is anyone going to explain that? Tina? Bill? HC? LMNO?
If it's PTSD, then why isn't anyone talking about that as a criminal impact from the skyjacking?
There are four Tina's on standby that get recycled through various filmings. One has a mole. One has a tattoo. One is on crutches. The fourth cant speak and only nods. They are hard to tell apart. One doubles as Princess Di when needed. . . .
-
Airliners such as the 727 would have had electrical de-icing on the wing leading edges,
Located on the overhead controls...
Shutter, are you sure those are the de-icing controls?
-
I have never used them, but here is what it says...
This panel controls the routing of pneumatic air to the engine cowlings and wings for anti-ice. There were several variations of this panel
-
see photo
This function didn't work in the first version I have...the photo shows the toggle switches missing...version two is functional.
here is the entire control...
-
Rataczak and his 5,000 above terrain:
He is correct with this response. the further south you go on V23, the higher the mountains get. In the Red Bluff area (Fort Jones) the elevation is around 4900 - 5000 feet. the closer you get to Reno the higher the mountains go again. they are up and above 9,000...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSH2qOo_Yf0
-
I suppose the only way to find out what Rataczak meant with his commentary on Cooper only having 5,000 foot worth of air space is to ask the fellow himself. I doubt that will happen, though, now that he has put everything to rest.
-
another interesting comment was the "flying through the overcast" that's where you will get icing...what were they doing in the clouds?
-
I was thinking about what you've posted above, Shut, with 305 flying over elevated terrain, up to 9,000 feet near Reno. Deciphering what Rataczak meant when he said what he said about 10,000 feet, Cooper having only 5,000 feet of airspace, etc., we have to remember what else he said: Rataczak was convinced that Cooper jumped at 8:13 pm. That puts Coop over Washington, not Nevada.
So, did Rataczak get confused during the HC docu? Did he mix up his concerns of flying over 9,000 foot terrain coming into Reno with his other speculation of Cooper jumping earlier in the flight?
It also begs the question of whether any pertinent information was edited out of the broadcast. Also, it shows the limitations of having rookie Cooper investigators, like Jensen and Fuentes, unable to really tease out the finer details from interviewees who may have memory issues or hidden agendas playing out.
To wit: does Bill Rataczak really want to put Norjak to rest, or he just saying that to get guys like me off his back? When I spoke with Bill in 2009 he was very eager to talk. We spoke for 70 minutes over the phone. But when he read the kinds of stuff I was writing on Norjak, he cut off all correspondence with me - no emails, phone or snail mail. Plus, he maintains his friendship with Himmelsbach, and even called him when I was sitting in Ralph's living room, back in 2011. What do they talk about? Hmmmmmm. I doubt those two guys let anything Norjak stay at rest for too long. And clearly, Bill's emotions about that night still reside close to the surface, especially when it comes to Tina.
So, this mantra that everyone recites: Norjak needs to go to bed, may be simply an attempt to wrap their actions of 11. 24. 71 in a cocoon that is sanctioned by the general public, and lets the principals off the hook of talking about it.
What could Rataczak be hiding? I'm not sure, but maybe he's been shaving the edges off the truth over the years to protect himself, NWO, the FBI and their secrets, or others in the crew. Maybe Bill was flying outside of V-23, high up on the slopes of the Cascades, and he - and others - don't want that information to be made public.
-
But, at this point I generally feel that the Tina we saw in the HC docu is the Tina Mucklow I met. What is different is the Tina from the docu - calm, warm, thoughtful - versus the Tina whom I experienced slamming doors and hanging up the phone. I don't have a satisfactory answer when I try to reconcile those extremes in behavior.
1) She obviously felt like you weren't respecting her space or her decision to not speak to you, thus the slams and hang ups. 2) The HC obviously paid her and Bill and they also had a former bigwig in the FBI who is highly respected, thus why she did the show.
It's not that complex.
Seriously Bruce, you're kinda lucky because this is more than enough to have had a restraining order or another criminal charge filed against you:
The 11 Slammed Doors/ Phone Hang-ups:
1. Springfield, Oregon, August 2011, Tina, “You need to leave now.”
2. Springfield, Oregon, August 2011, Tina, three minutes later. BAM!
3. Springfield, Oregon, August 2011, Tina, one minute after #2. BAM and a Dead-Bolt.
4. Dr. ET, Dec. 2010, Philly Hospital Office, Can we talk? “No.”
5. Cousin Arlene, 2010, Christmas time, all the lights went out.
6. Shelton, WA, Lee Dormuth, Feb. 2011, “I want nothing to do with it.”
7. Shelton, WA, Lee Dormuth, April 2011, “I have nothing to do with it.”
8. Carmel of Maria Regina, Sister Teresa, Feb. 2011, “I am going back to my prayers.”
9. Phone invitation, 2015, Tina, “I'm not interested. Click.”
10. Phone query on “permanent trauma,” Dr. ET, 2009, “...we need to respect her privacy. Goodbye.”
11. Phone conversation with FA Leslie, 2012, “I knew Tina as a wonderful, sweet person. That's all I want to say. Click.”
-
Maybe Bill was flying outside of V-23, high up on the slopes of the Cascades, and he - and others - don't want that information to be made public.
I'm positive he got things mixed up, but still wonder about his comment of being in the overcast...
We have to remember that Bill might not be as interested as we are, or he would be involved in the mix. they seem to be ready to move on, and forget the whole thing.
Keep in mind that they were dealing with a criminal. I don't think they would have to hide any attempts to get rid of him...Cooper made threats to kill everyone on board, so the crew could of dumped his ass in the ocean as Bill has said in the past.
-
1) She obviously felt like you weren't respecting her space or her decision to not speak to you, thus the slams and hang ups.
It's not obvious to me. Why is it obvious to you? Basically, I'm asking: Do reasonable people act like Tina?
If you say "Yes," to that question, then you have to explain the other whys of her life: why did she go into a cloistered convent for 12 years; why was she in a long-term residential treatment facility; why does she chose not to speak to anyone - not just me - about Norjak for 30 years; why have multiple witnesses describe her as being cognitively impaired, to such a degree that she wouldn't be called to testify in a trial if DB Cooper was brought to trial?
Maybe this is all just a very personal journey in a very strange life. But maybe it is something else? Could it be MKULTRA? Can you rule that out? If so, how?
Bottom Line: How has Tina's silence until the HC docu served other agendas? Did Tina's reticence serve NWO's marketing strategy of keeping the DB Cooper story as quiet as possible? Did NWO have any legal liability for a lack security system that allowed a skyjacker to threaten 36 passengers? Was CEO Nyrop scared of a law suit? Was Tina induced into silence to keep other secrets under wraps? SOG? Laos? Transferring 5th SF troopers out of the US Army and onto the CIA's payroll?
All of the above?
None of the above?
Some of the above?
Something else?
Bottom Line II: How messy a mess can you accept?
Or is it just easier to accuse the guy who asks the questions of being a stalker, a criminal, or a nut job?
-
Seriously Bruce, you're kinda lucky because this is more than enough to have had a restraining order or another criminal charge filed against you:
Bring it on, OleMiss.
Shall I send you Tina's address so that you can advise her of her legal powers to bring a possible end to pesky questions from someone who "needs to get a life," as she referred to me in the docu. Veiled of course. I wonder why Tina didn't name names. Maybe it's her good manners on display.
-
A Tina Mucklow Lawsuit
OleMiss, just imagine - if you are correct, I might be the first person successfully arrested and convicted in conjunction with the Norjak case.
I wonder what that might do to book sales. Could I still collect my royalties in prison from a book deal I made before incarceration? Is the Son of Sam ruling retroactive?
-
"bring it on?"
I'm not threatening you dude. Calm down.
Bruce, I think you are mistaking the tone of my post, which is a major problem when you have to solely rely on the written word. I like you and I think you are a relentless investigator and so I generally appreciate your efforts with NORJAK and I enjoyed your book. My tone wasn't hostile at all in that post. I'm just saying that your tactics regarding Tina are disagreeable to me and they obviously were to her as well and that your aggressiveness could have gotten you in trouble if someone really had it out for you. Having worked as a criminal lawyer doing both prosecution and defense at various times, I've had to track down and deal with countless witnesses. Generally people only need to tell me "no" twice and I'll respect their wishes.
I realize that Tina's lack of communication about the case over the years is frustrating. It's probably the most frustrating aspect of this whole NORJAK case. How great would it be if she spoke regularly about it and was very easy to get in touch with? How could would it be if she was active on internet forums? It'd be pretty sweet. Unfortunately, that's not who she is.
Tina's idiosyncrasies throughout her life are likely more to do with her childhood or some other aspect of her life as opposed to a few hours that she spent with a hijacker. It's unfortunate that the star witness in the whole thing happens to be someone whose personality is a bit odd and very guarded, but it is what it is.
You lose me when you start to bring up MKULTRA and that type of stuff. It's so much more likely that Cooper was just a clever criminal who was influenced by the skyjacking attempt that occurred a few weeks earlier in Canada as opposed to him being some mind controlled Manchurian Candidate.
-
A Tina Mucklow Lawsuit
OleMiss, just imagine - if you are correct, I might be the first person successfully arrested and convicted in conjunction with the Norjak case.
I wonder what that might do to book sales. Could I still collect my royalties in prison from a book deal I made before incarceration? Is the Son of Sam ruling retroactive?
Bruce, if my memory is correct, you would be the second person arrested and convicted in conjunction with the Cooper hijacking. I believe the first person tried to defraud some people in the Cooper matter, or something like that, and had some serious legal problems as a result.
Why do you continue to claim that the airliner was far to the east of Portland and flying over the Cascade Mountains when all the aircraft that were trying to intercept it were vectored to the west and southwest of Portland?
And why do you continue to try to make something out of the way tickets were issued by the airlines in the early 1970s when everyone who has actual knowledge of how that was done has told you that the ticket is a non-issue?
-
A Tina Mucklow Lawsuit
OleMiss, just imagine - if you are correct, I might be the first person successfully arrested and convicted in conjunction with the Norjak case.
I wonder what that might do to book sales. Could I still collect my royalties in prison from a book deal I made before incarceration? Is the Son of Sam ruling retroactive?
Bruce, if my memory is correct, you would be the second person arrested and convicted in conjunction with the Cooper hijacking. I believe the first person tried to defraud some people in the Cooper matter, or something like that, and had some serious legal problems as a result.
Why do you continue to claim that the airliner was far to the east of Portland and flying over the Cascade Mountains when all the aircraft that were trying to intercept it were vectored to the west and southwest of Portland?
And why do you continue to try to make something out of the way tickets were issued by the airlines in the early 1970s when everyone who has actual knowledge of how that was done has told you that the ticket is a non-issue?
It's called "ideation"! Tina brought it up because she's tired and a little afraid of dealing with possessed wackos! :)) :)) :))
-
A Tina Mucklow Lawsuit
OleMiss, just imagine - if you are correct, I might be the first person successfully arrested and convicted in conjunction with the Norjak case.
I wonder what that might do to book sales. Could I still collect my royalties in prison from a book deal I made before incarceration? Is the Son of Sam ruling retroactive?
Bruce, if my memory is correct, you would be the second person arrested and convicted in conjunction with the Cooper hijacking. I believe the first person tried to defraud some people in the Cooper matter, or something like that, and had some serious legal problems as a result.
Why do you continue to claim that the airliner was far to the east of Portland and flying over the Cascade Mountains when all the aircraft that were trying to intercept it were vectored to the west and southwest of Portland?
And why do you continue to try to make something out of the way tickets were issued by the airlines in the early 1970s when everyone who has actual knowledge of how that was done has told you that the ticket is a non-issue?
1. You are correct, R99, the fellows who defrauded What'shisname from Newsweek with bogus 20s in the early 1970s were first to the hoosegow.
2. I'm not claiming that 305 was east of V-23. I'm saying that Rataczak may be saying that. As for the location of the trailing aircraft, corroboration of their flight paths would be most welcome in my view.
3. I'm not "making anything" of the tickets. I'm trying to find out what happened during the ticket purchase. Did Cooper sign or not? I want to know, especially since Colbert and Company is making a major push to prove Rackstraw is DB Cooper via hand-writing analysis; namely, Rackstraw's signature is similar to the "Dan Cooper" written on the ticket.
-
What more proof do you need about the ticket? the FBI stated the ticket was not written by Cooper, NWO has claimed they don't allow the passengers to write on the ticket.John Maximuk wrote a letter to WSHS stating the same?
Cooper was very careful in retrieving all his notes, so why would he write on a ticket with multiple copies?
I believe this myth started with Grey Cop. he was one of the first to bring the myth up in the first place.
Unsolved Crimes website is starting to look good for you?
-
"bring it on?"
I'm not threatening you dude. Calm down.
Bruce, I think you are mistaking the tone of my post, which is a major problem when you have to solely rely on the written word. I like you and I think you are a relentless investigator and so I generally appreciate your efforts with NORJAK and I enjoyed your book. My tone wasn't hostile at all in that post. I'm just saying that your tactics regarding Tina are disagreeable to me and they obviously were to her as well and that your aggressiveness could have gotten you in trouble if someone really had it out for you. Having worked as a criminal lawyer doing both prosecution and defense at various times, I've had to track down and deal with countless witnesses. Generally people only need to tell me "no" twice and I'll respect their wishes.
I realize that Tina's lack of communication about the case over the years is frustrating. It's probably the most frustrating aspect of this whole NORJAK case. How great would it be if she spoke regularly about it and was very easy to get in touch with? How could would it be if she was active on internet forums? It'd be pretty sweet. Unfortunately, that's not who she is.
Tina's idiosyncrasies throughout her life are likely more to do with her childhood or some other aspect of her life as opposed to a few hours that she spent with a hijacker. It's unfortunate that the star witness in the whole thing happens to be someone whose personality is a bit odd and very guarded, but it is what it is.
You lose me when you start to bring up MKULTRA and that type of stuff. It's so much more likely that Cooper was just a clever criminal who was influenced by the skyjacking attempt that occurred a few weeks earlier in Canada as opposed to him being some mind controlled Manchurian Candidate.
I'm calming down OMC. Thank you for your reassurance.
As for MKULTRA, my primary concern is not that DB Cooper was a Manchurian Candidate kind of guy, but that Tina may have been silenced via MKULTRA-like processes. Remember, MKULTRA had a varied arsenal of tools to control mind, mood, memory, and emotions: surgery, pharmaceuticals, behavioral conditioning, and other intrusive psychodynamics such electro-convulsive shock therapy, (ECT).
One of the ancillary topics of Norjak is MKULTRA; more specifically, what is the role of cloistered convents in our country these days? Are they just a place for ladies to pray? Or are they something else, such as a place to convalesce? I've thought about digging a little deeper into this area, but I simply gave up after a while because I needed to focus more on Cooper and publishing my book.
But I did talk with one nun who encouraged me to continue, saying that she knew of a convent in the Tacoma area that she thought was being used as a rehab facility for traumatized women who had been former CIA agents and had undergone psychological torture at the hands of their foreign captors.
Remember, torture, and in particular the techniques of MKULTRA, are not necessarily exclusive to the bailiwick of the United States. So, the question really is, how do we treat our espionage agents who come home totally zapped?
-
What more proof do you need about the ticket? the FBI stated the ticket was not written by Cooper, NWO has claimed they don't allow the passengers to write on the ticket.John Maximuk wrote a letter to WSHS stating the same?
Cooper was very careful in retrieving all his notes, so why would he write on a ticket with multiple copies?
I believe this myth started with Grey Cop. he was one of the first to bring the myth up in the first place.
Unsolved Crimes website is starting to look good for you?
I have forwarded to Colbert all of the recent posts here concerning the tix. So, far, he says that he is unconvinced that he is wrong. Specifically, he says he has sworn testimony from two journalists who interviewed Larry Carr who told them that Cooper signed his tix.
-
All due respect to Colbert, but it seems to me that he may be heading down the same road as some other folks that have their favorite suspect.
-
All due respect to Colbert, but it seems to me that he may be heading down the same road as some other folks that have their favorite suspect.
Yep. It always reminds me of the quote from Larry Carr where he says people have their suspect and nothing can dissuade them from it.
Tom Colbert's theory rests on some shaky assumptions, like the money being planted and that the person sending the "DB Cooper Letters" was Cooper himself. Rackstraw had the skill set, but I don't see anything in Rackstraw's story that would lead someone to be that confident in him be Cooper - other than blind faith.
-
Larry Carr....
"It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you."He's not a viable suspect,"
-
This comment has been placed here for reasons of it's content matching the topic.....
Haggarknew posted the following...
Yes I agree Robert99. He had knowledge of some things that the average passenger wouldn't have. So what do we make of this? Did this come from being a pilot? Was this knowledge due to his occupation? Would love to hear your thoughts (and everyone else) on this matter.
-
This comment has been placed here for reasons of it's content matching the topic.....
Haggarknew posted the following...
Yes I agree Robert99. He had knowledge of some things that the average passenger wouldn't have. So what do we make of this? Did this come from being a pilot? Was this knowledge due to his occupation? Would love to hear your thoughts (and everyone else) on this matter.
Cooper had more information on some aspects of the 727 than the NWA flight crew had. He could have only obtained this information, either directly or indirectly, from the Boeing rear stair tests and/or the operational use of the modified 727s in Southeast Asia and maybe elsewhere.
Cooper specifically selected the 727 for his hijacking, and double checked with the NWA ticket agent in Portland that the incoming plane for his flight was a 727.
If Cooper's name ever becomes known, don't be surprised to find out that he was a former employee of the US Government, Boeing, or one of their subcontractors or front organizations.
-
The SAT 727 drop tests over Thailand had the stairs removed. You couldn't rapid fire a racked S/L cargo pallet drop with the stairs in the way.
But what about the Boeing 727 airdrop flight tests? Were the stairs lowered in flight? My guess is yes, but I have not seen the documents.
I'll bet Don Kirlin knows, but he has not revealed what he learned from Boeing during his successful fight to get FAA approval for skydives from a Boeing 727.
To me its beyond question that DBC knew quite a bit about planes and optimal configurations for airdrops.
IF, as one account reports, he found and pulled an NB 8 packing card quickly then he knew a lot about parachutes. Himmelspach disputes that account. Most folks don't even know that parachute rigs have packing cards, and finding one on an NB8 is NOT EASY.
if Rackstraw was DBC, what was the point of impersonating a count and calling attention to yourself?
Rackstraw ought to consider admitting he is DBC (even if he isn't) and cash in on it. It would be a good con. ;) Colbert has done all the work to support such a claim.
377
-
The SAT 727 drop tests over Thailand had the stairs removed. You couldn't rapid fire a racked S/L cargo pallet drop with the stairs in the way.
But what about the Boeing 727 airdrop flight tests? Were the stairs lowered in flight? My guess is yes, but I have not seen the documents.
I'll bet Don Kirlin knows, but he has not revealed what he learned from Boeing during his successful fight to get FAA approval for skydives from a Boeing 727.
To me its beyond question that DBC knew quite a bit about planes and optimal configurations for airdrops.
IF, as one account reports, he found and pulled an NB 8 packing card quickly then he knew a lot about parachutes. Himmelspach disputes that account. Most folks don't even know that parachute rigs have packing cards, and finding one on an NB8 is NOT EASY.
if Rackstraw was DBC, what was the point of impersonating a count and calling attention to yourself?
Rackstraw ought to consider admitting he is DBC (even if he isn't) and cash in on it. It would be a good con. ;) Colbert has done all the work to support such a claim.
377
Did he pull the cards on each chute - I presume each chute had one. Maybe he was looking for evidence of tampering or a tracking device ... and found the card(s).
-
Georger wrote: Did he pull the cards on each chute - I presume each chute had one. Maybe he was looking for evidence of tampering or a tracking device ... and found the card(s).
Don't know. The account I read (as I recall it was in Tosaws book) just had him looking at the packing card in the rig he decided to wear.
Beacon transmitters are way too large to put in the tiny packing car pouch which is nearly flush with the container surface and tight fit for a small folded piece of paper. The beacons are normally installed between the pack tray and back pad.
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=AD0630190
377
-
Georger wrote: Did he pull the cards on each chute - I presume each chute had one. Maybe he was looking for evidence of tampering or a tracking device ... and found the card(s).
Don't know. The account I read (as I recall it was in Tosaws book) just had him looking at the packing card in the rig he decided to wear.
Beacon transmitters are way too large to put in the tiny packing car pouch which is nearly flush with the container surface and tight fit for a small folded piece of paper. The beacons are normally installed between the pack tray and back pad.
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=AD0630190
377
So the chute he chose to use was the only chute he inspected? Hmmm.
One rumor has it the AF wanted to put chaff in the chutes, to track him with radar.
-
You don't need reflective chaff to track a jumper on ATC radar but it would certainly make it easier.
I talked extensively with an ATC controller who was also a pilot and skydiver. He said they routinely painted freefalling skydivers and could even count the number which had exited a jumpship.
It's a total myth that radar only sees metallic objects. I routinely tracked Pelicans on my X band boat radar. Newer S Band bird radars are used by tuna boats to spot birds at ranges exceeding twenty miles in ideal conditions.
If we had the RAW radar echo tapes we could have seen Coopers exit. Sadly the SAGE system processed the echoes and blanked out a "data box" in their immediate proximity in which they could post info about the target.
377
-
Got a Question:
How precise is DME. I've been contacted by a new Cooper sleuth who hasn't come to these pages yet, despite my encouragement. His name is Bill, and he is an engineer. He's been talking to me about DME, which I understand is a directional device that Cooper may have had to pin point his location.
Could 1971-era DME technology been able to give DB Cooper his exact, or nearly exact, location?
Continuing, if so, how come 305 wouldn't have had similar tech on board?
-
From Wikipedia:
The accuracy of DME ground stations is 185 m (±0.1 nmi).[2] It's important to understand that DME provides the physical distance from the aircraft to the DME transponder. This distance is often referred to as 'slant range' and depends trigonometrically upon both the altitude above the transponder and the ground distance from it.
For example, an aircraft directly above the DME station at 6,076 ft (1 nmi) altitude would still show 1.0 nmi (1.9 km) on the DME readout. The aircraft is technically a mile away, just a mile straight up. Slant range error is most pronounced at high altitudes when close to the DME station.
Radio-navigation aids must keep a certain degree of accuracy, given by international standards, FAA,[3] EASA, ICAO, etc. To assure this is the case, flight inspection organizations check periodically critical parameters with properly equipped aircraft to calibrate and certify DME precision.
ICAO recommends accuracy of less than the sum of 0.25 nmi plus 1.25% of the distance measured.
377
-
If I don't have my tablet running with the navigation map I can't really tell when I'm exactly over a VOR. my DME clock doesn't roll to zero.
-
If I don't have my tablet running with the navigation map I can't really tell when I'm exactly over a VOR. my DME clock doesn't roll to zero.
You really can't be certain when you are directly overhead of a VOR. There is a small angular "cone of silence" (maybe 3 degrees or so wide) extending vertically from the VOR station. The diameter of this cone is small at lower altitudes (and smaller distances from the VOR) and wider at high altitudes (and further from the VOR).
If you are tracking inbound on a specific radial to a VOR station and pass directly overhead of the station, the TO/FROM flag will switch from TO to FROM rapidly without hesitation. With the same radial as above set on the VOR, and say tracking inbound parallel to that radial but one-half mile offset from that radial, the TO/FROM flag will be noticeably slower and maybe fluctuate a bit as you approach the VOR radial that is 90 degrees from the one selected on the VOR.
So other things being equal, you can estimate to some extent if you hit the VOR exactly or missed it slightly just from the way the TO/FROM flag reacts. It is a good thing to be familiar with the idiosyncrasies of your equipment.
-
DME:
Okay, so it's not perfect. But could have DB Cooper used some sort of DME device to locate the Merwin Dam? Or other landmarks, such as the I-5?
-
Bruce Smith wrote: Okay, so it's not perfect. But could have DB Cooper used some sort of DME device to locate the Merwin Dam? Or other landmarks, such as the I-5?
Nope. DME in 1971 was big eqpt. Not suitable for jumper use.
Today you can buy a cheap handheld walkie talkie that will give you VOR radials, but DME gear, as far as I know, is still not small enough to carry. No need for a portable DME in modern times when handheld GPS gives you far more nav data for less money.
Good DME tutorial: http://www.avweb.com/news/avionics/183230-1.html
377
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPy15TC-h9s
-
Quote from: 377 on August 15, 2016, 03:40:47 PM
Georger wrote: Did he pull the cards on each chute - I presume each chute had one. Maybe he was looking for evidence of tampering or a tracking device ... and found the card(s).
Don't know. The account I read (as I recall it was in Tosaws book) just had him looking at the packing card in the rig he decided to wear.
Beacon transmitters are way too large to put in the tiny packing car pouch which is nearly flush with the container surface and tight fit for a small folded piece of paper. The beacons are normally installed between the pack tray and back pad.
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=AD0630190
377
So the chute he chose to use was the only chute he inspected? Hmmm.
One rumor has it the AF wanted to put chaff in the chutes, to track him with radar.
I would really love to hear more of your thoughts on that being the only chute he inspected.
-
377 You say: "Bruce Smith wrote: Okay, so it's not perfect. But could have DB Cooper used some sort of DME device to locate the Merwin Dam? Or other landmarks, such as the I-5?"
I say: "Marla in her book hints at using the tops of Mt Rainier and Mt St Hellens to form a sight line that would cross the flight path at Ariel." The tops of the mountains were above the clouds but could they be seen at night? Also, time elapsed and light shining through the clouds above Vancouver and Portland might have been used by DB.
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
-
Yeah, I remember Marla talking about a triangulation of Mt St Helens and Adams, but she seemed to be making the theory up on the fly as she was getting grilled in Portland. She is certainly quick on her feet. She always had an answer, even when her first answer was refuted, such as the "most similar of all the pictures you're showed me" comment about LD and Tina, then Flo.
I'm not a big triangulation fan, even though the skies above the clouds might have been clear and Georger has shown that the moon was more than half full.
-
Bruce: you say "Yeah, I remember Marla talking about a triangulation of Mt St Helens and Adams, but she seemed to be making the theory up on the fly as she was getting grilled in Portland. She is certainly quick on her feet. She always had an answer, even when her first answer was refuted, such as the "most similar of all the pictures you're showed me" comment about LD and Tina, then Flo."
I say: "In her book she mentions using Mt Rainer and Mt St Helens like a gun site that would point to Amboy for DB to use in knowing when to jump. Mt Adams would not work as it would point to the south and east too far and not at Amboy. She is really fixed upon her uncle as being Cooper and remembering how cut-up he was from the jump the next day after Norjak. When I play the Sheridan Peterson interview from the History Channel 4 hour program it is interesting how he tries to cover himself with false talk about how DB did not make it including using loafers proved DB was not a skydiver. However, Sheridan actually made a demonstration jump wearing all the same cloths as DB Cooper (including the loafers) and carrying a 50 lb bag of flour between his legs and this was before Norjak"
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
-
R99's Flight Path Theory
This is my understanding of Robert99's theory that the Flight Path was over Tina Bar, or just to the west. His speculation is that the money find at Tina Bar requires that the money was deposited via the following scenario:
1. The money bag tied around Cooper's waist became separated, or part of the money was released, or all of Cooper and his money impacted in the environs of Tina Bar, possibly on Caterpillar Island, or just inland from T-Bar, such as in the ponds or levee area of the Fazio ranch.
2. Shortly afterwards, some hydrological event, such as heavy rains or flooding, transported the money bag into the Columbia River, and in 1974 the dredging operation did two things – first, it spit up the three bundles, and secondly it chewed up as few more bundles into the itsy-bitsy pieces that were later recovered in the fragment field.
3. All of the money was deposited onto the beach at T-Bar in a huge mix of dredge spoils, which the Fazios then spread it around with their bulldozers. The fragments were buried several feet below the bundles, which were buried under only a few feet of sand.
4. The bundles were exposed in 1980, six years after the Army Corps of Engineers no longer placed dredge spoils on the shoreline of the Columbia. As a result, the sand at T-Bar began eroding. By the time of discovery, the sand layer above the three bundles had been stripped away sufficiently to nearly expose the bundles, which Brian Ingram found on Feb. 10. Two days later the FBI found the fragment field, which extended for a diameter of 40 feet, centered at the bundles' location.
R99's scenarios are supported by the following:
1. Captain Scott allegedly told Himmelsbach at his retirement party in 1980 that 305 was flying over Woodland, WA, which is west of Victor 23, the air corridor that the plane was presumably following.
2. The “believed Flight Path map,” supplied by the FBI is incorrect, as Shutter has shown in his flight simulation studies that 305 could not have hit the locations marked on the map at the times specified at the speed of 200 mph, approximately.
3. The work of Richard Tosaw generally follows R99's theories. Tosaw believed that DB Cooper and all of his stuff fell into the Columbia River, where the skyjacker drowned and all of the gear sunk to the bottom, including the money, later to be brought up by the dredging.
4. The many redactions of the flight transcripts suggest that 305 was not flying in Victor-23, where it was presumed to be, for reasons unknown.
R99's theories are not supported by the following:
1. Tom Kaye's theories, as expressed at the 2011 Symposium in Portland, fully supported the Victor-23 Flight Path. Kaye said that he had direct access to all the pertinent radar transcripts, such as SAGE, FAA Seattle Center, etc.
2. Bill Rataczak many pronouncements that he was flying east of V-23 (BAS interview), over the Washougal River Valley (Himmelsbach), or far to the east of V-23 and over the flanks of Mt. St. Helens, as intimated in his History Channel interview when he said that 305 was flying over terrain that was 5,000 foot in elevation at the time the skyjacker jumped.
3. Larry Carr's general acceptance of the Victor-23 scenario, as revealed in his DZ posts.
If I've got anything wrong, please let me know.
-
... When I play the Sheridan Peterson interview from the History Channel 4 hour program it is interesting how he tries to cover himself with false talk about how DB did not make it including using loafers proved DB was not a skydiver. However, Sheridan actually made a demonstration jump wearing all the same cloths as DB Cooper (including the loafers) and carrying a 50 lb bag of flour between his legs and this was before Norjak..."
Yeah, I get the same feeling that Petey is trying too hard to discredit DBC.
-
R99's Flight Path Theory
This is my understanding of Robert99's theory that the Flight Path was over Tina Bar, or just to the west. His speculation is that the money find at Tina Bar requires that the money was deposited via the following scenario:
1. The money bag tied around Cooper's waist became separated, or part of the money was released, or all of Cooper and his money impacted in the environs of Tina Bar, possibly on Caterpillar Island, or just inland from T-Bar, such as in the ponds or levee area of the Fazio ranch.
2. Shortly afterwards, some hydrological event, such as heavy rains or flooding, transported the money bag into the Columbia River, and in 1974 the dredging operation did two things – first, it spit up the three bundles, and secondly it chewed up as few more bundles into the itsy-bitsy pieces that were later recovered in the fragment field.
3. All of the money was deposited onto the beach at T-Bar in a huge mix of dredge spoils, which the Fazios then spread it around with their bulldozers. The fragments were buried several feet below the bundles, which were buried under only a few feet of sand.
4. The bundles were exposed in 1980, six years after the Army Corps of Engineers no longer placed dredge spoils on the shoreline of the Columbia. As a result, the sand at T-Bar began eroding. By the time of discovery, the sand layer above the three bundles had been stripped away sufficiently to nearly expose the bundles, which Brian Ingram found on Feb. 10. Two days later the FBI found the fragment field, which extended for a diameter of 40 feet, centered at the bundles' location.
R99's scenarios are supported by the following:
1. Captain Scott allegedly told Himmelsbach at his retirement party in 1980 that 305 was flying over Woodland, WA, which is west of Victor 23, the air corridor that the plane was presumably following.
2. The “believed Flight Path map,” supplied by the FBI is incorrect, as Shutter has shown in his flight simulation studies that 305 could not have hit the locations marked on the map at the times specified at the speed of 200 mph, approximately.
3. The work of Richard Tosaw generally follows R99's theories. Tosaw believed that DB Cooper and all of his stuff fell into the Columbia River, where the skyjacker drowned and all of the gear sunk to the bottom, including the money, later to be brought up by the dredging.
4. The many redactions of the flight transcripts suggest that 305 was not flying in Victor-23, where it was presumed to be, for reasons unknown.
R99's theories are not supported by the following:
1. Tom Kaye's theories, as expressed at the 2011 Symposium in Portland, fully supported the Victor-23 Flight Path. Kaye said that he had direct access to all the pertinent radar transcripts, such as SAGE, FAA Seattle Center, etc.
2. Bill Rataczak many pronouncements that he was flying east of V-23 (BAS interview), over the Washougal River Valley (Himmelsbach), or far to the east of V-23 and over the flanks of Mt. St. Helens, as intimated in his History Channel interview when he said that 305 was flying over terrain that was 5,000 foot in elevation at the time the skyjacker jumped.
3. Larry Carr's general acceptance of the Victor-23 scenario, as revealed in his DZ posts.
If I've got anything wrong, please let me know.
NO! NO! NO! HOLD EVERYTHING!
I have got to run to an appointment right now with my eye Doctor and will respond to this later today as soon as my pupils get undilated a bit.
-
Okay. I'm on hold.
-
I checked the distance again on the sim from VOR to VOR. it appears to be accurate in DME miles, and timing.
Mapping out the path from Seattle to the Canby intersection is about 139 miles DME.
Mapping out the path straight down to the Canby intersection is 130 miles DME.
This why my timing shows an arrival time of 8:15 to Tina Bar. the FBI plotting shows some turns in the path, but not enough east or west to change the time. if the plane was to head due east, or west, then the timing would be different.
While flying the alternate path, I reach the Canby intersection at around 8:23. while flying the FBI flight path I come up short reaching the Canby intersection in that time frame due to the extra miles.
Seattle to the Toledo area has a lot of valuable information.
1) Takeoff time
2) time of reaching 7,000 feet
3) speeds 155-160
4) Flap settings
5) leveling off at 10,000
6) speeds 170-180
7) time reaching, or turning at Ed Carlson Field (Toledo)
Arriving at Ed Carlson Field at around 7:58 which is about 62 nautical miles. Then you must turn and head southeast to connect with V23. I pass Malay at around 8:00. flying straight down V23 to Malay is 64.4 miles DME, but you don't side step around Ed Carlson getting there, so the times are similar. This part of the path is harder to calculate since the speeds change during the flight. The 3 minute mile doesn't apply.
Flying from Malay to the Lewis river via FBI path is about 29 miles DME. Flying straight down further west in the Woodland area gives the same DME miles, so the plane would be in the Woodland area at the 8:10 position. Just as Scott claims. I believe he said the Woodland area? I gain a minute due to passing Malay at 8:00. flying straight to Malay, you arrive at 7:59.
I'm still not 100% on the area from the Lewis river down to the Columbia. We obviously have issues with timing. The plots exceed 3 miles, so testing is not complete.
At this point is the alternate path plausible? I think it's possible, if Cooper bailed at 8:15. but we have a lot of data that would have to be discounted for the path to exist.
-
I checked the distance again on the sim from VOR to VOR. it appears to be accurate in DME miles, and timing.
Mapping out the path from Seattle to the Canby intersection is about 139 miles DME.
Mapping out the path straight down to the Canby intersection is 130 miles DME.
This why my timing shows an arrival time of 8:15 to Tina Bar. the FBI plotting shows some turns in the path, but not enough east or west to change the time. if the plane was to head due east, or west, then the timing would be different.
While flying the alternate path, I reach the Canby intersection at around 8:23. while flying the FBI flight path I come up short reaching the Canby intersection in that time frame due to the extra miles.
Seattle to the Toledo area has a lot of valuable information.
1) Takeoff time
2) time of reaching 7,000 feet
3) speeds 155-160
4) Flap settings
5) leveling off at 10,000
6) speeds 170-180
7) time reaching, or turning at Ed Carlson Field (Toledo)
Arriving at Ed Carlson Field at around 7:58 which is about 62 nautical miles. Then you must turn and head southeast to connect with V23. I pass Malay at around 8:00. flying straight down V23 to Malay is 64.4 miles DME, but you don't side step around Ed Carlson getting there, so the times are similar. This part of the path is harder to calculate since the speeds change during the flight. The 3 minute mile doesn't apply.
Flying from Malay to the Lewis river via FBI path is about 29 miles DME. Flying straight down further west in the Woodland area gives the same DME miles, so the plane would be in the Woodland area at the 8:10 position. Just as Scott claims. I believe he said the Woodland area? I gain a minute due to passing Malay at 8:00. flying straight to Malay, you arrive at 7:59.
I'm still not 100% on the area from the Lewis river down to the Columbia. We obviously have issues with timing. The plots exceed 3 miles, so testing is not complete.
At this point is the alternate path plausible? I think it's possible, if Cooper bailed at 8:15. but we have a lot of data that would have to be discounted for the path to exist.
One obvious question never really answered, so far as I know: Did BR, Scott, and Andy ever sit down with any group of officials including Air Force Group and go over the NWO (white search map), and then the FBI (yellow) map? What specific input did the crew have to making or reviewing any of the flight path maps that got generated out of this case ?
It's such a simple question.
-
I've heard, and read that they helped in certain area's of the map, but it might of been the jump map, I don't know.
I could take a guess and say the air force made the map, and they plotted the times using the flight data recorder.
that doesn't explain the added plots around Portland though...
-
Shut, what is the mileage from Malay to Canby using the straight line pathway?
Thanks.
-
Shut, what is the mileage from Malay to Canby using the straight line pathway?
Thanks.
67 nautical miles, or 22 minutes...
-
T'anks.
-
Carr made a post about the winds in the LZ....
The winds for that location are as follows:
wind direction wind speed height
225 degrees 20 knots 7,000
230 degrees 25 knots 5,000
235 degrees 20 knots 2,000
235 degrees 15 knots surface
If you buy my theory that Cooper was a novice jumper then he most likely deployed very soon after leaving the aircraft. If he jumped over Orchard or just south and deployed just out of the aircraft, I believe this would put him in the Washougal Water Shed.
-
He'd drift 20 miles in ten minutes?
Hmmm...
-
He'd drift 20 miles in ten minutes?
Hmmm...
How do you get a time frame, or 20 miles?
-
A 10,000 foot descent takes ten minutes, approximately, I hear. But add a few more minutes if you think is necessary. The general frame of reference that I have heard is that DB Cooper was on the ground - one way or the other - by 8:30 pm.
Battleground is approximately 20 miles southeast of the central Washougal River Valley. The nearest elements of the Washougal River are about 8 miles east of Amboy, while Amboy is about 8 miles northeast of Battleground. I'm just using "back of the envelope" geometry.
-
If he jumped over Orchard or just south and deployed just out of the aircraft, I believe this would put him in the Washougal Water Shed.
He would miss the watershed jumping from Battleground..
-
That is more plausible since the lower Washougal shifts course to the southwest as it approaches the Orchard-Vancouver area, and ultimately Camas.
I just re-read your post and I see that I had misread it originally. Ooops.
-
If he jumped over Orchard or just south and deployed just out of the aircraft, I believe this would put him in the Washougal Water Shed.
He would miss the watershed jumping from Battleground..
But, this is not the area Rataczak, Himmelsbach, and JT identified and JT searched - that area is far north of the area you are identifying. In fact the area you are identifying some would include in the Columbia drainage basin ... because everything in this area flows to .... the Columbia in time.
-
This is one of the problems with JT - where was he, and when?
I've never seen any maps from him, and when I agree to go on a search with him, he declines.
He speaks very authoritatively when I mention that I was on the west branch of the Little Washougal, "Oh, yeah, I know here that is...."
But I'd love to know exactly where he found the golf ball, and of course, the cave with the briefcase that got Himms all fired up in the 1980s.
-
This is one of the problems with JT - where was he, and when?
I've never seen any maps from him, and when I agree to go on a search with him, he declines.
He speaks very authoritatively when I mention that I was on the west branch of the Little Washougal, "Oh, yeah, I know where that is...."
But I'd love to know exactly where he found the golf ball, and of course, the cave with the briefcase that got Himms all fired up in the 1980s.
I would have to go to notes on this but the socalled 'briefcase' gets a lot of traction; nobody including JT has ever found any "briefcase", anywhere including the cave he found and searched, according to JT. Ive never heard about a golf ball being found? Where was that? Are you confusing golf ball with ping pong balls supposedly released in the Washougal as a test?
There are posts about Jerry's searches and several maps of the areas JT searched including the last area he searched ... at DZ.
His last search area, as I recall, was in the area of Dougan Falls in the northern region of the Washougal.
-
JT told me about the golf ball, and Himms told me about the briefcase in a cave. It was this latter find that got Himms going with JT.
Searching the DZ for maps? Ug. But thanks, if that's where some are.
-
was the golf ball tracked with radar on the bottom of the river :)) :)) :)) they sink ya know?
-
JT told me on the phone that he used ping pong balls, and they arrived at T-bar. I didn't asked him any questions about it. I would think you would have to use a lot of them since most of them would probably get hung up on the banks.
-
JT told me on the phone that he used ping pong balls, and they arrived at T-bar. I didn't asked him any questions about it. I would think you would have to use a lot of them since most of them would probably get hung up on the banks.
its all at DZ -
-
As I remember the conversation, JT spoke in an off-handed manner about "some of the weird stuff you can find, even in the deep woods." Apparently, the golf ball was just lying on the ground. JT and I speculated that it must have been thrown from a passing plane, ala the coke bottle in the movie, "The Gods Must be Crazy."
-
As I remember the conversation, JT spoke in an off-handed manner about "some of the weird stuff you can find, even in the deep woods." Apparently, the golf ball was just lying on the ground. JT and I speculated that it must have been thrown from a passing plane, ala the coke bottle in the movie, "The Gods Must be Crazy."
The last area of his search was Dougan Falls ... almost directly across from Orchards. This was in 2008-09? His other searches were north of this line. I always felt his Dougan Falls search if there was one, was in response to Sluggo moving the flight path DZ further south on the timeline. Who knows if an actual search happened or not.
-
Robert99's Alternative Flight Path Theory
I'm writing up R99's alt fp theory. Is this an accurate portrayal of your theories, Robert?
Alternative Flight Path
Because the so-called “believed flight path” offered by the FBI is so contentious, an alternative flight path was developed by Robert Nicholson in 2016. Nicholson, known as Robert99 at the DB Cooper Forum, is a long-time student of the case and is a retired avionics engineer and private pilot.
Nicholson scrapped all the previously held hypotheses and speculated on two major findings. First, the money find at Tina Bar defies explanation and a fly-over there would explain how the money arrived at the beach. Secondly, the pilots had full discretion to fly anywhere they wanted, and Nicholson feels the crew of 305 would be very desirous of passing west of Portland and avoiding urban populations in case DB Cooper detonated his bomb.
Therefore, Nicholson feels that 305 may have left the Victor-23 air corridor at one of its radio beacon stations known as the Malay Intersection, which is located near Mayfield, Washington, about 45 miles northwest of Portland. Nicholson then says that 305 could have flown due south from that point for about 70 miles until it reconnected with Victor-23 in Canby, Oregon, about 25 miles south of Portland. Thus was born the Malay-Canby transect theory.
This straight line flight not only puts 305 west of the populated areas of Vancouver and Portland, but it also places 305 directly above Tina Bar. In addition, this section of the Columbia River is a 40-mile stretch of flood plains and waterways that slosh westward for ten miles, giving this area over 400-square miles of river, marshes and mud for Rataczak to deposit his skyjacker. Remember, Rataczak initially wanted to fly over the Pacific ocean to a refueling in San Francisco, saying, “Let's see how long DB Cooper can hold his breath.” Certainly, flying over this part of the Columbia was a good second-choice for Rataczak.
Nicholson continues with his theories to include how the money actually got deposited at Tina Bar and in the various conditions it was found. Nicholson claims that Cooper was a “no-pull” and cratered near the money find site – landing no further upstream than the northern reaches of Caterpillar Island - and perhaps a few feet higher in elevation than Tina Bar, and far enough hidden in the brush and brambles to avoid detection for years. Nicholson says that the money bag broke apart upon impact, and multiple clumps of money began drifting downward and downstream toward the Tina Bar area. Due to varied weathering patterns, Nicholson feels that one clump of money was thoroughly torn apart and fragmented, forming the first and deeper level of money. Later, the three bundles found by Brian Ingram encountered less weathering and were buried above the initial fragmentation field. All of it was covered eventually through floods, rain and river action until sufficient erosion took place in the T-Bar area to reveal the upper bundles of money that Brian Ingram found on February 10, 1980.
Nicholson's theories are elegant and compelling, but there is no corroborating evidence from Rataczak or other sources. Nevertheless, it does explain the money find.
-
Robert99's Alternative Flight Path Theory
I'm writing up R99's alt fp theory. Is this an accurate portrayal of your theories, Robert?
Alternative Flight Path
Because the so-called “believed flight path” offered by the FBI is so contentious, an alternative flight path was developed by Robert Nicholson in 2016. Nicholson, known as Robert99 at the DB Cooper Forum, is a long-time student of the case and is a retired avionics engineer and private pilot.
Nicholson scrapped all the previously held hypotheses and speculated on two major findings. First, the money find at Tina Bar defies explanation and a fly-over there would explain how the money arrived at the beach. Secondly, the pilots had full discretion to fly anywhere they wanted, and Nicholson feels the crew of 305 would be very desirous of passing west of Portland and avoiding urban populations in case DB Cooper detonated his bomb.
Therefore, Nicholson feels that 305 may have left the Victor-23 air corridor at one of its radio beacon stations known as the Malay Intersection, which is located near Mayfield, Washington, about 45 miles northwest of Portland. Nicholson then says that 305 could have flown due south from that point for about 70 miles until it reconnected with Victor-23 in Canby, Oregon, about 25 miles south of Portland. Thus was born the Malay-Canby transect theory.
This straight line flight not only puts 305 west of the populated areas of Vancouver and Portland, but it also places 305 directly above Tina Bar. In addition, this section of the Columbia River is a 40-mile stretch of flood plains and waterways that slosh westward for ten miles, giving this area over 400-square miles of river, marshes and mud for Rataczak to deposit his skyjacker. Remember, Rataczak initially wanted to fly over the Pacific ocean to a refueling in San Francisco, saying, “Let's see how long DB Cooper can hold his breath.” Certainly, flying over this part of the Columbia was a good second-choice for Rataczak.
Nicholson continues with his theories to include how the money actually got deposited at Tina Bar and in the various conditions it was found. Nicholson claims that Cooper was a “no-pull” and cratered near the money find site – landing no further upstream than the northern reaches of Caterpillar Island - and perhaps a few feet higher in elevation than Tina Bar, and far enough hidden in the brush and brambles to avoid detection for years. Nicholson says that the money bag broke apart upon impact, and multiple clumps of money began drifting downward and downstream toward the Tina Bar area. Due to varied weathering patterns, Nicholson feels that one clump of money was thoroughly torn apart and fragmented, forming the first and deeper level of money. Later, the three bundles found by Brian Ingram encountered less weathering and were buried above the initial fragmentation field. All of it was covered eventually through floods, rain and river action until sufficient erosion took place in the T-Bar area to reveal the upper bundles of money that Brian Ingram found on February 10, 1980.
Nicholson's theories are elegant and compelling, but there is no corroborating evidence from Rataczak or other sources. Nevertheless, it does explain the money find.
BRUCE, HOLD EVERYTHING! LET'S START AT THE BEGINING AGAIN. THE NUMBERS BELOW ARE FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES.
1. The "believed flight path" offered by the FBI is so unbelievable that there is nothing to argue about. Simply put, no hijacked airliner would be flown in the manner depicted on the FBI chart under those conditions. Period!
2. The "alternative flight path" was actually developed in 2009 and not 2016.
3. I am a retired aeronautical engineer, general aviation pilot, and have made a small number of skydiver parachute jumps. Ask 377 what an avionics engineer does.
4. There are no radio beacons (or any other navigational hardware) located at the Malay and Canby Intersections. Between these two intersections, the airliner would be given headings to fly by the air traffic controllers who were tracking it on radar. The airliner would not be doing its own navigation. This is why Rataczak told the air traffic control people to "mark your maps" when the crew felt that Cooper had jumped. Otherwise, Rataczak could have given the jump location more accurately if the crew was doing its own navigation between navigations aids.
5. A direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections passes about 1000 feet west of Tina Bar, or approximately the Oregon shore of the Columbia River. Rataczak probably could not tell when the airliner was over the Columbia River or any of the numerous other rivers and lakes in the area of Tina Bar. Remember that the airliner was above an overcast.
6. Along with Rataczak, Himmelsbach, and numerous others, I believe that Cooper died in the jump. I also personally believe that Cooper was a no-pull who landed on solid ground but within a relatively few feet of the water in the Caterpillar Island channel. And that the money bag was still attached to him when he impacted.
7. How the money got from Cooper's impact point to the point where it was found at Tina Bar is a mystery. The recent discovery of the YouTube video of FBI agents digging up bundles and fragments of money buried under a foot or more of sand raises new questions about how it deteriorated. Tom Kaye has posted that the money in the video did not resemble the money being used in his tests. Consequently, the deterioration mechanism is apparently different.
8. The three bundles of money found at Tina Bar apparently arrived at the same time and one of those bundles showed signs of having been "torqued". See Tom Kaye's web site for a discussion of that. The fact that the three bundles were found under only two or three inches of sand does not explain how the fragments at a deeper level arrived a Tina Bar. There is no basis for speculation on this point at this time.
9. Cooper could have landed as far south (upstream) as the southern end of Caterpillar Island in this scenario.
10. There is corroborating evidence from Rataczak on this, see number 4 above. Georger has interviewed a large number of people on the flight path in the Portland area. All appear to be in agreement that the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side.
Robert99
-
Robert99's Alternative Flight Path Theory
I'm writing up R99's alt fp theory. Is this an accurate portrayal of your theories, Robert?
Alternative Flight Path
Because the so-called “believed flight path” offered by the FBI is so contentious, an alternative flight path was developed by Robert Nicholson in 2016. Nicholson, known as Robert99 at the DB Cooper Forum, is a long-time student of the case and is a retired avionics engineer and private pilot.
Nicholson scrapped all the previously held hypotheses and speculated on two major findings. First, the money find at Tina Bar defies explanation and a fly-over there would explain how the money arrived at the beach. Secondly, the pilots had full discretion to fly anywhere they wanted, and Nicholson feels the crew of 305 would be very desirous of passing west of Portland and avoiding urban populations in case DB Cooper detonated his bomb.
Therefore, Nicholson feels that 305 may have left the Victor-23 air corridor at one of its radio beacon stations known as the Malay Intersection, which is located near Mayfield, Washington, about 45 miles northwest of Portland. Nicholson then says that 305 could have flown due south from that point for about 70 miles until it reconnected with Victor-23 in Canby, Oregon, about 25 miles south of Portland. Thus was born the Malay-Canby transect theory.
This straight line flight not only puts 305 west of the populated areas of Vancouver and Portland, but it also places 305 directly above Tina Bar. In addition, this section of the Columbia River is a 40-mile stretch of flood plains and waterways that slosh westward for ten miles, giving this area over 400-square miles of river, marshes and mud for Rataczak to deposit his skyjacker. Remember, Rataczak initially wanted to fly over the Pacific ocean to a refueling in San Francisco, saying, “Let's see how long DB Cooper can hold his breath.” Certainly, flying over this part of the Columbia was a good second-choice for Rataczak.
Nicholson continues with his theories to include how the money actually got deposited at Tina Bar and in the various conditions it was found. Nicholson claims that Cooper was a “no-pull” and cratered near the money find site – landing no further upstream than the northern reaches of Caterpillar Island - and perhaps a few feet higher in elevation than Tina Bar, and far enough hidden in the brush and brambles to avoid detection for years. Nicholson says that the money bag broke apart upon impact, and multiple clumps of money began drifting downward and downstream toward the Tina Bar area. Due to varied weathering patterns, Nicholson feels that one clump of money was thoroughly torn apart and fragmented, forming the first and deeper level of money. Later, the three bundles found by Brian Ingram encountered less weathering and were buried above the initial fragmentation field. All of it was covered eventually through floods, rain and river action until sufficient erosion took place in the T-Bar area to reveal the upper bundles of money that Brian Ingram found on February 10, 1980.
Nicholson's theories are elegant and compelling, but there is no corroborating evidence from Rataczak or other sources. Nevertheless, it does explain the money find.
BRUCE, HOLD EVERYTHING! LET'S START AT THE BEGINING AGAIN. THE NUMBERS BELOW ARE FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES.
1. The "believed flight path" offered by the FBI is so unbelievable that there is nothing to argue about. Simply put, no hijacked airliner would be flown in the manner depicted on the FBI chart under those conditions. Period!
2. The "alternative flight path" was actually developed in 2009 and not 2016.
3. I am a retired aeronautical engineer, general aviation pilot, and have made a small number of skydiver parachute jumps. Ask 377 what an avionics engineer does.
4. There are no radio beacons (or any other navigational hardware) located at the Malay and Canby Intersections. Between these two intersections, the airliner would be given headings to fly by the air traffic controllers who were tracking it on radar. The airliner would not be doing its own navigation. This is why Rataczak told the air traffic control people to "mark your maps" when the crew felt that Cooper had jumped. Otherwise, Rataczak could have given the jump location more accurately if the crew was doing its own navigation between navigations aids.
5. A direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections passes about 1000 feet west of Tina Bar, or approximately the Oregon shore of the Columbia River. Rataczak probably could not tell when the airliner was over the Columbia River or any of the numerous other rivers and lakes in the area of Tina Bar. Remember that the airliner was above an overcast.
6. Along with Rataczak, Himmelsbach, and numerous others, I believe that Cooper died in the jump. I also personally believe that Cooper was a no-pull who landed on solid ground but within a relatively few feet of the water in the Caterpillar Island channel. And that the money bag was still attached to him when he impacted.
7. How the money got from Cooper's impact point to the point where it was found at Tina Bar is a mystery. The recent discovery of the YouTube video of FBI agents digging up bundles and fragments of money buried under a foot or more of sand raises new questions about how it deteriorated. Tom Kaye has posted that the money in the video did not resemble the money being used in his tests. Consequently, the deterioration mechanism is apparently different.
8. The three bundles of money found at Tina Bar apparently arrived at the same time and one of those bundles showed signs of having been "torqued". See Tom Kaye's web site for a discussion of that. The fact that the three bundles were found under only two or three inches of sand does not explain how the fragments at a deeper level arrived a Tina Bar. There is no basis for speculation on this point at this time.
9. Cooper could have landed as far south (upstream) as the southern end of Caterpillar Island in this scenario.
10. There is corroborating evidence from Rataczak on this, see number 4 above. Georger has interviewed a large number of people on the flight path in the Portland area. All appear to be in agreement that the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side.
Robert99
Tom Kaye has posted that the money in the video did not resemble the money being used in his tests. Consequently, the deterioration mechanism is apparently different.
[edit] oh ok! I git it! Tom is comparing Cooper money found at Tina Bar (photos of same) with his "test money" consisting of new/old bills he used for his water and buried sand tests in 2008... then saying deterioration in those two samples aren't the same. Well DUHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Why would one even expect deterioration to the be the same in these two (totally different) samples?
This doesn't tell us anything about how the Cooper money got to Tina Bar or its source! Only in the weakest sense are these two sample even comparable! This sounds like something Robert Blevins would cook up and say. It's nonsense on it's face. :))
-
Robert99's Alternative Flight Path Theory
I'm writing up R99's alt fp theory. Is this an accurate portrayal of your theories, Robert?
Alternative Flight Path
Because the so-called “believed flight path” offered by the FBI is so contentious, an alternative flight path was developed by Robert Nicholson in 2016. Nicholson, known as Robert99 at the DB Cooper Forum, is a long-time student of the case and is a retired avionics engineer and private pilot.
Nicholson scrapped all the previously held hypotheses and speculated on two major findings. First, the money find at Tina Bar defies explanation and a fly-over there would explain how the money arrived at the beach. Secondly, the pilots had full discretion to fly anywhere they wanted, and Nicholson feels the crew of 305 would be very desirous of passing west of Portland and avoiding urban populations in case DB Cooper detonated his bomb.
Therefore, Nicholson feels that 305 may have left the Victor-23 air corridor at one of its radio beacon stations known as the Malay Intersection, which is located near Mayfield, Washington, about 45 miles northwest of Portland. Nicholson then says that 305 could have flown due south from that point for about 70 miles until it reconnected with Victor-23 in Canby, Oregon, about 25 miles south of Portland. Thus was born the Malay-Canby transect theory.
This straight line flight not only puts 305 west of the populated areas of Vancouver and Portland, but it also places 305 directly above Tina Bar. In addition, this section of the Columbia River is a 40-mile stretch of flood plains and waterways that slosh westward for ten miles, giving this area over 400-square miles of river, marshes and mud for Rataczak to deposit his skyjacker. Remember, Rataczak initially wanted to fly over the Pacific ocean to a refueling in San Francisco, saying, “Let's see how long DB Cooper can hold his breath.” Certainly, flying over this part of the Columbia was a good second-choice for Rataczak.
Nicholson continues with his theories to include how the money actually got deposited at Tina Bar and in the various conditions it was found. Nicholson claims that Cooper was a “no-pull” and cratered near the money find site – landing no further upstream than the northern reaches of Caterpillar Island - and perhaps a few feet higher in elevation than Tina Bar, and far enough hidden in the brush and brambles to avoid detection for years. Nicholson says that the money bag broke apart upon impact, and multiple clumps of money began drifting downward and downstream toward the Tina Bar area. Due to varied weathering patterns, Nicholson feels that one clump of money was thoroughly torn apart and fragmented, forming the first and deeper level of money. Later, the three bundles found by Brian Ingram encountered less weathering and were buried above the initial fragmentation field. All of it was covered eventually through floods, rain and river action until sufficient erosion took place in the T-Bar area to reveal the upper bundles of money that Brian Ingram found on February 10, 1980.
Nicholson's theories are elegant and compelling, but there is no corroborating evidence from Rataczak or other sources. Nevertheless, it does explain the money find.
BRUCE, HOLD EVERYTHING! LET'S START AT THE BEGINING AGAIN. THE NUMBERS BELOW ARE FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES.
1. The "believed flight path" offered by the FBI is so unbelievable that there is nothing to argue about. Simply put, no hijacked airliner would be flown in the manner depicted on the FBI chart under those conditions. Period!
2. The "alternative flight path" was actually developed in 2009 and not 2016.
3. I am a retired aeronautical engineer, general aviation pilot, and have made a small number of skydiver parachute jumps. Ask 377 what an avionics engineer does.
4. There are no radio beacons (or any other navigational hardware) located at the Malay and Canby Intersections. Between these two intersections, the airliner would be given headings to fly by the air traffic controllers who were tracking it on radar. The airliner would not be doing its own navigation. This is why Rataczak told the air traffic control people to "mark your maps" when the crew felt that Cooper had jumped. Otherwise, Rataczak could have given the jump location more accurately if the crew was doing its own navigation between navigations aids.
5. A direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections passes about 1000 feet west of Tina Bar, or approximately the Oregon shore of the Columbia River. Rataczak probably could not tell when the airliner was over the Columbia River or any of the numerous other rivers and lakes in the area of Tina Bar. Remember that the airliner was above an overcast.
6. Along with Rataczak, Himmelsbach, and numerous others, I believe that Cooper died in the jump. I also personally believe that Cooper was a no-pull who landed on solid ground but within a relatively few feet of the water in the Caterpillar Island channel. And that the money bag was still attached to him when he impacted.
7. How the money got from Cooper's impact point to the point where it was found at Tina Bar is a mystery. The recent discovery of the YouTube video of FBI agents digging up bundles and fragments of money buried under a foot or more of sand raises new questions about how it deteriorated. Tom Kaye has posted that the money in the video did not resemble the money being used in his tests. Consequently, the deterioration mechanism is apparently different.
8. The three bundles of money found at Tina Bar apparently arrived at the same time and one of those bundles showed signs of having been "torqued". See Tom Kaye's web site for a discussion of that. The fact that the three bundles were found under only two or three inches of sand does not explain how the fragments at a deeper level arrived a Tina Bar. There is no basis for speculation on this point at this time.
9. Cooper could have landed as far south (upstream) as the southern end of Caterpillar Island in this scenario.
10. There is corroborating evidence from Rataczak on this, see number 4 above. Georger has interviewed a large number of people on the flight path in the Portland area. All appear to be in agreement that the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side.
Robert99
Tom Kaye has posted that the money in the video did not resemble the money being used in his tests. Consequently, the deterioration mechanism is apparently different.
What in blazes is that supposed to mean? :))
Where did Tom post this?
[edit] oh ok! I git it! Tom is comparing Cooper money found at Tina Bar (photos of same) with his "test money" consisting of new/old bills he used for his water and buried sand tests in 2008... then saying deterioration in those two samples aren't the same. Well DUHHHHHHHHHHHH! Camels in Finland and camels in Egypt are different too! Fords and Chevy's are different too.
Did Tom actually expect that deterioration (conditions) in his test bills would be the same as deterioration in Cooper bills on Tina Bar 1971-1980? What Tom is saying is basically meaningless. This is nonsense.
Not so fast here! Tom's original discussion is in a post on July 17, 2016, 01:31:16 AM, on the "Tina Bar Money Find Thread".
I am the one who said the deterioration process was apparently different between the Tina Bar money and the money Tom used in his tests. Actually, Tom said something like the money in his tests "still looks fine". And that he has no idea how the money got to Tina Bar although he discounts the dredge theory.
My suggestion was that the money found at Tina Bar may have originally gone through repeated wet/dry cycles that caused the fragments to be created. And as has been discussed in the past, one of the bundles showed signs of having been "torqued" which means to me that it was exposed to running water (or maybe wind) while locked in place somewhere along the way.
And to repeat an earlier post of this evening, how the money got from Cooper's impact site to Tina Bar and at different levels in the sand is a mystery to me also.
-
Thanks for the corrections, Robert.
-
Robert99's Alternative Flight Path Theory
I'm writing up R99's alt fp theory. Is this an accurate portrayal of your theories, Robert?
Alternative Flight Path
Because the so-called “believed flight path” offered by the FBI is so contentious, an alternative flight path was developed by Robert Nicholson in 2016. Nicholson, known as Robert99 at the DB Cooper Forum, is a long-time student of the case and is a retired avionics engineer and private pilot.
Nicholson scrapped all the previously held hypotheses and speculated on two major findings. First, the money find at Tina Bar defies explanation and a fly-over there would explain how the money arrived at the beach. Secondly, the pilots had full discretion to fly anywhere they wanted, and Nicholson feels the crew of 305 would be very desirous of passing west of Portland and avoiding urban populations in case DB Cooper detonated his bomb.
Therefore, Nicholson feels that 305 may have left the Victor-23 air corridor at one of its radio beacon stations known as the Malay Intersection, which is located near Mayfield, Washington, about 45 miles northwest of Portland. Nicholson then says that 305 could have flown due south from that point for about 70 miles until it reconnected with Victor-23 in Canby, Oregon, about 25 miles south of Portland. Thus was born the Malay-Canby transect theory.
This straight line flight not only puts 305 west of the populated areas of Vancouver and Portland, but it also places 305 directly above Tina Bar. In addition, this section of the Columbia River is a 40-mile stretch of flood plains and waterways that slosh westward for ten miles, giving this area over 400-square miles of river, marshes and mud for Rataczak to deposit his skyjacker. Remember, Rataczak initially wanted to fly over the Pacific ocean to a refueling in San Francisco, saying, “Let's see how long DB Cooper can hold his breath.” Certainly, flying over this part of the Columbia was a good second-choice for Rataczak.
Nicholson continues with his theories to include how the money actually got deposited at Tina Bar and in the various conditions it was found. Nicholson claims that Cooper was a “no-pull” and cratered near the money find site – landing no further upstream than the northern reaches of Caterpillar Island - and perhaps a few feet higher in elevation than Tina Bar, and far enough hidden in the brush and brambles to avoid detection for years. Nicholson says that the money bag broke apart upon impact, and multiple clumps of money began drifting downward and downstream toward the Tina Bar area. Due to varied weathering patterns, Nicholson feels that one clump of money was thoroughly torn apart and fragmented, forming the first and deeper level of money. Later, the three bundles found by Brian Ingram encountered less weathering and were buried above the initial fragmentation field. All of it was covered eventually through floods, rain and river action until sufficient erosion took place in the T-Bar area to reveal the upper bundles of money that Brian Ingram found on February 10, 1980.
Nicholson's theories are elegant and compelling, but there is no corroborating evidence from Rataczak or other sources. Nevertheless, it does explain the money find.
BRUCE, HOLD EVERYTHING! LET'S START AT THE BEGINING AGAIN. THE NUMBERS BELOW ARE FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES.
1. The "believed flight path" offered by the FBI is so unbelievable that there is nothing to argue about. Simply put, no hijacked airliner would be flown in the manner depicted on the FBI chart under those conditions. Period!
2. The "alternative flight path" was actually developed in 2009 and not 2016.
3. I am a retired aeronautical engineer, general aviation pilot, and have made a small number of skydiver parachute jumps. Ask 377 what an avionics engineer does.
4. There are no radio beacons (or any other navigational hardware) located at the Malay and Canby Intersections. Between these two intersections, the airliner would be given headings to fly by the air traffic controllers who were tracking it on radar. The airliner would not be doing its own navigation. This is why Rataczak told the air traffic control people to "mark your maps" when the crew felt that Cooper had jumped. Otherwise, Rataczak could have given the jump location more accurately if the crew was doing its own navigation between navigations aids.
5. A direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections passes about 1000 feet west of Tina Bar, or approximately the Oregon shore of the Columbia River. Rataczak probably could not tell when the airliner was over the Columbia River or any of the numerous other rivers and lakes in the area of Tina Bar. Remember that the airliner was above an overcast.
6. Along with Rataczak, Himmelsbach, and numerous others, I believe that Cooper died in the jump. I also personally believe that Cooper was a no-pull who landed on solid ground but within a relatively few feet of the water in the Caterpillar Island channel. And that the money bag was still attached to him when he impacted.
7. How the money got from Cooper's impact point to the point where it was found at Tina Bar is a mystery. The recent discovery of the YouTube video of FBI agents digging up bundles and fragments of money buried under a foot or more of sand raises new questions about how it deteriorated. Tom Kaye has posted that the money in the video did not resemble the money being used in his tests. Consequently, the deterioration mechanism is apparently different.
8. The three bundles of money found at Tina Bar apparently arrived at the same time and one of those bundles showed signs of having been "torqued". See Tom Kaye's web site for a discussion of that. The fact that the three bundles were found under only two or three inches of sand does not explain how the fragments at a deeper level arrived a Tina Bar. There is no basis for speculation on this point at this time.
9. Cooper could have landed as far south (upstream) as the southern end of Caterpillar Island in this scenario.
10. There is corroborating evidence from Rataczak on this, see number 4 above. Georger has interviewed a large number of people on the flight path in the Portland area. All appear to be in agreement that the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side.
Robert99
Tom Kaye has posted that the money in the video did not resemble the money being used in his tests. Consequently, the deterioration mechanism is apparently different.
What in blazes is that supposed to mean? :))
Where did Tom post this?
[edit] oh ok! I git it! Tom is comparing Cooper money found at Tina Bar (photos of same) with his "test money" consisting of new/old bills he used for his water and buried sand tests in 2008... then saying deterioration in those two samples aren't the same. Well DUHHHHHHHHHHHH! Camels in Finland and camels in Egypt are different too! Fords and Chevy's are different too.
Did Tom actually expect that deterioration (conditions) in his test bills would be the same as deterioration in Cooper bills on Tina Bar 1971-1980? What Tom is saying is basically meaningless. This is nonsense.
Not so fast here! Tom's original discussion is in a post on July 17, 2016, 01:31:16 AM, on the "Tina Bar Money Find Thread".
I am the one who said the deterioration process was apparently different between the Tina Bar money and the money Tom used in his tests. Actually, Tom said something like the money in his tests "still looks fine". And that he has no idea how the money got to Tina Bar although he discounts the dredge theory.
My suggestion was that the money found at Tina Bar may have originally gone through repeated wet/dry cycles that caused the fragments to be created. And as has been discussed in the past, one of the bundles showed signs of having been "torqued" which means to me that it was exposed to running water (or maybe wind) while locked in place somewhere along the way.
And to repeat an earlier post of this evening, how the money got from Cooper's impact site to Tina Bar and at different levels in the sand is a mystery to me also.
Since nobody knows what conditions the money went through since 71 it is impossible to duplicate unknown conditions. Tom's tests with bills might not even be a valid baseline.
Once again this is why I wanted the US Treasury Forensic group to get involved. They have baselines and experience and very likely they could have given us some guidance or perhaps examined Cooper bills themselves.
-
Interesting SAGE article: http://www.smecc.org/sage-__phoenix_air_defense_sector_&_4629_support_squadron.htm
377
-
Thanks, 377. Very cool.
-
Discussion moved to the proper thread...
Bruce wrote:
Robert, first you suggested that Sail sit in an open air cockpit in flight and see is he froze his ass off. Now, you want me to roll down a window in a moving car.
What does any of that have to do with your comments about wind chill on the aft stairs of a 727?
Please explain.
I keep asking you why you don't believe the reports about the lack of wind on those stairs from those folks who have actually been there.
Perhaps other posters here can help me understand Robert's apparent difficulty in answering these questions.
-
It's all speculation. we are to assume that Cooper knew exactly when to go down the stairs to see the lights from the dam? he gives no indication to timing anything. how would he have known they would fly close to it anyway? then of course the cloud coverage.
what evidence do you guys wish to use, you seem to keep ignoring actual evidence.
The transcripts are wrong.
The path is wrong.
The altitude was wrong.
can we change the wind direction to fit a suspect, or a theory? it's about the only thing nobody has challenged? IMO, this is getting worse than changing Cooper's description.
-
Discussion moved to the proper thread...
Bruce wrote:
Robert, first you suggested that Sail sit in an open air cockpit in flight and see is he froze his ass off. Now, you want me to roll down a window in a moving car.
What does any of that have to do with your comments about wind chill on the aft stairs of a 727?
Please explain.
I keep asking you why you don't believe the reports about the lack of wind on those stairs from those folks who have actually been there.
Perhaps other posters here can help me understand Robert's apparent difficulty in answering these questions.
Bruce,
And perhaps other posters here can help you understand what I have been saying.
But first, let's ask Georger a question since a recent post of his bears directly on this matter.
Georger, when you and your friend were doing 156 MPH in that sports car, was there any wind in the car cockpit? Please note that I am not asking if there was a 156 MPH wind in the cockpit itself. And I am assuming that there was no top on the car.
-
Discussion moved to the proper thread...
Bruce wrote:
Robert, first you suggested that Sail sit in an open air cockpit in flight and see is he froze his ass off. Now, you want me to roll down a window in a moving car.
What does any of that have to do with your comments about wind chill on the aft stairs of a 727?
Please explain.
I keep asking you why you don't believe the reports about the lack of wind on those stairs from those folks who have actually been there.
Perhaps other posters here can help me understand Robert's apparent difficulty in answering these questions.
Bruce,
And perhaps other posters here can help you understand what I have been saying.
But first, let's ask Georger a question since a recent post of his bears directly on this matter.
Georger, when you and your friend were doing 156 MPH in that sports car, was there any wind in the car cockpit? Please note that I am not asking if there was a 156 MPH wind in the cockpit itself. And I am assuming that there was no top on the car.
We had the top on but had we not it would have been unmanageable ... Ive driven many cars at 120+ many times and upwards of 150+ the blast is basically unmanageable unless you have goggles or something on - just the wind blast on your chest is significant. Now lets consider an open cockpit plane. At 150+ its a hurricane. Must use goggles and everything in the cockpit must be nailed down. Sun glasses dont stay on your head at 120+ in any open cockpit (car or plane).
However, I think I know where Bruce is coming from. He is referring to Carr comments, and other people's comments, about wind at the rear seat with the door open and stairs out, and wind on the stairs "during the test flight". As I recall this supposedly there was no wind on the stairs (the stairs were protected). That was the testimony? That is what Bruce is going by. Once you got off the stairs and left the protective envelope of the fuselage, then you were "Into the Blast", as the book title refers to. That "blast" according to Boeing Sky Diving team testimony would ... rip your shoes off, have Cooper knocked unconscious by the money bag, etc etc etc. That dire testimony was the basis of "Cooper died". Then skydivers like 377 surfaced saying: "no big deal! survivable. easy. fun..." and the like.
I dont question the physics of this. Little wind on the back seat, ie 'papers laid flat on my lap' is believable. No appreciable Bernoulli effect at the back seat, or in the doorway, but when you close the hole abruptly then instruments react and Anderson is seeing a pressure affect on his panel. People may feel it in their ears. That's telling and predictable.
It is also worth saying that crew brought up Tina being tethered for security if she was going to open the rear door and get the stair down. As I recall this Cooper said "no problem"? I forget what Cooper said ??
Take your choice.
-
My limited experience jumping from Marine CH46's, we backed down the ramp, one jumper on each side and there was little to no wind. Just a light breeze. No wind chill.
-
I've jumped from the following tailgate prop planes:
C 130
Casa 212
Short Skyvan
No wind on the lowered gate.
Jumped from a DC 9-21 jet, through the ventral airstair exit, but stairs removed. No wind until you cleared the plane.
377
-
Discussion moved to the proper thread...
Bruce wrote:
Robert, first you suggested that Sail sit in an open air cockpit in flight and see is he froze his ass off. Now, you want me to roll down a window in a moving car.
What does any of that have to do with your comments about wind chill on the aft stairs of a 727?
Please explain.
I keep asking you why you don't believe the reports about the lack of wind on those stairs from those folks who have actually been there.
Perhaps other posters here can help me understand Robert's apparent difficulty in answering these questions.
Bruce,
And perhaps other posters here can help you understand what I have been saying.
But first, let's ask Georger a question since a recent post of his bears directly on this matter.
Georger, when you and your friend were doing 156 MPH in that sports car, was there any wind in the car cockpit? Please note that I am not asking if there was a 156 MPH wind in the cockpit itself. And I am assuming that there was no top on the car.
We had the top on but had we not it would have been unmanageable ... Ive driven many cars at 120+ many times and upwards of 150+ the blast is basically unmanageable unless you have goggles or something on - just the wind blast on your chest is significant. Now lets consider an open cockpit plane. At 150+ its a hurricane. Must use goggles and everything in the cockpit must be nailed down. Sun glasses dont stay on your head at 120+ in any open cockpit (car or plane).
However, I think I know where Bruce is coming from. He is referring to Carr comments, and other people's comments, about wind at the rear seat with the door open and stairs out, and wind on the stairs "during the test flight". As I recall this supposedly there was no wind on the stairs (the stairs were protected). That was the testimony? That is what Bruce is going by. Once you got off the stairs and left the protective envelope of the fuselage, then you were "Into the Blast", as the book title refers to. That "blast" according to Boeing Sky Diving team testimony would ... rip your shoes off, have Cooper knocked unconscious by the money bag, etc etc etc. That dire testimony was the basis of "Cooper died". Then skydivers like 377 surfaced saying: "no big deal! survivable. easy. fun..." and the like.
I dont question the physics of this. Little wind on the back seat, ie 'papers laid flat on my lap' is believable. No appreciable Bernoulli effect at the back seat, or in the doorway, but when you close the hole abruptly then instruments react and Anderson is seeing a pressure affect on his panel. People may feel it in their ears. That's telling and predictable.
It is also worth saying that crew brought up Tina being tethered for security if she was going to open the rear door and get the stair down. As I recall this Cooper said "no problem"? I forget what Cooper said ??
Take your choice.
Georger, thanks for the information.
Bruce, Georger has answered your questions about the wind situation in autos and open cockpit airplanes as well as the rear cabin area of the airliner. Below is my response to you about the aft stairs.
There are two or three aft stair steps, just aft of the rear pressure hull door, that are permanently fixed to the fuselage structure. The hinge line for the rest of the stairs is placed so that the bottom of the stairs will be flush with the adjacent areas of the fuselage outer skin when the stairs are retracted.
When the stairs are deployed, there is a fabric "modesty panel" on each side of the stairs. As can be seen in some of the pictures taken of the airliner at Reno, these modesty panels were damaged despite the stairs being only slightly deployed on most of the flight to Reno.
When Cooper passed the stairs hinge line as he headed down the stairs, the stairs would start lowering and he would be exposed to increasing wind forces. To minimize these wind forces (and this does not mean they are being eliminated) Cooper would have to lie down on the stairs and slide down until he went off the end of the stairs. But Cooper would still be exposed to wind forces of some magnitude. Those wind forces would also increase the wind chill factor that Cooper was exposed to. And I see nothing further to discuss on this matter.
To add something to Georger's remarks, once upon a time an aircraft called the F-16 was being prepared for entry into the USAF inventory. It was equipped with a single piece canopy over the cockpit area and a rather small "windshield" over the instrument panel. The question came up as to the pilot's ability to function if the single piece canopy took leave of the airplane without any other problem with the aircraft.
So a wind tunnel test was set up to answer the question. The human test subject in this experiment was the F-16 program director (two stars) and, if I remember correctly, he said he could barely function at all at 180 knots and couldn't do anything meaningful at 200 knots. This meant that the aircraft would have to slow to something less than about 180 knots if the canopy was lost. The F-16 program director in this test went on to acquire a third star, direct the Star Wars Program, and to get the NASA Space Shuttle flying again after the last shuttle loss.
-
My limited experience jumping from Marine CH46's, we backed down the ramp, one jumper on each side and there was little to no wind. Just a light breeze. No wind chill.
I think you are actually saying that there was no noticeable change in the "wind chill". In any event, I think the "wind chill factor" doesn't kick in until the wind is at least 5 MPH or so.
To answer 377's remarks about no wind on the lowered tail gate of a C-130, I recall a video that made the evening network news a year or two ago. Two aircrew members were kneeling very close to the right side of the lowered tail gate and one was also very close to the rear edge of the gate.
Suddenly, the rear most crewman's parachute accidently popped out, streamed out behind him, and he departed the aircraft like he was shot from a gun. This was all an accident and I believe the crewman was uninjured.
-
That guy's spring loaded pilot chute cleared the wind-shielded tailgate area and caught the slipstream.
The MA-1 type spring loaded pilot chutes can launch surprisingly far if they have a free bridle and non compliant (firm) launching pad. We used to pack aluminum launching discs at the base of the compressed pilot chute spring to give it a boost. If it was just compressed against packed canopy material it didn't launch nearly as well.
377
-
That guy's spring loaded pilot chute cleared the wind-shielded tailgate area and caught the slipstream.
The MA-1 type spring loaded pilot chutes can launch surprisingly far if they have a free bridle and non compliant (firm) launching pad. We used to pack aluminum launching discs at the base of the compressed pilot chute spring to give it a boost. If it was just compressed against packed canopy material it didn't launch nearly as well.
377
I have never seen an aluminum launching disc but have seen and used hard plastic ones.
-
R99 and wind chill: "When Cooper passed the stairs hinge line as he headed down the stairs, the stairs would start lowering and he would be exposed to increasing wind forces. To minimize these wind forces (and this does not mean they are being eliminated) Cooper would have to lie down on the stairs and slide down until he went off the end of the stairs. But Cooper would still be exposed to wind forces of some magnitude. Those wind forces would also increase the wind chill factor that Cooper was exposed to. And I see nothing further to discuss on this matter."
(Emphasis added.)
BAS:
Your self-confidence is remarkable, Robert. Nevertheless, Robb Heady walked down the aft stairs of his 727 and reported that he did not feel any appreciable wind - or any wind chill - until he jumped off the stairs.
Do you believe him, Robert?
-
R99 and wind chill: "When Cooper passed the stairs hinge line as he headed down the stairs, the stairs would start lowering and he would be exposed to increasing wind forces. To minimize these wind forces (and this does not mean they are being eliminated) Cooper would have to lie down on the stairs and slide down until he went off the end of the stairs. But Cooper would still be exposed to wind forces of some magnitude. Those wind forces would also increase the wind chill factor that Cooper was exposed to. And I see nothing further to discuss on this matter."
(Emphasis added.)
BAS:
Your self-confidence is remarkable, Robert. Nevertheless, Robb Heady walked down the aft stairs of his 727 and reported that he did not feel any appreciable wind - or any wind chill - until he jumped off the stairs.
Do you believe him, Robert?
"Appreciable wind?" What does that mean?
Regardless, I am sticking with what I have written.
-
I think it would depend on how long someone was on the stairs at that altitude, and temperature. I don't think a lot of wind would be on the stairs, but I don't think it would take long standing on them. the hand rails were probably ice cold. I don't think it would be comfortable at all. given the circumstances, Cooper might of overcome those obstacles, I don't know.
-
R99 and wind chill: "When Cooper passed the stairs hinge line as he headed down the stairs, the stairs would start lowering and he would be exposed to increasing wind forces. To minimize these wind forces (and this does not mean they are being eliminated) Cooper would have to lie down on the stairs and slide down until he went off the end of the stairs. But Cooper would still be exposed to wind forces of some magnitude. Those wind forces would also increase the wind chill factor that Cooper was exposed to. And I see nothing further to discuss on this matter."
(Emphasis added.)
BAS:
Your self-confidence is remarkable, Robert. Nevertheless, Robb Heady walked down the aft stairs of his 727 and reported that he did not feel any appreciable wind - or any wind chill - until he jumped off the stairs.
Do you believe him, Robert?
We would need a wind tunnel test of this to be sure - seeing the 3d wind profile would tell. Very likely such tests were run on the 727 as a component of tests measuring its usefulness as a military cargo deployment tool. ?
We have the test flight photos showing deployment of a 200lb? object. It looks like a smooth parabolic vertical drop profile without appreciable wind interference?
Likewise time spent on the stairs will affect exposure (wind chill). If Cooper went straight off the stairs then the time he spends in 'the blast' is mere seconds (or fractions of seconds) converted to a vertical drop component very quickly. ...... we discussed all of this at DZ.
-
Walk down the stairs backwards. When you get clear of the fuselage pull the ripcord. Pilot chute launches and you are pulled off the stairs. Squidding inflation. No spin or tumble. No brutal opening shock. You are now under an open canopy. Your problems are far from over but you've exited a 727 successfully.
377
-
Walk down the stairs backwards. When you get clear of the fuselage pull the ripcord. Pilot chute launches and you are pulled off the stairs. Squidding inflation. No spin or tumble. No brutal opening shock. You are now under an open canopy. Your problems are far from over but you've exited a 727 successfully.
377
But where and when _ that's the rub. It would be too easy to say the fact he was parted of some of the money means he tumbled... some speculate the two are related.
-
Walk down the stairs backwards. When you get clear of the fuselage pull the ripcord. Pilot chute launches and you are pulled off the stairs. Squidding inflation. No spin or tumble. No brutal opening shock. You are now under an open canopy. Your problems are far from over but you've exited a 727 successfully.
377
But where and when _ that's the rub. It would be too easy to say the fact he was parted of some of the money means he tumbled... some speculate the two are related.
377 has good solid experience, but did Cooper? he could of did a back flip off the stairs for all we know...
-
Regardless, I am sticking with what I have written.
I assume then, you do not believe Robb Heady.
Why not?
-
I assume, Robert, that you know who Robb Heady is. True? Or should I provide more information on Robb?
-
Regardless, I am sticking with what I have written.
I assume then, you do not believe Robb Heady.
Why not?
No, I do not believe Robb Heady. That is, assuming he said anything at all about walking to the bottom of the aft stairs without noticing any "appreciable wind". It is interesting to note that you wrote nothing about that in your Mountain News 2013 article on Heady.
Humans are subjective, Mother Nature is not. The rest has been explained several times previously.
-
Regardless, I am sticking with what I have written.
I assume then, you do not believe Robb Heady.
Why not?
No, I do not believe Robb Heady. That is, assuming he said anything at all about walking to the bottom of the aft stairs without noticing any "appreciable wind". It is interesting to note that you wrote nothing about that in your Mountain News 2013 article on Heady.
Humans are subjective, Mother Nature is not. The rest has been explained several times previously.
I went back and re-read it - cant see anything either, whatever Bruce is beating around the bush about?
My guess is wind chill? Am I allowed 40 more guesses? Huh Bruce?
-
Robb told me that there wasn't any major wind on the stairs, and the only significant wind was after he jumped and hit the slipstream, which tumbled him for about fifteen seconds. Even at 12,000 feet at 11 pm it wasn't too cold. The plane was also traveling at 300-350 mph he figured. That's all in the book, I believe. Page 321 or so.
I suggest, Robert, that until you read my 2016 book on DB Cooper your knowledge of this case must be considered incomplete. Relying on an online news magazine article from 2013 is less substantive.
But I understand the internal pressure you are under. You need Cooper to be a no-pull to put the money near T-Bar by direct impact via the alt-flight path scenario. Claiming a 35 degrees below zero wind chill on the stairs helps solidify that perspective.
All I'm saying is that one man who was on the stairs at 12,000 feet - with 300 mpg winds nearby - said it wasn't too cold. To me, that makes a minus 35 degree wind chill - and its accompanying disorientation and discombobulation of fingers, arms and cognitive functions - hard to accept. Especially since DB Cooper was at a lower altitude and a significantly slower speed.
-
Ah, confirmation bias.
A common affliction in and around the VORTEX. I've had a few bouts myself. ;)
Jo has a reality resistant strain that appears incurable.
377
-
I corresponded with Rob Heady, jet jumper to jet jumper.
His was a much tougher jump than mine due to the higher exit speed, but nothing a skydiver couldn't handle.
377
-
Robb told me that there wasn't any major wind on the stairs, and the only significant wind was after he jumped and hit the slipstream, which tumbled him for about fifteen seconds. Even at 12,000 feet at 11 pm it wasn't too cold. The plane was also traveling at 300-350 mph he figured. That's all in the book, I believe. Page 321 or so.
I suggest, Robert, that until you read my 2016 book on DB Cooper your knowledge of this case must be considered incomplete. Relying on an online news magazine article from 2013 is less substantive.
But I understand the internal pressure you are under. You need Cooper to be a no-pull to put the money near T-Bar by direct impact via the alt-flight path scenario. Claiming a 35 degrees below zero wind chill on the stairs helps solidify that perspective.
All I'm saying is that one man who was on the stairs at 12,000 feet - with 300 mpg winds nearby - said it wasn't too cold. To me, that makes a minus 35 degree wind chill - and its accompanying disorientation and discombobulation of fingers, arms and cognitive functions - hard to accept. Especially since DB Cooper was at a lower altitude and a significantly slower speed.
Bruce, I have compared the text on pages 321 thru 329, inclusive, of the 2016 version of your book with the article you posted on your Mountain News site on March 28, 2013. Basically the only difference I see is that you added some of the comments, that were posted to your site after the story, to your book text. Otherwise, they appear to be the same thing without any particular differences.
In both of these items, you ask Robb Head the following: "Were you cold?" And he replied both times, "It was May or something, so the air was cold - maybe about 45 degrees." But he doesn't say that he himself was cold or not cold despite your reading that into his reply. It should also be remembered that Cooper was in 22 deg F weather, actually measured and not estimated.
For the record, I have NEVER said anything about the temperature being responsible for Cooper being a no-pull. That is straight from your imagination.
Healy's estimate of 300-350 MPH can basically be ignored. If the 727 had been going that fast he would never have made it to the bottom of the stairs as you have claimed.
To repeat, there is nothing in your book or posted article to support your claim that Robb Head denied seeing any evidence of wind chill.
-
Okay, Robb didn't spell it our as definitively as you might desire, and I didn't nail it down for the hard-to-convince reader.
Nevertheless, you do seem to be making the claim that there was significant wind chill on the stairs and that it impacted DB Cooper to a great degree, possibly making him dysfunctional.
No?
If so, then the onus seems to be on you to prove how much wind chill there was and how impactful is was, since all the people who hijacked 727s and walked down the aft stairs made it to the ground. So, if they did, how come DB Cooper didn't? Why were the weather conditions and Cooper's temperament such that he was a no-pull and all the others were not?
Claiming that the conditions were too tough for Cooper to be successful requires you to prove it, since a cursory view of the available information suggests that it wasn't too tough a jump, even in November at 22 degrees F.
Frankly, side comparisons to open-air cockpits, high-speed convertibles, and sticking a hand out a window while driving do not satisfy. You affirm your research status by saying you're a man of science. Okay, then, show us the science that explains both phenomena: Cooper's no-pull and everyone else's success, ie: LaPoint, McNally, et.al.
-
BAS WRITES: Okay, Robb didn't spell it our as definitively as you might desire, and I didn't nail it down for the hard-to-convince reader.
R99 REPLIES: Neither you nor Robb said a single word about "wind chill" in your article and/or book.
BAS WRITES: Nevertheless, you do seem to be making the claim that there was significant wind chill on the stairs and that it impacted DB Cooper to a great degree, possibly making him dysfunctional.
No?
R99 REPLIES: Cooper would have been experiencing a wind chill factor of about -35 degrees (F or C, take your pick) at the bottom of the stairs. I have never said that would make Cooper dysfunctional.
The coldest temperature I have ever personally experienced was more than 65 degrees F below zero in an unheated cockpit. I don't know the exact temperature, but the thermometer needle looked like it had hit a peg at minus 65 degrees. Based on some temperature compensated instruments that I had onboard, the temperature was much lower than standard for the altitude that I was at (36,500 feet). Ice from my breath built up on my oxygen mask, outer flight jacket, and the canopy. Some of the aircraft controls could not be used until I got to a lower and warmer altitude where they became functional again.
So low temperatures are important.
BAS WRITES: If so, then the onus seems to be on you to prove how much wind chill there was and how impactful is was, since all the people who hijacked 727s and walked down the aft stairs made it to the ground. So, if they did, how come DB Cooper didn't? Why were the weather conditions and Cooper's temperament such that he was a no-pull and all the others were not?
Claiming that the conditions were too tough for Cooper to be successful requires you to prove it, since a cursory view of the available information suggests that it wasn't too tough a jump, even in November at 22 degrees F.
R99 REPLIES: Again, your claim that I said Cooper was a no-pull because of the weather conditions is completely unfounded. No one knows why Cooper was a no-pull although it is almost 100 percent certain that he was.
BAS WRITES: Frankly, side comparisons to open-air cockpits, high-speed convertibles, and sticking a hand out a window while driving do not satisfy. You affirm your research status by saying you're a man of science. Okay, then, show us the science that explains both phenomena: Cooper's no-pull and everyone else's success, ie: LaPoint, McNally, et.al.
R99 REPLIES: A few weeks ago, you told me that you were an "Investigator". You make baseless claims above and then attribute them to me. Now you are asking me to prove that your baseless claims are accurate. If you are in fact an "Investigator", then get off your butt and prove your own allegations.
And if you don't understand what Georger was pointing out, using sports cars and open cockpit aircraft as illustrations, or what I have said above and previously about wind chill factors, then you have a very tough road ahead of you.
-
The FBI pushed the certain death jump angle.
The public at large may have bought it, but skydivers didn't.
We wondered who among us did it. And we weren't expecting our Cooper colleague
to be deceased.
377
-
The FBI pushed the certain death jump angle.
The public at large may have bought it, but skydivers didn't.
We wondered who among us did it. And we weren't expecting our Cooper colleague
to be deceased.
377
There is no doubt that the jump could have been made successfully. But for whatever reason(s), all available evidence and analysis indicates that he did not survive the jump and, in fact, could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar as it did.
-
Okay, Robb didn't spell it our as definitively as you might desire, and I didn't nail it down for the hard-to-convince reader.
Nevertheless, you do seem to be making the claim that there was significant wind chill on the stairs and that it impacted DB Cooper to a great degree, possibly making him dysfunctional.
No?
If so, then the onus seems to be on you to prove how much wind chill there was and how impactful is was, since all the people who hijacked 727s and walked down the aft stairs made it to the ground. So, if they did, how come DB Cooper didn't? Why were the weather conditions and Cooper's temperament such that he was a no-pull and all the others were not?
Claiming that the conditions were too tough for Cooper to be successful requires you to prove it, since a cursory view of the available information suggests that it wasn't too tough a jump, even in November at 22 degrees F.
Frankly, side comparisons to open-air cockpits, high-speed convertibles, and sticking a hand out a window while driving do not satisfy. You affirm your research status by saying you're a man of science. Okay, then, show us the science that explains both phenomena: Cooper's no-pull and everyone else's success, ie: LaPoint, McNally, et.al.
Why is all of this suddenly a point of contention since your original interview with Heady was clear back at the start of 2013! ? :-\ Wasnt just about everything that could be said about this discussed at Dropzone years ago ... to the same indecisive end we are approaching here, three years later?
Here is a photo of the rear section of the 727 showing its aerodynamic features. 305 was flying with wheels down, just as shown.
-
The FBI pushed the certain death jump angle.
The public at large may have bought it, but skydivers didn't.
We wondered who among us did it. And we weren't expecting our Cooper colleague
to be deceased.
377
There is no doubt that the jump could have been made successfully. But for whatever reason(s), all available evidence and analysis indicates that he did not survive the jump and, in fact, could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar as it did.
I never quite followed the evidence that he died in the jump. As near I can figure, there is no evidence either way. No body, no parachute and no brief case were ever found. On the other hand, nobody spending the money, either.
Your calculations might show the money went "splat", but that could result from Cooper losing the money on the way down and not going "splat" with it.
What do you see Robert that might indicate Cooper died with the money rather than just dropping it?
-
There is no doubt that the jump could have been made successfully. But for whatever reason(s), all available evidence and analysis indicates that he did not survive the jump and, in fact, could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar as it did.
[/quote]
R99:
Can you elaborate a bit on that last statement...Cooper could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar? How so? I know you've discussed it prior, please refresh my memory, I've been away again for a while. Meyer
-
There is no doubt that the jump could have been made successfully. But for whatever reason(s), all available evidence and analysis indicates that he did not survive the jump and, in fact, could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar as it did.
R99:
Can you elaborate a bit on that last statement...Cooper could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar? How so? I know you've discussed it prior, please refresh my memory, I've been away again for a while. Meyer
[/quote]
Meyer, there is nothing 'a priori' that requires some money being anywhere and he died. The mere fact some money is found anywhere does not mean he died, or did not die. He or somebody else could have lost some of the money in the drainage basin of the Columbia (a reasonable distance from T Bar) and it winds up at T_Bar. For a number of reasons many people believe the money was lost fairly near to Tina Bar ... but again that is a separate matter having nothing at all to do with whether he died or not, in the jump. And, some people who believe he bailed c.8:11 in the Ariel area believe the fact of money appearing on the Columbia means he survived the jump and lived to make his way back to Portland, then lost some of the money on the Vancouver side for some reason.
But, there are no logical imperatives in this, so far as I know. I mean no 'causal imperatives'; dying vs not dying vs money found at any location.
-
I concur. The money find does not automatically and definitively require a dead hijacker.
-
There is no doubt that the jump could have been made successfully. But for whatever reason(s), all available evidence and analysis indicates that he did not survive the jump and, in fact, could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar as it did.
R99:
Can you elaborate a bit on that last statement...Cooper could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar? How so? I know you've discussed it prior, please refresh my memory, I've been away again for a while. Meyer
Meyer, there is nothing 'a priori' that requires some money being anywhere and he died. The mere fact some money is found anywhere does not mean he died, or did not die. He or somebody else could have lost some of the money in the drainage basin of the Columbia (a reasonable distance from T Bar) and it winds up at T_Bar. For a number of reasons many people believe the money was lost fairly near to Tina Bar ... but again that is a separate matter having nothing at all to do with whether he died or not, in the jump. And, some people who believe he bailed c.8:11 in the Ariel area believe the fact of money appearing on the Columbia means he survived the jump and lived to make his way back to Portland, then lost some of the money on the Vancouver side for some reason.
But, there are no logical imperatives in this, so far as I know. I mean no 'causal imperatives'; dying vs not dying vs money found at any location.
[/quote]
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
That was my thinking too, Georger. However, we spent a whole day on the Travel Channel shoot at Tina Bar, on the Columbia River last August, testing R99's theory. I have great respect for R99, I learned a lot more about his theory on the Expedition Unknown shoot, and I would certainly want to let him have the floor to elaborate further.
-
There is no doubt that the jump could have been made successfully. But for whatever reason(s), all available evidence and analysis indicates that he did not survive the jump and, in fact, could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar as it did.
R99:
Can you elaborate a bit on that last statement...Cooper could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar? How so? I know you've discussed it prior, please refresh my memory, I've been away again for a while. Meyer
Meyer, there is nothing 'a priori' that requires some money being anywhere and he died. The mere fact some money is found anywhere does not mean he died, or did not die. He or somebody else could have lost some of the money in the drainage basin of the Columbia (a reasonable distance from T Bar) and it winds up at T_Bar. For a number of reasons many people believe the money was lost fairly near to Tina Bar ... but again that is a separate matter having nothing at all to do with whether he died or not, in the jump. And, some people who believe he bailed c.8:11 in the Ariel area believe the fact of money appearing on the Columbia means he survived the jump and lived to make his way back to Portland, then lost some of the money on the Vancouver side for some reason.
But, there are no logical imperatives in this, so far as I know. I mean no 'causal imperatives'; dying vs not dying vs money found at any location.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
That was my thinking too, Georger. However, we spent a whole day on the Travel Channel shoot at Tina Bar, on the Columbia River last August, testing R99's theory. I have great respect for R99, I learned a lot more about his theory on the Expedition Unknown shoot, and I would certainly want to let him have the floor to elaborate further.
[/quote]
Georger and Meyer,
Okay, I will elaborate further as time permits. Hopefully, starting in about two weeks. Cooper is not the only iron in the fire and some of the others are getting a bit warmer. This is all in addition to the regular activities I am involved in. Or to put it another way, I am pressed for time. But I will get to it as soon as possible.
Robert99
-
Sounds like R99 is just on the edge of the Vortex, not fully in its grip.
He has "other irons in the fire" besides Cooper.
A sign of mental health for sure. ;)
377
-
There is no doubt that the jump could have been made successfully. But for whatever reason(s), all available evidence and analysis indicates that he did not survive the jump and, in fact, could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar as it did.
R99:
Can you elaborate a bit on that last statement...Cooper could not have survived the jump for the money to end up at Tina Bar? How so? I know you've discussed it prior, please refresh my memory, I've been away again for a while. Meyer
Meyer, there is nothing 'a priori' that requires some money being anywhere and he died. The mere fact some money is found anywhere does not mean he died, or did not die. He or somebody else could have lost some of the money in the drainage basin of the Columbia (a reasonable distance from T Bar) and it winds up at T_Bar. For a number of reasons many people believe the money was lost fairly near to Tina Bar ... but again that is a separate matter having nothing at all to do with whether he died or not, in the jump. And, some people who believe he bailed c.8:11 in the Ariel area believe the fact of money appearing on the Columbia means he survived the jump and lived to make his way back to Portland, then lost some of the money on the Vancouver side for some reason.
But, there are no logical imperatives in this, so far as I know. I mean no 'causal imperatives'; dying vs not dying vs money found at any location.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
That was my thinking too, Georger. However, we spent a whole day on the Travel Channel shoot at Tina Bar, on the Columbia River last August, testing R99's theory. I have great respect for R99, I learned a lot more about his theory on the Expedition Unknown shoot, and I would certainly want to let him have the floor to elaborate further.
Georger and Meyer,
Okay, I will elaborate further as time permits. Hopefully, starting in about two weeks. Cooper is not the only iron in the fire and some of the others are getting a bit warmer. This is all in addition to the regular activities I am involved in. Or to put it another way, I am pressed for time. But I will get to it as soon as possible.
Robert99
[/quote]
Mee too, been hunting for this property for months - years! Found it today based on creeks and old rr lines ... the next party will be held on genuine Cooper property! Old family btw.
:))
-
It's all speculation. we are to assume that Cooper knew exactly when to go down the stairs to see the lights from the dam? he gives no indication to timing anything. how would he have known they would fly close to it anyway? then of course the cloud coverage.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
My contention is that Cooper had no indication of timing anything, he had no idea of when or where he was going to jump, and he didn't even care. I remember discussion on the DZ Forum about Tina helping Cooper get the aft stairs to go down. Tina gave no indication that Cooper was agitated, irritated, or panicked about the situation. In fact, he seemed cool, calm, and collected. Some people thought Cooper's original intention was to jump as soon as possible after leaving Seattle -- like around Tacoma (which is close to McChord AFB) or Olympia. Getting the aft stairs to deploy took longer than expected. No big deal, Cooper wasn't even annoyed. Tina didn't indicate he seemed rushed about anything -- he got agitated in Seattle when the fueling took so long, that's pretty much it. When he was cutting parachute chord and strapping the money bag to his waist, Tina didn't say he seemed rushed or panicked. Either this guy had nerves of steel and ice running through his veins, or he was specially trained to do this sort of thing -- like a special ops, creme de la creme, CIA ops, Navy Seals kind of guy -- or both. For him, it was just another day at the office.
As for using the lights of Vancouver as his guide -- that seems pretty far-fetched. With all that cloud cover (I was there that night, remember -- lots of rain and clouds for sure), the Vancouver lights would have done little to help him pinpoint a drop zone -- he could have landed anywhere -- on I-5, on someone's roof, in the River, on the north end of Vancouver, or the south end -- where?. On that night, he couldn't have known anything with any certainty.
Why wasn't he worried about when and where he would actually jump? He didn't seem to be overly concerned about those matters. Possible explanation: he had lots of help on the ground, several pickup points along V-23 -- it didn't really matter where he jumped out -- help was only a stone's throw away. Was he a hired hand? Did he grow old in the witness protection program? A possibility -- why not?
-
It's all speculation. we are to assume that Cooper knew exactly when to go down the stairs to see the lights from the dam? he gives no indication to timing anything. how would he have known they would fly close to it anyway? then of course the cloud coverage.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
My contention is that Cooper had no indication of timing anything, he had no idea of when or where he was going to jump, and he didn't even care. I remember discussion on the DZ Forum about Tina helping Cooper get the aft stairs to go down. Tina gave no indication that Cooper was agitated, irritated, or panicked about the situation. In fact, he seemed cool, calm, and collected. Some people thought Cooper's original intention was to jump as soon as possible after leaving Seattle -- like around Tacoma (which is close to McChord AFB) or Olympia. Getting the aft stairs to deploy took longer than expected. No big deal, Cooper wasn't even annoyed. Tina didn't indicate he seemed rushed about anything -- he got agitated in Seattle when the fueling took so long, that's pretty much it. When he was cutting parachute chord and strapping the money bag to his waist, Tina didn't say he seemed rushed or panicked. Either this guy had nerves of steel and ice running through his veins, or he was specially trained to do this sort of thing -- like a special ops, creme de la creme, CIA ops, Navy Seals kind of guy -- or both. For him, it was just another day at the office.
As for using the lights of Vancouver as his guide -- that seems pretty far-fetched. With all that cloud cover (I was there that night, remember -- lots of rain and clouds for sure), the Vancouver lights would have done little to help him pinpoint a drop zone -- he could have landed anywhere -- on I-5, on someone's roof, in the River, on the north end of Vancouver, or the south end -- where?. On that night, he couldn't have known anything with any certainty.
Why wasn't he worried about when and where he would actually jump? He didn't seem to be overly concerned about those matters. Possible explanation: he had lots of help on the ground, several pickup points along V-23 -- it didn't really matter where he jumped out -- help was only a stone's throw away. Was he a hired hand? Did he grow old in the witness protection program? A possibility -- why not?
Meyer, under this scenario above, how do you account for the money near Vancouver at Tina Bar?
-
Georger You say: "Meyer, under this scenario above, how do you account for the money near Vancouver at Tina Bar?"
I would like to add that the find of the money at Tina Bar and the Father Dwayne directing his son exactly where to smooth the sand for the beach fire is a little suspect when you view the History Channel interview of Dwayne. His shifty eyes and the explanation about where to look on the whole beach and then to uncover the DB money there, leaves me to believe it is a made up story by Dwayne. I think DB Gave Dwayne the money the night of Norjak to finish his get-away to PDX from where DB landed after his jump. Then Dwayne made a place on the beach for his son to find the money and get a little fame and prove it was from SB's loot. That could explane the shifty eyes and the find exactly where the money was planted.
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
-
Georger You say: "Meyer, under this scenario above, how do you account for the money near Vancouver at Tina Bar?"
I would like to add that the find of the money at Tina Bar and the Father Dwayne directing his son exactly where to smooth the sand for the beach fire is a little suspect when you view the History Channel interview of Dwayne. His shifty eyes and the explanation about where to look on the whole beach and then to uncover the DB money there, leaves me to believe it is a made up story by Dwayne. I think DB Gave Dwayne the money the night of Norjak to finish his get-away to PDX from where DB landed after his jump. Then Dwayne made a place on the beach for his son to find the money and get a little fame and prove it was from SB's loot. That could explane the shifty eyes and the find exactly where the money was planted.
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
Commodore Sailshaw,
Just exactly how did Father Dwayne and his friends plant all those bill fragments that were found at various depths on the Tina Bar beach?
-
Ah, yes, the shards. So pesky and problematic these little guys. They blow up SO many great theories. RIP Tom Colbert and the CCT. Propeller Theories; the Commodore. Maybe even Bill Rollins.
I think it is great that the FBI found those shards. The decision to dig at the beach and go down a few feet is the most innovative and creative decision making I have seen demonstrated in Norjak so far. Kudos to Himmelsbach, Dorwin, McPheters, et al.
-
It's all speculation. we are to assume that Cooper knew exactly when to go down the stairs to see the lights from the dam? he gives no indication to timing anything. how would he have known they would fly close to it anyway? then of course the cloud coverage.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
My contention is that Cooper had no indication of timing anything, he had no idea of when or where he was going to jump, and he didn't even care. I remember discussion on the DZ Forum about Tina helping Cooper get the aft stairs to go down. Tina gave no indication that Cooper was agitated, irritated, or panicked about the situation. In fact, he seemed cool, calm, and collected. Some people thought Cooper's original intention was to jump as soon as possible after leaving Seattle -- like around Tacoma (which is close to McChord AFB) or Olympia. Getting the aft stairs to deploy took longer than expected. No big deal, Cooper wasn't even annoyed. Tina didn't indicate he seemed rushed about anything -- he got agitated in Seattle when the fueling took so long, that's pretty much it. When he was cutting parachute chord and strapping the money bag to his waist, Tina didn't say he seemed rushed or panicked. Either this guy had nerves of steel and ice running through his veins, or he was specially trained to do this sort of thing -- like a special ops, creme de la creme, CIA ops, Navy Seals kind of guy -- or both. For him, it was just another day at the office.
As for using the lights of Vancouver as his guide -- that seems pretty far-fetched. With all that cloud cover (I was there that night, remember -- lots of rain and clouds for sure), the Vancouver lights would have done little to help him pinpoint a drop zone -- he could have landed anywhere -- on I-5, on someone's roof, in the River, on the north end of Vancouver, or the south end -- where?. On that night, he couldn't have known anything with any certainty.
Why wasn't he worried about when and where he would actually jump? He didn't seem to be overly concerned about those matters. Possible explanation: he had lots of help on the ground, several pickup points along V-23 -- it didn't really matter where he jumped out -- help was only a stone's throw away. Was he a hired hand? Did he grow old in the witness protection program? A possibility -- why not?
NOT FOR SAILSHAW!
Meyer, under this scenario above, how do you account for the money near Vancouver at Tina Bar?
-
It's all speculation. we are to assume that Cooper knew exactly when to go down the stairs to see the lights from the dam? he gives no indication to timing anything. how would he have known they would fly close to it anyway? then of course the cloud coverage.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
My contention is that Cooper had no indication of timing anything, he had no idea of when or where he was going to jump, and he didn't even care. I remember discussion on the DZ Forum about Tina helping Cooper get the aft stairs to go down. Tina gave no indication that Cooper was agitated, irritated, or panicked about the situation. In fact, he seemed cool, calm, and collected. Some people thought Cooper's original intention was to jump as soon as possible after leaving Seattle -- like around Tacoma (which is close to McChord AFB) or Olympia. Getting the aft stairs to deploy took longer than expected. No big deal, Cooper wasn't even annoyed. Tina didn't indicate he seemed rushed about anything -- he got agitated in Seattle when the fueling took so long, that's pretty much it. When he was cutting parachute chord and strapping the money bag to his waist, Tina didn't say he seemed rushed or panicked. Either this guy had nerves of steel and ice running through his veins, or he was specially trained to do this sort of thing -- like a special ops, creme de la creme, CIA ops, Navy Seals kind of guy -- or both. For him, it was just another day at the office.
As for using the lights of Vancouver as his guide -- that seems pretty far-fetched. With all that cloud cover (I was there that night, remember -- lots of rain and clouds for sure), the Vancouver lights would have done little to help him pinpoint a drop zone -- he could have landed anywhere -- on I-5, on someone's roof, in the River, on the north end of Vancouver, or the south end -- where?. On that night, he couldn't have known anything with any certainty.
Why wasn't he worried about when and where he would actually jump? He didn't seem to be overly concerned about those matters. Possible explanation: he had lots of help on the ground, several pickup points along V-23 -- it didn't really matter where he jumped out -- help was only a stone's throw away. Was he a hired hand? Did he grow old in the witness protection program? A possibility -- why not?
NOT FOR SAILSHAW!
Meyer, under this scenario above, how do you account for the money near Vancouver at Tina Bar?
Yes, Georger, that's the great conundrum-how did the money get to Tina Bar? I don't feel so bad because nobody else has really definitively figured that one out either. Here's an idea: When Cooper jumped, he got into a spin and had to cut the money loose just to save himself. The money ends up in the Columbia River watershed somewhere and eventually ends up at Tina Bar. Yeah, right -- I don't really know. That's the baffling thing for my little theory here, and for most theories, actually.
However, there is a case for the "hired hand" theory on other fronts. My list is not exhaustive, but here are a few points to consider:
(1) How Cooper got to PDX totally undetected can be easily done by the CIA or FBI -- it's what they do.
(2) The FBI has been evasive, inconclusive, and dismissive about most everything from the very beginning. They don't pursue anything because they've already got their guy is. The list goes on and on of how the FBI dropped the ball. The biggest ball they dropped, in my opinion, is losing the cigarette butts. Tell me again how this was just an honest mistake, how that was just an oversight. It was done on purpose, period! The one piece of evidence that would have definitively identified Cooper got lost. Bullshit! No way! You will never get me to believe that it was an honest mistake in a million years.
(3) The scenario I laid out earlier where Cooper just didn't seem to give a rat's ass about when or where to jump. He had lots of help. The one closest to the radio transmission from Cooper was the one who picked him up, probably within an hour of the jump.
(4) The money itself -- why was it so readily available in Seattle? I know, the banks set aside funds specifically for this purpose. But Cooper picked a rather short flight in which to commit his deed -- Portland to Seattle and back, that's not very far -- a 35 minute jaunt. It's as if Cooper knew he could get what he wanted in that short amount of time. He could have picked a longer flight that would have taken more time, thereby providing more time to get the loot assembled and delivered and get the parachutes transported. It's as if he already knew, and the only way he could have known was if he were told, informed, briefed, and coached.
(5) No one before or since 11/24/71 has gotten away with skyjacking a commercial aircraft. It's the only successful one in history. Now think about that...let's put some math to it. The empirical probability that Cooper would be successful in his hijacking attempt, before 11/24/71, was 0% --zero, zippo, nada, nothing. In other words, pulling off this caper was a virtual impossibility. But many say he probably made it -- let's say half say he did, half say he didn't. So, the probability went from 0% to 50+%. That's a pretty amazing jump in the odds. That only could have happened if he got significant assistance. Something that was impossible became certain -- the scales of probability were dramatically tipped. Something significant must have intervened.
You have to remember that at that time, in the early 1970s, there were many hijackings -- like or or two a month. The airline industry was dragging its feet on beefing up security and safer air travel. Some say they didn't remember hearing about the hijackings, because they lived on the east coast, so it must not have been that big of a deal. It was a big deal at the time. In fact, it was fast becoming a major crisis. The airline industry was dragging its feet on beefing up security. Who's to say the government didn't take a back door approach to solving the crisis? Is it really all that far-fetched to think that Nixon talked to the CIA Director and directed him to put his best man on the job -- to carry out something so crazy as successfully hijacking a plane so as to get the airline industry to get off its dead ass and start making air travel safer? Maybe, then again, maybe not....
Meyer
-
The problem I keep seeing with the money found on T-bar is the fact of an explanation is needed on how the money got off the bottom of the river if it came from upstream as far as the Washougal area? pieces found several feet below the money find leads one to ponder as to how that occurred?
A conspiracy makes no sense. why let the case linger unsolved? they had enough hijackings to implement new laws, no need to manufacture one.
-
It's all speculation. we are to assume that Cooper knew exactly when to go down the stairs to see the lights from the dam? he gives no indication to timing anything. how would he have known they would fly close to it anyway? then of course the cloud coverage.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
My contention is that Cooper had no indication of timing anything, he had no idea of when or where he was going to jump, and he didn't even care. I remember discussion on the DZ Forum about Tina helping Cooper get the aft stairs to go down. Tina gave no indication that Cooper was agitated, irritated, or panicked about the situation. In fact, he seemed cool, calm, and collected. Some people thought Cooper's original intention was to jump as soon as possible after leaving Seattle -- like around Tacoma (which is close to McChord AFB) or Olympia. Getting the aft stairs to deploy took longer than expected. No big deal, Cooper wasn't even annoyed. Tina didn't indicate he seemed rushed about anything -- he got agitated in Seattle when the fueling took so long, that's pretty much it. When he was cutting parachute chord and strapping the money bag to his waist, Tina didn't say he seemed rushed or panicked. Either this guy had nerves of steel and ice running through his veins, or he was specially trained to do this sort of thing -- like a special ops, creme de la creme, CIA ops, Navy Seals kind of guy -- or both. For him, it was just another day at the office.
As for using the lights of Vancouver as his guide -- that seems pretty far-fetched. With all that cloud cover (I was there that night, remember -- lots of rain and clouds for sure), the Vancouver lights would have done little to help him pinpoint a drop zone -- he could have landed anywhere -- on I-5, on someone's roof, in the River, on the north end of Vancouver, or the south end -- where?. On that night, he couldn't have known anything with any certainty.
Why wasn't he worried about when and where he would actually jump? He didn't seem to be overly concerned about those matters. Possible explanation: he had lots of help on the ground, several pickup points along V-23 -- it didn't really matter where he jumped out -- help was only a stone's throw away. Was he a hired hand? Did he grow old in the witness protection program? A possibility -- why not?
NOT FOR SAILSHAW!
Meyer, under this scenario above, how do you account for the money near Vancouver at Tina Bar?
Yes, Georger, that's the great conundrum-how did the money get to Tina Bar? I don't feel so bad because nobody else has really definitively figured that one out either. Here's an idea: When Cooper jumped, he got into a spin and had to cut the money loose just to save himself. The money ends up in the Columbia River watershed somewhere and eventually ends up at Tina Bar. Yeah, right -- I don't really know. That's the baffling thing for my little theory here, and for most theories, actually.
However, there is a case for the "hired hand" theory on other fronts. My list is not exhaustive, but here are a few points to consider:
(1) How Cooper got to PDX totally undetected can be easily done by the CIA or FBI -- it's what they do.
(2) The FBI has been evasive, inconclusive, and dismissive about most everything from the very beginning. They don't pursue anything because they've already got their guy is. The list goes on and on of how the FBI dropped the ball. The biggest ball they dropped, in my opinion, is losing the cigarette butts. Tell me again how this was just an honest mistake, how that was just an oversight. It was done on purpose, period! The one piece of evidence that would have definitively identified Cooper got lost. Bullshit! No way! You will never get me to believe that it was an honest mistake in a million years.
(3) The scenario I laid out earlier where Cooper just didn't seem to give a rat's ass about when or where to jump. He had lots of help. The one closest to the radio transmission from Cooper was the one who picked him up, probably within an hour of the jump.
(4) The money itself -- why was it so readily available in Seattle? I know, the banks set aside funds specifically for this purpose. But Cooper picked a rather short flight in which to commit his deed -- Portland to Seattle and back, that's not very far -- a 35 minute jaunt. It's as if Cooper knew he could get what he wanted in that short amount of time. He could have picked a longer flight that would have taken more time, thereby providing more time to get the loot assembled and delivered and get the parachutes transported. It's as if he already knew, and the only way he could have known was if he were told, informed, briefed, and coached.
(5) No one before or since 11/24/71 has gotten away with skyjacking a commercial aircraft. It's the only successful one in history. Now think about that...let's put some math to it. The empirical probability that Cooper would be successful in his hijacking attempt, before 11/24/71, was 0% --zero, zippo, nada, nothing. In other words, pulling off this caper was a virtual impossibility. But many say he probably made it -- let's say half say he did, half say he didn't. So, the probability went from 0% to 50+%. That's a pretty amazing jump in the odds. That only could have happened if he got significant assistance. Something that was impossible became certain -- the scales of probability were dramatically tipped. Something significant must have intervened.
You have to remember that at that time, in the early 1970s, there were many hijackings -- like or or two a month. The airline industry was dragging its feet on beefing up security and safer air travel. Some say they didn't remember hearing about the hijackings, because they lived on the east coast, so it must not have been that big of a deal. It was a big deal at the time. In fact, it was fast becoming a major crisis. The airline industry was dragging its feet on beefing up security. Who's to say the government didn't take a back door approach to solving the crisis? Is it really all that far-fetched to think that Nixon talked to the CIA Director and directed him to put his best man on the job -- to carry out something so crazy as successfully hijacking a plane so as to get the airline industry to get off its dead ass and start making air travel safer? Maybe, then again, maybe not....
Meyer
All good points Meyer - thanks.
The bulk of the hijackings at the time were south ... Cuban etc. If Cooper was Latin the northeast was an opportunity waiting to happen. If Cooper was political, again an opportunity waiting and the milk run flight late day an opportunity. Cooper himself allegedly said: "right place and right time" so he may have been looking-waiting for the right opportunity. He apparently had been following flight schedules and aircraft type - confirmed at the airport if it was a 727 en route (otherwise he might have walked away). Whatever his motivation his remarks and his questions indicate to me, he was waiting for an opportunity and putting the pieces together even as he stood in the airport...
Im not convinced the butts are lost. I base this on Carr's last remarks about them possibly being in Washington or in some lab archive where they may have been sent and tested. Remember according to Carr the butts were split up. Some were sent for analysis to ?? Carr never explained. If Carr is to be believed he was looking for them at several sites ... Reno & etc.
I believe the condition of the money indicates it was at Tina Bar early: 71 to 74. And eroded out from there. How it got there and from where is a puzzle complicated by the FBI and NWA search and flight path maps. My big regret is that we did not get the Forensic Div of the Treasury involved in this. Their experience and wisdom in this matter could have been crucial. As it stands we really don't have 'any' decomposition models to go by - other than people's 'seat of pants' opinions. But I agree with Tom and others that traits in the money indicate a length exposure to natural forces without having moved too much since is deposition on Tina 1971-74 and not as late as 1978-80 as Palmer rather flippantly first said then had to back away from ... and, if the shards at significant depths mean anything it only reinforces an early deposition model.
Thanks as always Meyer! ;)
-
Shutter: You say "the problem I keep seeing with the money found on T-bar is the fact of an explanation is needed on how the money got off the bottom of the river if it came from upstream as far as the Washougal area? pieces found several feet below the money find leads one to ponder as to how that occurred?"
I say: " The money (three bundles) on Tina Bar were a plant by Dwayne Ingram so his son could find the bundles. This is based upon the interview of Dwayne on the History Channel 4 hr program. How else could he have pointed to the exact spot where his son would find the money? His shifty eyes tell it all, it was a phony story. And Georger, he probably placed the money fragments in the bottom of the hole he dug and then the three bundles went on the surface and covered by just a little sand." The question is where did he get the three bundles? Were they given to him the night of Norjak by DB to thank him for the ride back to PDX airport and DB's parked car?
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
-
Shutter: You say "the problem I keep seeing with the money found on T-bar is the fact of an explanation is needed on how the money got off the bottom of the river if it came from upstream as far as the Washougal area? pieces found several feet below the money find leads one to ponder as to how that occurred?"
I say: " The money (three bundles) on Tina Bar were a plant by Dwayne Ingram so his son could find the bundles. This is based upon the interview of Dwayne on the History Channel 4 hr program. How else could he have pointed to the exact spot where his son would find the money? His shifty eyes tell it all, it was a phony story. And Georger, he probably placed the money fragments in the bottom of the hole he dug and then the three bundles went on the surface and covered by just a little sand." The question is where did he get the three bundles? Were they given to him the night of Norjak by DB to thank him for the ride back to PDX airport and DB's parked car?
Bob Sailshaw
sailshaw00@gmail.com
Sailshaw, the real question here is how you come up with this story. There was a rather widespread "field" of fragments at different levels in the sand at Tina Bar. So far, neither you, me, or anyone else on this thread has been able to come up with a valid explanation as to how that happened.
-
Until the currency chard field was established to a reasonable degree of certainty, I too suspected that Brian was subtly led to his dig spot by his parents.
If the chard field evidence is true, I think it rules out a plant by the Ingrams.
Rackstraw but for his age, is an intriguing DBC candidate. Could the witnesses have been that far off about DBC's age? It's certainly possible, but not too likely.
Aviation crimes are rare. Big bold crimes as a first criminal offense are rare. Rackstraw has a bold prior aviation crime, a fake mayday/ditching as a ruse to steal a plane. That is interesting to me.
Peterson has no priors (if you except his harassment arrests during civil rights work), of any kind.
377
-
The problem I keep seeing with the money found on T-bar is the fact of an explanation is needed on how the money got off the bottom of the river if it came from upstream as far as the Washougal area? pieces found several feet below the money find leads one to ponder as to how that occurred?
A conspiracy makes no sense. why let the case linger unsolved? they had enough hijackings to implement new laws, no need to manufacture one.
There is the old dredging theory from the Washougal theory -- the dredger spewed some of the money bag, in tact, from the river bottom onto the beach at Tina Bar.
How did the money pieces get several feet below the 3 packets? Possible answer: multiple dredgings. One guy I talked to said dredgings were pretty common in the Tina Bar area -- as was massive erosion. He showed us where the shore used to be. There was log on the hillside about 15 feet above us, and the horizontal distance to the log was probably 30 feet. He said that's where the beach used to be when he was a kid.
Once the dredger coughed up yards of sand from the river bottom, a backhoe would come along and spread the sand out. If a big pile of sand had to be moved from one place to another, it would be normal for the backhoe to take over and start scooping and piling. Maybe on one of the first spread operations, a bundle of bills got caught in the backhoe blade and got spread out, undetected. No one saw it. The three bundles, however, were still there, buried under the sand, but in tact. On one or more dredgings and spreadings later, the 3 bundles got scooped up together, in tact -- they stayed together. Later, maybe much later, they got dumped close by and above the money fragments. More sand from subsequent dredgings over the years covered them up even more, but the massive erosion there took over. Eventually the erosion took away enough sand to expose the packets, and the rest is history -- the money shards were eventually found below, and close to, the money packets. Far fetched? Maybe, then again, maybe not.
Meyer
-
The problem I keep seeing with the money found on T-bar is the fact of an explanation is needed on how the money got off the bottom of the river if it came from upstream as far as the Washougal area? pieces found several feet below the money find leads one to ponder as to how that occurred?
A conspiracy makes no sense. why let the case linger unsolved? they had enough hijackings to implement new laws, no need to manufacture one.
Because there is too much chance of the cover-up to be exposed. Laws were broken to carry out this deed. Governmental agencies colluded to commit a criminal act. Well intentioned or not, exposure would mean accountability, and folks in high places would most likely go to jail. That just wasn't going to happen. Therefore, the cover up has to continue. In turn, Cooper, their hired hand, would have to become a Spook number, or be stowed away forever in witness protection -- never to be heard from again. Exposing his identity could possibly blow the top off the entire terrible deed and expose the whole thing. Maybe that's why the cigarette butts conveniently, on purpose, got lost somewhere is all the shuffle. It was the one piece of physical evidence that could have definitively nailed down the identity of Cooper. Folks in high places (CIA,FBI, White House) were going to prevent that from happening -- at all costs. It's not like Nixon was above it, he was right in the middle of Watergate at the time!
Am I the reincarnation of Bob Knoss-tradamus? I'm not trying to be. A cover up explains so many things that pet theories don't. All still circumstantial, I know. Just think about it....
Meyer
-
You sound like Knoss, but not in a bad way...don't take it wrong.. O0
most unsolved mysteries end up surrounding conspiracies simply due to them not be solved, or understood. it's an easy explanation to a complicated problem.
If it was all a set up, how did physical evidence appear years later? hijackings were a problem, mainly political, but still a problem for the United States, not just specific area's. I would be more inclined to believe certain things regarding the case have been compromised. The FBI appears to have a track record of behavior. they don't like being wrong.
They seem to have it arranged so even if they allow people in to view the files, it's very possible they are not getting the gold package. that's extra. missing butts, flight data, everything critical to the case has somehow become missing.
I always fall back to the escape from Alcatraz. buried deep, really deep in the files were reports of a raft, and a stolen car following the escape. now, it's possible these guys got off the island in a way nobody imagined. if this ends up being true, all the conspiracies, and cover ups are exposed.
-
Is there ANY way that the Ingrams could have planted the currency (or been shown where it lay) and led Brian to the spot AND ALSO have the currency shard field documented in the TV news segment that Georger posted?
I don't see it, but Maybe Bruce can do some remote viewing, channeling or just plain imagining out of the box. ;)
377
-
The problem I keep seeing with the money found on T-bar is the fact of an explanation is needed on how the money got off the bottom of the river if it came from upstream as far as the Washougal area? pieces found several feet below the money find leads one to ponder as to how that occurred?
A conspiracy makes no sense. why let the case linger unsolved? they had enough hijackings to implement new laws, no need to manufacture one.
There is the old dredging theory from the Washougal theory -- the dredger spewed some of the money bag, in tact, from the river bottom onto the beach at Tina Bar.
How did the money pieces get several feet below the 3 packets? Possible answer: multiple dredgings. One guy I talked to said dredgings were pretty common in the Tina Bar area -- as was massive erosion. He showed us where the shore used to be. There was log on the hillside about 15 feet above us, and the horizontal distance to the log was probably 30 feet. He said that's where the beach used to be when he was a kid.
Once the dredger coughed up yards of sand from the river bottom, a backhoe would come along and spread the sand out. If a big pile of sand had to be moved from one place to another, it would be normal for the backhoe to take over and start scooping and piling. Maybe on one of the first spread operations, a bundle of bills got caught in the backhoe blade and got spread out, undetected. No one saw it. The three bundles, however, were still there, buried under the sand, but in tact. On one or more dredgings and spreadings later, the 3 bundles got scooped up together, in tact -- they stayed together. Later, maybe much later, they got dumped close by and above the money fragments. More sand from subsequent dredgings over the years covered them up even more, but the massive erosion there took over. Eventually the erosion took away enough sand to expose the packets, and the rest is history -- the money shards were eventually found below, and close to, the money packets. Far fetched? Maybe, then again, maybe not.
Meyer
The dredging is of course the simplest solution - a few bundles left in tact plus pieces distributed at different depths all in the same general area. A mechanical solution. Years later the Ingram bundles appear at the surface due to erosion but pieces are deeper and undisturbed and generally upstream or closer to the shoreline than the bundles.
But, what accounts for the money (bagged etc) being on the bottom to be dredged up at all, near Tina Bar? Thats the part I have difficulty with.
This money did not wash up off the bottom of the Columbia on to Tina Bar on its own! That's impossible.
This money was not dragged upstream from the Lewis on a propeller!
This money either came up with the dredging material or it washed in from nearby as R99 thinks. Those are the only two high probability alternatives.
-
Is there ANY way that the Ingrams could have planted the currency (or been shown where it lay) and led Brian to the spot AND ALSO have the currency shard field documented in the TV news segment that Georger posted?
I don't see it, but Maybe Bruce can do some remote viewing, channeling or just plain imagining out of the box. ;)
377
No.
-
If, and I mean if the money got there via dredge it should of placed the money all over the place due to slurry coming out of the pipe (liquid) possibly portions going right back into the river, I don't know. if they found pieces at 3 feet, isn't that already below, or with the dredge layer?
The bag, if it was intact could of been discarded as trash if it ever surfaced....
-
Is there ANY way that the Ingrams could have planted the currency (or been shown where it lay) and led Brian to the spot AND ALSO have the currency shard field documented in the TV news segment that Georger posted?
I don't see it, but Maybe Bruce can do some remote viewing, channeling or just plain imagining out of the box. ;)
377
I'm trying to think what reason Dwayne Ingram would have had for concocting a story about how he found the money.
It seems he realized (pretty early on) that it was likely the Cooper money. Did he think he couldn't just return it to a bank (it would be identified), so he figured he'd have more public sympathy to a claim if it was an 8 year old that found it?
If that's the case, it seems to me he was right. I'm not a lawyer, but from my couple of law classes the insurance company would seem to be the rightful owner of all of the money -- or at least its cash equivalent.
-
When it comes down to evidence, is there any that people accept? several months ago I ran the final test on the path, but the conclusions didn't phase anyone, in fact I read an article stating a "proper simulation needs to be done" time slipped by on me, and I took way to long with the whole project. the video views were always low, even on the DZ. without knowing exactly when Cooper jumped makes it hard to pinpoint an actual jump time. the simulation would have to be exact, down to the second. every twist and turn they did. I believe I came close, but since it runs along with the FBI map, it must be wrong? with the exception of the lake Merwin area.
There were limited adjustments needed to match the transcripts, including using auto pilot as the FBI records show (according to Tom Kaye). actually, it states it was used most of the time. it was suppose to be a stepping stone to bigger things, perhaps it will, I don't know. there is only one commercial 727 simulator left, so someone needs to run the path with it before it disappears. the owner wasn't to keen about the whole idea.
-
I say Cooper was an intelligent man who carefully planned this hijacking.
Rather than get caught in a roadblock trying to drive away from the dropzone, Cooper had a boat waiting in the Lewis River just downstream of the Merwin Dam. He took this boat down the Lewis River, up the Columbia to Tena Bar, where his pickup truck and boat trailer were waiting. During the period of transferring money from his boat to the truck, he loses a few bundles. These bundles are what was found by Brian Ingram over 8 years later.
So the money got to Tena Bar on the night of the hijacking. Three of the discovered bundles were intact, but deteriorated. A fourth bundle probably was nearer the surface and its elastic band broke. This bundle of money decayed and the fragments got spread around in the vicinity. Some of these bill fragments may have been washed or blown away. I think Galen Cook mentions some young fisherman, prior to Brian Ingram's find, saw some individual bill sections on the beach up to 100 yards away.
Mountain News Article (https://themountainnewswa.net/2012/11/16/the-hunt-for-db-cooper-new-evidence-on-money-find-sheds-harsh-light-on-fbi-investigation-but-excites-citizen-sleuths/)
-
If they are correct about the sand layers, how do you explain the dredge layer below the money found in 1980? your theory is based on Cooper jumping at the original time, and landing near Lake Merwin.
-
Yo, Bill, the money shards were found buried three feet below Brian's bundles. That's the rub. How does one account for two very different money finds? (!)
-
If they are correct about the sand layers, how do you explain the dredge layer below the money found in 1980? your theory is based on Cooper jumping at the original time, and landing near Lake Merwin.
Tom Kaye has said that they got it wrong concerning the dredge layers at the money find. The dredge layers were south of the actual money location.
Citizen Sleuths (http://www.citizensleuths.com/tenabar.html)
Under Research conclusions, the Sleuths write; "The money find on Tena Bar is complicated. The rubber band experiments allow less than a year for the money to become entombed in the sand. The money continues to resist all natural explanations for how it arrived on Tena Bar. The story behind the money may be as big as the Cooper story itself. There is no hard evidence that Cooper died in the jump so it remains a primary debate. If Cooper walked out of the woods, there would certainly be easier ways to explain the money if human intervention was involved."
So there you have their analysis: Less than one year for the money to become entombed in the sand.
At the D. B. Cooper Symposium in 2011, Tom Kaye states: "...there is no way the $5,800 in Cooper's cash found years after the hijacking by 8-year-old Brian Ingram in a sand bar on the Columbia River northwest of Vancouver could have gotten there naturally".
This all seems to support a theory where Cooper inadvertently loses the money as he escapes on the evening of the hijacking.
-
Yo, Bill, the money shards were found buried three feet below Brian's bundles. That's the rub. How does one account for two very different money finds? (!)
Bruce, I can only conjecture, but it is my belief that there was a fourth bundle (up to 35 more serial numbers have been identified by piecing some of the money fragments together). The rubber bands on this bundle broke, and the fragments as well as the center of the bills began to decay. These fragments were free to move individually, as they were no longer retained as a bundle. With the wind and the water current, some of these fragments may have moved, and then got buried by sediment in the river water (I'm not sure where the seasonal high water mark might be relative to the location of the 3 bundles).
In any event, I say that the fourth bundle was decayed and its fragments were distributed naturally by the action of the wind and water currents.
-
He seems to base this on the Fazio's only pushing the sand 50 yards in each direction...almost 200,000 cubic yards were placed on the shoreline. I find it hard to believe they only utilized a small portion of the constant eroding shoreline. no records state the sand was moved off the beach. so, they would basically, leave most of the dredge pile untouched....
Tom also states
we can speculate that he must have had some human interaction that could have eventually led to the money being buried on Tena Bar. How the Cooper bundles came to be buried where they were remains as big a mystery as who D.B. Cooper was.
-
And, of course, human interaction can mean that Cooper transported the money on the night in question to Tena Bar as he made his getaway.
The other significant detail related to Tena Bar is that Cooper leaves from here via a small boat (I say an inflatable like a Zodiac) at noon to reach PDX and then walks to the airport terminal (Zodiac tied up along shoreline of Columbia near PDX). After the hijacking, and jumping out, he goes to his boat located downstream of Merwin Dam, and tools down the Lewis River and then up river to Tena Bar. Once he has the money and his aluminum boat secured on the trailer, he drives through Vancouver and across the bridge to Portland. He drives along NE Marine drive to the Zodiac, deflates it, and loads it into the aluminum boat.
So from this location (Tena Bar), not only does he get 20 miles away from the drop zone elusively and in a short period of time, he also returns to the shoreline near PDX to take away any evidence that he was ever at the airport.
With this in mind, there are no longer any "mysteries" regarding the night of November 24, 1971. Cooper escaped with the money!
-
And, of course, human interaction can mean that Cooper transported the money on the night in question to Tena Bar as he made his getaway.
The other significant detail related to Tena Bar is that Cooper leaves from here via a small boat (I say an inflatable like a Zodiac) at noon to reach PDX and then walks to the airport terminal (Zodiac tied up along shoreline of Columbia near PDX). After the hijacking, and jumping out, he goes to his boat located downstream of Merwin Dam, and tools down the Lewis River and then up river to Tena Bar. Once he has the money and his aluminum boat secured on the trailer, he drives through Vancouver and across the bridge to Portland. He drives along NE Marine drive to the Zodiac, deflates it, and loads it into the aluminum boat.
So from this location (Tena Bar), not only does he get 20 miles away from the drop zone elusively and in a short period of time, he also returns to the shoreline near PDX to take away any evidence that he was ever at the airport.
With this in mind, there are no longer any "mysteries" regarding the night of November 24, 1971. Cooper escaped with the money!
Bill,
First, let me say welcome to the thread and you certainly seem to be more stable emotionally than Bruce Smith was indicating recently.
Basically, in your statements above you are assuming that Cooper knew his location when he jumped. Actually, the airliner was above a 5000 foot overcast and several lower cloud layers and it is very, very unlikely that he could estimate his positon to within a radius of 20 miles. Your statements require pinpoint position information and Cooper simply did not have that and could not make the various segments of the trip in the general time frame you propose.
Several years ago on the DZ thread, if I remember this incorrectly would some of the former DZ posters correct me, Amazon indicated that the Lewis River between the Merwin Dam and the Columbia River had areas that were almost impassable for even small boats. And trying to do this at night would greatly complicate the matter. From the Merwin Dam area, it is probably about 30 miles to the Columbia River and then about another 20 miles upstream to the Tina Bar area. At best, it would probably take at least five hours for that segment of trip.
In the Portland Airport area, I presume that the road adjacent to the Columbia River is the one you are referring to. I drove over that very road a few weeks back and I spent several hours shopping at a mall that is located between that road and the Portland Airport. It would be quite a hike for Cooper to walk from the Columbia River to the Portland Airport terminal. He would have to take a lengthy walk down the I-205 area east of the airport and then approach the terminal area from the southeast. That would be a lengthy walk and someone would probably have remembered seeing him and mentioned it to the FBI. Very few people arrive at airport terminals after walking five miles or so. And he certainly could not have climbed the airport fence in broad daylight without the tower and security people seeing him.
So to make a long story short, may I suggest that your ideas need further work. Good luck.
Robert99
-
Is there ANY way that the Ingrams could have planted the currency (or been shown where it lay) and led Brian to the spot AND ALSO have the currency shard field documented in the TV news segment that Georger posted?
I don't see it, but Maybe Bruce can do some remote viewing, channeling or just plain imagining out of the box. ;)
377
... they might have been tipped to money being out there so went looking.
-
If, and I mean if the money got there via dredge it should of placed the money all over the place due to slurry coming out of the pipe (liquid) possibly portions going right back into the river, I don't know. if they found pieces at 3 feet, isn't that already below, or with the dredge layer?
The bag, if it was intact could of been discarded as trash if it ever surfaced....
Not necessarily. Even the whole bag of money would have been shredded then compacted into a relatively small space very quickly, against the infinitely greater volume of sand and other debris being processed and forced into the tube. This isn't like a stirring pot. The money would have been deposited in a very small area then covered quickly. Spreading might have moved the portion that did not drain back into the Columbia. As people have noted erosion is quick and decisive at Tina Bar so there is a possibility the original deposit(s) might have been moved further north, away from the debris pile, say in the first year or two after 1974. Remember there were several very high water periods with lots of erosion at Tina Bar after the dredging and into 1976. 1976, for example, saw even higher flood levels numbers at Tina Bar than 1980 which Palmer cited! I dont think Palmer looked into the water levels at Tina Bar very closely - I think he was merely citing a hydrologist whose concern (because of Himmelsbach) was the Washougal vs. Tina Bar.
But as far as I can tell the mechanics of the dredging is compatable or matches pretty closely the forensic scene people found during the excavation of the Ingram find... including a confined area where bundles and related money shards buried as deep as 3 feet are all found in the same general area leading :"down stream" of the dredging pile locations (not that far away).
-
Is there ANY way that the Ingrams could have planted the currency (or been shown where it lay) and led Brian to the spot AND ALSO have the currency shard field documented in the TV news segment that Georger posted?
I don't see it, but Maybe Bruce can do some remote viewing, channeling or just plain imagining out of the box. ;)
377
I'm trying to think what reason Dwayne Ingram would have had for concocting a story about how he found the money.
It seems he realized (pretty early on) that it was likely the Cooper money. Did he think he couldn't just return it to a bank (it would be identified), so he figured he'd have more public sympathy to a claim if it was an 8 year old that found it?
If that's the case, it seems to me he was right. I'm not a lawyer, but from my couple of law classes the insurance company would seem to be the rightful owner of all of the money -- or at least its cash equivalent.
It seems he realized (pretty early on) that it was likely the Cooper money?
He didn't. This has all been explained before, in detail (using FBI summaries). Read the thread.
-
The dredge is still hard to dismiss just as the plane is also hard to dismiss. these are two mechanical devices that are facts, and human intervention being speculation!
we have an early report from the FBI stating it's possible a satchel could of made it through.
I have emailed several dredge/pump companies stating the same.
The dredge operation was offshore of the crime scene.
The material was deposited near the crime scene.
The plane crossed somewhere upstream.
I was hoping to get a test with a dredge done several months ago, but the testing never occurred due to availability. now, did it happen this way? I have no idea since no testing was done, but it needs to be in order to figure out what happened. I also wish someone would take a few bills, wrap them in a rubber band, and place it in an area similar, or close to the actual place the money was found to try and recreate what happened to the money.
nobody seems to know what the money would look like after being submerged for several years (in a bag) prior to being found on the shoreline. Cooper "clogging up the dredge" is only one scenario, and not the possibility of only losing the money. I believe we have far too many possibilities to dismiss prior to turning Cooper into 007 with motor boats, and cinematic type escapes.
-
Bill,
First, let me say welcome to the thread and you certainly seem to be more stable emotionally than Bruce Smith was indicating recently.
Basically, in your statements above you are assuming that Cooper knew his location when he jumped. Actually, the airliner was above a 5000 foot overcast and several lower cloud layers and it is very, very unlikely that he could estimate his positon to within a radius of 20 miles. Your statements require pinpoint position information and Cooper simply did not have that and could not make the various segments of the trip in the general time frame you propose.
Several years ago on the DZ thread, if I remember this incorrectly would some of the former DZ posters correct me, Amazon indicated that the Lewis River between the Merwin Dam and the Columbia River had areas that were almost impassable for even small boats. And trying to do this at night would greatly complicate the matter. From the Merwin Dam area, it is probably about 30 miles to the Columbia River and then about another 20 miles upstream to the Tina Bar area. At best, it would probably take at least five hours for that segment of trip.
In the Portland Airport area, I presume that the road adjacent to the Columbia River is the one you are referring to. I drove over that very road a few weeks back and I spent several hours shopping at a mall that is located between that road and the Portland Airport. It would be quite a hike for Cooper to walk from the Columbia River to the Portland Airport terminal. He would have to take a lengthy walk down the I-205 area east of the airport and then approach the terminal area from the southeast. That would be a lengthy walk and someone would probably have remembered seeing him and mentioned it to the FBI. Very few people arrive at airport terminals after walking five miles or so. And he certainly could not have climbed the airport fence in broad daylight without the tower and security people seeing him.
So to make a long story short, may I suggest that your ideas need further work. Good luck.
Robert99
Robert,
First, regarding Cooper's jump, think about this from the perspective of an engineer and instrument-rated pilot (which I am and I believe Cooper is as well). Why wouldn't you jump on a clear moonlit night? Seems much easier, doesn't it?
Surely jumping on a clear night simplifies Cooper's task, but what about the chase planes? Cooper knows there will be chase planes, so he can't jump on a clear night because they will see him and report his position as he descends on his parachute. Before he knows it, he will be surrounded by police, FBI, helicopters, etc. The clear night jump leads to an easy capture and Cooper knows this. Thus he selects a night with basically zero visibility above 5000', but clear below with 10-15 miles of visibility.
So since aircraft use avionics to determine their position when flying, Cooper configures some avionics device to determine his position. I believe it is DME (distance measuring equipment). DME was the latest and the greatest in 1971, but it could have been a standard NAV or ADF (automatic direction finder). Either way, Cooper knew exactly where he was from the avionics in his briefcase (battery(s) and mass of wires). I believe Cooper took a half a dozen trips from PDX to SEA in the month prior to the hijacking, testing this equipment. He had it calibrated to work, you can be assured. And next look at where he was projected to have landed. From the FBI Landing Zone Map at Sluggo's website, it is estimated that he jumped at point A and if he pulled his ripcord soon after the jump, he landed at point B. So Cooper's plan was to drift towards the well-lit Merwin Dam, land in the fields south and west of the dam, and then walk a short distance to the Lewis River. This isn't an accident!! If Cooper landed 20 miles north in Pigeon Springs, which looks like an area with logging roads and timber harvests, I would agree that he jumped blindly. But seeing the precision with which he jumped and drifted, I realize this was his plan (Cooper is a pilot, so he has the same winds aloft data as Northwest, so he calculated his drift distance and jump point earlier in the day).
I believe that the Lewis River is navigable from the dam to the river, if you take the correct route. At one point the river splits, and one branch has waterfalls, I believe. One map I saw showed mile 21 at the dam, so it is about 21 miles to the Columbia. From there it is only about 8 miles to Tena Bar. But you are correct, this trip will require a few hours in a small craft like a 12' aluminum boat. The advantage, though, is that he avoids any roadblocks and is miles away from the dropzone in a quiet rural area when he arrives at Tena Bar. Be assured again that Cooper has made this trip numerous times in the month prior to the hijacking.
I don't know what PDX was like in 1971, but there may not have been a perimeter fence. Also, where Cooper is a pilot, he may have known of a more direct route to the terminal. The economy parking lot today is about 1-1/2 miles east of the terminal, but they provide a free shuttle service to the terminal. Did that parking lot and service exist in 1971? I'm not sure of this next tidbit, as there are limited aerial views of the airport in 1971, but the I-205 bridge appeared to be under construction at the time. If you check Google Earth, you will see several marinas along the Columbia in the vicinity of the airport. One is almost directly across from the terminal.
According to Google, it is at best a 2.8 mile walk to the terminal from the I-205 bridge, and takes about 1 hour. And even if people saw him, it wouldn't necessarily lead investigators to a boat!
PDX Aerial View (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/45.5738678,-122.5475333/45.5895369,-122.5920108/@45.5817122,-122.5783645,4375m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e2)
Again, Cooper has surveyed PDX and made the trip from Tena Bar to PDX numerous times in the month prior to the hijacking. He has a plan!
-
The dredge is still hard to dismiss just as the plane is also hard to dismiss. these are two mechanical devices that are facts, and human intervention being speculation!
we have an early report from the FBI stating it's possible a satchel could of made it through.
I have emailed several dredge/pump companies stating the same.
The dredge operation was offshore of the crime scene.
The material was deposited near the crime scene.
The plane crossed somewhere upstream.
I was hoping to get a test with a dredge done several months ago, but the testing never occurred due to availability. now, did it happen this way? I have no idea since no testing was done, but it needs to be in order to figure out what happened. I also wish someone would take a few bills, wrap them in a rubber band, and place it in an area similar, or close to the actual place the money was found to try and recreate what happened to the money.
nobody seems to know what the money would look like after being submerged for several years (in a bag) prior to being found on the shoreline. Cooper "clogging up the dredge" is only one scenario, and not the possibility of only losing the money. I believe we have far too many possibilities to dismiss prior to turning Cooper into 007 with motor boats, and cinematic type escapes.
The Citizen Sleuths have done extensive testing on the money and rubber bands. They have concluded that the money did not arrive at Tena Bar from natural causes. And Andrade also agrees, as the money is found within about a 1 square foot area and the bills are neatly stacked one on top of the other. This order would not be seen if the money floated down the river or went through a dredge machine. It's human intervention, either a plant of the money at some date, or as I state, it arrived there with Cooper on the night of the hijacking and was lost by mistake.
https://martinandrade.wordpress.com/2014/11/03/d-b-cooper-conjecture-the-tena-bar-find/ (https://martinandrade.wordpress.com/2014/11/03/d-b-cooper-conjecture-the-tena-bar-find/)
You may call it a cinematic escape that would be typical of a James Bond film, however, it you look at Cooper's plan, everything is done as a rational decision to avoid a problem. For instance, by using a boat to get to PDX, Cooper avoids leaving any traceable evidence for investigators.
So tell me a better scenario where we no longer have questions like:
1) how did Cooper get to PDX without leaving evidence?
2) How come we have no trace of him at the drop zone, no dead body, no parachute, no money?
3) How did he do this without an accomplice?
4) How did the money get to Tena Bar and why was it in such an "orderly" condition?
5) Why no missing persons report?
I have a high degree of confidence that this is how Cooper planned his escapade, and it is so ingenious, that it has bewildered everyone for 45 years.
-
Is there ANY way that the Ingrams could have planted the currency (or been shown where it lay) and led Brian to the spot AND ALSO have the currency shard field documented in the TV news segment that Georger posted?
I don't see it, but Maybe Bruce can do some remote viewing, channeling or just plain imagining out of the box. ;)
377
I'm trying to think what reason Dwayne Ingram would have had for concocting a story about how he found the money.
It seems he realized (pretty early on) that it was likely the Cooper money. Did he think he couldn't just return it to a bank (it would be identified), so he figured he'd have more public sympathy to a claim if it was an 8 year old that found it?
If that's the case, it seems to me he was right. I'm not a lawyer, but from my couple of law classes the insurance company would seem to be the rightful owner of all of the money -- or at least its cash equivalent.
It seems he realized (pretty early on) that it was likely the Cooper money?
He didn't. This has all been explained before, in detail (using FBI summaries). Read the thread.
I guess it depends on what is meant by "pretty early on". The money was found on Sunday, February 10. The FBI was notified, assembled a team and began digging on Tuesday, February 12. Regardless of what the thread says, it's impossible for the Ingrams not to have realized it was Cooper money within hours -- not days.
-
Cooper can't be a loner? or easily get to PDX without being noticed, or traced?
The FBI admits it's the most probable place he jumped, but since no data has surface we can not determine whether the path is correct, or the timing of the jump. none of the other copycat hijackings had anything to do with wild rides getting away from the dropzone. the FBI now believes it's possible the jump was further south, which brings you closer to the river.
How hard do you really think it would be to parachute and leave the area? he had a good head start on them. Tosaw believes he went into the river, he's not the only one who has this theory. lets not forget about the path possibly being more eastward into the Washougal area, or R99's theory of the path westward?
Cooper tried to get the stairs down very early in the flight, do we automatically discount an early exit? if you don't, then you left your boys behind where they thought they should of been to pick him up?
Did he know the plane would fly over Ariel, and near the dam? I don't know. the known evidence doesn't point to him have any idea where he was. did he know the best case to jump from the stairs, freefall, or deploy off the stairs? it's all speculation due to not knowing the knowledge he had.
Nobody ever thought getting off Alcatraz could be as simple as catching a ride on the same boat that brought them to the island. it sounds plausible, is it true? time will tell. for years they have tried swimming across the bay to prove it could be done, when it's possible none of that matters what so ever if the new theory turns into fact.
sometimes things turn out a lot simpler than we make them out to be O0
-
Not necessarily. Even the whole bag of money would have been shredded then compacted into a relatively small space very quickly,
Possibly, but it's a pump, not a shredder. it doesn't have sharp blades. they are impellers. it's designed for suction.
-
Shutter, here are my replies.
Cooper can't be a loner? or easily get to PDX without being noticed, or traced?
Maybe he was seen, but he wasn't traced. No car at the airport, no taxi cab driver witnesses, no finds at any local hotel/motels. Just because he was seen doesn't lead to anything.
The FBI admits it's the most probable place he jumped, but since no data has surface we can not determine whether the path is correct, or the timing of the jump. none of the other copycat hijackings had anything to do with wild rides getting away from the dropzone. the FBI now believes it's possible the jump was further south, which brings you closer to the river.
It seems that no one questioned the flight path until the money was found. Now, since everyone assumes he died in the jump (or soon thereafter), we must adjust the flight path. Since the jet was on autopilot, it would have only deviated a small distance from Victor 23. Robb Heady, one of the copycat hijackers was caught when the FBI found his car. Roadblocks work! Cooper anticipated these, even though they didn't materialize soon after his jump.
How hard do you really think it would be to parachute and leave the area? he had a good head start on them. Tosaw believes he went into the river, he's not the only one who has this theory. lets not forget about the path possibly being more eastward into the Washougal area, or R99's theory of the path westward?
Cooper has prepared for the worst. If he has a bad landing and drifts further away than planned, he may need several hours to get to an escape vehicle. If that is a car, there could be roadblocks by then. He decides to take the more elusive escape route down the river.
Cooper tried to get the stairs down very early in the flight, do we automatically discount an early exit? if you don't, then you left your boys behind where they thought they should of been to pick him up?
According to Sluggo's timeline and the FBI interviews, Tina is in the cockpit by 7:42, only a few minutes after takeoff. The aft stairs are down shortly after that. By 7:53, the 727 is at level flight at 10,000'. At 8:05, the cockpit contacts Cooper and he responds. Cooper jumps at 8:11, almost 30 minutes after the stairs are down. Why does he wait so long? Because he is waiting for the avionics to indicate his predetermined point of departure. Note again, Cooper is elusive as for 30 minutes, no one other than Cooper is in the aft section of the aircraft. No one has any idea what he has in his paper bag or that he has avionics in his briefcase. This is all cleverly hidden by Cooper.
Did he know the plane would fly over Ariel, and near the dam? I don't know. the known evidence doesn't point to him have any idea where he was. did he know the best case to jump from the stairs, freefall, or deploy off the stairs? it's all speculation due to not knowing the knowledge he had.
You need to read my book. With the specified altitude, and the cascade mountains to the east, Victor 23 was almost the default route to fly. This has been mentioned by others as well. Being on that route, all Cooper needed was to monitor his avionics until he got the predetermined reading he needed.
Nobody ever thought getting off Alcatraz could be as simple as catching a ride on the same boat that brought them to the island. it sounds plausible, is it true? time will tell. for years they have tried swimming across the bay to prove it could be done, when it's possible none of that matters what so ever if the new theory turns into fact.
sometimes things turn out a lot simpler than we make them out to be O0
With a month or so to plan this caper, and the time to test all the phases of the plan (with the exception of the jump), this really is a fairly simple plan.
-
Is there ANY way that the Ingrams could have planted the currency (or been shown where it lay) and led Brian to the spot AND ALSO have the currency shard field documented in the TV news segment that Georger posted?
I don't see it, but Maybe Bruce can do some remote viewing, channeling or just plain imagining out of the box. ;)
377
I'm trying to think what reason Dwayne Ingram would have had for concocting a story about how he found the money.
It seems he realized (pretty early on) that it was likely the Cooper money. Did he think he couldn't just return it to a bank (it would be identified), so he figured he'd have more public sympathy to a claim if it was an 8 year old that found it?
If that's the case, it seems to me he was right. I'm not a lawyer, but from my couple of law classes the insurance company would seem to be the rightful owner of all of the money -- or at least its cash equivalent.
It seems he realized (pretty early on) that it was likely the Cooper money?
He didn't. This has all been explained before, in detail (using FBI summaries). Read the thread.
I guess it depends on what is meant by "pretty early on". The money was found on Sunday, February 10. The FBI was notified, assembled a team and began digging on Tuesday, February 12. Regardless of what the thread says, it's impossible for the Ingrams not to have realized it was Cooper money within hours -- not days.
Actually it was days!
They didn't have the faintest idea what they had until someone in law enforcement requested they call the FBI. The Ingrams were not global trend setters but Arkansas Hill people living in their own small world in Vancouver, praise Jesus! These Entanglement theories that the Ingrams were enlightened people in touch with DB Cooper in their circle of mysteriants is absolute fiction - a formless satire invented by people with nothing better to do and no more imagination than a frog.
These people were relatively new to the area and didn't even know Tina Bar existed until somebody told them about it. Harold had a warrant waiting for him back in New Mexico. Following their find they spent hours trying to clean and separate and dry the money on their kitchen table for presentation to a bank (for redemption). Everything changed when Harold went to work on Monday and started confiding in a few people. This lead to Harold calling law enforcement and they recommended he might call the FBI ... the rest is documented history.
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
-
nothing remotely linked to any device for monitoring aviation was seen in the case. this is 1971, highly unlikely something so compact was available. the path has been in question for a long time. stating nothing prior to the money find isn't plausible due to technology of that time. it just wasn't discussed like today.
Do you know Jo Weber?
-
Here is a vintage DME unit. It is about 6.3" wide, 1.3 inches high, and 12.25 inches long (see specs).
http://sarasotaavionics.com/avionics/kn62-used (http://sarasotaavionics.com/avionics/kn62-used)
Now take away the metal enclosure box, the plastic face plate, and any other unnecessary clutter for this mission, and you have a briefcase-mounted DME. Not as big as you might think, and definitely not recognizable by anyone not skilled in avionics. It just would look like a "mass of wires".
I don't know Jo Weber, and I don't believe any of the "suspects" brought forth to date are the real Dan Cooper.
-
Bill,
Your "vintage" Bendix DME above is WAAAAY later technology than 1971. Aircraft mounted DME, unlike passive VOR sets, is an active system, has a transmitter and receiver. The transmitter takes a considerable amount of power. I also question whether it would work without an externally positioned antenna. Fuselages are pretty good RF shields.
I got my BSEE from UC Berkeley in 1972, so I am reasonably familiar with early 70s state of the art in electronics/avionics. In my opinion there is no way Cooper had a briefcase contained DME interrogator and readout in 1971.
377
-
Bill,
First, let me say welcome to the thread and you certainly seem to be more stable emotionally than Bruce Smith was indicating recently.
Basically, in your statements above you are assuming that Cooper knew his location when he jumped. Actually, the airliner was above a 5000 foot overcast and several lower cloud layers and it is very, very unlikely that he could estimate his positon to within a radius of 20 miles. Your statements require pinpoint position information and Cooper simply did not have that and could not make the various segments of the trip in the general time frame you propose.
Several years ago on the DZ thread, if I remember this incorrectly would some of the former DZ posters correct me, Amazon indicated that the Lewis River between the Merwin Dam and the Columbia River had areas that were almost impassable for even small boats. And trying to do this at night would greatly complicate the matter. From the Merwin Dam area, it is probably about 30 miles to the Columbia River and then about another 20 miles upstream to the Tina Bar area. At best, it would probably take at least five hours for that segment of trip.
In the Portland Airport area, I presume that the road adjacent to the Columbia River is the one you are referring to. I drove over that very road a few weeks back and I spent several hours shopping at a mall that is located between that road and the Portland Airport. It would be quite a hike for Cooper to walk from the Columbia River to the Portland Airport terminal. He would have to take a lengthy walk down the I-205 area east of the airport and then approach the terminal area from the southeast. That would be a lengthy walk and someone would probably have remembered seeing him and mentioned it to the FBI. Very few people arrive at airport terminals after walking five miles or so. And he certainly could not have climbed the airport fence in broad daylight without the tower and security people seeing him.
So to make a long story short, may I suggest that your ideas need further work. Good luck.
Robert99
Robert,
First, regarding Cooper's jump, think about this from the perspective of an engineer and instrument-rated pilot (which I am and I believe Cooper is as well). Why wouldn't you jump on a clear moonlit night? Seems much easier, doesn't it?
Surely jumping on a clear night simplifies Cooper's task, but what about the chase planes? Cooper knows there will be chase planes, so he can't jump on a clear night because they will see him and report his position as he descends on his parachute. Before he knows it, he will be surrounded by police, FBI, helicopters, etc. The clear night jump leads to an easy capture and Cooper knows this. Thus he selects a night with basically zero visibility above 5000', but clear below with 10-15 miles of visibility.
So since aircraft use avionics to determine their position when flying, Cooper configures some avionics device to determine his position. I believe it is DME (distance measuring equipment). DME was the latest and the greatest in 1971, but it could have been a standard NAV or ADF (automatic direction finder). Either way, Cooper knew exactly where he was from the avionics in his briefcase (battery(s) and mass of wires). I believe Cooper took a half a dozen trips from PDX to SEA in the month prior to the hijacking, testing this equipment. He had it calibrated to work, you can be assured. And next look at where he was projected to have landed. From the FBI Landing Zone Map at Sluggo's website, it is estimated that he jumped at point A and if he pulled his ripcord soon after the jump, he landed at point B. So Cooper's plan was to drift towards the well-lit Merwin Dam, land in the fields south and west of the dam, and then walk a short distance to the Lewis River. This isn't an accident!! If Cooper landed 20 miles north in Pigeon Springs, which looks like an area with logging roads and timber harvests, I would agree that he jumped blindly. But seeing the precision with which he jumped and drifted, I realize this was his plan (Cooper is a pilot, so he has the same winds aloft data as Northwest, so he calculated his drift distance and jump point earlier in the day).
I believe that the Lewis River is navigable from the dam to the river, if you take the correct route. At one point the river splits, and one branch has waterfalls, I believe. One map I saw showed mile 21 at the dam, so it is about 21 miles to the Columbia. From there it is only about 8 miles to Tena Bar. But you are correct, this trip will require a few hours in a small craft like a 12' aluminum boat. The advantage, though, is that he avoids any roadblocks and is miles away from the dropzone in a quiet rural area when he arrives at Tena Bar. Be assured again that Cooper has made this trip numerous times in the month prior to the hijacking.
I don't know what PDX was like in 1971, but there may not have been a perimeter fence. Also, where Cooper is a pilot, he may have known of a more direct route to the terminal. The economy parking lot today is about 1-1/2 miles east of the terminal, but they provide a free shuttle service to the terminal. Did that parking lot and service exist in 1971? I'm not sure of this next tidbit, as there are limited aerial views of the airport in 1971, but the I-205 bridge appeared to be under construction at the time. If you check Google Earth, you will see several marinas along the Columbia in the vicinity of the airport. One is almost directly across from the terminal.
According to Google, it is at best a 2.8 mile walk to the terminal from the I-205 bridge, and takes about 1 hour. And even if people saw him, it wouldn't necessarily lead investigators to a boat!
PDX Aerial View (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/45.5738678,-122.5475333/45.5895369,-122.5920108/@45.5817122,-122.5783645,4375m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e2)
Again, Cooper has surveyed PDX and made the trip from Tena Bar to PDX numerous times in the month prior to the hijacking. He has a plan!
I am a retired aeronautical engineer and general aviation pilot with a limited amount of skydiving experience. I also held, at retirement, both Advanced and Instrument Ground Instructor Ratings. I owned general aviation aircraft in the 1960s and 1970s.
There was no navigational device existing in 1971 that would have been of any particular use to Cooper under the circumstances of his jump. It should also be remembered that Cooper showed the contents of his brief case to Tina (and/or maybe Flo) and she did not see anything except a battery and sticks of something (dynamite or road flares). Consequently, there is no evidence whatsoever that Cooper had any electronic device with him. The small paper bag that Cooper had with him was reported to be about the same size as the bag that today would be used for a single take-out Big Mac from McDonald's.
Cooper's hijacking was NOT well planned since, among other things, he was not dressed appropriately for the weather conditions that he would encounter on the ground.
Also, I believe that some of the distances you estimate are incorrect.
Robert99
-
"There was no navigational device existing in 1971 that would have been of any particular use to Cooper under the circumstances of his jump. "
Perhaps no electronic device but a mag compass and a stopwatch could have been used to dead reckon. You'd be guessing on ground speed but you could plot a track if you noted every turn and the time between turns. A mag compass works just fine inside an aluminum fuselage.
377
-
Handheld VOR receivers showed up in the late 80s: https://books.google.com/books?id=6cC-eWQx5Q4C&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=first+handheld+VOR&source=bl&ots=cK9dj_aQvc&sig=fVJo7seHh4RQ-_NzWRHvxmtwYBM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1zr6AvvbPAhVjh1QKHfFCCvg4ChDoAQhOMAw#v=onepage&q=first%20handheld%20VOR&f=false
Nothing remotely like this was available in 1971 as far as I can tell. I am told that these hand held VOR receivers don't work that well inside a metal aircraft and need to be connected to an external antenna.
377
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
-
Handheld VOR receivers showed up in the late 80s: https://books.google.com/books?id=6cC-eWQx5Q4C&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=first+handheld+VOR&source=bl&ots=cK9dj_aQvc&sig=fVJo7seHh4RQ-_NzWRHvxmtwYBM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1zr6AvvbPAhVjh1QKHfFCCvg4ChDoAQhOMAw#v=onepage&q=first%20handheld%20VOR&f=false
Nothing remotely like this was available in 1971 as far as I can tell. I am told that these hand held VOR receivers don't work that well inside a metal aircraft and need to be connected to an external antenna.
377
I received a Sporty's Pilot Shop catalog yesterday that offers the Sporty's SP-400 hand-held nav/com for $329.00. It includes the com/nav/loc/ils and NOAA frequencies and can be operated on AA batteries plus other power options. It weighs 16 ounces.
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
From my recollection, as you note, they found the money on Sunday. When Dwayne went to work, he mentioned it to some coworkers, and they told him to check to see if it was Cooper's money. As you note, the FBI was there the next day.
This might have been from the History Channel - Case Closed, but not precisely sure.
-
"There was no navigational device existing in 1971 that would have been of any particular use to Cooper under the circumstances of his jump. "
Perhaps no electronic device but a mag compass and a stopwatch could have been used to dead reckon. You'd be guessing on ground speed but you could plot a track if you noted every turn and the time between turns. A mag compass works just fine inside an aluminum fuselage.
377
Columbus made it to the western hemisphere with a magnetized needle on a straw floating in a bowl of water. No time piece (hour glasses don't count here) and probably an astrolabe (primarily to measure the angle between the horizon and the sun in order to estimate latitude). People who have studied his navigation on the trip west estimate that he was probably trying to maintain a constant latitude.
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
From my recollection, as you note, they found the money on Sunday. When Dwayne went to work, he mentioned it to some coworkers, and they told him to check to see if it was Cooper's money. As you note, the FBI was there the next day.
This might have been from the History Channel - Case Closed, but not precisely sure.
Here's the time line from page 109 of Himmelsbach's book:
1. The Ingrams found the money late in the afternoon of Sunday, February 10th.
2. Dwayne Ingram talked about the money at work the next day, Monday, February 11th, and his co-workers told him to call the FBI. He did and Himmelsbach made an appointment for him to be at the FBI offices at 9:00 AM, Tuesday, February 12th.
3. It is not stated exactly when the FBI agents first went to Tina Bar, but it was probably on Tuesday afternoon. The main search effort seems to have been made on Wednesday, February 13th, and Thursday, February 14th. And apparently the search was suspended after Thursday.
-
Robert99 and 377, thank you for your feedback.
I am a ME and while as a pilot understand how to use avionics, I am not that skilled in their design. DME was used by the 727, as they report their position via a DME distance in the transcripts. When I first started flying in the early '70's, a local pilot had DME in his single engine plane. It was quite the talking point, as it was expensive and not many small planes had it at the time.
But as I state, make no mistake, Cooper had something to tell him where to jump. If he jumped out at Pigeon Springs, I would agree that he jumped blindly, but if you look at the FBI Landing Zone Map, Cooper used the winds aloft data and his drift time to pre-calculate his jump point, so that he drifted towards Merwin Dam and the open fields south and west of the dam. This is not a blind-luck jump. Even Ted Mayfield said the man knew what he was doing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZQhUUjIXEo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZQhUUjIXEo)
And it's true, hand held NAV/COM's have been available for almost 30 years. How do they differ from the devices of 1971? Surely they are smaller, but is there any other basic difference? How come cell phones work on a plane at the gate or during taxi? You are still in a metal plane?
I will leave it to you gentlemen to decide how Cooper knew his position, but you will need to be creative and ingenious like Dan Cooper. As I stated in a previous post, Cooper knows he can't jump on a clear night, as it is a sure recipe for capture. He has planned for a jump that evades visual contact by the chase planes. Now tell me how he precisely determines his jump point. You've got a month or two to devise a system and do trial runs between PDX and SEA.
-
Robert99 and 377, thank you for your feedback.
I am a ME and while as a pilot understand how to use avionics, I am not that skilled in their design. DME was used by the 727, as they report their position via a DME distance in the transcripts. When I first started flying in the early '70's, a local pilot had DME in his single engine plane. It was quite the talking point, as it was expensive and not many small planes had it at the time.
But as I state, make no mistake, Cooper had something to tell him where to jump. If he jumped out at Pigeon Springs, I would agree that he jumped blindly, but if you look at the FBI Landing Zone Map, Cooper used the winds aloft data and his drift time to pre-calculate his jump point, so that he drifted towards Merwin Dam and the open fields south and west of the dam. This is not a blind-luck jump. Even Ted Mayfield said the man knew what he was doing.
And it's true, hand held NAV/COM's have been available for almost 30 years. How do they differ from the devices of 1971? Surely they are smaller, but is there any other basic difference? How come cell phones work on a plane at the gate or during taxi? You are still in a metal plane?
I will leave it to you gentlemen to decide how Cooper knew his position, but you will need to be creative and ingenious like Dan Cooper. As I stated in a previous post, Cooper knows he can't jump on a clear night, as it is a sure recipe for capture. He has planned for a jump that evades visual contact by the chase planes. Now tell me how he precisely determines his jump point. You've got a month or two to devise a system and do trial runs between PDX and SEA.
I believe you are thinking about CB radios in the early 70s and 60s.
-
It's all sounding like something Jo has been saying for years. Duane built the towers, wristwatch, backpack under the clothing, or in the briefcase etc. etc...
Now take away the metal enclosure box, the plastic face plate, and any other unnecessary clutter for this mission, and you have a briefcase-mounted DME. Not as big as you might think, and definitely not recognizable by anyone not skilled in avionics. It just would look like a "mass of wires".
IMO, this is no different then trying to change the description of Cooper.
-
Skydiving skyjackers Rob Heady and Richard McCoy landed pretty close to their desired LZ and neither was aided by electronic nav devices. I see absolutely nothing that indicates Cooper had electronic nav assistance. You cant assume it from where you think he landed. That could be pure chance or he might have recognized features on the ground though broken overcast.
NOBODY wants Cooper to have used radios more than I do. I have made dozens of radio jumps using radios near CB frequencies (28 MHz) and VHF and UHF frequencies 144, 440 and 1200 MHz) proving that Cooper could have easily made contact with a ground assistant 60 or more miles away. It's just a bias I have and I see it as such. I admit that there is zero evidence that Cooper used radios for nav or comm. If Cooper had a cheap analog tunable VHF AM receiver (I owned one in 1971 that was pocket sized, cost under $30) he could have listened to comms between the plane and the tower which would have been useful to see if the FBI agents were planning to storm the acft on the ground. As helpful as that wold have been, there is no evidence that Cooper had any means of listening to acft comms.
Cell phone signals are much higher frequency (800 and 1900 MHz) than VOR (approx 112 MHz) and have superior fuselage penetration characteristics. Airliners and military acft would love to get rid of those draggy ext VHF UHF NAV/COM antennas and would take them off if they didn't need them.
Workable DME in a briefcase in 1971? Not a chance.
377
-
CB radios or an AM receiver (isn't this ADF technology). What about LORAN?
If you guys keep thinking, I'll bet you will come up with something.
Remember, Cooper is motivated by his grudge. The money has little value to him. This man has a lot of emotional drive behind his actions. Where there is a will, there is a way.
This is why Cooper escaped. Everyone has totally underestimated this man!
-
Forget LORAN A or LORAN C. Not practical for briefcase use in 1971. LORAN A operated at about 1800 KHz and LORAN C operated at 100 KHz. Both needed external antennas to be effective.
An ordinary AM transistor radio with a ferrite bar antenna can be used as a crude DF to get bearings on AM radio stations. Since these simple radios lack a DF sense antenna, there is a 180 degree bearing ambiguity but that's not a big deal if you know generally which way the station lies from you. Ordinary Japanese transistor radios were used by MAC SOG jumpers in Vietnam to rendezvous on the ground. A low power beacon operating in the AM broadcast band was carried by one jumper and the others shot bearings on this beacon. Still unsure how they resolved the 180 degree bearing ambiguity. Perhaps if they trekked in the wrong direction they noted a reduction in beacon signal strength and reversed their course.
But why assume Cooper had ANY electronic nav devices? There is zero evidence that he did.
377
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
right - have it your way - YOU WILL ANYWAY. Let the FBI know! They will amend their files to accommodate your theory of the day -
Uhhhhh ... have you considered your "theory" has implications? But what the hell. Who gives a shit at this point?
I dont..... radios .... gag me with a silver bucket!
-
How about a shoe phone? it's possible, right?
Don Adams even looks like the sketch.......
-
Now you're thinking. Is that a slip-on shoe?
-
Now you're thinking. Is that a slip-on shoe?
Would you believe....I think it is :)) :)) :))
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
right - have it your way - YOU WILL ANYWAY. Let the FBI know! They will amend their files to accommodate your theory of the day -
Uhhhhh ... have you considered your "theory" has implications? But what the hell. Who gives a shit at this point?
I dont..... radios .... gag me with a silver bucket!
Sorry, Georger. I don't get where you're going with this. But, I don't have anything to add, so I'm going to drop it.
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
right - have it your way - YOU WILL ANYWAY. Let the FBI know! They will amend their files to accommodate your theory of the day -
Uhhhhh ... have you considered your "theory" has implications? But what the hell. Who gives a shit at this point?
I dont..... radios .... gag me with a silver bucket!
Sorry, Georger. I don't get where you're going with this. But, I don't have anything to add, so I'm going to drop it.
Again, the actions of the Ingrams during and after the money find do not support the notion that they had fore-knowledge that they were looking for or even knew they had found, Cooper money. Basically all they knew was they had found some old money, perhaps lost at Tina Bar by somebody. Had they not contacted local law enforcement on Monday they might never have even called the FBI, but gone straight to a bank with the money, trying to redeem it, and this money might have been taken and passed through the system without ever being identified as belonging to the Cooper hijacking. In fact, one of the Ingrams has stated that it was the intercession of someone at Harold's workplace that advised Harold to call local law enforcement, that changed everything.. One speculation voiced was that the money might be connected to some area burglary or bank robbery in the past (and there might be a reward). Once Harold called local law enforcement things changed rather quickly, in everyone's understanding. Harold was apparently told that local law enforcement ( The Sheriff's office etc) did not keep serial number lists from area bank robberies and the like - that only the FBI kept such lists! As far as I know, having interviewed some of these people and the Ingrams, the name "Cooper" or "Cooper Hijacking" never came up. The reason for calling the FBI was because only the FBI kept lists of serial numbers et-cetera related to old bank robberies and the like. That was the reason for calling the FBI. So far as I know, nobody had mentioned the Cooper hijacking yet ...
Harold called the FBI straightaway and told them what he had found and where, and gave them several serial numbers off his found bills. The FBI advised Harold they would look into it and was told to call back later. The FBI did not call Harold back. Hearing nothing Harold finally called the FBI back later in the day and I believe it was Himmelsbach who came on the phone with Harold. After some conversation RH asked Harold if he would be willing to bring his findings in in the morning and Harold agreed. (Of course the FBI could have gone to find Harold immediately had they chosen to do that). Instead the FBI waited and Pat and Harold called the FBI back the next morning and confirmed a time to come in at the Federal Building in Portland. One of the Ingrams told me that it was during that conversation on the morning of the day the Ingrams came to the Federal Bldg that Harold was told his money might have some relationship to the Cooper Hijacking. According to a number of people Harold was shocked! The FBI had run the serial numbers Harold provided and a match with ransom money from the Cooper hijacking was certain. Then later that morning a news conference was held at the Federal Building.
Harold was never in a position to know what his found money meant, until he was informed by the FBI. Harold was also advised that the reward in the Cooper case had expired.
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
right - have it your way - YOU WILL ANYWAY. Let the FBI know! They will amend their files to accommodate your theory of the day -
Uhhhhh ... have you considered your "theory" has implications? But what the hell. Who gives a shit at this point?
I dont..... radios .... gag me with a silver bucket!
Sorry, Georger. I don't get where you're going with this. But, I don't have anything to add, so I'm going to drop it.
Again, the actions of the Ingrams during and after the money find do not support the notion that they had fore-knowledge that they were looking for or even knew they had found, Cooper money. Basically all they knew was they had found some old money, perhaps lost at Tina Bar by somebody. Had they not contacted local law enforcement on Monday they might never have even called the FBI, but gone straight to a bank with the money, trying to redeem it, and this money might have been taken and passed through the system without ever being identified as belonging to the Cooper hijacking. In fact, one of the Ingrams has stated that it was the intercession of someone at Harold's workplace that advised Harold to call local law enforcement, that changed everything.. One speculation voiced was that the money might be connected to some area burglary or bank robbery in the past (and there might be a reward). Once Harold called local law enforcement things changed rather quickly, in everyone's understanding. Harold was apparently told that local law enforcement ( The Sheriff's office etc) did not keep serial number lists from area bank robberies and the like - that only the FBI kept such lists! As far as I know, having interviewed some of these people and the Ingrams, the name "Cooper" or "Cooper Hijacking" never came up. The reason for calling the FBI was because only the FBI kept lists of serial numbers et-cetera related to old bank robberies and the like. That was the reason for calling the FBI. So far as I know, nobody had mentioned the Cooper hijacking yet ...
Harold called the FBI straightaway and told them what he had found and where, and gave them several serial numbers off his found bills. The FBI advised Harold they would look into it and was told to call back later. The FBI did not call Harold back. Hearing nothing Harold finally called the FBI back later in the day and I believe it was Himmelsbach who came on the phone with Harold. After some conversation RH asked Harold if he would be willing to bring his findings in in the morning and Harold agreed. (Of course the FBI could have gone to find Harold immediately had they chosen to do that). Instead the FBI waited and Pat and Harold called the FBI back the next morning and confirmed a time to come in at the Federal Building in Portland. One of the Ingrams told me that it was during that conversation on the morning of the day the Ingrams came to the Federal Bldg that Harold was told his money might have some relationship to the Cooper Hijacking. According to a number of people Harold was shocked! The FBI had run the serial numbers Harold provided and a match with ransom money from the Cooper hijacking was certain. Then later that morning a news conference was held at the Federal Building.
Harold was never in a position to know what his found money meant, until he was informed by the FBI. Harold was also advised that the reward in the Cooper case had expired.
Thanks, Georger.
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
right - have it your way - YOU WILL ANYWAY. Let the FBI know! They will amend their files to accommodate your theory of the day -
Uhhhhh ... have you considered your "theory" has implications? But what the hell. Who gives a shit at this point?
I dont..... radios .... gag me with a silver bucket!
Sorry, Georger. I don't get where you're going with this. But, I don't have anything to add, so I'm going to drop it.
Again, the actions of the Ingrams during and after the money find do not support the notion that they had fore-knowledge that they were looking for or even knew they had found, Cooper money. Basically all they knew was they had found some old money, perhaps lost at Tina Bar by somebody. Had they not contacted local law enforcement on Monday they might never have even called the FBI, but gone straight to a bank with the money, trying to redeem it, and this money might have been taken and passed through the system without ever being identified as belonging to the Cooper hijacking. In fact, one of the Ingrams has stated that it was the intercession of someone at Harold's workplace that advised Harold to call local law enforcement, that changed everything.. One speculation voiced was that the money might be connected to some area burglary or bank robbery in the past (and there might be a reward). Once Harold called local law enforcement things changed rather quickly, in everyone's understanding. Harold was apparently told that local law enforcement ( The Sheriff's office etc) did not keep serial number lists from area bank robberies and the like - that only the FBI kept such lists! As far as I know, having interviewed some of these people and the Ingrams, the name "Cooper" or "Cooper Hijacking" never came up. The reason for calling the FBI was because only the FBI kept lists of serial numbers et-cetera related to old bank robberies and the like. That was the reason for calling the FBI. So far as I know, nobody had mentioned the Cooper hijacking yet ...
Harold called the FBI straightaway and told them what he had found and where, and gave them several serial numbers off his found bills. The FBI advised Harold they would look into it and was told to call back later. The FBI did not call Harold back. Hearing nothing Harold finally called the FBI back later in the day and I believe it was Himmelsbach who came on the phone with Harold. After some conversation RH asked Harold if he would be willing to bring his findings in in the morning and Harold agreed. (Of course the FBI could have gone to find Harold immediately had they chosen to do that). Instead the FBI waited and Pat and Harold called the FBI back the next morning and confirmed a time to come in at the Federal Building in Portland. One of the Ingrams told me that it was during that conversation on the morning of the day the Ingrams came to the Federal Bldg that Harold was told his money might have some relationship to the Cooper Hijacking. According to a number of people Harold was shocked! The FBI had run the serial numbers Harold provided and a match with ransom money from the Cooper hijacking was certain. Then later that morning a news conference was held at the Federal Building.
Harold was never in a position to know what his found money meant, until he was informed by the FBI. Harold was also advised that the reward in the Cooper case had expired.
Thanks, Georger.
Let's just assume for a moment that Harold's drug dealer did know DB Cooper and a plan was hatched to send the dumb and expendable Ingrams out to Tina Bar, knowingly or unknowingly, to find Cooper money ... that's risky and inevitably somebody gets thrown under the bus ... all to convince the FBI Cooper is dead and get the Feds off Cooper's back forever! ? A scheme like this could easily have backed up and thrown a drug dealer, his user clients, and Cooper himself into jail on Federal crimes. And in such a scheme Cooper himself wants to remain unknown and untouchable ?
A scheme like that is almost handing DB Cooper to the FBI, inevitably. For one thing, a scheme like that implies that Cooper is still alive directing matters and somewhere in the chain of players. Very likely the FBI would have been all over this convincing various people to give others up. I mean we are talking about a fairly small tightly knit group of conspirators here. It wouldn't take 2 minutes to have all of these people in jail spilling the beans on each other and willing to make deals ... all of which includes the players Pat Ingram, Crystal Ingram, Harold's brother, all of the kids, and all of Ingram's friends! All hatched by DB Cooper in order to convince the FBI he is dead?
And if Cooper is Radkstraw this puts Rackstraw at the level of a moron! O0 :)) :))
My five year old grandson could come up with a better plan than that!
Colbert has just painted Cooper as a moron ! What a scheme like that lacks is a "comfort dog" explaining reality to all of the players? So, where's the dog and what was it's name? :-*
-
proving that Cooper could have easily made contact with a ground assistant 60 or more miles away.
And maybe that's all Cooper needed.
Meyer
-
proving that Cooper could have easily made contact with a ground assistant 60 or more miles away.
And maybe that's all Cooper needed.
Meyer
56% of all Americans and Wage Earner Sheeple believe that Trump will get to the bottom of the Cooper hijacking. Mr Colbert and RobertMBlevibns are already talking to the Trump campaign competing to be appointed Cooperland Czar. They intend to flush DB Cooper out from his retirement home in Utah, California, or Oregon ... with new incentives that will abolish the FBI and appoint the New Cooperland Czar over all Unsolved Crimes! O0
You herd it here furst! :))
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
right - have it your way - YOU WILL ANYWAY. Let the FBI know! They will amend their files to accommodate your theory of the day -
Uhhhhh ... have you considered your "theory" has implications? But what the hell. Who gives a shit at this point?
I dont..... radios .... gag me with a silver bucket!
Sorry, Georger. I don't get where you're going with this. But, I don't have anything to add, so I'm going to drop it.
Again, the actions of the Ingrams during and after the money find do not support the notion that they had fore-knowledge that they were looking for or even knew they had found, Cooper money. Basically all they knew was they had found some old money, perhaps lost at Tina Bar by somebody. Had they not contacted local law enforcement on Monday they might never have even called the FBI, but gone straight to a bank with the money, trying to redeem it, and this money might have been taken and passed through the system without ever being identified as belonging to the Cooper hijacking. In fact, one of the Ingrams has stated that it was the intercession of someone at Harold's workplace that advised Harold to call local law enforcement, that changed everything.. One speculation voiced was that the money might be connected to some area burglary or bank robbery in the past (and there might be a reward). Once Harold called local law enforcement things changed rather quickly, in everyone's understanding. Harold was apparently told that local law enforcement ( The Sheriff's office etc) did not keep serial number lists from area bank robberies and the like - that only the FBI kept such lists! As far as I know, having interviewed some of these people and the Ingrams, the name "Cooper" or "Cooper Hijacking" never came up. The reason for calling the FBI was because only the FBI kept lists of serial numbers et-cetera related to old bank robberies and the like. That was the reason for calling the FBI. So far as I know, nobody had mentioned the Cooper hijacking yet ...
Harold called the FBI straightaway and told them what he had found and where, and gave them several serial numbers off his found bills. The FBI advised Harold they would look into it and was told to call back later. The FBI did not call Harold back. Hearing nothing Harold finally called the FBI back later in the day and I believe it was Himmelsbach who came on the phone with Harold. After some conversation RH asked Harold if he would be willing to bring his findings in in the morning and Harold agreed. (Of course the FBI could have gone to find Harold immediately had they chosen to do that). Instead the FBI waited and Pat and Harold called the FBI back the next morning and confirmed a time to come in at the Federal Building in Portland. One of the Ingrams told me that it was during that conversation on the morning of the day the Ingrams came to the Federal Bldg that Harold was told his money might have some relationship to the Cooper Hijacking. According to a number of people Harold was shocked! The FBI had run the serial numbers Harold provided and a match with ransom money from the Cooper hijacking was certain. Then later that morning a news conference was held at the Federal Building.
Harold was never in a position to know what his found money meant, until he was informed by the FBI. Harold was also advised that the reward in the Cooper case had expired.
Thanks, Georger.
Let's just assume for a moment that Harold's drug dealer did know DB Cooper and a plan was hatched to send the dumb and expendable Ingrams out to Tina Bar, knowingly or unknowingly, to find Cooper money ... that's risky and inevitably somebody gets thrown under the bus ... all to convince the FBI Cooper is dead and get the Feds off Cooper's back forever! ? A scheme like this could easily have backed up and thrown a drug dealer, his user clients, and Cooper himself into jail on Federal crimes. And in such a scheme Cooper himself wants to remain unknown and untouchable ?
A scheme like that is almost handing DB Cooper to the FBI, inevitably. For one thing, a scheme like that implies that Cooper is still alive directing matters and somewhere in the chain of players. Very likely the FBI would have been all over this convincing various people to give others up. I mean we are talking about a fairly small tightly knit group of conspirators here. It wouldn't take 2 minutes to have all of these people in jail spilling the beans on each other and willing to make deals ... all of which includes the players Pat Ingram, Crystal Ingram, Harold's brother, all of the kids, and all of Ingram's friends! All hatched by DB Cooper in order to convince the FBI he is dead?
And if Cooper is Radkstraw this puts Rackstraw at the level of a moron! O0 :)) :))
My five year old grandson could come up with a better plan than that!
Colbert has just painted Cooper as a moron ! What a scheme like that lacks is a "comfort dog" explaining reality to all of the players? So, where's the dog and what was it's name? :-*
Someone pulling a stunt like the one you describe would WANT to be caught. Such an act would immediately take an active, but mostly likely slow single-agent FBI case and immediately throw agents, resources, attention and publicity on it. AND involving people with not a lot of experience dealing with law enforcement who might not only spill the beans on the others, but crack under the stress of questioning and admit it themselves. It makes no sense unless Cooper was, as Georger suggests, a moron, or someone that enjoyed being chased.
I don't live in that area, but you had relatives there, right, Georger? GreyCop's book seems to imply there is a lot of urban legend that the Ingram's were directed where to find the money and it was Crystal who actually found it, and so on and so on. Often, that's just speculation that turns into rumor that turns into legend. Other times, someone does spill some beans in confidence and the story leaks out. Have stories like this been out there since the money was found?
-
Colbert has just painted Cooper as a moron ! What a scheme like that lacks is a "comfort dog" explaining reality to all of the players? So, where's the dog and what was it's name? :-*
Rackstraw was no moron, far from it, but some quirk in his warped sociopathic personality interfered with his ability to stay under police radar. He got caught, a lot actually,
He could easily have involved others in a "Cooper is dead" scheme, as stupid as that may seem. He often failed to see the consequences of his brash decisions and actions.
Why did he lie about his Vietnam exploits? The truth was pretty impressive. Why did he embellish it with EASILY detectable lies? He lied in court about his rank, his medals and his combat flying which was a felony. Why take such a stupid and unnecessary risk? Airborne Bob or Airhead Bob... or both?
Colbert's book is a great read. He painstakingly chronicles the life of a very interesting and unusual criminal. For a former Superior Court trial judge to call Rackstraw the most extreme sociopathic criminal he'd ever encountered is really saying something. These judges see very clever sociopaths nearly every day court is in session.
377
-
proving that Cooper could have easily made contact with a ground assistant 60 or more miles away.
And maybe that's all Cooper needed.
Meyer
56% of all Americans and Wage Earner Sheeple believe that Trump will get to the bottom of the Cooper hijacking. Mr Colbert and RobertMBlevibns are already talking to the Trump campaign competing to be appointed Cooperland Czar. They intend to flush DB Cooper out from his retirement home in Utah, California, or Oregon ... with new incentives that will abolish the FBI and appoint the New Cooperland Czar over all Unsolved Crimes! O0
You herd it here furst! :))
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I just re-watched the "DB Cooper:Case Closed?" episode again. What's all the fuss about -- they're all getting a hard one for this Rackstraw guy? It seems, to me, to be just another johnny-come-lately story again -- somebody (Colbert) has his pet suspect (Rackstraw) whom he will never let go as his guy, despite providing only circumstantial evidence, despite the FBI saying there just isn't any evidence to pursue the suspect. In spite of it all, Colbert is sticking to his story and his guy, come hell or high water. All that work, time, and effort just to be turned away almost as fast as it came in. No hard evidence -- like money, parachute, or a briefcase-- only circumstantial evidence was presented.
.....Hold on...... I'm getting a deja vue -- I got this same feeling with Jo Weber (and Duane) and Robert Blevins (and RC) and others..... Maybe that's why I respect guys like Georger and R99 -- they like to work with facts, data, and real evidence. Anything else is just speculation, and lord knows we've had our share of that!
Meyer
-
proving that Cooper could have easily made contact with a ground assistant 60 or more miles away.
And maybe that's all Cooper needed.
Meyer
56% of all Americans and Wage Earner Sheeple believe that Trump will get to the bottom of the Cooper hijacking. Mr Colbert and RobertMBlevibns are already talking to the Trump campaign competing to be appointed Cooperland Czar. They intend to flush DB Cooper out from his retirement home in Utah, California, or Oregon ... with new incentives that will abolish the FBI and appoint the New Cooperland Czar over all Unsolved Crimes! O0
You herd it here furst! :))
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I just re-watched the "DB Cooper:Case Closed?" episode again. What's all the fuss about -- they're all getting a hard one for this Rackstraw guy? It seems, to me, to be just another johnny-come-lately story again -- somebody (Colbert) has his pet suspect (Rackstraw) whom he will never let go as his guy, despite providing only circumstantial evidence, despite the FBI saying there just isn't any evidence to pursue the suspect. In spite of it all, Colbert is sticking to his story and his guy, come hell or high water. All that work, time, and effort just to be turned away almost as fast as it came in. No hard evidence -- like money, parachute, or a briefcase-- only circumstantial evidence was presented.
.....Hold on...... I'm getting a deja vue -- I got this same feeling with Jo Weber (and Duane) and Robert Blevins (and RC) and others..... Maybe that's why I respect guys like Georger and R99 -- they like to work with facts, data, and real evidence. Anything else is just speculation, and lord knows we've had our share of that!
Meyer
Meyer, bless you and I'm sure Georger feels the same way. :)
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
right - have it your way - YOU WILL ANYWAY. Let the FBI know! They will amend their files to accommodate your theory of the day -
Uhhhhh ... have you considered your "theory" has implications? But what the hell. Who gives a shit at this point?
I dont..... radios .... gag me with a silver bucket!
Sorry, Georger. I don't get where you're going with this. But, I don't have anything to add, so I'm going to drop it.
Again, the actions of the Ingrams during and after the money find do not support the notion that they had fore-knowledge that they were looking for or even knew they had found, Cooper money. Basically all they knew was they had found some old money, perhaps lost at Tina Bar by somebody. Had they not contacted local law enforcement on Monday they might never have even called the FBI, but gone straight to a bank with the money, trying to redeem it, and this money might have been taken and passed through the system without ever being identified as belonging to the Cooper hijacking. In fact, one of the Ingrams has stated that it was the intercession of someone at Harold's workplace that advised Harold to call local law enforcement, that changed everything.. One speculation voiced was that the money might be connected to some area burglary or bank robbery in the past (and there might be a reward). Once Harold called local law enforcement things changed rather quickly, in everyone's understanding. Harold was apparently told that local law enforcement ( The Sheriff's office etc) did not keep serial number lists from area bank robberies and the like - that only the FBI kept such lists! As far as I know, having interviewed some of these people and the Ingrams, the name "Cooper" or "Cooper Hijacking" never came up. The reason for calling the FBI was because only the FBI kept lists of serial numbers et-cetera related to old bank robberies and the like. That was the reason for calling the FBI. So far as I know, nobody had mentioned the Cooper hijacking yet ...
Harold called the FBI straightaway and told them what he had found and where, and gave them several serial numbers off his found bills. The FBI advised Harold they would look into it and was told to call back later. The FBI did not call Harold back. Hearing nothing Harold finally called the FBI back later in the day and I believe it was Himmelsbach who came on the phone with Harold. After some conversation RH asked Harold if he would be willing to bring his findings in in the morning and Harold agreed. (Of course the FBI could have gone to find Harold immediately had they chosen to do that). Instead the FBI waited and Pat and Harold called the FBI back the next morning and confirmed a time to come in at the Federal Building in Portland. One of the Ingrams told me that it was during that conversation on the morning of the day the Ingrams came to the Federal Bldg that Harold was told his money might have some relationship to the Cooper Hijacking. According to a number of people Harold was shocked! The FBI had run the serial numbers Harold provided and a match with ransom money from the Cooper hijacking was certain. Then later that morning a news conference was held at the Federal Building.
Harold was never in a position to know what his found money meant, until he was informed by the FBI. Harold was also advised that the reward in the Cooper case had expired.
Thanks, Georger.
Let's just assume for a moment that Harold's drug dealer did know DB Cooper and a plan was hatched to send the dumb and expendable Ingrams out to Tina Bar, knowingly or unknowingly, to find Cooper money ... that's risky and inevitably somebody gets thrown under the bus ... all to convince the FBI Cooper is dead and get the Feds off Cooper's back forever! ? A scheme like this could easily have backed up and thrown a drug dealer, his user clients, and Cooper himself into jail on Federal crimes. And in such a scheme Cooper himself wants to remain unknown and untouchable ?
A scheme like that is almost handing DB Cooper to the FBI, inevitably. For one thing, a scheme like that implies that Cooper is still alive directing matters and somewhere in the chain of players. Very likely the FBI would have been all over this convincing various people to give others up. I mean we are talking about a fairly small tightly knit group of conspirators here. It wouldn't take 2 minutes to have all of these people in jail spilling the beans on each other and willing to make deals ... all of which includes the players Pat Ingram, Crystal Ingram, Harold's brother, all of the kids, and all of Ingram's friends! All hatched by DB Cooper in order to convince the FBI he is dead?
And if Cooper is Radkstraw this puts Rackstraw at the level of a moron! O0 :)) :))
My five year old grandson could come up with a better plan than that!
Colbert has just painted Cooper as a moron ! What a scheme like that lacks is a "comfort dog" explaining reality to all of the players? So, where's the dog and what was it's name? :-*
Someone pulling a stunt like the one you describe would WANT to be caught. Such an act would immediately take an active, but mostly likely slow single-agent FBI case and immediately throw agents, resources, attention and publicity on it. AND involving people with not a lot of experience dealing with law enforcement who might not only spill the beans on the others, but crack under the stress of questioning and admit it themselves. It makes no sense unless Cooper was, as Georger suggests, a moron, or someone that enjoyed being chased.
I don't live in that area, but you had relatives there, right, Georger? GreyCop's book seems to imply there is a lot of urban legend that the Ingram's were directed where to find the money and it was Crystal who actually found it, and so on and so on. Often, that's just speculation that turns into rumor that turns into legend. Other times, someone does spill some beans in confidence and the story leaks out. Have stories like this been out there since the money was found?
Thanks Mark. Yes, there are morons who commit crimes but I dont see Cooper that way? Maybe its just my bias.
And 'yes', I asked my relatives if they knew the Ingrams, and I threw in a few other names ... the answer was no in each case. Frankly that came as a relief to me! :)) I wont go into details ... :)) The Ingrams probably feel the same.. :)) all good fun.
-
Colbert has just painted Cooper as a moron ! What a scheme like that lacks is a "comfort dog" explaining reality to all of the players? So, where's the dog and what was it's name? :-*
Rackstraw was no moron, far from it, but some quirk in his warped sociopathic personality interfered with his ability to stay under police radar. He got caught, a lot actually,
He could easily have involved others in a "Cooper is dead" scheme, as stupid as that may seem. He often failed to see the consequences of his brash decisions and actions.
Why did he lie about his Vietnam exploits? The truth was pretty impressive. Why did he embellish it with EASILY detectable lies? He lied in court about his rank, his medals and his combat flying which was a felony. Why take such a stupid and unnecessary risk? Airborne Bob or Airhead Bob... or both?
Colbert's book is a great read. He painstakingly chronicles the life of a very interesting and unusual criminal. For a former Superior Court trial judge to call Rackstraw the most extreme sociopathic criminal he'd ever encountered is really saying something. These judges see very clever sociopaths nearly every day court is in session.
377
Well yes and maybe ... but, the prisons are full of guys like this also.
There's no information suggesting Cooper was a sociopath ... or that radios were involved. Or that Marilyn Monroe was involved either.
-
There's no information suggesting Cooper was a sociopath ... or that radios were involved. Or that Marilyn Monroe was involved either.
Of course, there's no evidence to prove otherwise as well.
-
There's no information suggesting Cooper was a sociopath ... or that radios were involved. Or that Marilyn Monroe was involved either.
Of course, there's no evidence to prove otherwise as well.
Well yes there is - you yourself cited it in another post on how well Cooper covered his tracks leaving no evidence. (Isnt this the 2nd or 3rd time you have posted this?)
Sociopathic personalities don't think in a straight line and seldom can eat a meal without some episodic interruption.
So now: he covered his tracks or he didn't? Which of your two opposing points of view do you now endorse? :))
-
There's no information suggesting Cooper was a sociopath ... or that radios were involved. Or that Marilyn Monroe was involved either.
Of course, there's no evidence to prove otherwise as well.
Well yes there is - you yourself cited it in another post on how well Cooper covered his tracks leaving no evidence. (Isnt this the 2nd or 3rd time you have posted this?)
Sociopathic personalities don't think in a straight line and seldom can eat a meal without some episodic interruption.
So now: he covered his tracks or he didn't? Which of your two opposing points of view do you now endorse? :))
Okay, I'll agree with the sociopathic bit, but what about radios and Marilyn Monroe? ;D
-
But don't give us this B.S. that Harold or the Ingrams realised quickly what they had - they didn't! By all accounts they had barely even heard about the Cooper case being new to the State.
Please publish your interviews with the Ingrams so we may all share in your news?
:))
I don't think I'm reaching here on this one. I'm just looking at a calendar.
Ingram says they found the money in the afternoon on Sunday and the FBI showed up at the site on Tuesday. Are my dates wrong? The time between them finding the money and them contacting the FBI -- less than 24 hours -- would seem to qualify as pretty quickly.
You've expressed some skepticism with Dwayne's story. Now, if you're suggesting he actually found the money sometime before February 10, then I might agree with you. I know they tried bleaching the money and tried to figure out what to do with it before calling authorities, but unless my dates are wrong, I see that as "hours" not "days".
right - have it your way - YOU WILL ANYWAY. Let the FBI know! They will amend their files to accommodate your theory of the day -
Uhhhhh ... have you considered your "theory" has implications? But what the hell. Who gives a shit at this point?
I dont..... radios .... gag me with a silver bucket!
Sorry, Georger. I don't get where you're going with this. But, I don't have anything to add, so I'm going to drop it.
Again, the actions of the Ingrams during and after the money find do not support the notion that they had fore-knowledge that they were looking for or even knew they had found, Cooper money. Basically all they knew was they had found some old money, perhaps lost at Tina Bar by somebody. Had they not contacted local law enforcement on Monday they might never have even called the FBI, but gone straight to a bank with the money, trying to redeem it, and this money might have been taken and passed through the system without ever being identified as belonging to the Cooper hijacking. In fact, one of the Ingrams has stated that it was the intercession of someone at Harold's workplace that advised Harold to call local law enforcement, that changed everything.. One speculation voiced was that the money might be connected to some area burglary or bank robbery in the past (and there might be a reward). Once Harold called local law enforcement things changed rather quickly, in everyone's understanding. Harold was apparently told that local law enforcement ( The Sheriff's office etc) did not keep serial number lists from area bank robberies and the like - that only the FBI kept such lists! As far as I know, having interviewed some of these people and the Ingrams, the name "Cooper" or "Cooper Hijacking" never came up. The reason for calling the FBI was because only the FBI kept lists of serial numbers et-cetera related to old bank robberies and the like. That was the reason for calling the FBI. So far as I know, nobody had mentioned the Cooper hijacking yet ...
Harold called the FBI straightaway and told them what he had found and where, and gave them several serial numbers off his found bills. The FBI advised Harold they would look into it and was told to call back later. The FBI did not call Harold back. Hearing nothing Harold finally called the FBI back later in the day and I believe it was Himmelsbach who came on the phone with Harold. After some conversation RH asked Harold if he would be willing to bring his findings in in the morning and Harold agreed. (Of course the FBI could have gone to find Harold immediately had they chosen to do that). Instead the FBI waited and Pat and Harold called the FBI back the next morning and confirmed a time to come in at the Federal Building in Portland. One of the Ingrams told me that it was during that conversation on the morning of the day the Ingrams came to the Federal Bldg that Harold was told his money might have some relationship to the Cooper Hijacking. According to a number of people Harold was shocked! The FBI had run the serial numbers Harold provided and a match with ransom money from the Cooper hijacking was certain. Then later that morning a news conference was held at the Federal Building.
Harold was never in a position to know what his found money meant, until he was informed by the FBI. Harold was also advised that the reward in the Cooper case had expired.
Thanks, Georger.
Let's just assume for a moment that Harold's drug dealer did know DB Cooper and a plan was hatched to send the dumb and expendable Ingrams out to Tina Bar, knowingly or unknowingly, to find Cooper money ... that's risky and inevitably somebody gets thrown under the bus ... all to convince the FBI Cooper is dead and get the Feds off Cooper's back forever! ? A scheme like this could easily have backed up and thrown a drug dealer, his user clients, and Cooper himself into jail on Federal crimes. And in such a scheme Cooper himself wants to remain unknown and untouchable ?
A scheme like that is almost handing DB Cooper to the FBI, inevitably. For one thing, a scheme like that implies that Cooper is still alive directing matters and somewhere in the chain of players. Very likely the FBI would have been all over this convincing various people to give others up. I mean we are talking about a fairly small tightly knit group of conspirators here. It wouldn't take 2 minutes to have all of these people in jail spilling the beans on each other and willing to make deals ... all of which includes the players Pat Ingram, Crystal Ingram, Harold's brother, all of the kids, and all of Ingram's friends! All hatched by DB Cooper in order to convince the FBI he is dead?
And if Cooper is Radkstraw this puts Rackstraw at the level of a moron! O0 :)) :))
My five year old grandson could come up with a better plan than that!
Colbert has just painted Cooper as a moron ! What a scheme like that lacks is a "comfort dog" explaining reality to all of the players? So, where's the dog and what was it's name? :-*
Someone pulling a stunt like the one you describe would WANT to be caught. Such an act would immediately take an active, but mostly likely slow single-agent FBI case and immediately throw agents, resources, attention and publicity on it. AND involving people with not a lot of experience dealing with law enforcement who might not only spill the beans on the others, but crack under the stress of questioning and admit it themselves. It makes no sense unless Cooper was, as Georger suggests, a moron, or someone that enjoyed being chased.
I don't live in that area, but you had relatives there, right, Georger? GreyCop's book seems to imply there is a lot of urban legend that the Ingram's were directed where to find the money and it was Crystal who actually found it, and so on and so on. Often, that's just speculation that turns into rumor that turns into legend. Other times, someone does spill some beans in confidence and the story leaks out. Have stories like this been out there since the money was found?
I do believe there are 'lose ends' in the Ingram find - caused Dwayne/Harold himself in his propensity for fostering 'disbelief' in everything he says - his Colbert interviews were less than satisfying to put it mildly! Dodgy? I wonder if just acts dodgy? He does he treat a waitress? Is she sure what he wants? :)) He always leaves the impression he isn't telling the 'whole story'. What is the whole story? I seriously doubt we will ever know ... not from the Ingrams we won't and that definitely includes Brian. I wouldnt trust these people to wait for the traffic light to change! Praise Jesus and drive with caution around them! Wait for them to move before proceeding! We will never know the whole story of the Ingram find ... that's the bottom line.
... these posts belonged in the Tina Bar Thread but alas I have no control over where people post their stuff ...
-
It is said Cooper asked for a 15d flap setting just prior to bailing. Snowmman looked at the Transcript and confirmed a 15d flap setting had been performed, but Snowmman discovered the last radioed flap setting was 30 degrees, not 15 degrees. Ordering flap settings has been taken as part of the evidence that Cooper might have been a pilot and its fair to say some people take this as "dead-sure evidence" Cooper was a pilot. Some people go further and say even knowing there was a 15-d flap setting on this 727 indicates Cooper had specialised knowledge about the 727, in any event. That about sums it up, I guess.
I believe Rataczak made the call for 30 degree flaps. the flap change occurred around 7 minutes (I believe) into the flight while Cooper was having trouble with the stairs. they were at 30 degree's for a short period after realizing it would burn more fuel...
-
It is said Cooper asked for a 15d flap setting just prior to bailing. Snowmman looked at the Transcript and confirmed a 15d flap setting had been performed, but Snowmman discovered the last radioed flap setting was 30 degrees, not 15 degrees. Ordering flap settings has been taken as part of the evidence that Cooper might have been a pilot and its fair to say some people take this as "dead-sure evidence" Cooper was a pilot. Some people go further and say even knowing there was a 15-d flap setting on this 727 indicates Cooper had specialised knowledge about the 727, in any event. That about sums it up, I guess.
I believe Rataczak made the call for 30 degree flaps. the flap change occurred around 7 minutes (I believe) into the flight while Cooper was having trouble with the stairs. they were at 30 degree's for a short period after realizing it would burn more fuel...
I will look Snow's post up ... may take a few days.
-
Kaye vs. NWA Search Map:
Kaye argues strongly that Cooper bailed near Ariel, is correct - and all other assertions are wrong - based on Kaye's personal analysis. See his website for his analysis. One of Kaye's assumptions/claims is the radar tracking of 305 was accurate.
One problem is: The FBI/NWA Search Map does not say what Kaye is saying.
In fact, no document known says what Kaye is saying!
ps* I wont post the NWA document at issue because you all know it by heart by now.
-
Someone in another forum who pays attention to the Cooper case instead of social arguing and scoring social points and Jo Weber news, apparently had the placard coordinates all along. Congrats to him! They are:
46°14’35.40”N 122°41’1”W
I have no idea how accurate these coords are or where he got them. Here is a map. Sorry but Silver Lake script is backwards due to Google excellence in all things...
-
Interesting find here about the weather and the drop zone...
-
Interesting find here about the weather and the drop zone...
Where does this come from - the source?
-
Interesting find here about the weather and the drop zone...
Where does this come from - the source?
FBI files from the FOIA Tom Colbert has been receiving...
-
Interesting find here about the weather and the drop zone...
Where does this come from - the source?
FBI files from the FOIA Tom Colbert has been receiving...
any idea on the date? ... here we go with those weather/wind variables again!
-
Most of the files are dated 1976-77. no date on this file
-
Most of the files are dated 1976-77. no date on this file
That's interesting. Remember there was that San Francisco conference on the case that presumably examined 'all important parameters' of the case. I was almost going to guess 1976 before your post. That's interesting. Thanks!
-
Page above it is redacted where they were going to say something about the evening of 11/24/1971
"he recalls that night of 11/24/71. as being".........redacted :-X
Page above it was part 1 of two pages.....3/1/77 was the date..
-
anyone know the size of the steps of the airstairs, and could the briefcase even rest on those steps without falling all the way down?
-
anyone know the size of the steps of the airstairs, and could the briefcase even rest on those steps without falling all the way down?
Here is a vid of the stair operation and step angles, this one has no side panels but the stair angle could catch an attache if the stairs didn't go all the way down and they didn't..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMLWmKpwJ_0
-
anyone know the size of the steps of the airstairs, and could the briefcase even rest on those steps without falling all the way down?
Here is a vid of the stair operation and step angles, this one has no side panels but the stair angle could catch an attache if the stairs didn't go all the way down and they didn't..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMLWmKpwJ_0
Cooper could have fallen on the peanut on the stairs and strangled with the briefcase he had tied around his neck while Tina looked and reported it later to Bruce Smith. ?
-
anyone know the size of the steps of the airstairs, and could the briefcase even rest on those steps without falling all the way down?
Here is a vid of the stair operation and step angles, this one has no side panels but the stair angle could catch an attache if the stairs didn't go all the way down and they didn't..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMLWmKpwJ_0
Cooper could have fallen on the peanut on the stairs and strangled with the briefcase he had tied around his neck while Tina looked and reported it later to Bruce Smith. ?
and this comment helps the case how?
-
anyone know the size of the steps of the airstairs, and could the briefcase even rest on those steps without falling all the way down?
Here is a vid of the stair operation and step angles, this one has no side panels but the stair angle could catch an attache if the stairs didn't go all the way down and they didn't..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMLWmKpwJ_0
Cooper could have fallen on the peanut on the stairs and strangled with the briefcase he had tied around his neck while Tina looked and reported it later to Bruce Smith. ?
and this comment helps the case how?
It is every bit as plausible as your conjectures about briefcase snagging on the stairs, Dorwin being a liar doing a walkback, your personal attacks against me, not to mention the fact you still refuse to provide evidence as to the date and place of the GG photo you cite as stair panel evidence. If you are going to use GG's photo as an illustration of some fact you contend is true at least tell us the date of the photo! Frankly, I dont think you know or care. You have avoided the question since it was posted. As I read your posts, you claim the GG photo represents the state of the stair panels AFTER the test, or right before the test (you arent even clear about that) when in fact GG's photo may be from another date and time and place? I don't know sir. Im not the one making the claims; you are. It's a reasonable question given your claim -
Excuse me for breathing! :))
-
Didn't I read somewhere that at himmelsbachs's retirement party the airline captain talked to Ralph himmelsbach about the flight path and if not mistaken he told Ralph they were flying either east or west of the vector or I 5 cannot remember but it was different than was always believed
-
Russ Calame reports that Captain Scott told Himms Flight 305 was west of V-23, flying over Woodland, WA.
-
Didn't I read somewhere that at himmelsbachs's retirement party the airline captain talked to Ralph himmelsbach about the flight path and if not mistaken he told Ralph they were flying either east or west of the vector or I 5 cannot remember but it was different than was always believed
In all probability, the airliner left Victor-23 about the Malay Intersection (which is near Toledo) and flew direct to the area of the Canby Intersection south of Portland where it rejoined V-23. This means that the airliner deliberately bypassed Portland on the west side and would have passed about 1000 feet west of Tina Bar at the time Cooper is believed to have jumped. During the flight between the Malay and Canby Intersections, the airliner would have been receiving radar vectors to fly from the air traffic controller.
The above has been discussed at extreme lengths (at least to the point of extreme exhaustion!) on other threads on this site and on the DropZone site before that. If you are interested in pursuing the matter further, I suggest you read some of those threads since they give reasons and go into greater details about the flight path.
-
That's a fairly large surface with a big aft of CG moment arm, acting kinda like an elevator deflection. The autopilot would trim out pitch changes with elevator movement but if the crew were hand flying wouldn't the stair extension cause a significant downward pitch?
I call it T-Bar, which fits Tina and Tena.
Been reading about Tektronix CRT mfg and pre-1971 vintage screen phosphors. No matches yet.
Been also probing former spook pilots to see if 727 airdrop operational missions were done in SE Asia. The Korat Thailand drop ops show in the YouTube video were demos, tests, not operational missions. So far I have found no evidence that 727s were actually used for SE Asia war zone air drops. The MAC SOG airdrops were done from helos and Hercs, not 727s as far as I can tell.
One of my sources flew covert personnel and cargo drop missions over Cambodia but in C 47s, not 727s. Interesting guy. Lawyer, but worked as an Air America pilot.
377
-
That's a fairly large surface with a big aft of CG moment arm, acting kinda like an elevator deflection. The autopilot would trim out pitch changes with elevator movement but if the crew were hand flying wouldn't the stair extension cause a significant downward pitch?
I call it T-Bar, which fits Tina and Tena.
Been reading about Tektronix CRT mfg and pre-1971 vintage screen phosphors. No matches yet.
Been also probing former spook pilots to see if 727 airdrop operational missions were done in SE Asia. The Korat Thailand drop ops show in the YouTube video were demos, tests, not operational missions. So far I have found no evidence that 727s were actually used for SE Asia war zone air drops. The MAC SOG airdrops were done from helos and Hercs, not 727s as far as I can tell.
One of my sources flew covert personnel and cargo drop missions over Cambodia but in C 47s, not 727s. Interesting guy. Lawyer, but worked as an Air America pilot.
377
It is a very good question as to why modified 727s would be used in SEA. With all the military equipment available that was specifically designed for air drops, it would appear to be a waste of money to buy a new 727 straight off the production line and modify it for jumping and aerial delivery operations. Maybe the 727s were used elsewhere.
-
It is a very good question as to why modified 727s would be used in SEA. With all the military equipment available that was specifically designed for air drops, it would appear to be a waste of money to buy a new 727 straight off the production line and modify it for jumping and aerial delivery operations. Maybe the 727s were used elsewhere.
This is the US government we are talking about, right?! :rofl:
-
This US govt idiocy will sicken you.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-turns-486-million-afghan-air-fleet-32000/story?id=26083173
These scrapped turboprop cargo aircraft had about 250 hours each on the clock since NEW.
377
-
Bruce did get second hand info that 727s were used to air drop commandos over Laos and Cambodia. https://themountainnewswa.net/2011/07/20/the-hunt-for-db-cooper-report-on-727s-used-by-world-airways-in-covert-vietnam-ops/
But my extensive interviewing of an Air America pilot who flew numerous air drop missions over Cambodia turned up no knowledge by him of 727's used for operational airdrops in that theater or anywhere else in SE Asia. I think he would have known had it happened. He said the spook pilots traded stories about unusual missions. It was a small tight knit group.
No good reason to use 727s for those missions. Other planes were far better suited.
377
-
Two thoughts:
1. The use of 727s to drop commandos was a story offered by a former CIA - World Airways 727 pilot named Everett Johnson. Everett told me that he got this piece of information from Tom Sailor, the senior 727 pilot for World Airways at that time. I have not been able to find Mr. Sailor.
2. The second piece comes from Billy Waugh. I remember Billy telling me that 727s were used to ferry covert troops into North Vietnam - that having jet speeds of 550 mph+ was useful when escaping from MIGs. Can't necessarily outrun 'em, but it was better than 300 mph in a Herc.
-
A 727 would be easy prey for SAMs and AAA fire. No electronic jammers or other countermeasures aboard, not even detection gear to let them know they were being painted by targeting/tracking radar.
If you wanted to drop stuff Up North, a night helo flight would have a better chance of surviving than a 727. Migs only accounted for a small percentage of US and RVN acft losses over N Vietnam (estimated 321 planes lost in air combat). AAA (anti aircraft artillery) accounted for thousands of US and RVN acft losses. SA-2 SAMs got a few hundred as well.
Aside from Billy Waugh's tale of 727 drops over N Vietnam, no other published accounts corroborate this. The accounts I have read say that the MAC SOG jumps into North Vietnam were made at night from Hercs, helos and other conventional airdrop aircraft. Not a single mention of 727s.
So we have World Airways Capt Sailor and Sgt. Maj. Billy Waugh attesting to the operational use of 727s for air, but nobody else corroborates this. Who is right?
377
-
A 727 would be easy prey for SAMs and AAA fire. No electronic jammers or other countermeasures aboard, not even detection gear to let them know they were being painted by targeting/tracking radar.
If you wanted to drop stuff Up North, a night helo flight would have a better chance of surviving than a 727. Migs only accounted for a small percentage of US and RVN acft losses over N Vietnam (estimated 321 planes lost in air combat). AAA (anti aircraft artillery) accounted for thousands of US and RVN acft losses. SA-2 SAMs got a few hundred as well.
Aside from Billy Waugh's tale of 727 drops over N Vietnam, no other published accounts corroborate this. The accounts I have read say that the MAC SOG jumps into North Vietnam were made at night from Hercs, helos and other conventional airdrop aircraft. Not a single mention of 727s.
So we have World Airways Capt Sailor and Sgt. Maj. Billy Waugh attesting to the operational use of 727s for air, but nobody else corroborates this. Who is right?
377
Captain Sailor and Billy Waugh are wrong. As you point out, it would be senseless to use 727s in North Vietnam. For the record, I am personally not aware of a single case where the black operations people used anything other than former USA military aircraft and helicopters during SEA operations. In other third world countries, the black operations would probably be done with aircraft from the local region if at all possible.
-
A 727 would be easy prey for SAMs and AAA fire. No electronic jammers or other countermeasures aboard, not even detection gear to let them know they were being painted by targeting/tracking radar.
If you wanted to drop stuff Up North, a night helo flight would have a better chance of surviving than a 727. Migs only accounted for a small percentage of US and RVN acft losses over N Vietnam (estimated 321 planes lost in air combat). AAA (anti aircraft artillery) accounted for thousands of US and RVN acft losses. SA-2 SAMs got a few hundred as well.
Aside from Billy Waugh's tale of 727 drops over N Vietnam, no other published accounts corroborate this. The accounts I have read say that the MAC SOG jumps into North Vietnam were made at night from Hercs, helos and other conventional airdrop aircraft. Not a single mention of 727s.
So we have World Airways Capt Sailor and Sgt. Maj. Billy Waugh attesting to the operational use of 727s for air, but nobody else corroborates this. Who is right?
377
Hard to say. I have approached Air America folks through their retirees directory and that has been a total dead-end. I've corresponded with another journalist who wrote about Air America and CIA ops in Cambodia and Laos and that was interesting but ultimately unsuccessful in getting any information on 727s.
Any suggestions?
-
A 727 would be easy prey for SAMs and AAA fire. No electronic jammers or other countermeasures aboard, not even detection gear to let them know they were being painted by targeting/tracking radar.
If you wanted to drop stuff Up North, a night helo flight would have a better chance of surviving than a 727. Migs only accounted for a small percentage of US and RVN acft losses over N Vietnam (estimated 321 planes lost in air combat). AAA (anti aircraft artillery) accounted for thousands of US and RVN acft losses. SA-2 SAMs got a few hundred as well.
Aside from Billy Waugh's tale of 727 drops over N Vietnam, no other published accounts corroborate this. The accounts I have read say that the MAC SOG jumps into North Vietnam were made at night from Hercs, helos and other conventional airdrop aircraft. Not a single mention of 727s.
So we have World Airways Capt Sailor and Sgt. Maj. Billy Waugh attesting to the operational use of 727s for air, but nobody else corroborates this. Who is right?
377
Captain Sailor and Billy Waugh are wrong. As you point out, it would be senseless to use 727s in North Vietnam. For the record, I am personally not aware of a single case where the black operations people used anything other than former USA military aircraft and helicopters during SEA operations. In other third world countries, the black operations would probably be done with aircraft from the local region if at all possible.
I love it Robert when you speak so authoritatively! It's downright sexy.
You say you're not personally aware of black operations using anything other than "military aircraft and helos..." Okay. How do you know that?
At least we know Everett Johnson, and we can confirm that Tom Sailor was a pilot for World Airways and flew 727s in SE Asia. He was mentioned in the CBS TV clip on take-offs with the aft stairs down in Da Nang, as I recall.
-
A 727 would be easy prey for SAMs and AAA fire. No electronic jammers or other countermeasures aboard, not even detection gear to let them know they were being painted by targeting/tracking radar.
If you wanted to drop stuff Up North, a night helo flight would have a better chance of surviving than a 727. Migs only accounted for a small percentage of US and RVN acft losses over N Vietnam (estimated 321 planes lost in air combat). AAA (anti aircraft artillery) accounted for thousands of US and RVN acft losses. SA-2 SAMs got a few hundred as well.
Aside from Billy Waugh's tale of 727 drops over N Vietnam, no other published accounts corroborate this. The accounts I have read say that the MAC SOG jumps into North Vietnam were made at night from Hercs, helos and other conventional airdrop aircraft. Not a single mention of 727s.
So we have World Airways Capt Sailor and Sgt. Maj. Billy Waugh attesting to the operational use of 727s for air, but nobody else corroborates this. Who is right?
377
Captain Sailor and Billy Waugh are wrong. As you point out, it would be senseless to use 727s in North Vietnam. For the record, I am personally not aware of a single case where the black operations people used anything other than former USA military aircraft and helicopters during SEA operations. In other third world countries, the black operations would probably be done with aircraft from the local region if at all possible.
I love it Robert when you speak so authoritatively! It's downright sexy.
You say you're not personally aware of black operations using anything other than "military aircraft and helos..." Okay. How do you know that?
At least we know Everett Johnson, and we can confirm that Tom Sailor was a pilot for World Airways and flew 727s in SE Asia. He was mentioned in the CBS TV clip on take-offs with the aft stairs down in Da Nang, as I recall.
Bruce, You were just complaining about someone not paying attention. You would know the answer to your first sentence, or at least have reasons to suspect why I might know that information, if you had been paying attention over the last eight years or so.
I have been involved with aircraft since my early teens which is probably several decades longer than you have been breathing. My involvement wasn't just reading newspaper clippings and I haven't wasted any of those years harassing Tina.
Note that I am NOT claiming that all black operations used former military aircraft that were routinely used in great numbers in the military services. And some of these aircraft never had military designations in the first place.
To illustrate, if you have ever visited the USAF Museum at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, you may have seen a helicopter that carried only the USA national star symbol. It did not carry any other markings of identification. The sign by that helicopter specifically states (if I remember correctly) that it was not a USAF aircraft but that it was operated by an OGA (Other Government Agency) which was not named.
Finally, I love it when you speak so authoritatively claiming that World Airways was a CIA front airline. Where is your proof?
-
Everett Johnson and others have claimed that World Airways was a CIA front operation. I didn't know that there was any question about this.
Just because you have been a pilot, skydiver, and an avionics professional your whole life doesn't make you an absolute authority on covert operations. You may be, but you haven't told us yet how that knowledge has come into your wheelhouse.
-
I knew several pilots who flew for World Airways. It did a lot of military contract flying but wasn't like
SAT or Air America. Different animal. Ed Daly, World's hard drinking and publicity seeking CEO never saw a
camera or microphone that he didn't like. That wouldn't do for a CIA front operation. World pilot Ed Herring in the mid 1970s gave me a personal tour of Dalys executive plane, a luxurious Convair Twin, probably a 440. It had a big onboard liquor inventory. World hauled cargo and people but didn't directly engage in military ops. SAT and Air America did. Prof. Joe Leeker of U Texas knows more about covert CIA cover airlines than anybody. He doesn't include World in the same spook universe as SAT and AIr America.
377
-
Everett Johnson and others have claimed that World Airways was a CIA front operation. I didn't know that there was any question about this.
Just because you have been a pilot, skydiver, and an avionics professional your whole life doesn't make you an absolute authority on covert operations. You may be, but you haven't told us yet how that knowledge has come into your wheelhouse.
First, you admit that you don't have any evidence that World Airways was a CIA front operation, other than second hand stories. Do you know what the word "hearsay" means?
Second, I have never claimed to be an "avionics professional". I would suggest you contact 377 if you have any questions about avionics. If you have any questions about "aeronautical engineering" (see Wikipedia for an explanation), I might be able to help.
Third, I have never claimed to be an "absolute authority on covert operations", or any kind of authority on covert operations for that matter.
Fourth, the knowledge that has come into my "wheelhouse" over the years has done so through the customary five physical senses, or however many there are now.
-
I knew several pilots who flew for World Airways. It did a lot of military contract flying but wasn't like
SAT or Air America. Different animal. Ed Daly, World's hard drinking and publicity seeking CEO never saw a
camera or microphone that he didn't like. That wouldn't do for a CIA front operation. World pilot Ed Herring in the mid 1970s gave me a personal tour of Dalys executive plane, a luxurious Convair Twin, probably a 440. It had a big onboard liquor inventory. World hauled cargo and people but didn't directly engage in military ops. SAT and Air America did. Prof. Joe Leeker of U Texas knows more about covert CIA cover airlines than anybody. He doesn't include World in the same spook universe as SAT and AIr America.
377
The world is full of small commercial aircraft operations, with only a handful of aircraft each, that fills the gaps left by the military in certain cargo hauling activities as well as transportation of personnel. If you see a commercial aircraft loading personnel for transportation to or from some place in the Middle East or Southwest Asia, you probably will not recognize the name on the fuselage.
Basically, this is a feast-or-famine type of operation. In the leaner times, some of the operators are going to lose out since the contracts go to the lowest bidder in the first place, and may end up hauling fish in Alaska or who knows what.
-
I knew several pilots who flew for World Airways. It did a lot of military contract flying but wasn't like
SAT or Air America. Different animal. Ed Daly, World's hard drinking and publicity seeking CEO never saw a
camera or microphone that he didn't like. That wouldn't do for a CIA front operation. World pilot Ed Herring in the mid 1970s gave me a personal tour of Dalys executive plane, a luxurious Convair Twin, probably a 440. It had a big onboard liquor inventory. World hauled cargo and people but didn't directly engage in military ops. SAT and Air America did. Prof. Joe Leeker of U Texas knows more about covert CIA cover airlines than anybody. He doesn't include World in the same spook universe as SAT and AIr America.
377
Good to know, Three-Seven-Seven. Thanks.
-
So for all the flight path gurus here, what do you make of the latest Tom Colbert "parachute finding" stuff as it relates to the flight path and projected drop zone? In order for it to hold any water, the jump would've had to been made near La Center. In your opinion (and based on what we know about the pressure bump), any chance Cooper could've jumped in this area?
-
So for all the flight path gurus here, what do you make of the latest Tom Colbert "parachute finding" stuff as it relates to the flight path and projected drop zone? In order for it to hold any water, the jump would've had to been made near La Center. In your opinion (and based on what we know about the pressure bump), any chance Cooper could've jumped in this area?
Basically none based on time and position.
The time of the jump was about 8:12 PM give or take a minute or two. All indications are that the airliner was off V-23 and deliberately bypassing Portland on the west side. And at 8:12 PM it would be almost directly over Tina Bar.
Also, an analysis of the free fall of the aft stair placard indicates that the airliner was already well west of the V-23 centerline when it separated from the aircraft. And that supports the jump being near Tina Bar as well.
-
So for all the flight path gurus here, what do you make of the latest Tom Colbert "parachute finding" stuff as it relates to the flight path and projected drop zone? In order for it to hold any water, the jump would've had to been made near La Center. In your opinion (and based on what we know about the pressure bump), any chance Cooper could've jumped in this area?
Basically none based on time and position.
The time of the jump was about 8:12 PM give or take a minute or two. All indications are that the airliner was off V-23 and deliberately bypassing Portland on the west side. And at 8:12 PM it would be almost directly over Tina Bar.
Also, an analysis of the free fall of the aft stair placard indicates that the airliner was already well west of the V-23 centerline when it separated from the aircraft. And that supports the jump being near Tina Bar as well.
Tom Kaye is in the other camp on this one, right? He believes in the original DZ?
-
So for all the flight path gurus here, what do you make of the latest Tom Colbert "parachute finding" stuff as it relates to the flight path and projected drop zone? In order for it to hold any water, the jump would've had to been made near La Center. In your opinion (and based on what we know about the pressure bump), any chance Cooper could've jumped in this area?
Basically none based on time and position.
The time of the jump was about 8:12 PM give or take a minute or two. All indications are that the airliner was off V-23 and deliberately bypassing Portland on the west side. And at 8:12 PM it would be almost directly over Tina Bar.
Also, an analysis of the free fall of the aft stair placard indicates that the airliner was already well west of the V-23 centerline when it separated from the aircraft. And that supports the jump being near Tina Bar as well.
Tom Kaye is in the other camp on this one, right? He believes in the original DZ?
Correct. Tom Kaye, at the 2011 DB Cooper Symposium in Portland, stated that the placard was found in V-23, and based upon wind currents confirmed that 305 was in V-23 when it passed by the Castle Rock/Silver Lake region.
Obviously if that is true, then R99's T-Bar impact hypothesis - with the concurrent Mandalay-Canby Intersect scenario - can not be correct.
-
So for all the flight path gurus here, what do you make of the latest Tom Colbert "parachute finding" stuff as it relates to the flight path and projected drop zone? In order for it to hold any water, the jump would've had to been made near La Center. In your opinion (and based on what we know about the pressure bump), any chance Cooper could've jumped in this area?
Basically none based on time and position.
The time of the jump was about 8:12 PM give or take a minute or two. All indications are that the airliner was off V-23 and deliberately bypassing Portland on the west side. And at 8:12 PM it would be almost directly over Tina Bar.
Also, an analysis of the free fall of the aft stair placard indicates that the airliner was already well west of the V-23 centerline when it separated from the aircraft. And that supports the jump being near Tina Bar as well.
Tom Kaye is in the other camp on this one, right? He believes in the original DZ?
Correct. Tom Kaye, at the 2011 DB Cooper Symposium in Portland, stated that the placard was found in V-23, and based upon wind currents confirmed that 305 was in V-23 when it passed by the Castle Rock/Silver Lake region.
Obviously if that is true, then R99's T-Bar impact hypothesis - with the concurrent Mandalay-Canby Intersect scenario - can not be correct.
Unsurelock,
Bruce Smith already knows this despite his statements above, so I am repeating it for your benefit.
You can go to Tom Kaye's web page and read an analysis that I did for him at his request. Tom Kaye was taken to the location where the placard was found by members of the family that found it. Tom recorded the GPS coordinates of that location and those coordinates were used in the calculations that I did for him.
Tom and I discussed the factors affecting the free fall of the placard at great length. This included the effect of rain drops and tumbling on the descent rate of the placard. The actual winds aloft and their direction were not known so they had to be estimated. Every effort was made to be "conservative", meaning that the actual distance travelled by the placard would be greater than the distance calculated.
The end result was that the placard apparently separated from the airliner at a point that was well west of the centerline of V-23 and which was consistent with the airliner bypassing Portland on the west side.
Other factors such as pilot statements, ground observers, dispatch of the chase aircraft, and all other relevant information is also consistent with the airliner bypassing Portland on the west side.
Bruce Smith's speculations are baseless.
-
...Bruce Smith's speculations are baseless.
My statements to Unsure above are not speculations, nor are they baseless. I was simply repeating what Tom Kaye publicly stated in 2011 at the Portland Symposium.
What is speculative at this point, Robert, is your belief that Flight 305 was far to the west of V-23 - well, wait, you only say that 305 was well to the west of the center line of V-23, which is only 6-8 miles wide to begin with, so where are you saying 305 actually was?
You may be correct that it was "well to the west of the center line," but it is still speculative as of tonight, and if true it only gives us a slight notion of where it might be. It could still have been in V-23.
Also, the placard has not been conclusively determined to be from Flight 305. It probably is, since the plane was missing its placard upon returning to Boeing Field for repairs, but it is not definitive. Yes, I know everyone says that the placard was Coop's and blew into the Silver Lake area when DB opened the stairs, but it is not 100% certain.
-
...Other factors such as pilot statements, ground observers, dispatch of the chase aircraft, and all other relevant information is also consistent with the airliner bypassing Portland on the west side...
That's quite a mouthful there, Robert. Can you give us the specifics on:
1. What ground observers are you citing?
2. Where were they? What did they see?
3. Dispatch of what chase planes - I assume the 106s out of McCord, the T-33 out of Mountain Home, and Himms' helo - and what was their flight path?
4. Statements of what pilot(s)? Scotty? Rataczak? Anderson? Exactly what did they say, and to whom did they say it to?
Just askin'.
Lastly, what is the connection between bypassing Portland on the west and flying in the right-hand side of V-23 near Castle Rock?
-
...Bruce Smith's speculations are baseless.
My statements to Unsure above are not speculations, nor are they baseless. I was simply repeating what Tom Kaye publicly stated in 2011 at the Portland Symposium.
What is speculative at this point, Robert, is your belief that Flight 305 was far to the west of V-23 - well, wait, you only say that 305 was well to the west of the center line of V-23, which is only 6-8 miles wide to begin with, so where are you saying 305 actually was?
You may be correct that it was "well to the west of the center line," but it is still speculative as of tonight, and if true it only gives us a slight notion of where it might be. It could still have been in V-23.
Also, the placard has not been conclusively determined to be from Flight 305. It probably is, since the plane was missing its placard upon returning to Boeing Field for repairs, but it is not definitive. Yes, I know everyone says that the placard was Coop's and blew into the Silver Lake area when DB opened the stairs, but it is not 100% certain.
Bruce,
Assuming that the airliner flew direct from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, it would never be more than eight miles west of the centerline of V-23 anywhere between those two points. So the airliner, and placard as well, would be within the lateral limits of V-23 for a considerable part of that diversion.
Where is your evidence that the airliner returned to "Boeing Field" for repairs? Everything I have seen says it returned to SEATAC.
-
The flight to Boeing Field from Reno took place the next day, as I recall info that was posted at the 2013 COOPER conference. I also believe I have read it in GG's book, or his documents, and elsewhere. I'll check.
What documentation do you have that says it went to SeaTac? The repairs were made there? By Boeing? Seems strange.
Along those lines, it is my understanding that the crew flew the next day from Reno to SeaTac on another NWO aircraft, or to MPS, I forget which at the moment. Flight #55 stands out in my memory for some reason.
Also a bit hazy is when 305 went to Langley for the seat removal. GG told me that occurred before the plane went to Boeing, which I find strange, too.
-
Bruce,
Assuming that the airliner flew direct from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, it would never be more than eight miles west of the centerline of V-23 anywhere between those two points. So the airliner, and placard as well, would be within the lateral limits of V-23 for a considerable part of that diversion.
Good to know.
Are answers to my others questions coming any time soon? Ground Obs, pilot testimony, etc...
Just askin'.
-
New FP-Search Map predates Jan 9, 72 NWA Search Map
Have any of you seen this map before?
The NWA Search map we have always used was published Jan 9, 1972. What may be a first iteration of this map has surfaced in the new FBI FOIA files. The tag on photo attached identifies the page location of this map in the Colbert FBI files. This map was sent to Seattle by NWA at 6:05pm on the evening of Dec 4th, 1971. Copies of the map were then distributed to FBI offices on 12/6/71 (see next post).
The copy of the LaCenter Sectional map we have known is dated: published Jan 9, 1972.
See below. The map fax copy here is of very poor quality.
-
more on new 12/4/71 NWA search map. See 12/6/71 Seattle office distribution memo -
Storage space limitation prevents the posting of the full sized version of this map.
Does anyone have a better full-sized copy of this map?
-
Bruce,
Assuming that the airliner flew direct from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, it would never be more than eight miles west of the centerline of V-23 anywhere between those two points. So the airliner, and placard as well, would be within the lateral limits of V-23 for a considerable part of that diversion.
Good to know.
Are answers to my others questions coming any time soon? Ground Obs, pilot testimony, etc...
Just askin'.
Bruce, if you have been paying attention for the past eight years or so, then you know where you can find the answers to your questions. They have been answered numerous times here by a number of people, including myself.
You told me once that you were an "investigative reporter". So you should be overqualified for the simple task of reading some of the threads here.
-
Comparison of later FBI flight path map with 12/4/71 NWA (first iteration?) flight path map ?
-
Bruce, if you have been paying attention for the past eight years or so, then you know where you can find the answers to your questions. They have been answered numerous times here by a number of people, including myself.
You told me once that you were an "investigative reporter". So you should be overqualified for the simple task of reading some of the threads here.
So I gather you are not going to answer my questions about ground observations, pilot statements, and other documentation. Instead, you mock me and make provocative statements suggesting that I go looking through the records so that you don't have to actually cite the people and documents that you previously claimed verify your Mandalay-Canby Intersect Flight Path.
Is that correct?
-
Bruce, if you have been paying attention for the past eight years or so, then you know where you can find the answers to your questions. They have been answered numerous times here by a number of people, including myself.
You told me once that you were an "investigative reporter". So you should be overqualified for the simple task of reading some of the threads here.
So I gather you are not going to answer my questions about ground observations, pilot statements, and other documentation. Instead, you mock me and make provocative statements suggesting that I go looking through the records so that you don't have to actually cite the people and documents that you previously claimed verify your Mandalay-Canby Intersect Flight Path.
Is that correct?
Give it a rest Achilles!
-
Bruce, if you have been paying attention for the past eight years or so, then you know where you can find the answers to your questions. They have been answered numerous times here by a number of people, including myself.
You told me once that you were an "investigative reporter". So you should be overqualified for the simple task of reading some of the threads here.
So I gather you are not going to answer my questions about ground observations, pilot statements, and other documentation. Instead, you mock me and make provocative statements suggesting that I go looking through the records so that you don't have to actually cite the people and documents that you previously claimed verify your Mandalay-Canby Intersect Flight Path.
Is that correct?
No that is not correct.
Your questions have already been answered multiple times and at great length. All you have to do is read the answers.
Is that simple enough?
-
No.
Your response is vague, non-specific, and unsatisfying. In fact, it's a dodge.
If you are going to claim multiple sources verify your hypothesis then you should be able to back it up upon demand.
Remember, the guy actually flying the plane said something very different than you on national television last year. So if you are going to contradict him you should have your proof readily available because extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, Robert. Always has. Always will.
-
Bruce, if you have been paying attention for the past eight years or so, then you know where you can find the answers to your questions. They have been answered numerous times here by a number of people, including myself.
You told me once that you were an "investigative reporter". So you should be overqualified for the simple task of reading some of the threads here.
So I gather you are not going to answer my questions about ground observations, pilot statements, and other documentation. Instead, you mock me and make provocative statements suggesting that I go looking through the records so that you don't have to actually cite the people and documents that you previously claimed verify your Mandalay-Canby Intersect Flight Path.
Is that correct?
Give it a rest Achilles!
Why?
Are you satisfied with Robert's non-answer? If so, why?
More to the point - do you support the Mandalay-Canby Intersect Flight Path?
-
No.
Your response is vague, non-specific, and unsatisfying. In fact, it's a dodge.
If you are going to claim multiple sources verify your hypothesis then you should be able to back it up upon demand.
Bruce, I do give the sources, reasoning, etc.. But I am damned tired of having to explain the same thing to YOU repeatedly. Other people seem to understand it with the first explanation. So no more "on demand" explanations. You are going to have to read the explanations yourself and they are already on this site.
And I am not on "The Road to Mandalay". It's the Malay to Canby Intersections flight path.
-
No.
Your response is vague, non-specific, and unsatisfying. In fact, it's a dodge.
If you are going to claim multiple sources verify your hypothesis then you should be able to back it up upon demand.
Bruce, I do give the sources, reasoning, etc.. But I am damned tired of having to explain the same thing to YOU repeatedly. Other people seem to understand it with the first explanation. So no more "on demand" explanations. You are going to have to read the explanations yourself and they are already on this site.
And I am not on "The Road to Mandalay". It's the Malay to Canby Intersections flight path.
Rudyard Kipling ..... Gunga Din ......... The Great Image is also considered as the greatest in Burma next to Shwedagon Pagoda. A visit to Mandalay is incomplete without a visit to Mahamuni Pagoda. ... Shwenandaw Monastery: Famous for its intricate wood carvings, this monastery is a fragile reminder of the old Mandalay Palace on The Road to Mandalay! :rofl:
I about cracked up the first time I read that post by Bruce. ;D
-
Bruce, I do give the sources, reasoning, etc..
Where?
You say "pilots," and I say which ones. Is that too much to answer, especially when the primary pilot contradicts you and does so on a major platform?
You say "ground observers," and I ask which ones. Where did they see the plane? Are we talking "Janet" here, or Dona Elliott? You consider them credible? If so, why?
As for being tired, well, I guess that comes from making bold statements and not being prepared to defend them.
As for me, I'm tired, too, so I'm going to bed.
-
... A visit to Mandalay is incomplete without a visit to Mahamuni Pagoda. ...
I about cracked up the first time I read that post by Bruce. ;D
"The greatest of things can be accomplished in a light heart," Georger. Sounds like you are on your way. BTW, guess who voiced that quote - my old buddy, the Big R. Heh, heh...
-
... A visit to Mandalay is incomplete without a visit to Mahamuni Pagoda. ...
I about cracked up the first time I read that post by Bruce. ;D
"The greatest of things can be accomplished in a light heart," Georger. Sounds like you are on your way. BTW, guess who voiced that quote - my old buddy, the Big R. Heh, heh...
Here we go again. The smarmy bullshit never stops with you does it?
Look! You make it miserable here - impossible to function here.
I guess Bruce must have his fun - at the expense of everything else. Let us know Bruce when we can have this forum back, wont cha?
For those who like Bruce's destructive crap, please continue ... without some of the rest of us!
-
Bruce,
Assuming that the airliner flew direct from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, it would never be more than eight miles west of the centerline of V-23 anywhere between those two points. So the airliner, and placard as well, would be within the lateral limits of V-23 for a considerable part of that diversion.
Good to know.
Are answers to my others questions coming any time soon? Ground Obs, pilot testimony, etc...
Just askin'.
Bruce, if you have been paying attention for the past eight years or so, then you know where you can find the answers to your questions. They have been answered numerous times here by a number of people, including myself.
You told me once that you were an "investigative reporter". So you should be overqualified for the simple task of reading some of the threads here.
Well put, R99....you would think an "investigative reporter" would know how to find information that has been reviewed, gone over, and analyzed for 8 years. Smith asks questions and ponders issues that have been dealt with, in detail, in past years. It' like the guy has total amnesia at times. Also, I thought an investigative reporter would try to be more objective and neutral in his observation of things.
Meyer
-
So... Georger's question still stands, has anyone seen this map before?
-
So... Georger's question still stands, has anyone seen this map before?
I've never seen it, but it's very similar to what has been published and seen for years....it appears to show two possible jump times before the Lewis river...make that 3 times...
I don't know why they make it appear to be two different tracks, but one jump time shows him landing close to the Lewis river..
-
It is different from the FBI map showing the 3 possible paths and different jump scenario's...this might explain why they were camped at Ariel looking in the area above the Lewis river, or north of the river?
-
So... Georger's question still stands, has anyone seen this map before?
Nope. One interesting thing to me is that the write-up states that it used data from the flight data recorder. I would think the air traffic control people would have better information than that.
-
It is different from the FBI map showing the 3 possible paths and different jump scenario's...this might explain why they were camped at Ariel looking in the area above the Lewis river, or north of the river?
There are a few supporting FBI docs around the map ... will gather those together and post em ...... but thanks for recognizing that I even posted the map! ;)
-
So... Georger's question still stands, has anyone seen this map before?
Nope. One interesting thing to me is that the write-up states that it used data from the flight data recorder. I would think the air traffic control people would have better information than that.
My exact same thoughts when I looked the commentary over. But its an interesting map and it may be the first attempt to formalise something ... after the horse was already long gone from the barn! So much for a quick solution! There almost had to be something else before this map... before the FDR had even been removed from the plane?
-
So... Georger's question still stands, has anyone seen this map before?
Nope. One interesting thing to me is that the write-up states that it used data from the flight data recorder. I would think the air traffic control people would have better information than that.
My exact same thoughts when I looked the commentary over. But its an interesting map and it may be the first attempt to formalise something ... after the horse was already long gone from the barn! So much for a quick solution! There almost had to be something else before this map... before the FDR had even been removed from the plane?
The write-up memo is dated 12-6-71 and the map is dated 12-4-71. So the horse hadn't been gone long.
The Oakland Center radio transcripts were dated 11-30-71, which is apparently the date they were transmitted to the FBI.
The Seattle Center radio transcripts do not have a date on the form transmitting it to the FBI, but it was probably about 12-1-71, maybe give or take a day or so.
So the FBI apparently had all of this paperwork within the space of about one week.
The flight data recorder data was apparently reduced in Minneapolis by NWA.
-
Carr mentions the 8:10 location but the transcripts state an "Oscillation" occurred, and not the pressure bump. he thought they might of gotten the two mixed up but it appears they didn't...so why did they look south of the Lewis river if they felt he jumped further north?
-
Carr mentions the 8:10 location but the transcripts state an "Oscillation" occurred, and not the pressure bump. he thought they might of gotten the two mixed up but it appears they didn't...so why did they look south of the Lewis river if they felt he jumped further north?
Good question. My brain is finally kicking in tonight: in these FOIA docs there are maybe 20+ docs on the initial searches, day by day. These first searches and the adjustments in search daily, were being conducted on the basis of info from someone ? This is all before any map, the plane FDR being read (took days to do this), etc etc. Im going to try and put these early search docs in chronological order and see how it fits together with the map of 12/4/71 and see where this comes out ... might be interesting.
And of course we have Bruce's search info to correlate with, which is independent of this. We also have a third source to consider at some point ...
-
It's odd to see so many maps by the media always claiming "the original search area" when actually, it was north of the so called "original jump location area" where they started looking and gives reason to why they were using the Ariel Tavern as base. it's very possible the bomb and dummy chute is north of the Lewis river.....
-
It's odd to see so many maps by the media always claiming "the original search area" when actually, it was north of the so called "original jump location area" where they started looking and gives reason to why they were using the Ariel Tavern as base. it's very possible the bomb and dummy chute is north of the Lewis river.....
damned good point! :good post:
-
12/2/71 they looked at the FDR (again) and suggested 3 miles north and as far south as the Columbia river...the area is rather large and appears they really don't know where he jumped as I've heard agents claim...this is the first report I've seen putting him at the river...
-
12/2/71 the looked at the FDR (again) and suggested 3 miles north and as far south as the Columbia river...the area is rather large and appears they really don't know where he jumped as I've heard agents claim...this is the first report I've seen putting him at the river...
I saw that .... will find it and post it. As far south as the Columbia!
This may be headed back to where it all began .... at Portland! :rofl:
-
SPLASH....
-
If they looked at the FDR several times it tells me that something is possibly confusing them. what would be on the FDR for them to extend the search area's. would this be pressure spikes, or the fact of them not knowing exactly where the plane was during these readings on the FDR?
The document above suggest a distance of over 25 miles of possible jump times....that's north of the Lewis river all the way down to the Columbia...
-
If they looked at the FDR several times it tells me that something is possibly confusing them. what would be on the FDR for them to extend the search area's. would this be pressure spikes, or the fact of them not knowing exactly where the plane was during these readings on the FDR?
The document above suggest a distance of over 25 miles of possible jump times....that's north of the Lewis river all the way down to the Columbia...
It is a mystery to me why they would try to reconstruct the flight path from the data on the FDR. Much more accurate data would be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts.
Take a look at the Oakland ATC and Reno tower radio transcripts to see what should be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, but had been deleted.
So the pressure spike time would be about the only useful thing available from the FDR.
-
If they looked at the FDR several times it tells me that something is possibly confusing them. what would be on the FDR for them to extend the search area's. would this be pressure spikes, or the fact of them not knowing exactly where the plane was during these readings on the FDR?
The document above suggest a distance of over 25 miles of possible jump times....that's north of the Lewis river all the way down to the Columbia...
It is a mystery to me why they would try to reconstruct the flight path from the data on the FDR. Much more accurate data would be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts.
Take a look at the Oakland ATC and Reno tower radio transcripts to see what should be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, but had been deleted.
So the pressure spike time would be about the only useful thing available from the FDR.
From the context of the document, it looks more like they were using the FDR to try to time the jump, they were not trying to reconstruct the flight path since they already had it from the radar. What's interesting is that they couldn't get a precise time for the jump from the FDR; in the document they are relying on the cockpit testimony to shorten the window of the jump.
-
If they looked at the FDR several times it tells me that something is possibly confusing them. what would be on the FDR for them to extend the search area's. would this be pressure spikes, or the fact of them not knowing exactly where the plane was during these readings on the FDR?
The document above suggest a distance of over 25 miles of possible jump times....that's north of the Lewis river all the way down to the Columbia...
It is a mystery to me why they would try to reconstruct the flight path from the data on the FDR. Much more accurate data would be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts.
Take a look at the Oakland ATC and Reno tower radio transcripts to see what should be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, but had been deleted.
So the pressure spike time would be about the only useful thing available from the FDR.
From the context of the document, it looks more like they were using the FDR to try to time the jump, they were not trying to reconstruct the flight path since they already had it from the radar. What's interesting is that they couldn't get a precise time for the jump from the FDR; in the document they are relying on the cockpit testimony to shorten the window of the jump.
If the aircraft track presented on the so-called "FBI map" is for the hijacked airliner, then why didn't the controllers make some effort to get the airliner back on the airway centerline and to keep it from wandering all over the place while in the Portland area?
It is to be noted that neither the Seattle ATC, Oakland ATC or Reno tower, nor the airliner crew, indicated any problems with the airliner flying a given track. The airliner crew indicated that they did have problems descending at certain vertical speeds when making turns, but this was not related to the track of the airplane in level flight.
What do those red "X" marks on the west, southwest, and south sides of Portland, which are also shown on the "FBI map", mean to you?
-
If the aircraft track presented on the so-called "FBI map" is for the hijacked airliner, then why didn't the controllers make some effort to get the airliner back on the airway centerline and to keep it from wandering all over the place while in the Portland area?
It is to be noted that neither the Seattle ATC, Oakland ATC or Reno tower, nor the airliner crew, indicated any problems with the airliner flying a given track. The airliner crew indicated that they did have problems descending at certain vertical speeds when making turns, but this was not related to the track of the airplane in level flight.
What do those red "X" marks on the west, southwest, and south sides of Portland, which are also shown on the "FBI map", mean to you?
Yes, the yellow "FBI map" is an odd document and I have my own opinions about the various markings on it. And my opinions don't really matter since none of us know who made the map, when it was made and what they were using as a primary source. However, we now have a second flight path map from the FBI, and it favors a flight path generally along victor 23. This map, from the context of the documents, was being used to determine search locations within weeks of the hijacking. So whatever the source for the new maps, the FBI had enough confidence in it to be used for investigative purposes, which is telling.
-
If they looked at the FDR several times it tells me that something is possibly confusing them. what would be on the FDR for them to extend the search area's. would this be pressure spikes, or the fact of them not knowing exactly where the plane was during these readings on the FDR?
The document above suggest a distance of over 25 miles of possible jump times....that's north of the Lewis river all the way down to the Columbia...
It is a mystery to me why they would try to reconstruct the flight path from the data on the FDR. Much more accurate data would be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts.
Take a look at the Oakland ATC and Reno tower radio transcripts to see what should be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, but had been deleted.
So the pressure spike time would be about the only useful thing available from the FDR.
From the context of the document, it looks more like they were using the FDR to try to time the jump, they were not trying to reconstruct the flight path since they already had it from the radar. What's interesting is that they couldn't get a precise time for the jump from the FDR; in the document they are relying on the cockpit testimony to shorten the window of the jump.
I think that is exactly right - timing is their issue. Is it even possible that FDR did not record things in 'clock time'?
See the attached. Supposedly a three channel pressure recording for a 727 showing stairs open (oscillations) and bump. The time scale is not in clock time! My question to the Rockwell-Boeing guy that supplied this was: 'well what time is this? How do you know the time of an event?' His reply: 'Oh. We would have to correlate this with the clock recorder or flight comms then.' ::) The Rockwell guy noted further: "oh that was pretty common back in the day". Can this possibly be true!? (dumbfounded)
Is it possible Rataczak's attempt to nail down a time of departure ("about 5 to 10 minutes after we last talked to him...") was the best they could do technically, data-wise? I find that very difficult to believe. But if you take R's statements at face value then they perhaps did not know and have no straightforward way of determining the exact time of Cooper's departure? And what blows my mind about this is the Boeing guy Ive talked to countless times about this finds nothing strange in any of it. He basically is saying: 'well we didn't build the plane to keep time of hijacker's actions'.
This ambivalence is an open hole to hell. But it has plagued this case, apparently since the beginning. I almost dread to post this graph. ::)
-
I almost dread to post this graph.
I'm glad you did, that's fascinating. It's also astounding that they couldn't match the pressure events with the actual time.
-
I almost dread to post this graph.
I'm glad you did, that's fascinating. It's also astounding that they couldn't match the pressure events with the actual time.
I can tell you the Boeing guy Im dealing with claims there is nothing unusual about any of this! It just drives me crazy. At one point years ago he finally said to me: 'well that is why this case is a mystery isn't it. Now you know why'. I still don't know if he's just jerking me around or being truthful, but it has driven me crazy trying to find some way around it - - -
I have to go watch a football game ....................... later.
I think we are looking at a central; factual problem in this whole case ..... and it is real! For some reason they didn't know the time or couldnt determine it, or its a big deep dark secret.
Add into this this is days AFTER DBC is long gone from wherever he landed. The horse is out of the barn days ago!
-
If they looked at the FDR several times it tells me that something is possibly confusing them. what would be on the FDR for them to extend the search area's. would this be pressure spikes, or the fact of them not knowing exactly where the plane was during these readings on the FDR?
The document above suggest a distance of over 25 miles of possible jump times....that's north of the Lewis river all the way down to the Columbia...
It is a mystery to me why they would try to reconstruct the flight path from the data on the FDR. Much more accurate data would be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts.
Take a look at the Oakland ATC and Reno tower radio transcripts to see what should be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, but had been deleted.
So the pressure spike time would be about the only useful thing available from the FDR.
From the context of the document, it looks more like they were using the FDR to try to time the jump, they were not trying to reconstruct the flight path since they already had it from the radar. What's interesting is that they couldn't get a precise time for the jump from the FDR; in the document they are relying on the cockpit testimony to shorten the window of the jump.
I think that is exactly right - timing is their issue. Is it even possible that FDR did not record things in 'clock time'?
See the attached. Supposedly a three channel pressure recording for a 727 showing stairs open (oscillations) and bump. The time scale is not in clock time! My question to the Rockwell-Boeing guy that supplied this was: 'well what time is this? How do you know the time of an event?' His reply: 'Oh. We would have to correlate this with the clock recorder or flight comms then.' ::) The Rockwell guy noted further: "oh that was pretty common back in the day". Can this possibly be true!? (dumbfounded)
Is it possible Rataczak's attempt to nail down a time of departure ("about 5 to 10 minutes after we last talked to him...") was the best they could do technically, data-wise? I find that very difficult to believe. But if you take R's statements at face value then they perhaps did not know and have no straightforward way of determining the exact time of Cooper's departure? And what blows my mind about this is the Boeing guy Ive talked to countless times about this finds nothing strange in any of it. He basically is saying: 'well we didn't build the plane to keep time of hijacker's actions'.
This ambivalence is an open hole to hell. But it has plagued this case, apparently since the beginning. I almost dread to post this graph. ::)
First, a bit of history. Flight Data Recorders and Cockpit Voice Recorders were mandated by the FAA/NTSB with a lot of opposition from the pilot's unions, airlines, and manufacturers. Cost and what the data would be used for (such as enforcement actions against pilots, etc.) were hotly contested matters, legally and otherwise. The main reasons given for mandating these recorders was the information they would provide for accident investigators.
Also, the early recorders, which were probably introduced in the early 1960s, had quite limited capability compared to today's recorders. Perhaps only about 20 or 30 parameters were recorded by the first FDRs and they were recorded on foil drums.
Todays FDRs can record probably hundreds of parameters and save them on solid state equipment. In fact, the overall system can also send such things as engine performance parameters to the airline and/or engine manufacturer ever minute, or less, in real time. It was this type of information that was used in trying to locate MH370.
As I have pointed out several times over the years, one of the advantages of getting the actual Seattle ATC radio transcripts is that they have the GMT embedded in the voice tapes. They could give the times of each radio transmission by ATC or the airliner crew down to the second.
But redacting those Seattle ATC tapes to remove pertinent transmissions is an excellent CYA action.
-
It's the chain of events that we don't have...we have multiple maps and multiple locations he could of jumped. I've been saying it's a timing issue for some time now. the last known position Cooper was heard from is some distance from the possible landing zones. I don't know if they were able to get any timing from the FDR. it records on the foil at 6 inches per hour..
It smells more and more of human error than anything. a lot of shooting from the hip, and then realizing it was wrong. several agents from that period claim they had no idea where he jumped. flight 305 was given permission to do what they had to do. the path is wild, almost as if they are shaking him up, but they do stay with in the 8 mile wide track of the victor..they were quick to radio Cooper "doing something with the stairs" but nothing after that is on any documentation. they were also suppose to flash the exterior lights if they felt he left the plane.
we don't really have any evidence of a possible landing zone unless you examine the money found downstream from where the plane crossed. it would be a huge task trying to figure out where he could of tossed anything he didn't want to jump with since the possibilities have expanded even further.
-
It's the chain of events that we don't have...we have multiple maps and multiple locations he could of jumped. I've been saying it's a timing issue for some time now. the last known position Cooper was heard from is some distance from the possible landing zones. I don't know if they were able to get any timing from the FDR. it records on the foil at 6 inches per hour..
It smells more and more of human error than anything. a lot of shooting from the hip, and then realizing it was wrong. several agents from that period claim they had no idea where he jumped. flight 305 was given permission to do what they had to do. the path is wild, almost as if they are shaking him up, but they do stay with in the 8 mile wide track of the victor..they were quick to radio Cooper "doing something with the stairs" but nothing after that is on any documentation. they were also suppose to flash the exterior lights if they felt he left the plane.
we don't really have any evidence of a possible landing zone unless you examine the money found downstream from where the plane crossed. it would be a huge task trying to figure out where he could of tossed anything he didn't want to jump with since the possibilities have expanded even further.
(1) No briefcase, chute, or anything else save the placard has ever been found ... with all kinds of people searching every available area in all the years since. And yet the placard was found.
(2) I think Ckret talked to a number of people before coming to DZ. I think somebody had told him the time stamps were the weakest link in the timing of the drop. (not the flight path itself) Examining the time stamps became a major priority for Ckret with Sluggo, Snowmman, etal contributing. That was my impression.
I think Ckret divulged the most accurate indicator he had (or knew about), which was "5-10 minutes after our last conversation with ... and the lights of Vancouver were coming up'. It may never get any more accurate than that.
Does anyone know if they saved that FDR or the tape that was in it?
-
It's the chain of events that we don't have...we have multiple maps and multiple locations he could of jumped. I've been saying it's a timing issue for some time now. the last known position Cooper was heard from is some distance from the possible landing zones. I don't know if they were able to get any timing from the FDR. it records on the foil at 6 inches per hour..
It smells more and more of human error than anything. a lot of shooting from the hip, and then realizing it was wrong. several agents from that period claim they had no idea where he jumped. flight 305 was given permission to do what they had to do. the path is wild, almost as if they are shaking him up, but they do stay with in the 8 mile wide track of the victor..they were quick to radio Cooper "doing something with the stairs" but nothing after that is on any documentation. they were also suppose to flash the exterior lights if they felt he left the plane.
we don't really have any evidence of a possible landing zone unless you examine the money found downstream from where the plane crossed. it would be a huge task trying to figure out where he could of tossed anything he didn't want to jump with since the possibilities have expanded even further.
(1) No briefcase, chute, or anything else save the placard has ever been found ... with all kinds of people searching every available area in all the years since. And yet the placard was found.
(2) I think Ckret talked to a number of people before coming to DZ. I think somebody had told him the time stamps were the weakest link in the timing of the drop. (not the flight path itself) Examining the time stamps became a major priority for Ckret with Sluggo, Snowmman, etal contributing. That was my impression.
I think Ckret divulged the most accurate indicator he had (or knew about), which was "5-10 minutes after our last conversation with ... and the lights of Vancouver were coming up'. It may never get any more accurate than that.
Does anyone know if they saved that FDR or the tape that was in it?
Everything related to the hijacking should have been saved, just as a matter of routine, for some period of time.
-
It's the chain of events that we don't have...we have multiple maps and multiple locations he could of jumped. I've been saying it's a timing issue for some time now. the last known position Cooper was heard from is some distance from the possible landing zones. I don't know if they were able to get any timing from the FDR. it records on the foil at 6 inches per hour..
It smells more and more of human error than anything. a lot of shooting from the hip, and then realizing it was wrong. several agents from that period claim they had no idea where he jumped. flight 305 was given permission to do what they had to do. the path is wild, almost as if they are shaking him up, but they do stay with in the 8 mile wide track of the victor..they were quick to radio Cooper "doing something with the stairs" but nothing after that is on any documentation. they were also suppose to flash the exterior lights if they felt he left the plane.
we don't really have any evidence of a possible landing zone unless you examine the money found downstream from where the plane crossed. it would be a huge task trying to figure out where he could of tossed anything he didn't want to jump with since the possibilities have expanded even further.
(1) No briefcase, chute, or anything else save the placard has ever been found ... with all kinds of people searching every available area in all the years since. And yet the placard was found.
(2) I think Ckret talked to a number of people before coming to DZ. I think somebody had told him the time stamps were the weakest link in the timing of the drop. (not the flight path itself) Examining the time stamps became a major priority for Ckret with Sluggo, Snowmman, etal contributing. That was my impression.
I think Ckret divulged the most accurate indicator he had (or knew about), which was "5-10 minutes after our last conversation with ... and the lights of Vancouver were coming up'. It may never get any more accurate than that.
Does anyone know if they saved that FDR or the tape that was in it?
Everything related to the hijacking should have been saved, just as a matter of routine, for some period of time.
OK, an actual question. How is this FDR constructed? Is the tape (metal tape) exposed or shielded to all outside forces? Is the tape and drum protected by lead? Is some portion of the tape unshielded as it moved on its drum? I assume the tape and drum are not exposed to the air? ...... I have some tests in mind that might constitute an independent clock.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlY5W7be5jU
-
Everything related to the hijacking should have been saved, just as a matter of routine, for some period of time.
-
Shut, this Engineer Guy is fantastic. Thank you for posting.
-
Shut, this Engineer Guy is fantastic. Thank you for posting.
Would look good in an Easter suit? Do you want his phone number? ::)
-
The video has been posted numerous times by me over the years. it's not new to this forum...
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlY5W7be5jU
Well there is one clock - the device itself. Not sure how accurate a clock but it's 6 inches travel per hour on at least 4 channels. Find an event (could be an electrical event) with a known time and there is your time of oscillations and bump. Sensors and recording pens are strain gauges, electrically powered. Any electrical artifact that can be identified, sourced, and documented provides another clock(s). So, the length of distance between start of oscillations and bump at the rate of 6 inches travel per hour provides the time of the bump/jump based on an independent time mark. For example they reported the oscillation at 8:12pm. The jump came at least a minute later. This recorder will show a distance on the graph between oscillations and bump, as Larry predicted. Two distinct events. See graph which I have crudely changed ...
Five to ten minutes after our last contact with him at 8:05.
My guess is any variance in the 6"/hr is negligible. What does that come out as? 0.10" per minute? That's a long distance in forensic terms ....
-
the foil would be nice to have...I doubt they tried to relate any time frames using the foil. they had the tapes and testimony among others things. this would be something that would pop out in a cold case investigation while searching for things overlooked.
-
the foil would be nice to have...I doubt they tried to relate any time frames using the foil. they had the tapes and testimony among others things. this would be something that would pop out in a cold case investigation while searching for things overlooked.
I doubt they did either ... too time consuming unless the Lab that processed this device took the time to look. But, if they had wanted to they could have.
However, "the numerical data" was recovered. Its the data that matters. Those numbers will show the contents of the foil. And they probably did produce some paper graphs to examine. That may have been done by Soderlind and his guys? One way or another the numerical data exists and they were examining that data for signs of a bump as a distinct artifact in the numbers!
I grew up working with strain gauges and strain gauge recorded data. This is like a trip down memory lane for me.
The Boeing guy's chart may actually apply at least as a prototype.
-
the foil would be nice to have...I doubt they tried to relate any time frames using the foil. they had the tapes and testimony among others things. this would be something that would pop out in a cold case investigation while searching for things overlooked.
I doubt they did either ... too time consuming unless the Lab that processed this device took the time to look. But, if they had wanted to they could have.
However, "the numerical data" was recovered. Its the data that matters. Those numbers will show the contents of the foil. And they probably did produce some paper graphs to examine. That may have been done by Soderlind and his guys? One way or another the numerical data exists and they were examining that data for signs of a bump as a distinct artifact in the numbers!
I grew up working with strain gauges and strain gauge recorded data. This is like a trip down memory lane for me.
That's why I think they have several locations..some error's were probably made, and could still be wrong. to have all of this documentation would be key in finding out where the plane really was when he jumped. so much has changed since 1971. it's ashame we probably will never gain access to the data....
-
the foil would be nice to have...I doubt they tried to relate any time frames using the foil. they had the tapes and testimony among others things. this would be something that would pop out in a cold case investigation while searching for things overlooked.
I doubt they did either ... too time consuming unless the Lab that processed this device took the time to look. But, if they had wanted to they could have.
However, "the numerical data" was recovered. Its the data that matters. Those numbers will show the contents of the foil. And they probably did produce some paper graphs to examine. That may have been done by Soderlind and his guys? One way or another the numerical data exists and they were examining that data for signs of a bump as a distinct artifact in the numbers!
I grew up working with strain gauges and strain gauge recorded data. This is like a trip down memory lane for me.
That's why I think they have several locations..some error's were probably made, and could still be wrong. to have all of this documentation would be key in finding out where the plane really was when he jumped. so much has changed since 1971. it's ashame we probably will never gain access to the data....
I dont know that any of this FDR data would give you position - it would narrow down the time of jump as a function of other physical data being recorded. I am 100% positive that is exactly what Soderlind was after. The position of the plane is another matter entirely. Soderlind may have been relying on the (McChord?) radar data for position.
R99 what do you think? (he will probably be reading this later)
I think we have made some progress here? Somebody has the FDR data!
-
Everything related to the hijacking should have been saved, just as a matter of routine, for some period of time.
The FAA, not the FBI, would be the primary agency to preserve the evidence related to an aircraft accident/incident.
-
Everything related to the hijacking should have been saved, just as a matter of routine, for some period of time.
The FAA, not the FBI, would be the primary agency to preserve the evidence related to an aircraft accident/incident.
thats right ... unless the NWA History people would have a copy? But Bruce Kitt says no. I asked a long time ago. Bruce's comment to me was: "I would love to have those documents!" Bruce has a personal interest in this.
-
Everything related to the hijacking should have been saved, just as a matter of routine, for some period of time.
The FAA, not the FBI, would be the primary agency to preserve the evidence related to an aircraft accident/incident.
thats right ... unless the NWA History people would have a copy? But Bruce Kitt says no. I asked a long time ago. Bruce's comment to me was: "I would love to have those documents!" Bruce has a personal interest in this.
Georger, whoever prepared that new map you recently posted stated in the accompanying write-up that they used data from the FDR. If it was NWA that prepared the map and write-up, and I think it was, then they had a copy of the traces on the FDR foil.
There was not any "digital" data until someone took a very close look at those traces, and wrote down specific values for each trace at some "time" (whatever that means in this context). Hopefully, they identified the traces correctly and had and used the correct "scales" and values for each trace.
The above was very time consuming and some people probably made a career out of some of the more complex data traces.
In aircraft flight test projects in the 1960s, some data was usually radioed back to the test facility and available to the people in the radio communications room in real time. But much of the flight test data was recorded on-board the aircraft and then ran through a computer program that reduced the data and applied appropriate corrections to that data, with the result that the engineers received a computer print-out of everything. But even the computer print-out required a lot of work from the engineers.
The flight test instrumentation was more complex than the data recorded on an FDR, and your available budget determined the instrumentation that you were able to use. Ever program I ever worked on had a budget that ranged from "tight" to "vastly underfunded".
-
the foil would be nice to have...I doubt they tried to relate any time frames using the foil. they had the tapes and testimony among others things. this would be something that would pop out in a cold case investigation while searching for things overlooked.
I doubt they did either ... too time consuming unless the Lab that processed this device took the time to look. But, if they had wanted to they could have.
However, "the numerical data" was recovered. Its the data that matters. Those numbers will show the contents of the foil. And they probably did produce some paper graphs to examine. That may have been done by Soderlind and his guys? One way or another the numerical data exists and they were examining that data for signs of a bump as a distinct artifact in the numbers!
I grew up working with strain gauges and strain gauge recorded data. This is like a trip down memory lane for me.
That's why I think they have several locations..some error's were probably made, and could still be wrong. to have all of this documentation would be key in finding out where the plane really was when he jumped. so much has changed since 1971. it's ashame we probably will never gain access to the data....
I dont know that any of this FDR data would give you position - it would narrow down the time of jump as a function of other physical data being recorded. I am 100% positive that is exactly what Soderlind was after. The position of the plane is another matter entirely. Soderlind may have been relying on the (McChord?) radar data for position.
R99 what do you think? (he will probably be reading this later)
I think we have made some progress here? Somebody has the FDR data!
The FDR video that Shutter posted above stated that the magnetic direction was recorded. If so, this would be from the aircraft heading system (not the "whiskey compass") and probably the Horizontal Situation Indicator. Due to the overall accuracy of such a system, such information should only be used for determining the heading of the aircraft for a few seconds, or maybe a couple of minutes at most, prior to the "event" that is being investigated.
After a few miles down the road, the position of the aircraft using only the heading changes as explained above, would be essentially worthless.
-
the foil would be nice to have...I doubt they tried to relate any time frames using the foil. they had the tapes and testimony among others things. this would be something that would pop out in a cold case investigation while searching for things overlooked.
I doubt they did either ... too time consuming unless the Lab that processed this device took the time to look. But, if they had wanted to they could have.
However, "the numerical data" was recovered. Its the data that matters. Those numbers will show the contents of the foil. And they probably did produce some paper graphs to examine. That may have been done by Soderlind and his guys? One way or another the numerical data exists and they were examining that data for signs of a bump as a distinct artifact in the numbers!
I grew up working with strain gauges and strain gauge recorded data. This is like a trip down memory lane for me.
That's why I think they have several locations..some error's were probably made, and could still be wrong. to have all of this documentation would be key in finding out where the plane really was when he jumped. so much has changed since 1971. it's ashame we probably will never gain access to the data....
I dont know that any of this FDR data would give you position - it would narrow down the time of jump as a function of other physical data being recorded. I am 100% positive that is exactly what Soderlind was after. The position of the plane is another matter entirely. Soderlind may have been relying on the (McChord?) radar data for position.
R99 what do you think? (he will probably be reading this later)
I think we have made some progress here? Somebody has the FDR data!
The FDR video that Shutter posted above stated that the magnetic direction was recorded. If so, this would be from the aircraft heading system (not the "whiskey compass") and probably the Horizontal Situation Indicator. Due to the overall accuracy of such a system, such information should only be used for determining the heading of the aircraft for a few seconds, or maybe a couple of minutes at most, prior to the "event" that is being investigated.
After a few miles down the road, the position of the aircraft using only the heading changes as explained above, would be essentially worthless.
... which brings us back to the radar tapes! or at least the full communications transcripts ...THE FULL UNREDACTED TAPES!
-
Shut, this Engineer Guy is fantastic. Thank you for posting.
Would look good in an Easter suit? Do you want his phone number? ::)
LOL Georger. Funny. Seems like a pretty ordinary, nice guy in the video. Fantastic? Might be a bit of an overstatement from what was shown in the video, but what the heck -- some people find fantastic in the most ordinary events -- like some of my hippie friends back in the day. I remember the way they used to talk -- "Wow man, what a groove! You're all a bunch of wonderful people! Peace, love, dove. Peace, hope, dope. Far out, dude. Right on. Groovy." Sometimes, they just liked sitting around all day drinking wine and talking about Jesus. Believe me, you don't forget that kind of fantastic.
Meyer
-
Fantastic is as fantastic does.
The "Engineer Guy" has a large YouTube channel that is absolutely fantastic. I was thanking Shut for giving us the link to the whole bevy of videos, as they appeared at the end of the "Black Box" vid.
I was mesmerized by the EG's 20-minute analysis of how an aluminum can is made. I had no idea that it takes about 50 separate machine procedures, and 18 million cans are made every minute (or some such statistic) and that 75% of all cans come from recycled aluminum.
-
Colbert's latest FOIA package has this:
13th page, Seattle SAC to Minneapolis SAC:
'The original and one copy of an Air Force map of the flight path was delivered to Northwest Airlines, Seattle, today to be dispatched on flight twenty four, leaving at five fifty pm, addressed to xxx NW airlines, Minneapolis'
So was the USAF map where it all began map wise?
377
-
Colbert's latest FOIA package has this:
13th page, Seattle SAC to Minneapolis SAC:
'The original and one copy of an Air Force map of the flight path was delivered to Northwest Airlines, Seattle, today to be dispatched on flight twenty four, leaving at five fifty pm, addressed to xxx NW airlines, Minneapolis'
So was the USAF map where it all began map wise?
377
Note the date: 12/23/71 ......... for future reference.
was delivered to Northwest Airlines, Seattle, .......... Transfer to SAC Minneapolis! From SAC Seattle.
Here is the page you are referring to. Yes, where is the map? No accompanying map shown.
-
Colbert's latest FOIA package has this:
13th page, Seattle SAC to Minneapolis SAC:
'The original and one copy of an Air Force map of the flight path was delivered to Northwest Airlines, Seattle, today to be dispatched on flight twenty four, leaving at five fifty pm, addressed to xxx NW airlines, Minneapolis'
So was the USAF map where it all began map wise?
377
Do you have the date those Air Force maps were actually put on the plane to Minneapolis by the FBI? Or do you have a better identification for the FBI paperwork mentioned above?
Thanks to Georger the date is 12-31-1971.
Other identifying numbers are on Georger's post above and are "DB COOPER-5024" and "FBI File 164-81-1508".
-
Colbert's latest FOIA package has this:
13th page, Seattle SAC to Minneapolis SAC:
'The original and one copy of an Air Force map of the flight path was delivered to Northwest Airlines, Seattle, today to be dispatched on flight twenty four, leaving at five fifty pm, addressed to xxx NW airlines, Minneapolis'
So was the USAF map where it all began map wise?
377
Do you have the date those Air Force maps were actually put on the plane to Minneapolis by the FBI? Or do you have a better identification for the FBI paperwork mentioned above?
Thanks to Georger the date is 12-31-1971.
Other identifying numbers are on Georger's post above and are "DB COOPER-5024" and "FBI File 164-81-1508".
OK, now we have a sequence of maps. The next map transmitted is at 6:59pm on 12/4 from Minneapolis back to Seattle, map crop below ... which is the first dropzone - search map. It looks like MWA took the previously transmitted AF radar fp map (12/23) and added their timing data (pressure bump) to determine a search zone.
BTW I found the cleanest copy so far of the 12/4 NWA search map in the new Gray folio. I copied that map and am cleaning it up further but the quality far exceeds the previous copy I had - will post the whole map tonight as time allows.
-
We are getting closer to a map genealogy. I like that.
Still wonder what the hell is on those redacted portions of the radio comms transcript. :conspiracy: ?
377
-
Dated 12/23
-
I have wondered if Cooper or an accomplice could have used some kind of radio. You could buy a portable radio that picks up aircraft control towers and planes in flight, or they could have used a two way radio to radio the parachute drop location to his getaway driver.
This radio is made by Nova-Tech which happens to be company that is associated with a DB Cooper suspect I am researching.
Nova-Tech and it's stockbroker Black & Co (Portland) were sued by investors for $200,000 in damages for stock fraud in 1970. The courts sided with the investors in summer 1971.
-
Dated 12/23
Please post the whole doc so we can see the date and entire document.
Are you sure about your date - 12/23 ? See mine below dated dated: 11/26
-
I have wondered if Cooper or an accomplice could have used some kind of radio. You could buy a portable radio that picks up aircraft control towers and planes in flight, or they could have used a two way radio to radio the parachute drop location to his getaway driver.
This radio is made by Nova-Tech which happens to be company that is associated with a DB Cooper suspect I am researching.
Nova-Tech and it's stockbroker Black & Co (Portland) were sued by investors for $200,000 in damages for stock fraud in 1970. The courts sided with the investors in summer 1971.
I owned a similar radio in the 1970 time frame and I do not remember it as having any capabilities that would help Cooper locate his position in any useful fashion. Also, two way radios would not be of any use to Cooper either.
Remember that the airliner was at 10,000 feet ASL with an overcast at 5000 feet and other cloud layers below that. All of this on a rainy night. Cooper never asked the flight crew where the aircraft was and he did not have a means to determine it himself.
Also, the radio discussed above would probably not fit into the paper bag that Cooper had with him.
-
I have wondered if Cooper or an accomplice could have used some kind of radio. You could buy a portable radio that picks up aircraft control towers and planes in flight, or they could have used a two way radio to radio the parachute drop location to his getaway driver.
This radio is made by Nova-Tech which happens to be company that is associated with a DB Cooper suspect I am researching.
Nova-Tech and it's stockbroker Black & Co (Portland) were sued by investors for $200,000 in damages for stock fraud in 1970. The courts sided with the investors in summer 1971.
I owned a similar radio in the 1970 time frame and I do not remember it as having any capabilities that would help Cooper locate his position in any useful fashion. Also, two way radios would not be of any use to Cooper either.
Remember that the airliner was at 10,000 feet ASL with an overcast at 5000 feet and other cloud layers below that. All of this on a rainy night. Cooper never asked the flight crew where the aircraft was and he did not have a means to determine it himself.
Also, the radio discussed above would probably not fit into the paper bag that Cooper had with him.
Some still hold out the possibility that Cooper was "channeling" the whole time, and might have picked up instructions and info from Ramtha or St Michael, in the Cooper Vortex. Channeling tapes stored at Sierra de Tololo Monastery were examined and nothing was found. That however does not shut the door to a 4th dimension experience. Does the FBI have a 4th dimension microscope and did they apply it to the Cooper case, and if not why not! ? Once again the FBI is suspect in its failure to examine all possible leads.
I doubt very much that Ramtha and the others had anything to do with it.
But there may be some possibilities with the 4th dimension equipment. So I will with hold judgment on that point. ;D
-
I have wondered if Cooper or an accomplice could have used some kind of radio. You could buy a portable radio that picks up aircraft control towers and planes in flight, or they could have used a two way radio to radio the parachute drop location to his getaway driver.
This radio is made by Nova-Tech which happens to be company that is associated with a DB Cooper suspect I am researching.
Nova-Tech and it's stockbroker Black & Co (Portland) were sued by investors for $200,000 in damages for stock fraud in 1970. The courts sided with the investors in summer 1971.
I owned a similar radio in the 1970 time frame and I do not remember it as having any capabilities that would help Cooper locate his position in any useful fashion. Also, two way radios would not be of any use to Cooper either.
Remember that the airliner was at 10,000 feet ASL with an overcast at 5000 feet and other cloud layers below that. All of this on a rainy night. Cooper never asked the flight crew where the aircraft was and he did not have a means to determine it himself.
Also, the radio discussed above would probably not fit into the paper bag that Cooper had with him.
Some still hold out the possibility that Cooper was "channeling" the whole time, and might have picked up instructions and info from Ramtha or St Michael, in the Cooper Vortex. Channeling tapes stored at Sierra de Tololo Monastery were examined and nothing was found. That however does not shut the door to a 4th dimension experience. Does the FBI have a 4th dimension microscope and did they apply it to the Cooper case, and if not why not! ? Once again the FBI is suspect in its failure to examine all possible leads.
I doubt very much that Ramtha and the others had anything to do with it.
But there may be some possibilities with the 4th dimension equipment. So I will with hold judgment on that point. ;D
Thats good enough for me. :rofl:
-
Posts like this are a quandary for me. Mocking Ramtha is offensive to me, but I understand that I have introduced him here to this forum. Perhaps I was naïve about how that action would be received, as the comments above are unexpected and distasteful.
So, please stop.
If you want to mock the aspects of quantum physics and the science of consciousness that I have introduced here, such as interdimensional experiences, mind-over-matter, or the transformation of time and space, please frame your comments to reflect what I have shared, and leave everyone else out of it.
Thank you.
-
Posts like this are a quandary for me. Mocking Ramtha is offensive to me, but I understand that I have introduced him here to this forum. Perhaps I was naïve about how that action would be received, as the comments above are unexpected and distasteful.
So, please stop.
If you want to mock the aspects of quantum physics and the science of consciousness that I have introduced here, such as interdimensional experiences, mind-over-matter, or the transformation of time and space, please frame your comments to reflect what I have shared, and leave everyone else out of it.
Thank you.
Bruce, I have a request for you once you get things squared away with Georger. Please do not ever refer to me as a Cooper "investigator" or "researcher" again. :(
Where did you get your training in quantum mechanics and the other things mentioned in your last paragraph above? And if you wish to pursue quantum mechanics, where is your proof that Schrodinger even had a cat?
-
Posts like this are a quandary for me. Mocking Ramtha is offensive to me, but I understand that I have introduced him here to this forum. Perhaps I was naïve about how that action would be received, as the comments above are unexpected and distasteful.
So, please stop.
If you want to mock the aspects of quantum physics and the science of consciousness that I have introduced here, such as interdimensional experiences, mind-over-matter, or the transformation of time and space, please frame your comments to reflect what I have shared, and leave everyone else out of it.
Thank you.
Bruce, I have a request for you once you get things squared away with Georger. Please do not ever refer to me as a Cooper "investigator" or "researcher" again. :(
Where did you get your training in quantum mechanics and the other things mentioned in your last paragraph above? And if you wish to pursue quantum mechanics, where is your proof that Schrodinger even had a cat?
One Georger issue has been resolved and I appreciate Smith's cooperation. I hope I dont have to revisit this for another year or so ... but BS did fix the problem and it is appreciated.
As for QM, I will leave that to you and Bruce to sort out. I just dont see any application of these matters to the Cooper case ... any more than I see Unicorns for sale at CarMax. ;)
-
Bruce, I have a request for you once you get things squared away with Georger. Please do not ever refer to me as a Cooper "investigator" or "researcher" again. :(
Okay, Robert. But why? Also, what would you like me to call you? Describing you as: "A Guy Who Posts Regularly at the DB Cooper Forum and Was a Featured Expert on Cooper for the Travel Channel" is a little unwieldy wouldn't you say?
-
I have wondered if Cooper or an accomplice could have used some kind of radio. You could buy a portable radio that picks up aircraft control towers and planes in flight, or they could have used a two way radio to radio the parachute drop location to his getaway driver.
This radio is made by Nova-Tech which happens to be company that is associated with a DB Cooper suspect I am researching.
Nova-Tech and it's stockbroker Black & Co (Portland) were sued by investors for $200,000 in damages for stock fraud in 1970. The courts sided with the investors in summer 1971.
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F173080708874
Too big to carry concealed. I owned one. Basically a terrible DF (direction finder) navigation tool. DF function only worked on beacon and broadcast bands, not VHF. Lacked a sense circuit so
every DF bearing had a 180 degree ambiguity. Worked fine as a VHF receiver though.
377
-
Where did you get your training in quantum mechanics and the other things mentioned in your last paragraph above? And if you wish to pursue quantum mechanics, where is your proof that Schrodinger even had a cat?
My education and training in quantum physics comes from several sources, most of which are unconventional.
To begin, physics was a major part of my study in the pre-med program at Hofstra. Those basic courses coupled with a major in Biology and together provided me with a general science background.
Most of my quantum physics knowledge comes from my 25 years study at the Ramtha School. Of course, Ramtha has been my primary teacher, but guest lecturers have also included such luminaries as Dr. Fred Alan Wolf and Dr. John Hagelin.
These studies provided an underpinning that allowed me to expand upon that base and write professionally on selected topics. My magazine article on the hard science of antigravity was published in NEXUS magazine in 2003, and the piece was accepted by the American Physics Association for presentation at their 2004 STAIF (Space Technology and Application International Forum) conference in Albuquerque. My research on this topic put me in touch with leading figures in the cutting-edge science of antigravitic research, such as Dr. Harold Putoff and Boeing's leading researcher Dr. Eugene Podkletnov. With the latter I developed a very warm relationship. For this article I interviewed almost every leading figure in Nick Cook's iconic work on antigravity: The Hunt for Zero Point - Inside the Classified World of Antigravity. Cook is a major author on the subject and is also the aviation editor for Jane's Defence Weekly in the UK. I wouldn't say that Nick and I became friends, but we were close associates during the writing of my piece.
That work lead to another magazine article; this time the hard science of human levitation, and that piece was published in Mt. Shasta magazine in 2004. Together with my antigravity writing they form the nucleus on my book that is still in development, titled: Into the Science of Consciousness - A Primer on the New Physics.
As for Schrodinger's cat, I'll just say that I have a Big Crush on author Suzanne Nichols, and she has penned the delightful tome on Dr. S's pets, titled: "Schrodinger's Kittens." It's a compendium of the basic tenets of quantum mechanics.
-
Bruce, I have a request for you once you get things squared away with Georger. Please do not ever refer to me as a Cooper "investigator" or "researcher" again. :(
Okay, Robert. But why? Also, what would you like me to call you? Describing you as: "A Guy Who Posts Regularly at the DB Cooper Forum and Was a Featured Expert on Cooper for the Travel Channel" is a little unwieldy wouldn't you say?
I don't like the word "expert" either. In the real engineering world, that I was involved with for several decades, the term "expert" was usually used as a pejorative.
-
Where did you get your training in quantum mechanics and the other things mentioned in your last paragraph above? And if you wish to pursue quantum mechanics, where is your proof that Schrodinger even had a cat?
My education and training in quantum physics comes from several sources, most of which are unconventional.
To begin, physics was a major part of my study in the pre-med program at Hofstra. Those basic courses coupled with a major in Biology and together provided me with a general science background.
Most of my quantum physics knowledge comes from my 25 years study at the Ramtha School. Of course, Ramtha has been my primary teacher, but guest lecturers have also included such luminaries as Dr. Fred Alan Wolf and Dr. John Hagelin.
These studies provided an underpinning that allowed me to expand upon that base and write professionally on selected topics. My magazine article on the hard science of antigravity was published in NEXUS magazine in 2003, and the piece was accepted by the American Physics Association for presentation at their 2004 STAIF (Space Technology and Application International Forum) conference in Albuquerque. My research on this topic put me in touch with leading figures in the cutting-edge science of antigravitic research, such as Dr. Harold Putoff and Boeing's leading researcher Dr. Eugene Podkletnov. With the latter I developed a very warm relationship. For this article I interviewed almost every leading figure in Nick Cook's iconic work on antigravity: The Hunt for Zero Point - Inside the Classified World of Antigravity. Cook is a major author on the subject and is also the aviation editor for Jane's Defence Weekly in the UK. I wouldn't say that Nick and I became friends, but we were close associates during the writing of my piece.
That work lead to another magazine article; this time the hard science of human levitation, and that piece was published in Mt. Shasta magazine in 2004. Together with my antigravity writing they form the nucleus on my book that is still in development, titled: Into the Science of Consciousness - A Primer on the New Physics.
As for Schrodinger's cat, I'll just say that I have a Big Crush on author Suzanne Nichols, and she has penned the delightful tome on Dr. S's pets, titled: "Schrodinger's Kittens." It's a compendium of the basic tenets of quantum mechanics.
Well, I must admit that my original question opened a really big can of worms. ::)
-
Yup.
-
Yup.
Yeah, but ARE THE WORMS ALIVE OR DEAD?! LOL. QM is one of my fave subjects, one of my friends' exes worked under Hawking and eventually was attending conferences on superstrings and such, but unless one of us knows how to navigate space-time back to 1971 Portland... (How great would that be? We could find Cooper AND make a ridiculous amount of money placing bets and buying stocks we KNOW are gonna pay off...) ;D
-
As I understand quantum theory, the worms are both alive and dead until observed. However, there is an interesting counter theory that says the observer drinking the Twequila might not be observant enough. Interesting dilemma, no?
Yes, remote viewing, when we develop the skills necessary to make it reliable, will be a tremendous asset.
-
Where did you get your training in quantum mechanics and the other things mentioned in your last paragraph above? And if you wish to pursue quantum mechanics, where is your proof that Schrodinger even had a cat?
My education and training in quantum physics comes from several sources, most of which are unconventional.
To begin, physics was a major part of my study in the pre-med program at Hofstra. Those basic courses coupled with a major in Biology and together provided me with a general science background.
Most of my quantum physics knowledge comes from my 25 years study at the Ramtha School. Of course, Ramtha has been my primary teacher, but guest lecturers have also included such luminaries as Dr. Fred Alan Wolf and Dr. John Hagelin.
These studies provided an underpinning that allowed me to expand upon that base and write professionally on selected topics. My magazine article on the hard science of antigravity was published in NEXUS magazine in 2003, and the piece was accepted by the American Physics Association for presentation at their 2004 STAIF (Space Technology and Application International Forum) conference in Albuquerque. My research on this topic put me in touch with leading figures in the cutting-edge science of antigravitic research, such as Dr. Harold Putoff and Boeing's leading researcher Dr. Eugene Podkletnov. With the latter I developed a very warm relationship. For this article I interviewed almost every leading figure in Nick Cook's iconic work on antigravity: The Hunt for Zero Point - Inside the Classified World of Antigravity. Cook is a major author on the subject and is also the aviation editor for Jane's Defence Weekly in the UK. I wouldn't say that Nick and I became friends, but we were close associates during the writing of my piece.
That work lead to another magazine article; this time the hard science of human levitation, and that piece was published in Mt. Shasta magazine in 2004. Together with my antigravity writing they form the nucleus on my book that is still in development, titled: Into the Science of Consciousness - A Primer on the New Physics.
As for Schrodinger's cat, I'll just say that I have a Big Crush on author Suzanne Nichols, and she has penned the delightful tome on Dr. S's pets, titled: "Schrodinger's Kittens." It's a compendium of the basic tenets of quantum mechanics.
All freelance.
-
What if Cooper had one of these or an accomplice on the ground listening to the Air Traffic radio and was able to determine where the plane was when he jumped? Maybe this explains why he was not concerned about the exact flight path.
The advertisement says you could listen to jet airliners and control towers. Measures: 8" x 5" x x 2" and is portable.
https://www.radiomuseum.org/r/novatech_pilot_iipilot.html
See attachment.
Could easily fit in suitcase and uses dry cell batteries like the ones in bomb.
-
What if Cooper had one of these or an accomplice on the ground listening to the Air Traffic radio and was able to determine where the plane was when he jumped? Maybe this explains why he was not concerned about the exact flight path.
The advertisement says you could listen to jet airliners and control towers.
See attachment.
you have to ask, if he wasn't concerned about the flight path, why would he be concerned about where he was?
-
did he use this on the stairs, I doubt it would pick anything up inside the plane...metal 360 degree's around the inside?
-
Could have had a 30 mile long range walkie talkie to communicate to someone on the ground. Maybe that is what was in the brown paper bag.
-
did he use this on the stairs, I doubt it would pick anything up inside the plane...metal 360 degree's around the inside?
This is the portable model that is just like ones that are designed to be used on an airplane, so I think they would work inside the plane.
But I think more likely he had someone on the ground listening to the Air Traffic Controller and the Pilots.
They could figured out where the plane was and planned all along to jump near Portland. I think it could have been an oversight on the hijacker's part not to specific the flight path. Maybe he just assumed if he told them to fly to Mexico that they would fly right over Portland.
He didn't seem worried about taking so long to get the airstair down, so maybe he didn't plan to jump right after the plane took off afterall.
I happen to know of someone that worked for Nova-Tech at one time and had a brother who was
convicted of using police scanners to file fake accident reports with insurance companies in the 1960s. So
they would have known how to use radios to communicate and listen to aircraft.
And this someone also had a grudge against
the State of Washington because he had been indicted for financial
fraud one year to the date before the hijacking.
May be just a coincidence but I am put in a public records request to
find out some more details.
But he also was in deep trouble financially because he had invested
heavily in Titanium stocks and was working for a titanium company
at the time. The two companies he invested in were down 90% and 50% from 1968-1971.
And this guy was involved with horseracing with a man who had a son who was serving in the Air Force in Thailand in 1970....when Air America was filming "Flying Men, Flying Machines"
-
Could have had a 30 mile long range walkie talkie to communicate to someone on the ground. Maybe that is what was in the brown paper bag.
this poor bag get changed more than Mr. Potato head...boots, googles, long johns, radio's, direction finders...this list goes on..
has anyone ever thought he might of jumped out of the back (very easy) landed and took off? if you can find a reference of the name DB Cooper with James Bond, we might have something...the easiest way between two points is a straight line...most here seem to zig zag and turn left and right to get to point B...
-
What's wrong with thinking he knew where he was from the fact that airliners fly Victor 23 when they fly south from Seattle to Mexico at 10,000 feet?
-
What's wrong with thinking he knew where he was from the fact that airliners fly Victor 23 when they fly south from Seattle to Mexico at 10,000 feet?
that's a low level path..typically while flying such a long distance they wouldn't be at 10,000 or on V23....
-
again, it appears you guys like to believe he knew exactly where he was without knowing where he was? we have seen what a pilot displays trying this crime...it was done much different flight wise due to his experience....
-
But did DBC know he was on V-23 for the first hour? He didn't need V-23 or its equivalent for the whole 2,000 mile run, or at least to Reno - just long enough to put on his parachute and do all the things that he did with 80-foot of rope and 35 minutes without Tina.
-
McCoy seems to be everything you want Cooper to be...he didn't need a radio, or direction finder, or even walkie talkies...he flew the plane from the back..constant updates and timing placed him right where he wanted to be, maybe not exact, but impressive in my book..
-
But did DBC know he was on V-23 for the first hour? He didn't need V-23 or its equivalent for the whole 2,000 mile run, or at least to Reno - just long enough to put on his parachute and do all the things that he did with 80-foot of rope and 35 minutes without Tina.
many are claiming he did...if you ask me, he had no idea what path they were on, nor did he seem to care..people assume that he knew they would pick V23...lets not forget he might of wanted out much earlier...
landing in Mexico was his demand....not in the states...
-
had a grudge against
the State of Washington because he had been indicted for financial
fraud
To Titanium:
Aren't grudges more formed from a percieved wrong or injustice done to them, and not something they know full well that they did? You say he was indicted for fraud, and Id think the guilt reflex would prevent the feeling of a grudge to develop...or not...just saying....
-
Could have had a 30 mile long range walkie talkie to communicate to someone on the ground. Maybe that is what was in the brown paper bag.
this poor bag get changed more than Mr. Potato head...boots, googles, long johns, radio's, direction finders...this list goes on..
has anyone ever thought he might of jumped out of the back (very easy) landed and took off? if you can find a reference of the name DB Cooper with James Bond, we might have something...the easiest way between two points is a straight line...most here seem to zig zag and turn left and right to get to point B...
Grinning on the bag. The bag, by House's description, is about the size of a square boot box (I measured) and was flattened on the top. I found a note in the FBI files to ask Tina about that bag, but she only mentions a small green paper one, which IMHO is a different bag from the one Mitchell and House describe. My first guess on the sack was boots because one skydiver mentioned online that Cooper's footwear was far from ideal particularly in the storm. But jumps have been made in all sorts, as Bruce mentioned. Long undies would be useless in a rainstorm. A scuba suit might be better, but you'd be better off with it under your clothes.
How likely would it be for a radio to survive the jump? I personally think this was a solo jack - or else the ransom would have been higher, for one thing - but in the interests of open-mindedness, I'm curious. I've never done a jump and have no idea how heavily you'd land. But with 20+ lbs of money and the briefcase plus the chutes on him, if what was in the big bag wasn't a clothing item, I hope what was in the smaller bag was D-rings. :D
-
the bag changes colors too 8) and size...Carr stated it wasn't big enough for boots while others claim the bag was big enough..
377 jumps with radios all the time...
-
What's wrong with thinking he knew where he was from the fact that airliners fly Victor 23 when they fly south from Seattle to Mexico at 10,000 feet?
There are actually two airways for flying between the Seattle VORTAC and what is now the Battleground VORTAC. Even if Cooper knew he was on one of those airways, he would not know where along that airway without additional information.
-
This is the portable model that is just like ones that are designed to be used on an airplane, so I think they would work inside the plane.
it's pretty simple...metal will block signals..that unit is 8" x 5" x 2" that's a lot of real estate in the briefcase not to be noticed..
the antenna's are on the outside of a plane for a reason....yes, it picks up air traffic control, but the problem will be picking up a signal inside with the antenna...
-
had a grudge against
the State of Washington because he had been indicted for financial
fraud
To Titanium:
Aren't grudges more formed from a percieved wrong or injustice done to them, and not something they know full well that they did? You say he was indicted for fraud, and Id think the guilt reflex would prevent the feeling of a grudge to develop...or not...just saying....
Also, I don't really see how the State of Washington was in any way the victim in this skyjacking. DBC never said the reason for the hijacking was the grudge, just that he had one that wasn't with NWO. Money is a good motive, but if he was also trying to flip the bird to the state, the hijacking does not accomplish that.
-
What's wrong with thinking he knew where he was from the fact that airliners fly Victor 23 when they fly south from Seattle to Mexico at 10,000 feet?
There are actually two airways for flying between the Seattle VORTAC and what is now the Battleground VORTAC. Even if Cooper knew he was on one of those airways, he would not know where along that airway without additional information.
If he was airway savvy and current (with charts) he might have guessed a low elevation route going south would use V23 or the other Victor airway, time in five minutes intervals counted off in his mind, and he can estimate he must be somewhere between SEA and PDX and close to PDX in the 8:05 period. He may also have had a watch! Now, if he has clocked off time in his head and now goes to the stairs and look around, he might have seen the skyglow from Portland-Vancouver coming up (as Ratzk said he saw), and now he jumps. He knows he's close to Portland. Moreover, his preparations prepared him to bail early and do exactly as described. His asking to slow and level the plane at 8:05 indicates to me he had some estimate of where he must be and was going to jump - the crew took that message from Cooper to indicate he was intending to jump.
If as R99 thinks he was close to Tena Bar then the same scenario applies, but west of V23 by several miles.
THANK YOU ALABAMA - GO TIDE!
-
What if Cooper had one of these or an accomplice on the ground listening to the Air Traffic radio and was able to determine where the plane was when he jumped? Maybe this explains why he was not concerned about the exact flight path.
The advertisement says you could listen to jet airliners and control towers. Measures: 8" x 5" x x 2" and is portable.
https://www.radiomuseum.org/r/novatech_pilot_iipilot.html
See attachment.
Could easily fit in suitcase and uses dry cell batteries like the ones in bomb.
In 1968 I bought a pocket sized tunable VHF aviation receiver at Radio Shack for under $30. Worked fine. Could hear airliners and ATC. Ran on a 9 VDC battery. Received VORs too but it didn’t decode the radial info. The VOR stations did announce their ID in a recorded voice. One I recall was “WOODSIDE VORTAC”.
I’ve used various portable radios and walkie talkies while under canopy. 100 miles is easy from high up with just a couple of watts. Read about it here: http://www.arrl.org/files/file/QST/This%20Month%20in%20QST/May2016/GLIFFORT.pdf
377
-
What if Cooper had one of these or an accomplice on the ground listening to the Air Traffic radio and was able to determine where the plane was when he jumped? Maybe this explains why he was not concerned about the exact flight path.
The advertisement says you could listen to jet airliners and control towers. Measures: 8" x 5" x x 2" and is portable.
https://www.radiomuseum.org/r/novatech_pilot_iipilot.html
See attachment.
Could easily fit in suitcase and uses dry cell batteries like the ones in bomb.
In 1968 I bought a pocket sized tunable VHF aviation receiver at Radio Shack for under $30. Worked fine. Could hear airliners and ATC. Ran on a 9 VDC battery. Received VORs too but it didn’t decode the radial info. The VOR stations did announce their ID in a recorded voice. One I recall was “WOODSIDE VORTAC”.
I’ve used various portable radios and walkie talkies while under canopy. 100 miles is easy from high up with just a couple of watts. Read about it here: http://www.arrl.org/files/file/QST/This%20Month%20in%20QST/May2016/GLIFFORT.pdf
377
who was listening? and never reported hearing anything? on the other hand some did listen to 305 and reported a little on that ... I mean more people reported hearing Amelia Earnhardt in the northwest than reported hearing DB Cooper! :)
-
As I understand quantum theory, the worms are both alive and dead until observed. However, there is an interesting counter theory that says the observer drinking the Twequila might not be observant enough. Interesting dilemma, no?
Yes, remote viewing, when we develop the skills necessary to make it reliable, will be a tremendous asset.
My understanding of QM is completely different from yours. There is no known association between QM and Consciousness - Perception - Neurology. A scientist at Harvard, Barb Shipman, actually looked into this - her father is a great mathematician. Look up Shipman's work on Bee roaming (in order to find pollen) and read it.
After that read something about what Quantum Mechanics is and how it came into being, and why. Your dimestore version of QM and Uncertainty is just that, a dimestore novel! QM and Uncertainty is not a fact - just opposite is the case.
QM is not the father of Uncertainty. QM predicts extremely rigorous standards and certainty! QM is a mathematical strategy ( a tool) which explains or predicts how atomic and subatomic particles and forces will act (and interact). QM actually applies more certainty to the world, rather than less! QM actually tightens and restricts 'what can happen' vs 'what cannot happen' and the whole body of quantum theory is tantamount to a new set of Conservation Laws which are the most basic Laws in Physics!
What the Sun does in nucleo-synthesis, for example, is a dead-certain proposition. That certainty is precisely what has lead to the technological world we have today ... from LEDs to nuclear bombs and reactors to radiation therapy and CT scanning. QM theory is responsible for that.
When it comes to QM and Uncertainty vs the idea of Remote Perception, I think you are confusing QM with ordinary probabilistic Innumeracy and Chance which occurs in daily life also - as a random statistical experience in life! The two are not the same. Any contribution of QM to the Cooper case will occur in a Lab vs trying to remote view or imagine what Cooper did or did not do. Its as simple (and certain) as that.
I predict you will ignore everything I am saying, and continue in the same habits you have always had as part of your life strategy. We all have life strategies of one kind or another. Different life strategies lead to different life outcomes! ;)
-
As I understand quantum theory, the worms are both alive and dead until observed. However, there is an interesting counter theory that says the observer drinking the Twequila might not be observant enough. Interesting dilemma, no?
Yes, remote viewing, when we develop the skills necessary to make it reliable, will be a tremendous asset.
My understanding of QM is completely different from yours. There is no known association between QM and Consciousness - Perception - Neurology. A scientist at Harvard, Barb Shipman, actually looked into this - her father is a great mathematician. Look up Shipman's work on Bee roaming (in order to find pollen) and read it.
After that read something about what Quantum Mechanics is and how it came into being, and why. Your dimestore version of QM and Uncertainty is just that, a dimestore novel! QM and Uncertainty is not a fact - just opposite is the case.
QM is not the father of Uncertainty. QM predicts extremely rigorous standards and certainty! QM is a mathematical strategy ( a tool) which explains or predicts how atomic and subatomic particles and forces will act (and interact). QM actually applies more certainty to the world, rather than less! QM actually tightens and restricts 'what can happen' vs 'what cannot happen' and the whole body of quantum theory is tantamount to a new set of Conservation Laws which are the most basic Laws in Physics!
What the Sun does in nucleo-synthesis, for example, is a dead-certain proposition. That certainty is precisely what has lead to the technological world we have today ... from LEDs to nuclear bombs and reactors to radiation therapy and CT scanning. QM theory is responsible for that.
When it comes to QM and Uncertainty vs the idea of Remote Perception, I think you are confusing QM with ordinary probabilistic Innumeracy and Chance which occurs in daily life also - as a random statistical experience in life! The two are not the same. Any contribution of QM to the Cooper case will occur in a Lab vs trying to remote view or imagine what Cooper did or did not do. Its as simple (and certain) as that.
I predict you will ignore everything I am saying, and continue in the same habits you have always had as part of your life strategy. We all have life strategies of one kind or another. Different life strategies lead to different life outcomes! ;)
Another option is that I will hold your perspective (and advice) in superposition until I have more information that would help me decide which quantum potential I want to collapse.
Until then.
-
As I understand quantum theory, the worms are both alive and dead until observed. However, there is an interesting counter theory that says the observer drinking the Twequila might not be observant enough. Interesting dilemma, no?
Yes, remote viewing, when we develop the skills necessary to make it reliable, will be a tremendous asset.
My understanding of QM is completely different from yours. There is no known association between QM and Consciousness - Perception - Neurology. A scientist at Harvard, Barb Shipman, actually looked into this - her father is a great mathematician. Look up Shipman's work on Bee roaming (in order to find pollen) and read it.
After that read something about what Quantum Mechanics is and how it came into being, and why. Your dimestore version of QM and Uncertainty is just that, a dimestore novel! QM and Uncertainty is not a fact - just opposite is the case.
QM is not the father of Uncertainty. QM predicts extremely rigorous standards and certainty! QM is a mathematical strategy ( a tool) which explains or predicts how atomic and subatomic particles and forces will act (and interact). QM actually applies more certainty to the world, rather than less! QM actually tightens and restricts 'what can happen' vs 'what cannot happen' and the whole body of quantum theory is tantamount to a new set of Conservation Laws which are the most basic Laws in Physics!
What the Sun does in nucleo-synthesis, for example, is a dead-certain proposition. That certainty is precisely what has lead to the technological world we have today ... from LEDs to nuclear bombs and reactors to radiation therapy and CT scanning. QM theory is responsible for that.
When it comes to QM and Uncertainty vs the idea of Remote Perception, I think you are confusing QM with ordinary probabilistic Innumeracy and Chance which occurs in daily life also - as a random statistical experience in life! The two are not the same. Any contribution of QM to the Cooper case will occur in a Lab vs trying to remote view or imagine what Cooper did or did not do. Its as simple (and certain) as that.
I predict you will ignore everything I am saying, and continue in the same habits you have always had as part of your life strategy. We all have life strategies of one kind or another. Different life strategies lead to different life outcomes! ;)
Another option is that I will hold your perspective (and advice) in superposition until I have more information that would help me decide which quantum potential I want to collapse.
Until then.
Bruce you are still talking in riddles, using buzz words - that is the whole point of my post. QM adds greater certainty, its rules (what can and cannot happen) in the physical world is very strict. QM is the fundamental laws that run the universe! What can happen vs what cannot happen. Otherwise hypothetical matters like remote viewing through time would be an everyday common occurrence every living creature would be doing in one form or another. Otherwise, become a physicist and tell/show us all how this works. I will look forward to your article in the Mountain News! :chr2:
Prior to that article hire a good tax attorney because you will be the richest man on Earth - instantly! :) You will have changed the history of the world with one article! You aspire to that role. Good luck.
As all of the mathematicians at this forum will tell you, mathematics is at the core of this (1750-1880) from Euler to Kirchhoff to Planck and names long forgotten - so gird yourself for the quantum leap! No parachute is possible.
-
Are you saying, Georger, that remote viewing is impossible?
-
Another 727 exit video with pressure thumps clearly audible as each jumper exits. Don’t need a stair rebound. Stairs not lowered.
On my DC 9 jump I could have accurately counted every jumper exit from my seat in the forward section of the cabin, even blindfolded
https://www.facebook.com/RedMarauder/videos/1420894486643/
377
-
Another 727 exit video with pressure thumps clearly audible as each jumper exits. Don’t need a stair rebound. Stairs not lowered.
On my DC 9 jump I could have accurately counted every jumper exit from my seat in the forward section of the cabin, even blindfolded
https://www.facebook.com/RedMarauder/videos/1420894486643/
377
Still curious what accounts for the 'pressure thumps clearly audible'. If not stairs closing hole then what? Presence of a moving body obstructing the hole then opening the hole - opening of chute close to the hole - ??
-
Another 727 exit video with pressure thumps clearly audible as each jumper exits. Don’t need a stair rebound. Stairs not lowered.
On my DC 9 jump I could have accurately counted every jumper exit from my seat in the forward section of the cabin, even blindfolded
https://www.facebook.com/RedMarauder/videos/1420894486643/
377
Still curious what accounts for the 'pressure thumps clearly audible'. If not stairs closing hole then what? Presence of a moving body obstructing the hole then opening the hole - opening of chute close to the hole - ??
That is a good question.
377, did you actually feel a pressure change or was it a noise change or both?
I can't think of any reason for a pronounced pressure change under these conditions.
-
Chutes were deployed at about 3000 ft, far far below the exit altitude of 14,000 ft.
The audio compression on the videotape actually makes it sound less pronounced that it is in reality. On the DC 9, my eardrums got a pretty good whack every time a jumper exited. It was very noisy inside the jet with the ventral door open, but the thumps were easily heard.
What really drives me nuts is that Cooper's exit and separation from the 727 was almost certainly visible on radar. Apparently, nobody thought about that and the importance of preserving the raw radar video signal. By video signal I don't mean screen data, I mean the raw radar receiver output. It is called "video signal" in radar terminology. https://dsp.stackexchange.com/questions/38521/radar-terminology-specific-meaning-of-video-signal
377
-
Another 727 exit video with pressure thumps clearly audible as each jumper exits. Don’t need a stair rebound. Stairs not lowered.
On my DC 9 jump I could have accurately counted every jumper exit from my seat in the forward section of the cabin, even blindfolded
https://www.facebook.com/RedMarauder/videos/1420894486643/
377
Still curious what accounts for the 'pressure thumps clearly audible'. If not stairs closing hole then what? Presence of a moving body obstructing the hole then opening the hole - opening of chute close to the hole - ??
That is a good question.
377, did you actually feel a pressure change or was it a noise change or both?
I can't think of any reason for a pronounced pressure change under these conditions.
DEFINITELY a pressure bump felt. All sound of course involves pressure waves but this was a feel it in your gut "THUNK". I'll bet a rate of climb gauge (dP/dT) would have shown a big needle excursion.
377
-
Another 727 exit video with pressure thumps clearly audible as each jumper exits. Don’t need a stair rebound. Stairs not lowered.
On my DC 9 jump I could have accurately counted every jumper exit from my seat in the forward section of the cabin, even blindfolded
https://www.facebook.com/RedMarauder/videos/1420894486643/
377
Still curious what accounts for the 'pressure thumps clearly audible'. If not stairs closing hole then what? Presence of a moving body obstructing the hole then opening the hole - opening of chute close to the hole - ??
That is a good question.
377, did you actually feel a pressure change or was it a noise change or both?
I can't think of any reason for a pronounced pressure change under these conditions.
DEFINITELY a pressure bump felt. All sound of course involves pressure waves but this was a feel it in your gut "THUNK". I'll bet a rate of climb gauge (dP/dT) would have shown a big needle excursion.
377
Okay, good. And the pressure changes involved "increased" pressure?
-
Perception can be tricky, but it sure felt like a positive pressure excursion.
377
-
Perception can be tricky, but it sure felt like a positive pressure excursion.
377
And no chute had been opened? Yes or No.
If "no" then the pressure spike has nothing to do with chute area but with the body of the person blocking air flow?
-
Perception can be tricky, but it sure felt like a positive pressure excursion.
377
Thanks. Let me now make a wild eyed guess about the pressure and noise.
Consider an empty wine bottle with a cork in the top. Assume that the cork has been replaced sufficiently to just completely seal the opening. At this point the air inside and outside the bottle will be at the same pressure. If the cork is pushed in further, the air in the bottle will have a greater pressure than the air outside the bottle. In either case, if the cork is suddenly (repeat, suddenly) pulled out of the bottle, there will be both a "pop" and pressure changes inside the bottle.
When the rear stairs of a 727 have been removed and with the cabin's aft pressure door wide open, the pressure inside the cabin and just outside the aft stairwell are essentially the same.
When a skydiver, in free fall, goes through the stair opening, he/she apparently blocks enough of the opening for split second to create a slightly lower pressure in the cabin. The skydiver clearing the opening is about the equivalent of pulling the cork out of the bottle. It will cause a "pop" (or some kind of noise) and cause a pressure disturbance in the cabin. In addition, the skydiver free falling through the stair opening will block some of the external engine and aerodynamic noise for a split second.
And remember that 377 states that the sound of the skydiver going through the stair opening is different from the ambient noise.
-
Perception can be tricky, but it sure felt like a positive pressure excursion.
377
Thanks. Let me now make a wild eyed guess about the pressure and noise.
Consider an empty wine bottle with a cork in the top. Assume that the cork has been replaced sufficiently to just completely seal the opening. At this point the air inside and outside the bottle will be at the same pressure. If the cork is pushed in further, the air in the bottle will have a greater pressure than the air outside the bottle. In either case, if the cork is suddenly (repeat, suddenly) pulled out of the bottle, there will be both a "pop" and pressure changes inside the bottle.
When the rear stairs of a 727 have been removed and with the cabin's aft pressure door wide open, the pressure inside the cabin and just outside the aft stairwell are essentially the same.
When a skydiver, in free fall, goes through the stair opening, he/she apparently blocks enough of the opening for split second to create a slightly lower pressure in the cabin. The skydiver clearing the opening is about the equivalent of pulling the cork out of the bottle. It will cause a "pop" (or some kind of noise) and cause a pressure disturbance in the cabin. In addition, the skydiver free falling through the stair opening will block some of the external engine and aerodynamic noise for a split second.
And remember that 377 states that the sound of the skydiver going through the stair opening is different from the ambient noise.
Chute is opened or not on exiting! ? IT MATTERS!
Area of person/body vs area of a chute vis a vis the hole air stream.
Until that is answered you haven't defined the whole problem.
Do they stand at the hole and open a chute or do they jump and open the chute later - further away from the hole?
-
Perception can be tricky, but it sure felt like a positive pressure excursion.
377
Thanks. Let me now make a wild eyed guess about the pressure and noise.
Consider an empty wine bottle with a cork in the top. Assume that the cork has been replaced sufficiently to just completely seal the opening. At this point the air inside and outside the bottle will be at the same pressure. If the cork is pushed in further, the air in the bottle will have a greater pressure than the air outside the bottle. In either case, if the cork is suddenly (repeat, suddenly) pulled out of the bottle, there will be both a "pop" and pressure changes inside the bottle.
When the rear stairs of a 727 have been removed and with the cabin's aft pressure door wide open, the pressure inside the cabin and just outside the aft stairwell are essentially the same.
When a skydiver, in free fall, goes through the stair opening, he/she apparently blocks enough of the opening for split second to create a slightly lower pressure in the cabin. The skydiver clearing the opening is about the equivalent of pulling the cork out of the bottle. It will cause a "pop" (or some kind of noise) and cause a pressure disturbance in the cabin. In addition, the skydiver free falling through the stair opening will block some of the external engine and aerodynamic noise for a split second.
And remember that 377 states that the sound of the skydiver going through the stair opening is different from the ambient noise.
Chute is opened or not on exiting! ? IT MATTERS!
Area of person/body vs area of a chute vis a vis the hole air stream.
Until that is answered you haven't defined the whole problem.
Do they stand at the hole and open a chute or do they jump and open the chute later - further away from the hole?
In the jumps that 377 describes, the skydiver does about a 10,000 foot free fall before opening his chute. So no open parachutes are involved.
-
Perception can be tricky, but it sure felt like a positive pressure excursion.
377
Thanks. Let me now make a wild eyed guess about the pressure and noise.
Consider an empty wine bottle with a cork in the top. Assume that the cork has been replaced sufficiently to just completely seal the opening. At this point the air inside and outside the bottle will be at the same pressure. If the cork is pushed in further, the air in the bottle will have a greater pressure than the air outside the bottle. In either case, if the cork is suddenly (repeat, suddenly) pulled out of the bottle, there will be both a "pop" and pressure changes inside the bottle.
When the rear stairs of a 727 have been removed and with the cabin's aft pressure door wide open, the pressure inside the cabin and just outside the aft stairwell are essentially the same.
When a skydiver, in free fall, goes through the stair opening, he/she apparently blocks enough of the opening for split second to create a slightly lower pressure in the cabin. The skydiver clearing the opening is about the equivalent of pulling the cork out of the bottle. It will cause a "pop" (or some kind of noise) and cause a pressure disturbance in the cabin. In addition, the skydiver free falling through the stair opening will block some of the external engine and aerodynamic noise for a split second.
And remember that 377 states that the sound of the skydiver going through the stair opening is different from the ambient noise.
Chute is opened or not on exiting! ? IT MATTERS!
Area of person/body vs area of a chute vis a vis the hole air stream.
Until that is answered you haven't defined the whole problem.
Do they stand at the hole and open a chute or do they jump and open the chute later - further away from the hole?
In the jumps that 377 describes, the skydiver does about a 10,000 foot free fall before opening his chute. So no open parachutes are involved.
ok ...... thanks.
-
Perception can be tricky, but it sure felt like a positive pressure excursion.
377
Thanks. Let me now make a wild eyed guess about the pressure and noise.
Consider an empty wine bottle with a cork in the top. Assume that the cork has been replaced sufficiently to just completely seal the opening. At this point the air inside and outside the bottle will be at the same pressure. If the cork is pushed in further, the air in the bottle will have a greater pressure than the air outside the bottle. In either case, if the cork is suddenly (repeat, suddenly) pulled out of the bottle, there will be both a "pop" and pressure changes inside the bottle.
When the rear stairs of a 727 have been removed and with the cabin's aft pressure door wide open, the pressure inside the cabin and just outside the aft stairwell are essentially the same.
When a skydiver, in free fall, goes through the stair opening, he/she apparently blocks enough of the opening for split second to create a slightly lower pressure in the cabin. The skydiver clearing the opening is about the equivalent of pulling the cork out of the bottle. It will cause a "pop" (or some kind of noise) and cause a pressure disturbance in the cabin. In addition, the skydiver free falling through the stair opening will block some of the external engine and aerodynamic noise for a split second.
And remember that 377 states that the sound of the skydiver going through the stair opening is different from the ambient noise.
Chute is opened or not on exiting! ? IT MATTERS!
Area of person/body vs area of a chute vis a vis the hole air stream.
Until that is answered you haven't defined the whole problem.
Do they stand at the hole and open a chute or do they jump and open the chute later - further away from the hole?
In the jumps that 377 describes, the skydiver does about a 10,000 foot free fall before opening his chute. So no open parachutes are involved.
Robert, if you see this ... have you got anything on Columbia water column temps near TBar? Surface to channel bottom? I looked around a little and was surprised to find the Columbia as warm as it is, apparently? But I have yet to find any water column temps say in ten foot intervals? It matters if the money and bands were ever in the main river at some depth ... for example melt transition (gooey stage) of the bands is at 68F ! anything would helpful ...
-
Perception can be tricky, but it sure felt like a positive pressure excursion.
377
Thanks. Let me now make a wild eyed guess about the pressure and noise.
Consider an empty wine bottle with a cork in the top. Assume that the cork has been replaced sufficiently to just completely seal the opening. At this point the air inside and outside the bottle will be at the same pressure. If the cork is pushed in further, the air in the bottle will have a greater pressure than the air outside the bottle. In either case, if the cork is suddenly (repeat, suddenly) pulled out of the bottle, there will be both a "pop" and pressure changes inside the bottle.
When the rear stairs of a 727 have been removed and with the cabin's aft pressure door wide open, the pressure inside the cabin and just outside the aft stairwell are essentially the same.
When a skydiver, in free fall, goes through the stair opening, he/she apparently blocks enough of the opening for split second to create a slightly lower pressure in the cabin. The skydiver clearing the opening is about the equivalent of pulling the cork out of the bottle. It will cause a "pop" (or some kind of noise) and cause a pressure disturbance in the cabin. In addition, the skydiver free falling through the stair opening will block some of the external engine and aerodynamic noise for a split second.
And remember that 377 states that the sound of the skydiver going through the stair opening is different from the ambient noise.
Chute is opened or not on exiting! ? IT MATTERS!
Area of person/body vs area of a chute vis a vis the hole air stream.
Until that is answered you haven't defined the whole problem.
Do they stand at the hole and open a chute or do they jump and open the chute later - further away from the hole?
In the jumps that 377 describes, the skydiver does about a 10,000 foot free fall before opening his chute. So no open parachutes are involved.
Robert, if you see this ... have you got anything on Columbia water column temps near TBar? Surface to channel bottom? I looked around a little and was surprised to find the Columbia as warm as it is, apparently? But I have yet to find any water column temps say in ten foot intervals? It matters if the money and bands were ever in the main river at some depth ... for example melt transition (gooey stage) of the bands is at 68F ! anything would helpful ...
I doubt if such information is routinely collected. But there may be special papers or projects that checked into this matter. Maybe the Washington State or Oregon State Fish or wildlife departments have done something along this line. Perhaps the Portland area fishermen who are online here can help.
An eon or so ago, I spent a lot of time swimming in a tributary of the Columbia River about 200 miles upstream of Tina Bar. Amazon and I discussed this on DropZone, but even in July and August the water in that river was essentially just melted ice and I can guarantee that the water temperature was never anywhere close to 68F degrees.
And I suspect that the water at Tina Bar is also going to be essentially just melted ice and quite a bit colder than anything you would see in a central or mid-western river during the summer.
Also, keep in mind that the deepest part of the Columbia in the Tina Bar area is the 40 foot deep shipping channel that is close to the Oregon side of the river. I doubt that there is much variation vertically in water temperature.
Meyer, and maybe Bruce, have ventured a few feet into the river to cool off, so maybe they can provide some input on this.
-
Perception can be tricky, but it sure felt like a positive pressure excursion.
377
Thanks. Let me now make a wild eyed guess about the pressure and noise.
Consider an empty wine bottle with a cork in the top. Assume that the cork has been replaced sufficiently to just completely seal the opening. At this point the air inside and outside the bottle will be at the same pressure. If the cork is pushed in further, the air in the bottle will have a greater pressure than the air outside the bottle. In either case, if the cork is suddenly (repeat, suddenly) pulled out of the bottle, there will be both a "pop" and pressure changes inside the bottle.
When the rear stairs of a 727 have been removed and with the cabin's aft pressure door wide open, the pressure inside the cabin and just outside the aft stairwell are essentially the same.
When a skydiver, in free fall, goes through the stair opening, he/she apparently blocks enough of the opening for split second to create a slightly lower pressure in the cabin. The skydiver clearing the opening is about the equivalent of pulling the cork out of the bottle. It will cause a "pop" (or some kind of noise) and cause a pressure disturbance in the cabin. In addition, the skydiver free falling through the stair opening will block some of the external engine and aerodynamic noise for a split second.
And remember that 377 states that the sound of the skydiver going through the stair opening is different from the ambient noise.
Chute is opened or not on exiting! ? IT MATTERS!
Area of person/body vs area of a chute vis a vis the hole air stream.
Until that is answered you haven't defined the whole problem.
Do they stand at the hole and open a chute or do they jump and open the chute later - further away from the hole?
In the jumps that 377 describes, the skydiver does about a 10,000 foot free fall before opening his chute. So no open parachutes are involved.
Robert, if you see this ... have you got anything on Columbia water column temps near TBar? Surface to channel bottom? I looked around a little and was surprised to find the Columbia as warm as it is, apparently? But I have yet to find any water column temps say in ten foot intervals? It matters if the money and bands were ever in the main river at some depth ... for example melt transition (gooey stage) of the bands is at 68F ! anything would helpful ...
I doubt if such information is routinely collected. But there may be special papers or projects that checked into this matter. Maybe the Washington State or Oregon State Fish or wildlife departments have done something along this line. Perhaps the Portland area fishermen who are online here can help.
An eon or so ago, I spent a lot of time swimming in a tributary of the Columbia River about 200 miles upstream of Tina Bar. Amazon and I discussed this on DropZone, but even in July and August the water in that river was essentially just melted ice and I can guarantee that the water temperature was never anywhere close to 68F degrees.
And I suspect that the water at Tina Bar is also going to be essentially just melted ice and quite a bit colder than anything you would see in a central or mid-western river during the summer.
Also, keep in mind that the deepest part of the Columbia in the Tina Bar area is the 40 foot deep shipping channel that is close to the Oregon side of the river. I doubt that there is much variation vertically in water temperature.
Meyer, and maybe Bruce, have ventured a few feet into the river to cool off, so maybe they can provide some input on this.
ok, let me see what I can find. Thanks. Will keep you posted. All of this matters as far as money and band deterioration IF the money spent time in the river.
-
...Meyer, and maybe Bruce, have ventured a few feet into the river to cool off, so maybe they can provide some input on this.
I have swum at T-Bar in August when it was 105 degrees on a local bank reader board. The water felt delicious.
I have also swum in the Columbia in August, east of the Dalles, and it was surprisingly cold. Ice melt? From where? Snow melt? Maybe, but that section of the Columbia was in the western edge of the high desert and the sun was strong.
What struck me most about both swims was the rapid current. The river took me downstream in a jiffy.
As for temps at depth, there is such a thing as a thermo-cline, the point in a water column where there is a distinct pressure and temperature differential, almost like a barrier. The water doesn't mix too easily across the thermo-cline. In lake water there are usually two thermo-clines that a swimmer can access. The first one is at 16 feet, and the next one around 40-feet or so. Based on my personal summer-time experience, I would say there is a 10-15 degree drop across the thermo-cline. Hence, water that is 75 degrees on the surface would be 60 degrees at 16 feet, and 45-50-ish at 40-feet.
-
Find someone who is monitoring invasive species; zebra and quagga mussels begin reproducing at 54 degrees so most AIS specialists monitor water temp to understand where and when to look when doing assessments and surveys. They might have the best info.
-
...Meyer, and maybe Bruce, have ventured a few feet into the river to cool off, so maybe they can provide some input on this.
I have swum at T-Bar in August when it was 105 degrees on a local bank reader board. The water felt delicious.
I have also swum in the Columbia in August, east of the Dalles, and it was surprisingly cold. Ice melt? From where? Snow melt? Maybe, but that section of the Columbia was in the western edge of the high desert and the sun was strong.
What struck me most about both swims was the rapid current. The river took me downstream in a jiffy.
As for temps at depth, there is such a thing as a thermo-cline, the point in a water column where there is a distinct pressure and temperature differential, almost like a barrier. The water doesn't mix too easily across the thermo-cline. In lake water there are usually two thermo-clines that a swimmer can access. The first one is at 16 feet, and the next one around 40-feet or so. Based on my personal summer-time experience, I would say there is a 10-15 degree drop across the thermo-cline. Hence, water that is 75 degrees on the surface would be 60 degrees at 16 feet, and 45-50-ish at 40-feet.
Lots on the net about salmon being in danger in the Lower Columbia due to mean increase in annual temps?
Have you got even a guess about what the temp would be at the bottom where dredging material was removed?
Also need typical beach sand soil temps by season, down to 4 ft, anywhere near TBar.
-
Find someone who is monitoring invasive species; zebra and quagga mussels begin reproducing at 54 degrees so most AIS specialists monitor water temp to understand where and when to look when doing assessments and surveys. They might have the best info.
will do - Thanks! Will start looking at Portland ?
-
....Have you got even a guess about what the temp would be at the bottom where dredging material was removed?
My guess is 45 degrees year-round at a depth of at least 40-feet. I suspect that the depth of the Columbia is variable, and often deeper that 40-feet.
-
....Have you got even a guess about what the temp would be at the bottom where dredging material was removed?
My guess is 45 degrees year-round at a depth of at least 40-feet. I suspect that the depth of the Columbia is variable, and often deeper that 40-feet.
ok tnx
-
Okay, this is the thread that boggles me the most. I know a lot of maps have been made speculating on the landing zone. I hope I ask this clearly enough- is there a map of the region that shows ALL the possible areas where the DZ could have been if you presume the pressure bump at 8:13 was Cooper diving - ex. Plane was going at X speed for this long and Y speed for that long, so the RANGE of DZ's is [area]? Do we at least have some idea where he wasn't?
-
Most, if not all the maps where made shortly after the hijacking...the confusion with the pressure bump came many years later...the exact location can not be found due to the lack of information in it's totality..
-
Most, if not all the maps where made shortly after the hijacking...the confusion with the pressure bump came many years later...the exact location can not be found due to the lack of information in it's totality..
And there are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts that remove ALL meaningful information that would help locate the airliner at 8:13 PM. So there are a lot of guesses as to where he jumped.
-
Most, if not all the maps where made shortly after the hijacking...the confusion with the pressure bump came many years later...the exact location can not be found due to the lack of information in it's totality..
And there are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts that remove ALL meaningful information that would help locate the airliner at 8:13 PM. So there are a lot of guesses as to where he jumped.
Dare I ask if any agency anywhere has possession of the unredacted versions?
-
Most, if not all the maps where made shortly after the hijacking...the confusion with the pressure bump came many years later...the exact location can not be found due to the lack of information in it's totality..
And there are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts that remove ALL meaningful information that would help locate the airliner at 8:13 PM. So there are a lot of guesses as to where he jumped.
Dare I ask if any agency anywhere has possession of the unredacted versions?
Presumably, yes.
-
Maybe even GG.
-
Most, if not all the maps where made shortly after the hijacking...the confusion with the pressure bump came many years later...the exact location can not be found due to the lack of information in it's totality..
And there are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts that remove ALL meaningful information that would help locate the airliner at 8:13 PM. So there are a lot of guesses as to where he jumped.
Dare I ask if any agency anywhere has possession of the unredacted versions?
Presumably, yes.
The 19 redactions in the radio transcript for the flight from Seattle to the point in Northern California where the airliner was handed off to the Oakland ATC, appears to be a CYA operation by the FBI and FAA. There are no redactions in any of the other radio transcripts.
-
Could there be an innocent non CYA explanation for the radio redactions? If it is a cover up what might it be concealing? Speculation welcomed.
377
-
Could there be an innocent non CYA explanation for the radio redactions? If it is a cover up what might it be concealing? Speculation welcomed.
377
This is the section where Cooper bailed. Apparently everyone lost their marbles and the Maldum Fornax collapsed! :rofl: All starting around 8:10 and ending when 305 was in the hands of a different controller south of Portland.
Plus we dont have anything from the company communications ... or the military side.
-
Could there be an innocent non CYA explanation for the radio redactions? If it is a cover up what might it be concealing? Speculation welcomed.
377
This is the section where Cooper bailed. Apparently everyone lost their marbles and the Maldum Fornax collapsed! :rofl: All starting around 8:10 and ending when 305 was in the hands of a different controller south of Portland.
Plus we dont have anything from the company communications ... or the military side.
NWA did apparently have its own channel at SEATAC for direct communications with its aircraft while they were on the ground there. There is a reference in the SEATAC transcripts to the crew being on the "company channel" and missing a message from the tower. The company channel would have been used for such things as coordinating the service of the aircraft during a turn around, passing flight plan information, passenger information, enroute weather, etc., etc..
While in flight, the direct communications with various NWA facilities would be handled through the ARINC teletype system and the ARINC telephone patch that was specifically set up during the hijacking. Only a very limited amount of the ARINC teletype information was released for the Seattle area. Fred Poynter, of the Washington State History Museum, had access to the teletype printouts of some of the ARINC communications several years ago. He and his staff analyzed what they had and concluded that the printouts had also been redacted.
The Oakland ATC told the airliner at one point to contact the ARINC station in Sacramento on a specific frequency while it was under their control. Presumably, there could have been a phone patch transcript involved in this as well as the teletype printouts. But they have never surfaced.
-
"While in flight, the direct communications with various NWA facilities would be handled through the ARINC teletype system..."
I assume you mean ground to ground through TTY. NWA 727s did not have radio teletype systems.
377
-
"While in flight, the direct communications with various NWA facilities would be handled through the ARINC teletype system..."
I assume you mean ground to ground through TTY. NWA 727s did not have radio teletype systems.
377
ARINC was/is a commercial service for the airlines that communicated by VHF voice between the airliner and ARINC ground stations. ARINC was assigned specified VHF frequencies for those communications. When ARINC received a message from an airliner, it copied the message and then formatted that message and sent it to the appropriate airline station(s) on a ground teletype network. Since this was a commercial for-profit operation, the airlines subscribed to and paid for the service. Only airline business was discussed on this as a rule, an exception to the rule was the FBI using the ARINC facilities for a phone patch to the airliner.
ARINC service was NOT an air traffic control operation. Only the FAA radio network carried air traffic control messages.
-
That matches my understanding of AIRINC ops.
I've heard transoceanic airliners report to their companies through AIRINC HF SSB voice comms.
https://www.rockwellcollins.com/Products_and_Services/Commercial_Aviation/Connectivity_and_Network_Services/Flight-deck-solutions/ARINC-Voice-Service.aspx
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/air_traffic_services/ny_owg/media/hf_fundamentals.pdf
Once I heard a report of an unruly intoxicated VIP passenger and a discrete discussion about how to handle things without getting "the authorities" involved.
No ATC stuff, just operations messages. I suspect SATCOMMS are eroding this HF voice service as the number of calls has steadily diminished over the years.
377
-
That matches my understanding of AIRINC ops.
I've heard transoceanic airliners report to their companies through AIRINC HF SSB voice comms.
https://www.rockwellcollins.com/Products_and_Services/Commercial_Aviation/Connectivity_and_Network_Services/Flight-deck-solutions/ARINC-Voice-Service.aspx
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/air_traffic_services/ny_owg/media/hf_fundamentals.pdf
Once I heard a report of an unruly intoxicated VIP passenger and a discrete discussion about how to handle things without getting "the authorities" involved.
No ATC stuff, just operations messages. I suspect SATCOMMS are eroding this HF voice service as the number of calls has steadily diminished over the years.
377
AirTwardo posted some time back, I believe on this site, that when his wife was flying her 747 between anywhere in the USA and Europe that she could receive Faxes, text messages, and voice messages direct from her company dispatcher.
Fred Poynter and I were in contact for a period of time with the ARINC headquarters (I assume it was) in Annapolis, MD just a couple of weeks or so before MH370 disappeared in the Indian Ocean. This was also just a few months before Rockwell Collins bought ARINC.
It was ARINC's European competitor which operated in Asia that did the calculations to estimate the crash location of MH370.
-
Satcomms and data modems keep boats and aircraft in constant touch with the ground regardless of position or all but extreme ionospheric conditions. Even before comm sats existed the USAF had HF radioteletype gear in long range large aircraft.
I think Airtwardo’s lovely wife flew Boeing 72 75 and 76 but not 74 aircraft. Could be mistaken.
Wish he were on the forum. Great guy. Superbly skilled jumper.
377
-
Satcomms and data modems keep boats and aircraft in constant touch with the ground regardless of position or all but extreme ionospheric conditions. Even before comm sats existed the USAF had HF radioteletype gear in long range large aircraft.
I think Airtwardo’s lovely wife flew Boeing 72 75 and 76 but not 74 aircraft. Could be mistaken.
Wish he were on the forum. Great guy. Superbly skilled jumper.
377
When TWA and Pan Am started intercontinental 707 operations between the USA and Europe around 1960, the 707s usually had a long pipe-like antenna extending forward from the top of the vertical stabilizer. That was an HF antenna, but I think they only had voice capabilities.
And some of the USAF 707/C-135 aircraft that were used for VIP operations did indeed have teletype communication capabilities.
-
That's correct on the Pan Am 707s, voice (USB) only. Most carried the Collins 618T HF transceiver which was capable of SSB voice, CW (Morse Code) and RTTY (teletype) but CW required a key and an operator who understood Morse and RTTY required a modem, printer and a keyboard to send and receive. Pan Am just used the voice mode. That horizontal spike antenna on the vertical stabilizer top seemed way too short to be an effective HF transmitting antenna but 707s had good HF comms. Maybe some other part of the tail structure was part of the antenna.
I've been searching for more info on the Army 727 jumps reportedly made in the US but so far only that one personal anecdote reference has been found. Might be time to tap Snowmman for help.
377
-
http://www.aquiziam.com/db-cooper-the-813-problem/
377
-
http://www.aquiziam.com/db-cooper-the-813-problem/
377
Just a glance at the link you cite above indicates that it is filled with errors. Do you know who wrote that?
-
http://www.aquiziam.com/db-cooper-the-813-problem/
377
Just a glance at the link you cite above indicates that it is filled with errors. Do you know who wrote that?
It is yet one more uninformed maestro of the unknown who saz:
This ‘moment’ (8:13) was determined because it was shortly after the time that the stairs were opened and because the pilot (Scott) noticed the tail of the aircraft lurch upwards and he claims he had to trim the wings to compensate. The motion felt by Scott was said to have been caused by the weight of Cooper leaving the stairs causing them to bounce upwards towards the fuselage. This assumption led to one of the largest manhunts on American soil and very much focused on the small town of Ariel some 25 miles north of Portland and turned up absolutely no trace of Cooper whatsoever.
But … what if Cooper didn’t jump at 18:13?
It's more Chinese Cooper Scrabble for English speakers. Some people must share the useless.
As a result, the storm calms and the sailors then offer sacrifices to God. Jonah is miraculously saved by being swallowed by a whale, in whose belly he spends three days and three nights. The same fate may have been visited upon DB Cooper, but after 8:13pm. :o
-
Yes, the "Aquiziam" website is filled with lots of errors, yet it does present a thoughtful perspective, especially in listing the possible political and corporate concerns about the public's perception of the FBI and NWO.
Maybe "Aqui" will appear aqui, so to speak, to continue the conversation...
-
Yes, the "Aquiziam" website is filled with lots of errors, yet it does present a thoughtful perspective, especially in listing the possible political and corporate concerns about the public's perception of the FBI and NWO.
Maybe "Aqui" will appear aqui, so to speak, to continue the conversation...
Bruce, what are you saying fer gawds sake? ???
-
Yes, the "Aquiziam" website is filled with lots of errors, yet it does present a thoughtful perspective, especially in listing the possible political and corporate concerns about the public's perception of the FBI and NWO.
Maybe "Aqui" will appear aqui, so to speak, to continue the conversation...
Bruce, what are you saying fer gawds sake? ???
It's in tongues again - not meant for public consumption. Shama lacka respitotamolinogos Aqui. The "Elect" shall know and be elevated to knowledge by the Knowing Eye. To get the full effect see his videos. You must 'be in the know' to know. Only the Elect can know. ;)
-
Ahem. "Aqui" is a shortened form of Aquiziam, the title of the web page in question. And the use of the word, aqui, is of course, Spanish for "here." Hence, I was suggesting that the guy who wrote the Aquiziam site ought to come to the Forum and post his thoughts more directly.
-
Ahem. "Aqui" is a shortened form of Aquiziam, the title of the web page in question. And the use of the word, aqui, is of course, Spanish for "here." Hence, I was suggesting that the guy who wrote the Aquiziam site ought to come to the Forum and post his thoughts more directly.
Last time I checked we were not in Spain? vote the smileycode and safe
-
Check again, G.
Derek just wrote me that DB Cooper is huge in Mexico due to the "True Crime" TV shows that are immensely popular. DB Cooper is one of the themes frequently discussed.
On a related theme, the US is expected to be 51% brown-skinned and non-Caucasian by 2040 or so. I'm just getting ready so I can chat with my case workers at social security in their native language. Besides, I want to move to Ecuador and dry out and warm up.
Asta la vista, mi amigo!
-
Ahem. "Aqui" is a shortened form of Aquiziam, the title of the web page in question. And the use of the word, aqui, is of course, Spanish for "here." Hence, I was suggesting that the guy who wrote the Aquiziam site ought to come to the Forum and post his thoughts more directly.
I actually got that when I read your original post. So proud! (I only know like 20 words in Spanish and about 12 of them are food).
-
Let's see: cerveza, cerviche, pizza, café, tequila, flan, tacos, dos equis, empanillas, hmmm. I'm running out of gas...
-
It’s a simple concept really. Any turn that severe would have been noticed by Cooper. See the map at Imgur dot com. I imagine he would have picked up the interphone and said: “Where the eff are you GOING?”
Robert Blevins has a simple solution to the flight path posted on his new home TMN. I guess Cooper knew exactly where he was all the time during the flight regardless of cloud coverage and visibility..
He hates R99's concept but fails to see there would not be any turns in his theory. I guess Cooper failed to notice two heavy bank rolls just past the 7:59 mark that should of had Cooper on "the interphone" if he was watching where they were going.
This is the same guy who said he pulled the ripcord on the sports model and cut the lines and also claims the Cooper vane was installed after he did the hijacking. how did the copycats get out of the plane? he's also another believer that Cooper planted the money to throw off the cops that had no clue who was which is is exactly where it stands today...
Basically, multiple hijackings similar to Cooper's was what caused them to install the device..Cooper was still big news and was given credit for the name of the device..
-
The lines on the map don't really show how the path was flown. the turn at Toledo is a S turn to link back up with V23. you have to fly the path in order to understand it. unlike McCoy constantly asking for updates, Cooper knew when turns were wrong according to Robert Blevins.
Flight 305 was given any airspace they desired. V23 was the best route further down the path because of elevation issues. they wanted to dump him in the ocean..since Cooper gave zero indication with getting to Reno he couldn't have known where the plane was at any given time unless he received updates..
-
It's just hilarious picturing Kenny Christensen sitting there as DBC doing all of these things. Excited to get home, running to tell all the little runaway boys about his exploits in the skies over WA. :rofl:
-
It's just hilarious picturing Kenny Christensen sitting there as DBC doing all of these things. Excited to get home, running to tell all the little runaway boys about his exploits in the skies over WA. :rofl:
Keep in mind Kenny isnt here to defend himself or even comment.
Its others making this CRAPOLLA up! vote the smileycode and safe
-
Correct, being banned for bad behavior is grounds for not talking about Robert Blevins :rofl: Greg Page is monitoring this site..he's a hired watchdog of the AB force out to fight justice and dictatorship for all...Mr. Blevins is upset nothing positive about his motion picture is being mentioned anywhere...after all he has a 54 page report seen by billions and a You Tube video seen by 95% of the globe...this makes everything truthful..lets not forget about agent Jarvis, another allegation with zero backing other than some guys with high security clearance to once again put honest truth into this...
He's the number one go to guy on The Mountain News..loved by all there...
-
lets not go a page on this..too much Blevins is dangerous to your well being... :chr2:
-
...He's the number one go to guy on The Mountain News..loved by all there...
Ahem. I would say RMB is loved by some, tolerated by many, and endured by me for journalistic reasons.
-
sure, okay....
-
sure, okay....
The Cooper mystery is full of Narcissists trying to milk it. For example this quote: "This stuff here is just killing time while I watch a rerun of Vanishing Point. An underrated movie that Quentin Tarentino once said was one of his favorites. Mine too!"
The person brings up a Quentin Tarentino movie, which Ckret also said he liked! And compares himself to Quentin Tarentino, which has nothing to do with the DB Cooper case! The person is also comparing himself to Ckret, which we all know! That is pure unadulterated Narcissism. ???
There is nothing worse than a herd of Narcissists trying to defend territory they have staked out. They will say and do anything until called down for it, and their only clock is their Narcissism. Sooner or later they all get into serious trouble. Prisons and jails are full of these people. :))
Who says "Vanishing Point" is an underrated movie!? It's a highly acclaimed movie. The Narcissist will distort reality to make a point. The Narcissist is talking about themselves being underrated and ignored, not the movie! The Narcissist operates in a vacuum outside of reality and struggles to bring everyone in to their reality. It's a no-win situation for all concerned and must be avoided short of total chaos for everyone including the Narcissist.
The first job of a Narcissist is to create a false reality. Everything follows from that...
:nono:
-
:offtopicman:
It's always a good idea to keep a Narcissists and character assassinator around on a forum. when I go away for a week or so, I always look for a guy with a criminal background to watch over my house while I'm gone, perhaps give him the keys to boot?
Lets not forget dictatorship 101 ..he speaks for everyone and constantly tells people how he thinks the internet and forums should be run. he also projects his thoughts onto others...
-
Interesting side note about Quentin Tarentino. When I was in first grade, Tarentino was a 5th grader at the same school. There was drive in theater a few blocks from where I live now, where Terentino says he first developed his love for movies. I remember going there as a kid and seeing "Walking Tall".
Too bad Tarentino doesn't do a D.B. Cooper movie. Probably wouldn't be factual, but it would damn entertaining.
-
Interesting side note about Quentin Tarentino. When I was in first grade, Tarentino was a 5th grader at the same school. There was drive in theater a few blocks from where I live now, where Terentino says he first developed his love for movies. I remember going there as a kid and seeing "Walking Tall".
Too bad Tarentino doesn't do a D.B. Cooper movie. Probably wouldn't be factual, but it would damn entertaining.
I’d see no problem doing a movie based on D B Cooper that wasn’t pretending to be a true story ! Base the movie and known facts of hyjacking and POSSIBLE conclusions. Interesting to have gone to school with such a great Producer!
-
Interesting side note about Quentin Tarentino. When I was in first grade, Tarentino was a 5th grader at the same school. There was drive in theater a few blocks from where I live now, where Terentino says he first developed his love for movies. I remember going there as a kid and seeing "Walking Tall".
Too bad Tarentino doesn't do a D.B. Cooper movie. Probably wouldn't be factual, but it would damn entertaining.
I’d see no problem doing a movie based on D B Cooper that wasn’t pretending to be a true story ! Base the movie and known facts of hyjacking and POSSIBLE conclusions. Interesting to have gone to school with such a great Producer!
I think that has been attempted, Kermit, a few times over the years. How about a new angle, a new take, a different approach based the criteria you cited above. I'd go watch it. As for Tarentino, he likes to spoof violence -- I just watched Django Unchained and Pulp Fiction again recently -- don't know how you would meld DB Cooper and a Tarentino spoof on violence. Ask Bruce Smith, he knows everything, you know....
Meyer
-
Interesting side note about Quentin Tarentino. When I was in first grade, Tarentino was a 5th grader at the same school. There was drive in theater a few blocks from where I live now, where Terentino says he first developed his love for movies. I remember going there as a kid and seeing "Walking Tall".
Too bad Tarentino doesn't do a D.B. Cooper movie. Probably wouldn't be factual, but it would damn entertaining.
Tarentino has passed his movie making wisdom to the younger generation.
It seems that when Tarentino was in his late teens, he worked at a video rental store in the southern part of the Los Angeles area. One of his customers was an early teenager named Danny Strong. Strong and Tarentino used to have long talks about movies at that store.
I understand that Danny Strong graduated from the USC film school and now has established a career as an actor, writer, director, producer, and who knows what else. Recently, Strong has been an actor on the "Billions" cable program. He wrote, directed, and produced the recent "Rebel in the Rye" program on HBO (?) about J. D. Salinger.
Personally, I prefer Strong's movies over the "dark" movies that Tarentino makes.
Parrotheadvol, did you go to school with Danny Strong also?
-
Interesting side note about Quentin Tarentino. When I was in first grade, Tarentino was a 5th grader at the same school. There was drive in theater a few blocks from where I live now, where Terentino says he first developed his love for movies. I remember going there as a kid and seeing "Walking Tall".
Too bad Tarentino doesn't do a D.B. Cooper movie. Probably wouldn't be factual, but it would damn entertaining.
I’d see no problem doing a movie based on D B Cooper that wasn’t pretending to be a true story ! Base the movie and known facts of hyjacking and POSSIBLE conclusions. Interesting to have gone to school with such a great Producer!
I turned into the last episode of Mad Men, only because I heard rumor that Draper may be Cooper and hijack the plane...was disappointed when it didn't happen.
-
Parrotheadvol, did you go to school with Danny Strong also?
Nope. It was in Tennessee where I was at the same school as Tarentino. He was only in that area for a very short time but it seems to have had a great impact on him. He makes several Tennessee references in his movies:
https://www.knoxnews.com/story/entertainment/2017/03/27/knoxville-native-director-quentin-tarantino-works-hometown-into-his-films/99712840/
-
Interesting side note about Quentin Tarentino. When I was in first grade, Tarentino was a 5th grader at the same school. There was drive in theater a few blocks from where I live now, where Terentino says he first developed his love for movies. I remember going there as a kid and seeing "Walking Tall".
Too bad Tarentino doesn't do a D.B. Cooper movie. Probably wouldn't be factual, but it would damn entertaining.
I’d see no problem doing a movie based on D B Cooper that wasn’t pretending to be a true story ! Base the movie and known facts of hyjacking and POSSIBLE conclusions. Interesting to have gone to school with such a great Producer!
I turned into the last episode of Mad Men, only because I heard rumor that Draper may be Cooper and hijack the plane...was disappointed when it didn't happen.
I was also disappointed. Draper's night jump out of a 727 would have been sooo much better than that insipid CocaCola ad ending.
377
-
Interesting side note about Quentin Tarentino. When I was in first grade, Tarentino was a 5th grader at the same school. There was drive in theater a few blocks from where I live now, where Terentino says he first developed his love for movies. I remember going there as a kid and seeing "Walking Tall".
Too bad Tarentino doesn't do a D.B. Cooper movie. Probably wouldn't be factual, but it would damn entertaining.
I’d see no problem doing a movie based on D B Cooper that wasn’t pretending to be a true story ! Base the movie and known facts of hyjacking and POSSIBLE conclusions. Interesting to have gone to school with such a great Producer!
I turned into the last episode of Mad Men, only because I heard rumor that Draper may be Cooper and hijack the plane...was disappointed when it didn't happen.
I was also disappointed. Draper's night jump out of a 727 would have been sooo much better than that insipid CocaCola ad ending.
377
377.....
I do think that was a gigantic opportunity missed by the MadMen writers/producer.... Imagine the episode they could have created with all the known facts of the flight, and then the series culminating with him jumping into the dark blue.... Couldn't get better than that to end the show right there, especially because this caper hasn't been solved, and the endearing and long lasting effect that stay with the viewers... that'd have been greatness.
-
Robert99: I didn't mean "missing minutes" to be taken literally, but rather figuratively as an unaccounted for "time frame for jump exit." The exact exit time for Cooper will never be known. The pilots did not log the time of the bump, and the bump isn't an absolute indication of him leaving the aircraft. There is speculation in play on Cooper's time of probable departure. And the money find at Tina's Bar is important to the case, but limited in value if you believe that it is direct evidence of the flight path. It is not. There is a chance that the money find was a cunnard. This case carries no ablsolutes. Alignment of factual evidence does not produce a clear solution. And if you think you know the solution, you still have a problem, because the factual evidence does not fall into place to bare out a clear conclusion.
Coopsnoop, let me post the below to give some meat to the discussion. What follows includes
paraphrased testimony recently received from H. Anderson, received by myself and two others.
People can cherry pick what I am posting, agree, disagree, complain, ... whatever. But I believe
what follows is an accurate portrait and paraphrase of testimony recently received, juxtaposed
with the timeline in the Transcripts -
Intro: The period of the ‘oscillations & bump’ was used to set the time and location of Cooper’s
jump. These symptoms of a parachutist leaving the 727 via the rear door/stairs was
unanticipated by the flight crew at the time, therefore the crew was not sure what was going on
or it’s meaning. Tina had come forward and advised ‘it appears Cooper is getting ready to
jump’.
19:42 (07:42) Flt 305 reports “14 NM out of SEA on Victor-23. Cooper is trying to get the door
down, Stew is with us, he cannot get the stairs down. We now have an aft stair light on.
19:54 (07:54) Flt 305 reports: Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him
and [she] thinks he will jump.
19:54 (07:54) Flt Ops MSP advised that they have a direct phone patch hooked up on 131.8
MHz. [Phone patch to NWA … indicates crew thinks Cooper about to bail, communication restricted
to NWA?]
Time ?? Cooper calls on intercom requests “Slow down! Stabilize the plane…”. Unreported in
TR but verified in crew testimony. Scott responds by slowing and stabilizing the aircraft so Cooper
can bail. Rataczak communicating events to NWA as they happen. (source: Rataczak & Anderson)
20:05 (08:05) MSP-Flt Ops. Pilot reports that he has tried twice to contact Cooper unsuccessfully,
then he came on the PA system and said everything is OK. (Cooper still on the plane)
20:11 (08:11) Time generally attributed to Cooper’s jump. (FBI)
20:12 (08:12) Oscillations reported… Flt 305 advises they are getting some oscillations in the
cabin, Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. (Anderson & Rataczak later explain this
report did not include mention of a ‘bump’. Bump reported later to NWA by Rataczak “after we
discussed it for several minutes…”) (Cooper still on the plane or stairs)
20:15 (08:15) SEA CNTR advises Portland Altimeter (Corresponding Sea Level Barometric
Pressure) is 30.03 inches of Hg. [This is important because it shows that at 20:15:56 they were
very near Portland.]
Time ?? Rataczak reports Cooper may have bailed to NWA on 131.8 MHz . (‘The oscillations
had stopped and we hadn’t experienced any further bumps, so we discussed it among ourselves
and we decided the ‘bump’ was when Cooper bailed so Bill (Rataczak) called it in to NWA’ – exact
time and position uncertain. ‘Nobody was taking notes or noting times and positions of any of
these events. Bill (Rataczak) thought (later reported) the bump we felt was about 5-10 minutes
after our last contact with Cooper at 8:05. I agreed with that but it could have been later. We
weren’t sure what had happened or if he was gone at all. Scott wanted to go back and look but
that got vetoed. Bill estimated (recalling) that he could see the lights of Portland-Vancouver
coming up, but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet. Bill was looking ahead and out his right
window. The test flight we conducted verified the link between the ‘bump’ and the stairs slamming
back up when weight was taken off the stairs. The Air Force guys and one NWA tech made that
connection pretty quickly. We weren’t sure what the ‘bump’ meant at the time, we weren’t sure
Cooper was gone, but the test flight confirmed what the ‘bump’ was. No, we weren’t anywhere
near the Washougal when the bump happened. As I said, we could see the lights of Portland-
Vancouver coming up. ‘ (H. Anderson, paraphased)
20:20 (08:20) Flt Ops MSP request Go to 131.8 MHz. (NWA channel)
20:20 (08:20) Flt-Ops SEA advises Flt 305 is already on that frequency. Flt Ops MSP Advises we
are on the phone and will be talking with him shortly.
Note* Rataczak says the bump happened 5-10 mins after their last conversation with C at 8:05.
Rataczak’s bailout window is: 8:10-8:15. Anderson agrees but says it might have been slightly
later. What Anderson reveals is there was a delay in reporting, because they didn’t know what
had happened or what the bump meant for certain. They discussed the matter before reporting
the socalled ‘bump. But, this uncertainty as to precise time and location due to combined factors including delayed reporting, is reflected in the NWA-FBI search map. Indeed, including uncertainty in the NWA-FBI map confirms the fact there were "uncertainties" at play, in real time aboard flight 305 at the time. Otherwise, they could very easily have just issued a map of the primary search area and reduced the uncertainty the made-map conveys!
Here it is and it was posted under Flight Path.
-
Robert99: I didn't mean "missing minutes" to be taken literally, but rather figuratively as an unaccounted for "time frame for jump exit." The exact exit time for Cooper will never be known. The pilots did not log the time of the bump, and the bump isn't an absolute indication of him leaving the aircraft. There is speculation in play on Cooper's time of probable departure. And the money find at Tina's Bar is important to the case, but limited in value if you believe that it is direct evidence of the flight path. It is not. There is a chance that the money find was a cunnard. This case carries no ablsolutes. Alignment of factual evidence does not produce a clear solution. And if you think you know the solution, you still have a problem, because the factual evidence does not fall into place to bare out a clear conclusion.
Coopsnoop, let me post the below to give some meat to the discussion. What follows includes
paraphrased testimony recently received from H. Anderson, received by myself and two others.
People can cherry pick what I am posting, agree, disagree, complain, ... whatever. But I believe
what follows is an accurate portrait and paraphrase of testimony recently received, juxtaposed
with the timeline in the Transcripts -
Intro: The period of the ‘oscillations & bump’ was used to set the time and location of Cooper’s
jump. These symptoms of a parachutist leaving the 727 via the rear door/stairs was
unanticipated by the flight crew at the time, therefore the crew was not sure what was going on
or it’s meaning. Tina had come forward and advised ‘it appears Cooper is getting ready to
jump’.
19:42 (07:42) Flt 305 reports “14 NM out of SEA on Victor-23. Cooper is trying to get the door
down, Stew is with us, he cannot get the stairs down. We now have an aft stair light on.
19:54 (07:54) Flt 305 reports: Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him
and [she] thinks he will jump.
19:54 (07:54) Flt Ops MSP advised that they have a direct phone patch hooked up on 131.8
MHz. [Phone patch to NWA … indicates crew thinks Cooper about to bail, communication restricted
to NWA?]
Time ?? Cooper calls on intercom requests “Slow down! Stabilize the plane…”. Unreported in
TR but verified in crew testimony. Scott responds by slowing and stabilizing the aircraft so Cooper
can bail. Rataczak communicating events to NWA as they happen. (source: Rataczak & Anderson)
20:05 (08:05) MSP-Flt Ops. Pilot reports that he has tried twice to contact Cooper unsuccessfully,
then he came on the PA system and said everything is OK. (Cooper still on the plane)
20:11 (08:11) Time generally attributed to Cooper’s jump. (FBI)
20:12 (08:12) Oscillations reported… Flt 305 advises they are getting some oscillations in the
cabin, Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. (Anderson & Rataczak later explain this
report did not include mention of a ‘bump’. Bump reported later to NWA by Rataczak “after we
discussed it for several minutes…”) (Cooper still on the plane or stairs)
20:15 (08:15) SEA CNTR advises Portland Altimeter (Corresponding Sea Level Barometric
Pressure) is 30.03 inches of Hg. [This is important because it shows that at 20:15:56 they were
very near Portland.]
Time ?? Rataczak reports Cooper may have bailed to NWA on 131.8 MHz . (‘The oscillations
had stopped and we hadn’t experienced any further bumps, so we discussed it among ourselves
and we decided the ‘bump’ was when Cooper bailed so Bill (Rataczak) called it in to NWA’ – exact
time and position uncertain. ‘Nobody was taking notes or noting times and positions of any of
these events. Bill (Rataczak) thought (later reported) the bump we felt was about 5-10 minutes
after our last contact with Cooper at 8:05. I agreed with that but it could have been later. We
weren’t sure what had happened or if he was gone at all. Scott wanted to go back and look but
that got vetoed. Bill estimated (recalling) that he could see the lights of Portland-Vancouver
coming up, but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet. Bill was looking ahead and out his right
window. The test flight we conducted verified the link between the ‘bump’ and the stairs slamming
back up when weight was taken off the stairs. The Air Force guys and one NWA tech made that
connection pretty quickly. We weren’t sure what the ‘bump’ meant at the time, we weren’t sure
Cooper was gone, but the test flight confirmed what the ‘bump’ was. No, we weren’t anywhere
near the Washougal when the bump happened. As I said, we could see the lights of Portland-
Vancouver coming up. ‘ (H. Anderson, paraphased)
20:20 (08:20) Flt Ops MSP request Go to 131.8 MHz. (NWA channel)
20:20 (08:20) Flt-Ops SEA advises Flt 305 is already on that frequency. Flt Ops MSP Advises we
are on the phone and will be talking with him shortly.
Note* Rataczak says the bump happened 5-10 mins after their last conversation with C at 8:05.
Rataczak’s bailout window is: 8:10-8:15. Anderson agrees but says it might have been slightly
later. What Anderson reveals is there was a delay in reporting, because they didn’t know what
had happened or what the bump meant for certain. They discussed the matter before reporting
the socalled ‘bump. But, this uncertainty as to precise time and location due to combined factors including delayed reporting, is reflected in the NWA-FBI search map. Indeed, including uncertainty in the NWA-FBI map confirms the fact there were "uncertainties" at play, in real time aboard flight 305 at the time. Otherwise, they could very easily have just issued a map of the primary search area and reduced the uncertainty the made-map conveys!
Here it is and it was posted under Flight Path.
Thanks - knew it looked familiar...
-
Robert99: I didn't mean "missing minutes" to be taken literally, but rather figuratively as an unaccounted for "time frame for jump exit." The exact exit time for Cooper will never be known. The pilots did not log the time of the bump, and the bump isn't an absolute indication of him leaving the aircraft. There is speculation in play on Cooper's time of probable departure. And the money find at Tina's Bar is important to the case, but limited in value if you believe that it is direct evidence of the flight path. It is not. There is a chance that the money find was a cunnard. This case carries no ablsolutes. Alignment of factual evidence does not produce a clear solution. And if you think you know the solution, you still have a problem, because the factual evidence does not fall into place to bare out a clear conclusion.
Coopsnoop, let me post the below to give some meat to the discussion. What follows includes
paraphrased testimony recently received from H. Anderson, received by myself and two others.
People can cherry pick what I am posting, agree, disagree, complain, ... whatever. But I believe
what follows is an accurate portrait and paraphrase of testimony recently received, juxtaposed
with the timeline in the Transcripts -
Intro: The period of the ‘oscillations & bump’ was used to set the time and location of Cooper’s
jump. These symptoms of a parachutist leaving the 727 via the rear door/stairs was
unanticipated by the flight crew at the time, therefore the crew was not sure what was going on
or it’s meaning. Tina had come forward and advised ‘it appears Cooper is getting ready to
jump’.
19:42 (07:42) Flt 305 reports “14 NM out of SEA on Victor-23. Cooper is trying to get the door
down, Stew is with us, he cannot get the stairs down. We now have an aft stair light on.
19:54 (07:54) Flt 305 reports: Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him
and [she] thinks he will jump.
19:54 (07:54) Flt Ops MSP advised that they have a direct phone patch hooked up on 131.8
MHz. [Phone patch to NWA … indicates crew thinks Cooper about to bail, communication restricted
to NWA?]
Time ?? Cooper calls on intercom requests “Slow down! Stabilize the plane…”. Unreported in
TR but verified in crew testimony. Scott responds by slowing and stabilizing the aircraft so Cooper
can bail. Rataczak communicating events to NWA as they happen. (source: Rataczak & Anderson)
20:05 (08:05) MSP-Flt Ops. Pilot reports that he has tried twice to contact Cooper unsuccessfully,
then he came on the PA system and said everything is OK. (Cooper still on the plane)
20:11 (08:11) Time generally attributed to Cooper’s jump. (FBI)
20:12 (08:12) Oscillations reported… Flt 305 advises they are getting some oscillations in the
cabin, Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. (Anderson & Rataczak later explain this
report did not include mention of a ‘bump’. Bump reported later to NWA by Rataczak “after we
discussed it for several minutes…”) (Cooper still on the plane or stairs)
20:15 (08:15) SEA CNTR advises Portland Altimeter (Corresponding Sea Level Barometric
Pressure) is 30.03 inches of Hg. [This is important because it shows that at 20:15:56 they were
very near Portland.]
Time ?? Rataczak reports Cooper may have bailed to NWA on 131.8 MHz . (‘The oscillations
had stopped and we hadn’t experienced any further bumps, so we discussed it among ourselves
and we decided the ‘bump’ was when Cooper bailed so Bill (Rataczak) called it in to NWA’ – exact
time and position uncertain. ‘Nobody was taking notes or noting times and positions of any of
these events. Bill (Rataczak) thought (later reported) the bump we felt was about 5-10 minutes
after our last contact with Cooper at 8:05. I agreed with that but it could have been later. We
weren’t sure what had happened or if he was gone at all. Scott wanted to go back and look but
that got vetoed. Bill estimated (recalling) that he could see the lights of Portland-Vancouver
coming up, but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet. Bill was looking ahead and out his right
window. The test flight we conducted verified the link between the ‘bump’ and the stairs slamming
back up when weight was taken off the stairs. The Air Force guys and one NWA tech made that
connection pretty quickly. We weren’t sure what the ‘bump’ meant at the time, we weren’t sure
Cooper was gone, but the test flight confirmed what the ‘bump’ was. No, we weren’t anywhere
near the Washougal when the bump happened. As I said, we could see the lights of Portland-
Vancouver coming up. ‘ (H. Anderson, paraphased)
20:20 (08:20) Flt Ops MSP request Go to 131.8 MHz. (NWA channel)
20:20 (08:20) Flt-Ops SEA advises Flt 305 is already on that frequency. Flt Ops MSP Advises we
are on the phone and will be talking with him shortly.
Note* Rataczak says the bump happened 5-10 mins after their last conversation with C at 8:05.
Rataczak’s bailout window is: 8:10-8:15. Anderson agrees but says it might have been slightly
later. What Anderson reveals is there was a delay in reporting, because they didn’t know what
had happened or what the bump meant for certain. They discussed the matter before reporting
the socalled ‘bump. But, this uncertainty as to precise time and location due to combined factors including delayed reporting, is reflected in the NWA-FBI search map. Indeed, including uncertainty in the NWA-FBI map confirms the fact there were "uncertainties" at play, in real time aboard flight 305 at the time. Otherwise, they could very easily have just issued a map of the primary search area and reduced the uncertainty the made-map conveys!
Here it is and it was posted under Flight Path.
Thanks - knew it looked familiar...
Note in the second "Time ??" the sentence: "Bill was looking ahead and out his right window." If he was looking ahead, it had to toward the nose of the aircraft and not off toward the right wing tip.
-
Robert99: I didn't mean "missing minutes" to be taken literally, but rather figuratively as an unaccounted for "time frame for jump exit." The exact exit time for Cooper will never be known. The pilots did not log the time of the bump, and the bump isn't an absolute indication of him leaving the aircraft. There is speculation in play on Cooper's time of probable departure. And the money find at Tina's Bar is important to the case, but limited in value if you believe that it is direct evidence of the flight path. It is not. There is a chance that the money find was a cunnard. This case carries no ablsolutes. Alignment of factual evidence does not produce a clear solution. And if you think you know the solution, you still have a problem, because the factual evidence does not fall into place to bare out a clear conclusion.
Coopsnoop, let me post the below to give some meat to the discussion. What follows includes
paraphrased testimony recently received from H. Anderson, received by myself and two others.
People can cherry pick what I am posting, agree, disagree, complain, ... whatever. But I believe
what follows is an accurate portrait and paraphrase of testimony recently received, juxtaposed
with the timeline in the Transcripts -
Intro: The period of the ‘oscillations & bump’ was used to set the time and location of Cooper’s
jump. These symptoms of a parachutist leaving the 727 via the rear door/stairs was
unanticipated by the flight crew at the time, therefore the crew was not sure what was going on
or it’s meaning. Tina had come forward and advised ‘it appears Cooper is getting ready to
jump’.
19:42 (07:42) Flt 305 reports “14 NM out of SEA on Victor-23. Cooper is trying to get the door
down, Stew is with us, he cannot get the stairs down. We now have an aft stair light on.
19:54 (07:54) Flt 305 reports: Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him
and [she] thinks he will jump.
19:54 (07:54) Flt Ops MSP advised that they have a direct phone patch hooked up on 131.8
MHz. [Phone patch to NWA … indicates crew thinks Cooper about to bail, communication restricted
to NWA?]
Time ?? Cooper calls on intercom requests “Slow down! Stabilize the plane…”. Unreported in
TR but verified in crew testimony. Scott responds by slowing and stabilizing the aircraft so Cooper
can bail. Rataczak communicating events to NWA as they happen. (source: Rataczak & Anderson)
20:05 (08:05) MSP-Flt Ops. Pilot reports that he has tried twice to contact Cooper unsuccessfully,
then he came on the PA system and said everything is OK. (Cooper still on the plane)
20:11 (08:11) Time generally attributed to Cooper’s jump. (FBI)
20:12 (08:12) Oscillations reported… Flt 305 advises they are getting some oscillations in the
cabin, Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. (Anderson & Rataczak later explain this
report did not include mention of a ‘bump’. Bump reported later to NWA by Rataczak “after we
discussed it for several minutes…”) (Cooper still on the plane or stairs)
20:15 (08:15) SEA CNTR advises Portland Altimeter (Corresponding Sea Level Barometric
Pressure) is 30.03 inches of Hg. [This is important because it shows that at 20:15:56 they were
very near Portland.]
Time ?? Rataczak reports Cooper may have bailed to NWA on 131.8 MHz . (‘The oscillations
had stopped and we hadn’t experienced any further bumps, so we discussed it among ourselves
and we decided the ‘bump’ was when Cooper bailed so Bill (Rataczak) called it in to NWA’ – exact
time and position uncertain. ‘Nobody was taking notes or noting times and positions of any of
these events. Bill (Rataczak) thought (later reported) the bump we felt was about 5-10 minutes
after our last contact with Cooper at 8:05. I agreed with that but it could have been later. We
weren’t sure what had happened or if he was gone at all. Scott wanted to go back and look but
that got vetoed. Bill estimated (recalling) that he could see the lights of Portland-Vancouver
coming up, but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet. Bill was looking ahead and out his right
window. The test flight we conducted verified the link between the ‘bump’ and the stairs slamming
back up when weight was taken off the stairs. The Air Force guys and one NWA tech made that
connection pretty quickly. We weren’t sure what the ‘bump’ meant at the time, we weren’t sure
Cooper was gone, but the test flight confirmed what the ‘bump’ was. No, we weren’t anywhere
near the Washougal when the bump happened. As I said, we could see the lights of Portland-
Vancouver coming up. ‘ (H. Anderson, paraphased)
20:20 (08:20) Flt Ops MSP request Go to 131.8 MHz. (NWA channel)
20:20 (08:20) Flt-Ops SEA advises Flt 305 is already on that frequency. Flt Ops MSP Advises we
are on the phone and will be talking with him shortly.
Note* Rataczak says the bump happened 5-10 mins after their last conversation with C at 8:05.
Rataczak’s bailout window is: 8:10-8:15. Anderson agrees but says it might have been slightly
later. What Anderson reveals is there was a delay in reporting, because they didn’t know what
had happened or what the bump meant for certain. They discussed the matter before reporting
the socalled ‘bump. But, this uncertainty as to precise time and location due to combined factors including delayed reporting, is reflected in the NWA-FBI search map. Indeed, including uncertainty in the NWA-FBI map confirms the fact there were "uncertainties" at play, in real time aboard flight 305 at the time. Otherwise, they could very easily have just issued a map of the primary search area and reduced the uncertainty the made-map conveys!
Here it is and it was posted under Flight Path.
Thanks - knew it looked familiar...
Note in the second "Time ??" the sentence: "Bill was looking ahead and out his right window." If he was looking ahead, it had to toward the nose of the aircraft and not off toward the right wing tip.
cockpit view -
-
Robert99: I didn't mean "missing minutes" to be taken literally, but rather figuratively as an unaccounted for "time frame for jump exit." The exact exit time for Cooper will never be known. The pilots did not log the time of the bump, and the bump isn't an absolute indication of him leaving the aircraft. There is speculation in play on Cooper's time of probable departure. And the money find at Tina's Bar is important to the case, but limited in value if you believe that it is direct evidence of the flight path. It is not. There is a chance that the money find was a cunnard. This case carries no ablsolutes. Alignment of factual evidence does not produce a clear solution. And if you think you know the solution, you still have a problem, because the factual evidence does not fall into place to bare out a clear conclusion.
Coopsnoop, let me post the below to give some meat to the discussion. What follows includes
paraphrased testimony recently received from H. Anderson, received by myself and two others.
People can cherry pick what I am posting, agree, disagree, complain, ... whatever. But I believe
what follows is an accurate portrait and paraphrase of testimony recently received, juxtaposed
with the timeline in the Transcripts -
Intro: The period of the ‘oscillations & bump’ was used to set the time and location of Cooper’s
jump. These symptoms of a parachutist leaving the 727 via the rear door/stairs was
unanticipated by the flight crew at the time, therefore the crew was not sure what was going on
or it’s meaning. Tina had come forward and advised ‘it appears Cooper is getting ready to
jump’.
19:42 (07:42) Flt 305 reports “14 NM out of SEA on Victor-23. Cooper is trying to get the door
down, Stew is with us, he cannot get the stairs down. We now have an aft stair light on.
19:54 (07:54) Flt 305 reports: Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him
and [she] thinks he will jump.
19:54 (07:54) Flt Ops MSP advised that they have a direct phone patch hooked up on 131.8
MHz. [Phone patch to NWA … indicates crew thinks Cooper about to bail, communication restricted
to NWA?]
Time ?? Cooper calls on intercom requests “Slow down! Stabilize the plane…”. Unreported in
TR but verified in crew testimony. Scott responds by slowing and stabilizing the aircraft so Cooper
can bail. Rataczak communicating events to NWA as they happen. (source: Rataczak & Anderson)
20:05 (08:05) MSP-Flt Ops. Pilot reports that he has tried twice to contact Cooper unsuccessfully,
then he came on the PA system and said everything is OK. (Cooper still on the plane)
20:11 (08:11) Time generally attributed to Cooper’s jump. (FBI)
20:12 (08:12) Oscillations reported… Flt 305 advises they are getting some oscillations in the
cabin, Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. (Anderson & Rataczak later explain this
report did not include mention of a ‘bump’. Bump reported later to NWA by Rataczak “after we
discussed it for several minutes…”) (Cooper still on the plane or stairs)
20:15 (08:15) SEA CNTR advises Portland Altimeter (Corresponding Sea Level Barometric
Pressure) is 30.03 inches of Hg. [This is important because it shows that at 20:15:56 they were
very near Portland.]
Time ?? Rataczak reports Cooper may have bailed to NWA on 131.8 MHz . (‘The oscillations
had stopped and we hadn’t experienced any further bumps, so we discussed it among ourselves
and we decided the ‘bump’ was when Cooper bailed so Bill (Rataczak) called it in to NWA’ – exact
time and position uncertain. ‘Nobody was taking notes or noting times and positions of any of
these events. Bill (Rataczak) thought (later reported) the bump we felt was about 5-10 minutes
after our last contact with Cooper at 8:05. I agreed with that but it could have been later. We
weren’t sure what had happened or if he was gone at all. Scott wanted to go back and look but
that got vetoed. Bill estimated (recalling) that he could see the lights of Portland-Vancouver
coming up, but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet. Bill was looking ahead and out his right
window. The test flight we conducted verified the link between the ‘bump’ and the stairs slamming
back up when weight was taken off the stairs. The Air Force guys and one NWA tech made that
connection pretty quickly. We weren’t sure what the ‘bump’ meant at the time, we weren’t sure
Cooper was gone, but the test flight confirmed what the ‘bump’ was. No, we weren’t anywhere
near the Washougal when the bump happened. As I said, we could see the lights of Portland-
Vancouver coming up. ‘ (H. Anderson, paraphased)
20:20 (08:20) Flt Ops MSP request Go to 131.8 MHz. (NWA channel)
20:20 (08:20) Flt-Ops SEA advises Flt 305 is already on that frequency. Flt Ops MSP Advises we
are on the phone and will be talking with him shortly.
Note* Rataczak says the bump happened 5-10 mins after their last conversation with C at 8:05.
Rataczak’s bailout window is: 8:10-8:15. Anderson agrees but says it might have been slightly
later. What Anderson reveals is there was a delay in reporting, because they didn’t know what
had happened or what the bump meant for certain. They discussed the matter before reporting
the socalled ‘bump. But, this uncertainty as to precise time and location due to combined factors including delayed reporting, is reflected in the NWA-FBI search map. Indeed, including uncertainty in the NWA-FBI map confirms the fact there were "uncertainties" at play, in real time aboard flight 305 at the time. Otherwise, they could very easily have just issued a map of the primary search area and reduced the uncertainty the made-map conveys!
Here it is and it was posted under Flight Path.
Thanks - knew it looked familiar...
Note in the second "Time ??" the sentence: "Bill was looking ahead and out his right window." If he was looking ahead, it had to toward the nose of the aircraft and not off toward the right wing tip.
cockpit view -
That picture is of a Boeing 727 test flight crew. The pilot in the left seat is Lew Wallick who was the 727 project pilot, he made the first flight and flew practically all the tests that are of interest to the Cooper matter.
Note on the right side of the picture that there is a window directly in front of the co-pilot. Then there is one to the right side of the co-pilot. And a third window between the co-pilot and the flight engineer station and it is partly open in this picture.
-
Robert99: I didn't mean "missing minutes" to be taken literally, but rather figuratively as an unaccounted for "time frame for jump exit." The exact exit time for Cooper will never be known. The pilots did not log the time of the bump, and the bump isn't an absolute indication of him leaving the aircraft. There is speculation in play on Cooper's time of probable departure. And the money find at Tina's Bar is important to the case, but limited in value if you believe that it is direct evidence of the flight path. It is not. There is a chance that the money find was a cunnard. This case carries no ablsolutes. Alignment of factual evidence does not produce a clear solution. And if you think you know the solution, you still have a problem, because the factual evidence does not fall into place to bare out a clear conclusion.
Coopsnoop, let me post the below to give some meat to the discussion. What follows includes
paraphrased testimony recently received from H. Anderson, received by myself and two others.
People can cherry pick what I am posting, agree, disagree, complain, ... whatever. But I believe
what follows is an accurate portrait and paraphrase of testimony recently received, juxtaposed
with the timeline in the Transcripts -
Intro: The period of the ‘oscillations & bump’ was used to set the time and location of Cooper’s
jump. These symptoms of a parachutist leaving the 727 via the rear door/stairs was
unanticipated by the flight crew at the time, therefore the crew was not sure what was going on
or it’s meaning. Tina had come forward and advised ‘it appears Cooper is getting ready to
jump’.
19:42 (07:42) Flt 305 reports “14 NM out of SEA on Victor-23. Cooper is trying to get the door
down, Stew is with us, he cannot get the stairs down. We now have an aft stair light on.
19:54 (07:54) Flt 305 reports: Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him
and [she] thinks he will jump.
19:54 (07:54) Flt Ops MSP advised that they have a direct phone patch hooked up on 131.8
MHz. [Phone patch to NWA … indicates crew thinks Cooper about to bail, communication restricted
to NWA?]
Time ?? Cooper calls on intercom requests “Slow down! Stabilize the plane…”. Unreported in
TR but verified in crew testimony. Scott responds by slowing and stabilizing the aircraft so Cooper
can bail. Rataczak communicating events to NWA as they happen. (source: Rataczak & Anderson)
20:05 (08:05) MSP-Flt Ops. Pilot reports that he has tried twice to contact Cooper unsuccessfully,
then he came on the PA system and said everything is OK. (Cooper still on the plane)
20:11 (08:11) Time generally attributed to Cooper’s jump. (FBI)
20:12 (08:12) Oscillations reported… Flt 305 advises they are getting some oscillations in the
cabin, Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. (Anderson & Rataczak later explain this
report did not include mention of a ‘bump’. Bump reported later to NWA by Rataczak “after we
discussed it for several minutes…”) (Cooper still on the plane or stairs)
20:15 (08:15) SEA CNTR advises Portland Altimeter (Corresponding Sea Level Barometric
Pressure) is 30.03 inches of Hg. [This is important because it shows that at 20:15:56 they were
very near Portland.]
Time ?? Rataczak reports Cooper may have bailed to NWA on 131.8 MHz . (‘The oscillations
had stopped and we hadn’t experienced any further bumps, so we discussed it among ourselves
and we decided the ‘bump’ was when Cooper bailed so Bill (Rataczak) called it in to NWA’ – exact
time and position uncertain. ‘Nobody was taking notes or noting times and positions of any of
these events. Bill (Rataczak) thought (later reported) the bump we felt was about 5-10 minutes
after our last contact with Cooper at 8:05. I agreed with that but it could have been later. We
weren’t sure what had happened or if he was gone at all. Scott wanted to go back and look but
that got vetoed. Bill estimated (recalling) that he could see the lights of Portland-Vancouver
coming up, but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet. Bill was looking ahead and out his right
window. The test flight we conducted verified the link between the ‘bump’ and the stairs slamming
back up when weight was taken off the stairs. The Air Force guys and one NWA tech made that
connection pretty quickly. We weren’t sure what the ‘bump’ meant at the time, we weren’t sure
Cooper was gone, but the test flight confirmed what the ‘bump’ was. No, we weren’t anywhere
near the Washougal when the bump happened. As I said, we could see the lights of Portland-
Vancouver coming up. ‘ (H. Anderson, paraphased)
20:20 (08:20) Flt Ops MSP request Go to 131.8 MHz. (NWA channel)
20:20 (08:20) Flt-Ops SEA advises Flt 305 is already on that frequency. Flt Ops MSP Advises we
are on the phone and will be talking with him shortly.
Note* Rataczak says the bump happened 5-10 mins after their last conversation with C at 8:05.
Rataczak’s bailout window is: 8:10-8:15. Anderson agrees but says it might have been slightly
later. What Anderson reveals is there was a delay in reporting, because they didn’t know what
had happened or what the bump meant for certain. They discussed the matter before reporting
the socalled ‘bump. But, this uncertainty as to precise time and location due to combined factors including delayed reporting, is reflected in the NWA-FBI search map. Indeed, including uncertainty in the NWA-FBI map confirms the fact there were "uncertainties" at play, in real time aboard flight 305 at the time. Otherwise, they could very easily have just issued a map of the primary search area and reduced the uncertainty the made-map conveys!
Here it is and it was posted under Flight Path.
Thanks - knew it looked familiar...
Note in the second "Time ??" the sentence: "Bill was looking ahead and out his right window." If he was looking ahead, it had to toward the nose of the aircraft and not off toward the right wing tip.
cockpit view -
That picture is of a Boeing 727 test flight crew. The pilot in the left seat is Lew Wallick who was the 727 project pilot, he made the first flight and flew practically all the tests that are of interest to the Cooper matter.
Note on the right side of the picture that there is a window directly in front of the co-pilot. Then there is one to the right side of the co-pilot. And a third window between the co-pilot and the flight engineer station and it is partly open in this picture.
I think the “ but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet “ to be the most interesting ! If the bump occurred prior to the plane crossing the Columbia, how is the Tina Bar no pull theory possible ?
-
cockpit view -
That picture is of a Boeing 727 test flight crew. The pilot in the left seat is Lew Wallick who was the 727 project pilot, he made the first flight and flew practically all the tests that are of interest to the Cooper matter.
Note on the right side of the picture that there is a window directly in front of the co-pilot. Then there is one to the right side of the co-pilot. And a third window between the co-pilot and the flight engineer station and it is partly open in this picture.
I think the “ but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet “ to be the most interesting ! If the bump occurred prior to the plane crossing the Columbia, how is the Tina Bar no pull theory possible ?
Kermit, Language is a strange thing isn't it. Have you ever been to Tina Bar? Have you taken a good look at Tina Bar on a map? I believe you have said that you were a hunter and fisherman. If so, do you know how to use a simple magnetic compass? And are you familiar with aeronautical charts and air traffic control operations?
You will probably claim that I am trying to toot my own horn, but you might learn something if you take even a casual glance at the flight path thread on which I discuss these matters at great length. The information is already there, but you are just not interested in doing your homework. And since you don't like to do your homework, I am not going to explain to you for the 100th time about the no-pull at Tina Bar. All you have to do is to point your mouse to that thread and start reading.
-
The most interesting part of this sequence is Cooper's demand to "Slow down. Stabilize the plane." It tells me that Cooper recognized the problem deploying the stairs and knew the solution. He strikes me as perfectly comfortable and in control at this moment. He knew the 727 well.
Regarding the portion about crossing the Columbia: My question is, how could the guys in the cockpit know this? How could the Columbia have been visible? Furthermore, they are recollecting an event that occurred--5 minutes, 10 minutes, perhaps even longer--earlier.
That said, if Cooper was a no-pull, presumably it would have to have been in the river or directly into Tena Bar. I'm not certain anyone could derive a position that precise based upon the above discussion among the pilots.
On the other hand, if Cooper survived and walked away, it really wouldn't matter where he landed. He could have landed near Lake Tahoe and found his way back to Tena to bury the cash. The problem with this is that it's too much of a coincidence.
Given that the jet flew over, or very near, Tena Bar, and that this occurred right about the time of the "bump", and that the money was found on Tena Bar, strongly suggests that Cooper touched Mother Earth either dead (Robert99) or alive (EU) on or near Tena Bar on November 24, 1971.
-
cockpit view -
That picture is of a Boeing 727 test flight crew. The pilot in the left seat is Lew Wallick who was the 727 project pilot, he made the first flight and flew practically all the tests that are of interest to the Cooper matter.
Note on the right side of the picture that there is a window directly in front of the co-pilot. Then there is one to the right side of the co-pilot. And a third window between the co-pilot and the flight engineer station and it is partly open in this picture.
I think the “ but we hadn’t crossed the Columbia yet “ to be the most interesting ! If the bump occurred prior to the plane crossing the Columbia, how is the Tina Bar no pull theory possible ?
Kermit, Language is a strange thing isn't it. Have you ever been to Tina Bar? Have you taken a good look at Tina Bar on a map? I believe you have said that you were a hunter and fisherman. If so, do you know how to use a simple magnetic compass? And are you familiar with aeronautical charts and air traffic control operations?
You will probably claim that I am trying to toot my own horn, but you might learn something if you take even a casual glance at the flight path thread on which I discuss these matters at great length. The information is already there, but you are just not interested in doing your homework. And since you don't like to do your homework, I am not going to explain to you for the 100th time about the no-pull at Tina Bar. All you have to do is to point your mouse to that thread and start reading.
Nothing wrong with tooting your own horn especially if you’re open and truthful and pay attention to other people when they do the same ! Apparently you have paid absolutely NO attention to me when I have spoken numerous time about Never going on a hunting trip without both a compass and an altimiter! I have read your flight plan numerous times and it’s a distinct POSSIBILITY ! Is it a fact ? No ! it simplifies things but has lots of holes in my mind. It’s a simply question I asked you. If you don’t have an answer, that’s fine with me ! If the ‘Bump’ occurs prior to the plane crossing the Columbia, wind direction says Cooper couldn’t land in the Columbia. In your on words “ you can’t fight Mother Nature “.
-
I got my sectional chart for Portland.....not to good of a pic but here it is...
-
If you adopt the FBI flight path, Rataczak's point of view (POV) changes as 305 approaches the Columbia/Portland. A different flight path will show a different configuration of Rat's POV in time.
R2 believes that Rat's observation had to have been "prior" to 305 crossing the Columbia because it was just north of Portland that R2 began communicating with 305 and the military in order to set both planes up for an intercept south of Portland near Lake Oswego. 305 and the T33 achieved their rendezvous! If this is true, and R2 believes it is, then all of the events involving oscillations, bump, and Cooper leaving had to occur before the crew got busy communicating with R2 just north of Portland in order to set up his T33 intercept just below Portland minutes later. This T33 intercept draws a time line in the sand. If we had the transcript of ALL communications the events Rataczak and Anderson describe could be narrowed further.
The T33 incidentally, launched from the Ntl Guard base at Portland Airport and was in the air flying a holding pattern waiting prior to 305 crossing the Columbia. Once 305 crossed the Columbia just west of Portland, the T33 turned and flew to its rendezvous point with 305 at Lake Oswego. This places constraints on where and when 305 was in terms of all prior events already expired. This incidentally is one argument against people who claim Cooper bailed over Oregon or later; these people never enter the T33 rendezvous into their calculations, which is a proven fact!
-
Where can I go to learn more about this T-33 out of Portland? I had thought that the T-33 was out of Mountain Home, Idaho, presumably IANG.
-
Where can I go to learn more about this T-33 out of Portland? I had thought that the T-33 was out of Mountain Home, Idaho, presumably IANG.
That T33 was definitely flown out of Portland ANG 142. That was my Unit from 1962 to 1968. At the time I was in the Unit was called 142 nd Combat Support. Now it’s the 142 Fighter wing. I’d like to note that the Regular Air Force had their Base there until they pulled out in about 1966 when ANG took over. I helped a fellow Letter Carrier dismantle several of the barracks which he attained the rights to via winning bid and reused the materials.
-
Where can I go to learn more about this T-33 out of Portland? I had thought that the T-33 was out of Mountain Home, Idaho, presumably IANG.
Himmelsbach's book would be a good place to look. He also got aboard a helicopter at PIA as he also describes in his book. The origin of the T-33 is also discussed at extreme length in threads on this site in case you missed them.
-
Where can I go to learn more about this T-33 out of Portland? I had thought that the T-33 was out of Mountain Home, Idaho, presumably IANG.
well it has been discussed at length over the years ... ever since R2 revealed it. I guess you never did interview R2; Hominid, Kaye, etc did after I did. R2 said the T33 was launched from the Ntl Guard base at Portland. R2 vectored the T33 to 305 near Oswego. If there are any discrepancies I can check my notes.
-
Where can I go to learn more about this T-33 out of Portland? I had thought that the T-33 was out of Mountain Home, Idaho, presumably IANG.
That T33 was definitely flown out of Portland ANG 142. That was my Unit from 1962 to 1968. At the time I was in the Unit was called 142 nd Combat Support. Now it’s the 142 Fighter wing. I’d like to note that the Regular Air Force had their Base there until they pulled out in about 1966 when ANG took over. I helped a fellow Letter Carrier dismantle several of the barracks which he attained the rights to via winning bid and reused the materials.
Thanks! This T33 intercept at Oswego places a lower time limit on Cooper bailing. I guess we set the upper limit at the beginning of the oscillations ... ? :-\
-
Im going to post this - may regret it. This chart was prepared years ago modifying a chart Sluggo had prepared when Sluggo was still at DZ; after my first conversation with R2. . . note that R2? told 305 to "wag" so the T33 could identify it. That note is included in this chart ...
-
Where can I go to learn more about this T-33 out of Portland? I had thought that the T-33 was out of Mountain Home, Idaho, presumably IANG.
That T33 was definitely flown out of Portland ANG 142. That was my Unit from 1962 to 1968. At the time I was in the Unit was called 142 nd Combat Support. Now it’s the 142 Fighter wing. I’d like to note that the Regular Air Force had their Base there until they pulled out in about 1966 when ANG took over. I helped a fellow Letter Carrier dismantle several of the barracks which he attained the rights to via winning bid and reused the materials.
Thanks! This T33 intercept at Oswego places a lower time limit on Cooper bailing. I guess we set the upper limit at the beginning of the oscillations ... ? :-\
"This T33 intercept at Oswego places a lower time limit on Cooper bailing"
Why is that?
It assumes that Cooper could not have jumped undetected AND Cooper could not have jumped after the plane turned away before Eugene..
Not suggesting you are wrong, just interested in your reasoning.
.
-
Where can I go to learn more about this T-33 out of Portland? I had thought that the T-33 was out of Mountain Home, Idaho, presumably IANG.
That T33 was definitely flown out of Portland ANG 142. That was my Unit from 1962 to 1968. At the time I was in the Unit was called 142 nd Combat Support. Now it’s the 142 Fighter wing. I’d like to note that the Regular Air Force had their Base there until they pulled out in about 1966 when ANG took over. I helped a fellow Letter Carrier dismantle several of the barracks which he attained the rights to via winning bid and reused the materials.
Thanks! This T33 intercept at Oswego places a lower time limit on Cooper bailing. I guess we set the upper limit at the beginning of the oscillations ... ? :-\
"This T33 intercept at Oswego places a lower time limit on Cooper bailing"
Why is that?
It assumes that Cooper could not have jumped undetected AND Cooper could not have jumped after the plane turned away before Eugene..
Not suggesting you are wrong, just interested in your reasoning.
.
Its an arbitrary line beyond which there is no physical evidence of Cooper or a jump. Some might place the line at 20:16-20. Some would use 20:13. But when 305 began to 'wag' freely as part of the T33 intercept Cooper did not appear on the interphone to complain - a number of people think had he been on board he definitely would have complained. Moreover the pilots did not reject or complain about being asked to perform that maneuver; they thought Cooper was gone and were confident enough about that that they wanted to go to the back to check if Cooper was there. (Several people claim they did!).
-
Where can I go to learn more about this T-33 out of Portland? I had thought that the T-33 was out of Mountain Home, Idaho, presumably IANG.
That T33 was definitely flown out of Portland ANG 142. That was my Unit from 1962 to 1968. At the time I was in the Unit was called 142 nd Combat Support. Now it’s the 142 Fighter wing. I’d like to note that the Regular Air Force had their Base there until they pulled out in about 1966 when ANG took over. I helped a fellow Letter Carrier dismantle several of the barracks which he attained the rights to via winning bid and reused the materials.
Thanks! This T33 intercept at Oswego places a lower time limit on Cooper bailing. I guess we set the upper limit at the beginning of the oscillations ... ? :-\
"This T33 intercept at Oswego places a lower time limit on Cooper bailing"
Why is that?
It assumes that Cooper could not have jumped undetected AND Cooper could not have jumped after the plane turned away before Eugene..
Not suggesting you are wrong, just interested in your reasoning.
.
Its an arbitrary line beyond which there is no physical evidence of Cooper or a jump. Some might place the line at 20:16-20. Some would use 20:13. But when 305 began to 'wag' freely as part of the T33 intercept Cooper did not appear on the interphone to complain - a number of people think had he been on board he definitely would have complained. Moreover the pilots did not reject or complain about being asked to perform that maneuver; they thought Cooper was gone and were confident enough about that that they wanted to go to the back to check if Cooper was there. (Several people claim they did!).
Thanks,,
Though the evidence suggests the most likely LZ was near the original FBI one.. I haven't ruled out the possibility that he jumped in the Willamette Valley.
I have pinpointed a precise location just N of Eugene and W of I5, but it is a real real long shot.
-
If anyone is ever in the area, the Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum in McMinnville, Oregon might be of interest to you Aviation Buffs. One of the OREGON ANG T33 was retired there as was Howard Hughes’s Spruce Goose and much more. It’s right on the way to Lincoln City from Portland. I think there’s a $8 charge to Tour last time I was,there.
-
If anyone is ever in the area, the Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum in McMinnville, Oregon might be of interest to you Aviation Buffs. One of the OREGON ANG T33 was retired there as was Howard Hughes’s Spruce Goose and much more. It’s right on the way to Lincoln City from Portland. I think there’s a $8 charge to Tour last time I was,there.
I've been there it is an amazing place even for non Aviation Buffs.
Anybody know the land access laws in Oregon? I am looking at an uninhabited tree farm/harvesting property.
-
If anyone is ever in the area, the Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum in McMinnville, Oregon might be of interest to you Aviation Buffs. One of the OREGON ANG T33 was retired there as was Howard Hughes’s Spruce Goose and much more. It’s right on the way to Lincoln City from Portland. I think there’s a $8 charge to Tour last time I was,there.
I was skippering a commercial fishing boat off SF decades ago when I spotted on odd cargo on a barge being towed northbound. The unmistakable silhouette of the Hughes Flying Boat fuselage shrink wrapped in white plastic is a sight I’ll never forget. The wings were not attached.
I worked at Hughes Aircraft. We were told to never refer to it as the Spruce Goose which HH considered derogatory.
Regarding landing areas I can’t understand Reca’s Cle Elum claim. How bizzare. How did he expect that would be taken seriously? Was he even there that night? I doubt it. The “Cowboy” story may hdve been elicited by leading questions.
I love air museums. In retirement I plan to visit many.
377
-
If anyone is ever in the area, the Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum in McMinnville, Oregon might be of interest to you Aviation Buffs. One of the OREGON ANG T33 was retired there as was Howard Hughes’s Spruce Goose and much more. It’s right on the way to Lincoln City from Portland. I think there’s a $8 charge to Tour last time I was,there.
I was skippering a commercial fishing boat off SF decades ago when I spotted on odd cargo on a barge being towed northbound. The unmistakable silhouette of the Hughes Flying Boat fuselage shrink wrapped in white plastic is a sight I’ll never forget. The wings were not attached.
I worked at Hughes Aircraft. We were told to never refer to it as the Spruce Goose which HH considered derogatory.
Regarding landing areas I can’t understand Reca’s Cle Elum claim. How bizzare. How did he expect that would be taken seriously? Was he even there that night? I doubt it. The “Cowboy” story may hdve been elicited by leading questions.
I love air museums. In retirement I plan to visit many.
377
Wow ! That’s almost an unbelievable coincidence! Yes I’m sure Mr. Hughes wasn’t pleased with the “ Spruce Goose “
Phrase ! LOL
Reca’s Cle Elum story is so bizarre it doesn’t deserve a comment.
If you’re ever up in my area, give me a gingle as I’d love to meet you. We could gather up some local Cooperites and head up to the Museum. There’s a few around here !
-
If anyone is ever in the area, the Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum in McMinnville, Oregon might be of interest to you Aviation Buffs. One of the OREGON ANG T33 was retired there as was Howard Hughes’s Spruce Goose and much more. It’s right on the way to Lincoln City from Portland. I think there’s a $8 charge to Tour last time I was,there.
I was skippering a commercial fishing boat off SF decades ago when I spotted on odd cargo on a barge being towed northbound. The unmistakable silhouette of the Hughes Flying Boat fuselage shrink wrapped in white plastic is a sight I’ll never forget. The wings were not attached.
I worked at Hughes Aircraft. We were told to never refer to it as the Spruce Goose which HH considered derogatory.
Regarding landing areas I can’t understand Reca’s Cle Elum claim. How bizzare. How did he expect that would be taken seriously? Was he even there that night? I doubt it. The “Cowboy” story may hdve been elicited by leading questions.
I love air museums. In retirement I plan to visit many.
377
Wow ! That’s almost an unbelievable coincidence! Yes I’m sure Mr. Hughes wasn’t pleased with the “ Spruce Goose “
Phrase ! LOL
Reca’s Cle Elum story is so bizarre it doesn’t deserve a comment.
If you’re ever up in my area, give me a gingle as I’d love to meet you. We could gather up some local Cooperites and head up to the Museum. There’s a few around here !
Yet it wasn't made from spruce ..
-
Part of the skin was made of veneers laminated cross grained for extra strength. Although Hughes spent a lot of money maintaining the flying boat long after it had any real utility, it suffered gradual water absorption which caused the plane to weigh more over time and be capable of carrying less payload. This moisture in the structure may also have weakened it. The US Navy showed some interest in leasing and restoring the aircraft to flying condition in the 1970s to study WIG (wing in ground effect) technology that the USSR had such a big head start in. Ultimately they decided not to when they could not find any reliable way of assessing structural integrity and load limits of a unique laminated wood aircraft structure that had aged and absorbed moisture.
377
-
Seeing the Spruce Goose sitting in Long Beach harbor is one of my memories of a vacation in LA a long time ago.
-
If anyone is ever in the area, the Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum in McMinnville, Oregon might be of interest to you Aviation Buffs. One of the OREGON ANG T33 was retired there as was Howard Hughes’s Spruce Goose and much more. It’s right on the way to Lincoln City from Portland. I think there’s a $8 charge to Tour last time I was,there.
I agree. I went there a few years ago and there is a whole lot more there than just Spruce Goose. We had a tour from a WWII trained flyer getting ready to go to the Pacific. The war ended before he could be sent and he said he was very disappointed at the time. He then added "what was I thinking???"
-
No Flyjack. The interviews in the recent FOIA memos confirm that the stew (Tina) interviews said that Cooper wanted to take off with "the ladder down" ...now whether Cooper said "ladder" or whether the stew used that word...Don't know.
Both of the snips I've attached are from the FBI interview of Tina Mucklow and confirm that Cooper wanted to take off with the stairs (ladder) down.
Note in one of the snip that Tina later found out secondhand that Boeing knew you could take off with stairs down. Not sure who told her that post-hijack.
The text from one doc:
About one hour had passed since landing, and TINA was taking information for the hijacker from the pilot and she told the other stewardesses to go ahead and she would be with them in a second and they went forward to the cockpit. She told the hijacker that the plane couldn't take off with the ladder down and he said in a low tone, "Yes they can, but the cockpit can put it down after they got airborne. She told him that the stairs had to be let down from the rear and at this point he appeared disturbed because of the duration of time of refueling and he told her to stay.
Snowmman is a friend of mine. I have confirmed that this is really him posting. I couldn't be happier that he has joined us. He will add a lot to the discussion here.
I have always thought it was very significant that Cooper told the crew that they actually could take off with the stairs deployed after they told him it wasn't possible. Snowmman has uncovered evidence of a "Boeing 1963-1964 Airstairs Test". The title suggests this Airstairs Test was distinct from Boeing's 727 drop tests which appear to have been flown with the stairs removed.
Did this Airstairs Test involve taking off with deployed stairs? Might Cooper have had access to the test documents? Look at the dates. We do have one candidate who was employed at Boeing during this time and working in tech documentation. It's miles away from proving the candidate was Cooper, but it is interesting.
377
I don't believe this is true.. Cooper originally asked for Airstairs to be lowered in flight. not down.
The crew wanted to attempt an escape but Tina was stuck on the plane to lower the Airstairs, the crew was trying to get Cooper to let her off the plane so they could jump out the front. The rear Airstairs down on takeoff idea came about through the negotiation to get Tina off the plane.
-
No Flyjack. The interviews in the recent FOIA memos confirm that the stew (Tina) interviews said that Cooper wanted to take off with "the ladder down" ...now whether Cooper said "ladder" or whether the stew used that word...Don't know.
Both of the snips I've attached are from the FBI interview of Tina Mucklow and confirm that Cooper wanted to take off with the stairs (ladder) down.
The text from one doc:
About one hour had passed since landing, and TINA was taking information for the hijacker from the pilot and she told the other stewardesses to go ahead and she would be with them in a second and they went forward to the cockpit. She told the hijacker that the plane couldn't take off with the ladder down and he said in a low tone, "Yes they can, but the cockpit can put it down after they got airborne. She told him that the stairs had to be let down from the rear and at this point he appeared disturbed because of the duration of time of refueling and he told her to stay.
Snowmman is a friend of mine. I have confirmed that this is really him posting. I couldn't be happier that he has joined us. He will add a lot to the discussion here.
I have always thought it was very significant that Cooper told the crew that they actually could take off with the stairs deployed after they told him it wasn't possible. Snowmman has uncovered evidence of a "Boeing 1963-1964 Airstairs Test". The title suggests this Airstairs Test was distinct from Boeing's 727 drop tests which appear to have been flown with the stairs removed.
Did this Airstairs Test involve taking off with deployed stairs? Might Cooper have had access to the test documents? Look at the dates. We do have one candidate who was employed at Boeing during this time and working in tech documentation. It's miles away from proving the candidate was Cooper, but it is interesting.
377
I don't believe this is true.. Cooper originally asked for Airstairs to be lowered in flight. not down.
The crew wanted to attempt an escape but Tina was stuck on the plane to lower the Airstairs, the crew was trying to get Cooper to let her off the plane so they could jump out the front. The rear Airstairs down on takeoff idea came about through the negotiation to get Tina off the plane.
I realize what the 302's say and they are not accurate to timeline. Read the ground transcripts. I posted them somewhere here not long ago, it is a complex argument but the takeaway is that the ground transcripts are in real time sequence while 302's are witness interviews summarized by agents, less reliable.
I also thought for a long time that Cooper originally asked for Airstairs down on takeoff but the transcripts contradict that. It came up later during negotiations to get Tina off the plane so the crew could escape.
check this post..
http://www.thedbcooperforum.com/db-cooper/clues-documents-and-evidence-about-the-case/msg24691/#msg24691
305 - wants to go to Mexico city
2 fly with gear down and flaps 15 degrees after underway all lights o be turned out
cannot land in US for fuel or other reason no crew member is to go aft of first class curtain
305 - Aft passenger loading door will be open and will remain open in that position and aft stairs to be lowered after takeoff
MSP FLIGHT OPS - The drag will be such that U cannot make Mexican border even with stairs up
305 will have to negotiate with him and will have to stop for fuel girls not off yet......
Jun 20, 2008, 10:32 AM
Post #2868 of 58140 (64405 views)
snowmman - When I first read the transcripts, I thought it was very clear that Cooper didn't ask for the stairs down on takeoff, and that Flt Ops/crew got into the discussion because they didn't believe in deployment in the air.
I always thought that Cooper asked for the aft door open and stairs deployed in flight.
I went along with Ckret's insistence that Cooper asked for stairs deployed on takeoff, assuming there must be some other interviews that haven't been released.
Then I thought "What if people misremembered on their interviews...what if the transcripts (real time) are actually the best source of data for what Cooper actually asked for"
Ckret: can you reference the passage in the transcripts that tells you Cooper asked for stairs deployed on takeoff?
My thinking is based on page 11 of the transcripts
-
I am a student of SAGE. I have studied SAGE manuals and had extensive conversations with SAGE engineers and techs. I had hoped that the SAGE system would have displayed Cooper's exit as a weak echo separating from the 727 and falling further behind it as time passed. It turns out SAGE displayed target data in a blocked out field surrounding the aircraft echo. This would have hidden presentation of a nearby Cooper echo.
There is zero doubt that FAA ATC radar can detect falling skydivers at significant distances. I have talked with a skydiver air traffic controller who could accurately count the number of skydivers exiting jumpships on his screen. If the raw radar tapes (containing unprocessed echo signals) had been preserved we would know beyond a doubt where Cooper exited.
377
-
Flyjack
after that point in the transcript you mention there is another relevant exchange from the pilot where he says he's still trying to convince Cooper to let them lower the stairs after takeoff
6:38 PM, PST
305 HAV NOXXX NEGOTD RLS OF 2 GIRLS LVG ANY MOMENT 3RD GIRL TO STAY ITH ACFT WANTS HER TO MANIPULATE STAIRS FOR HIM AFTR PLANE AIRBORNE HAVE TRIED TO TELL HIM INXXX UNAM OPRTE STAIRS TO LWRD AFTR TKOFF TRYING TO GET HIM TO LET US LWR STAIRS PARTLLY FOR TKOFF
MSP FLT OPNS DONT KNOW OF ANY WAY TO LOCK STAIRS IN INTMTDE POSN
305 R WIL TALK TO HIM AGAIN
KC0238CK
-
Flyjack
after that point in the transcript you mention there is another relevant exchange from the pilot where he says he's still trying to convince Cooper to let them lower the stairs after takeoff
6:38 PM, PST
305 HAV NOXXX NEGOTD RLS OF 2 GIRLS LVG ANY MOMENT 3RD GIRL TO STAY ITH ACFT WANTS HER TO MANIPULATE STAIRS FOR HIM AFTR PLANE AIRBORNE HAVE TRIED TO TELL HIM INXXX UNAM OPRTE STAIRS TO LWRD AFTR TKOFF TRYING TO GET HIM TO LET US LWR STAIRS PARTLLY FOR TKOFF
MSP FLT OPNS DONT KNOW OF ANY WAY TO LOCK STAIRS IN INTMTDE POSN
305 R WIL TALK TO HIM AGAIN
KC0238CK
Guys ... this is the TENA BAR MONEY THREAD - NOT THE FLIGHT PATH THREAD ETC.
and you arent Snowmman either !
:rofl:
-
Flyjack
after that point in the transcript you mention there is another relevant exchange from the pilot where he says he's still trying to convince Cooper to let them lower the stairs after takeoff
6:38 PM, PST
305 HAV NOXXX NEGOTD RLS OF 2 GIRLS LVG ANY MOMENT 3RD GIRL TO STAY ITH ACFT WANTS HER TO MANIPULATE STAIRS FOR HIM AFTR PLANE AIRBORNE HAVE TRIED TO TELL HIM INXXX UNAM OPRTE STAIRS TO LWRD AFTR TKOFF TRYING TO GET HIM TO LET US LWR STAIRS PARTLLY FOR TKOFF
MSP FLT OPNS DONT KNOW OF ANY WAY TO LOCK STAIRS IN INTMTDE POSN
305 R WIL TALK TO HIM AGAIN
KC0238CK
Yes, IMO this was a "negotiation" between the crew and Cooper to get Tina off the plane to attempt an escape by the cabin crew, not a legitimate attempt to take off. It is alluded elsewhere. Point is Cooper did NOT initially demand Airstairs down on takeoff, it arose during the discussion to get Tina off the plane.
Pilots wanted/asked if they could lower/lock partially to get Tina off the plane.
-
...Interestingly, there was a memo talking about hiring Cossey to recreate the jump. They decided it was too risky.
If you distrust Cossey, then his role in "ruling out" found parachutes, could be suspect. Unsure. I believe the only place that info about the 28' canopy in a NB6 comes from, is Cossey's packing notes (since he packed both of Hayden's rigs around May 1971). Maybe Cossey mistakenly wrote down 28' instead of 26'? 377 has said a 28' wouldn't fit in a NB6 without closing flap modifications. The rig was bought at a surplus store, not from Cossey, so it's unlikely it would have a non-standard 28' canopy in it. The FBI memos do maintain that it's 28' canopy in a NB6. Hayden would have been unlikely to know canopy diameter. So I'm guessing only Cossey's packing notes gave the 28' info.
Yet another confusing detail.
Well, it's like old times here, Snow. Welcome Back to the Action.
Teasing out what is truthful from Earl Cossey is difficult. He told me multiple stories about the back chutes. To his death he always insisted that he owned them, and was more than just a rigger of the ones that went aboard Flight 305.
On several occasions he told me that Cooper jumped with an NB-6 container that had a 28-foot canopy inside, making it over stuffed and a tough pull. Then he reversed himself and said it was an NB-8 with a standard 28-footer.
-
Snow, now that you're back in the saddle, you gonna come to the conference?
Present?
Sure hope so.
-
I was laughing to myself about how georger thinks he can id fact/fiction with respect to cooper trivia, yet he doesn't seem to be able to come up with an acid test to decide if I'm me. It's quite a metaphysical feeling, to be told "you're not you". ...I mean what makes "me", "me"?
I guess, as 377 has pointed out..the new angle for me is the "airstairs experiment" at Boeing. In the '63/'64 timeframe. And I was psyched to see you guys found a pic of the box drop that they did with a 727 prototype. I got a better pic of that from a paper early in '65..it was distributed to many smalltown papers as part of a syndicated set of photos. I think it was taken in '64
The plane is either the 727 E1 or E2. Most people don't know there was more than one 727 prototype. E1 was sold to United at the end of '64. It'd be good to find out if E1 or E2 was used in that box drop test.
Separately: the FBI FOIA docs talk about looking for overlap between the "airstairs experiment" and the Boeing Skydiving Club. Wrongly though, they seem to say that the Club didn't exist after '60-'61 and we know Sheridan started or restarted the club in the '62-'63 timeframe. I think they only looked at officers of the club.
The idea that they looked at overlapping membership of the "airstairs experiment" and the Skydiving Club, tells me that information could have been shared in the Club just by people talking. You get some skydivers together bullshitting, and who knows what information gets exchanged.
Geoffrey Grey has a one paragraph mention of the "airstairs experiment" adding that it happened in '63-'64. The initial first flight of 727 was '63. I think Grey saw a memo that's different from what I've seen. Be nice to get Grey to tell us what he saw.
I could post the FBI memos talking about when they found out about the "airstairs experiment" and the investigation they did (which I think was incomplete). I'm waiting for Shutter to start a topic on this, because it's a deep topic.
It's new to me, because while I posted the Air America air drop video a long time ago, I didn't know the date of that, just prior to '70-'71. And that air drop is a totally different setup from the '63 drop picture with the 727 E1 or E2
That picture shows airstairs removed. Surely there's people still alive that we can find that can give us detail about he "airstairs experiment" and the drop test in '63-'64. I don't know if the airstairs experiment covered flying with the stairs loose (in that case, probably taking off with them up, and lowering them in flight) or taking off with stairs down (as Tena implied she found out) or was it just the drop test we have a photo of?
So there's still lots of info to get. The release of all the recent FOIA FBI memos has clarified a lot of things for me. Also, it's clarified how Ckret caused a lot of confusion with his deathgrip on memos, that he should have just gotten redacted and released.
I also gave Shutter all my OCR'ed FBI docs and critical extracted memos. I don't know why he's not made them available here yet. It would ease our discussion to be able to point to memos, rather than the small snips allowed in a post.
{updated}
attached pic is from The Millville Daily, Feb 26, 1965. Earlier than last pic, but same. I'm guessing they didn't test in winter, so thinking the pic is from late '64. Don't know.
Damn size restrictions force the-not-best pic.
-
Also..
Found info dated 18 June 1964 that claims 727 flown "satisfactorily" with Airstairs lowered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201860.html?search=airstairs
-
yeah Flyjack. nice
I think that implies they took off with stairs up, and lowered them in flight. With the small number of prototypes I don't think they would be destroying the airstairs by taking off with them down? Don't know.
-
pic of the 727 E1 and E2 on the runway together, sporting the same paint job (as in the drop pic above)
and in a hanger with the Dash 80.
-
pic of the 727 E1 and E2 on the runway together, sporting the same paint job (as in the drop pic above)
and in a hanger with the Dash 80.
:offtopicman:
We have some conventions round here -
Post in the threads where posts belong!
A message has been sent to Moderator to get you in the right thread ... fake Snowmman.
-
To move the flight path would be a rather large conspiracy. The FAA, Air Force, ATC, FBI, pilots.
I don't think the dredge can be dismissed until it's proven the money couldn't survive. the only place it would get some what damaged is with the impellers which are not blades. then you need to determine where Cooper went into the water. it's possible he went into the Columbia but it's a long shot. the odds would be worse moving the path vs going into the river. they have a very large area of possibility due to not knowing exactly where he jumped and a small area/margin of error on the flight path. it makes sense to avoid populated area's but that doesn't mean it's true.
If Cooper was a no pull anywhere around Tbar, I find it odd that nobody stumbled onto him or his scent. lots of people use the beach and search the area for wood or exploration. it can't be ruled out either but the odds are once again high.
-
Regarding the flight path:
1) The Hicks' placard was found WEST of the FBI's flight path.
Question: Given that the winds were quite brisk from the SW that night, how is it possible that the placard was found west of the flight path?
-
Regarding the flight path:
1) The Hicks' placard was found WEST of the FBI's flight path.
Question: Given that the winds were quite brisk from the SW that night, how is it possible that the placard was found west of the flight path?
West of the flight path? I show it east of the flight path. Southeast of Toutle, WA and north of Pigeon Springs, WA. Coordinates below. Based off altitude, wind, and descent speed, the spot of the placard is pretty close to where it would have blown had it dropped off right where the FBI says the flight path was. Now, if they plane all of a sudden turned west at that point, then it could have ended up over Tina Bar. But to Shutter's point, that's a lot of people who had to be wrong. The pilots, the air traffic controllers, the pilots in the F-106's. A mile or two off on the flight path, maybe, but even that is unlikely. All these men were professionals, many were combat vets, so to be off by 5 or even 10 miles is huge. They have to know where they are in the air or they aren't pilots.
46°14’38.4″N 122°41’01.3″W
This can be cut and pasted in to Google Maps, just let it cycle thru a bit or hit search.
Shows as Unamed Road, Toutle, WA 98649
Why people like to think water is a magnet is beyond me. Lake Merwin or the Columbia are islands in a sea of land. Parachutes don't seek out water like humans do going to the beach.
-
Regarding the flight path:
1) The Hicks' placard was found WEST of the FBI's flight path.
Question: Given that the winds were quite brisk from the SW that night, how is it possible that the placard was found west of the flight path?
West of the flight path? I show it east of the flight path. Southeast of Toutle, WA and north of Pigeon Springs, WA. Coordinates below. Based off altitude, wind, and descent speed, the spot of the placard is pretty close to where it would have blown had it dropped off right where the FBI says the flight path was. Now, if they plane all of a sudden turned west at that point, then it could have ended up over Tina Bar. But to Shutter's point, that's a lot of people who had to be wrong. The pilots, the air traffic controllers, the pilots in the F-106's. A mile or two off on the flight path, maybe, but even that is unlikely. All these men were professionals, many were combat vets, so to be off by 5 or even 10 miles is huge. They have to know where they are in the air or they aren't pilots.
46°14’38.4″N 122°41’01.3″W
This can be cut and pasted in to Google Maps, just let it cycle thru a bit or hit search.
Shows as Unamed Road, Toutle, WA 98649
Why people like to think water is a magnet is beyond me. Lake Merwin or the Columbia are islands in a sea of land. Parachutes don't seek out water like humans do going to the beach.
The FBI states that the flight path was put together based upon radar from the Air Force. I have not read anything regarding pilots providing clarity on the flight path. I do know the jet ended up west of Portland.
The GPS coordinates for the placard find were provided by Carroll Hicks. This spot is west of the FBI flight path.
Nothing has been found in the FBI's search area after 47 years. The money was found on Tena Bar which is upstream from the search area.
If the pilots flew south from Maylay directly to Canby this lines up with the Hicks' placard find, Tena Bar money find and west-of-Portland staging area.
-
I think it's on track now?
-
where do you see the placard west of the flight path?
-
Why people like to think water is a magnet is beyond me. Lake Merwin or the Columbia are islands in a sea of land. Parachutes don't seek out water like humans do going to the beach.
darkness overrules...nobody knows if Cooper knew where he was at any given time. it's all speculation as to his experience.
-
The night of the hijacking, both air traffic control and military radars were following the plane
Extremely hard to counter.....
-
where do you see the placard west of the flight path?
I lifted this image from Tom Kaye's site.
The white line depicts the FBI flight path.
-
I would talk with Tom regarding the accuracy of the map..
-
The night of the hijacking, both air traffic control and military radars were following the plane
Extremely hard to counter.....
The radio transcripts released by the FBI show that the guy in Portland tracking the jet was also the guy who organized the chase planes meeting up west of Portland. I other words, he was multi-tasking and coordinating a few things in addition to tracking the flight. It seems likely that he was not tracking the flight precisely given his other tasks.
-
Understanding the flight path is a critical first step in determining the history of the money and how it became buried on Tena Bar. The various lines of evidence all point to the original FBI flight path as accurate and do not support the Tena Bar overflight or Washougal Washdown Theory. This research finds no reason to believe that the FBI fight path or the jump zone was in error. This does however create a large obstacle in explaining how the money came to rest on Tena Bar. The flight path information along with other research presented here, provides no support for naturally transporting the bundles to Tena Bar via the Columbia River. This leaves only a mechanical or human explanation. The human explanation has historically been ruled out due to the belief that Cooper died in the jump. After 40 years, no body or other evidence has ever been found, suggesting that the idea Cooper died in the jump may be in error. A mechanical explanation has additional obstacles, so the processes that transported the money out of the woods and then twenty miles to the sand bar remains a mystery.
-
I would talk with Tom regarding the accuracy of the map..
What part of the map are you disputing?
Also, upon speaking with R99 he says the placard free-fall analysis conducted by him--and presented in this image--was very conservative. In fact, he believes the jet was further west then depicted on the map.
-
This research finds no reason to believe that the FBI fight path or the jump zone was in error.
This is clearly incorrect. After all, the placard find is pretty convincing evidence that the flight path was wrong. Not to mention, the Tena Bar money find also indicates the flight path was wrong.
-
again, I understand Roberts theory. I even flew it and it doesn't "fly" it makes a lot of sense but to go against just about everything is tough. it's basically saying the military and the pilots of 305 were either lying or didn't belong in the sky using instrumentation only.
I don't have a suspect that needs this to work!
-
again, I understand Roberts theory. I even flew it and it doesn't "fly" it makes a lot of sense but to go against just about everything is tough. it's basically saying the military and the pilots of 305 were either lying or didn't belong in the sky using instrumentation only.
I don't have a suspect that needs this to work!
The pilots of 305 didn't know "precisely" where the jet was or where it flew. Hence, "you may want to note this spot on your maps...our friend may have just taken leave of us."
-
again, I understand Roberts theory. I even flew it and it doesn't "fly" it makes a lot of sense but to go against just about everything is tough. it's basically saying the military and the pilots of 305 were either lying or didn't belong in the sky using instrumentation only.
I don't have a suspect that needs this to work!
The pilots of 305 didn't know "precisely" where the jet was or where it flew. Hence, "you may want to note this spot on your maps...our friend may have just taken leave of us."
Yes, and the area was noted and that's where the search began. it changed several times due to incoming information. it was nowhere near Tbar.
-
again, I understand Roberts theory. I even flew it and it doesn't "fly" it makes a lot of sense but to go against just about everything is tough. it's basically saying the military and the pilots of 305 were either lying or didn't belong in the sky using instrumentation only.
I don't have a suspect that needs this to work!
Also, where did you come up short when you flew it via the simulator? Where was the jet at 8:12PM? My analysis puts it at just south of St. Helens, OR.
-
They have a navigator. I believe it was not known exactly where he jumped once they landed. I don't buy the fact of them flying blind!!!
-
I'll also say that people are not infallible. Even experts. An example of this can be found in the Palmer Report. Dr. Palmer got it wrong as proven by Tom Kaye with the help of Mother Nature who stripped away a significant length of Tena Bar and afforded TK the opportunity to see the strata running the length of the beach in 2008.
The problem is that the FBI flight path appeared to involve some level of conjecture. That said, the actual evidence--placard find, money find--is concrete. Furthermore, the fact that the search area is several miles downstream from Tena Bar is concrete. And, the fact that not a shred of anything has been found in the search area after more than 47 years is also concrete.
These concrete facts tell a story. Unfortunately, it doesn't bode well for the FBI's flight path. Perhaps, just perhaps, the FBI got the flight path wrong just as they got the Tena Bar dredge layer analysis wrong?
-
nothing concrete in any of this...
We have multiple radars watching 305 all the way to Norad. military aircraft chasing the plane, with radar. the Sage radar as well. The Air Force plotted the course given to the FBI. why or how could they be wrong with multiple radars? the placard in no way works for the original path, concrete against it?
I said this before. it's like reading an old cold case where 10 people say the suspect goes in the front door and now people believe they went in through the back?
Then you want to believe Roberts theory BUT, not the no pull part of it because the suspect needs to survive.....
In the middle of staining my french door....
-
nothing concrete in any of this...
We have multiple radars watching 305 all the way to Norad. military aircraft chasing the plane, with radar. the Sage radar as well. The Air Force plotted the course given to the FBI. why or how could they be wrong with multiple radars? the placard in no way works for the original path, concrete against it?
I said this before. it's like reading an old cold case where 10 people say the suspect goes in the front door and now people believe they went in through the back?
Then you want to believe Roberts theory BUT, not the no pull part of it because the suspect needs to survive.....
In the middle of staining my french door....
I am unaware of anything that states SAGE radar was used.
The FBI also admitted that the flight path was wrong inasmuch as they adjusted the flight path and search area to bring it over the Washougal area after Palmer's report. Somebody got something wrong somewhere.
I do not need my suspect to live. That is backwards. The evidence--Tena Bar packets--indicate that Cooper lived. Plus the fact that nothing else--no body, no money, no parachute, no dummy reserve, no attache' case--was ever found also indicates Cooper lived.
-
I think the odds are good he survived but you can't state anything without knowing where and when he jumped when it come to evidence. it's hard to dismiss what you don't know.
-
I am unaware of anything that states SAGE radar was used.
The Sage radar tracks anything hostile. I'm not sure if it's in the files or not. I can't remember at the moment. it's always running to protect the country.
-
EU, you called while I was on the phone. getting ready to have some dinner at the moment and talk with the police in a while about a break in to my shed. I'm a little busy today..
-
From Tom's site titled "Research Conclusion"
The FBI flight path map passes the test. Agents working on the flight path in 1971 had the radar and flight path data which is lost today. The SAGE radar used to track Cooper's plane was relied upon to identify, locate and track incoming Russian bombers and threats to the United States, so there is no reason to assume they would get it wrong. Analysis of various features of this case rule out the theories that require a different flight path than the one portrayed on the FBI map. Lastly, the text descriptions in the FBI 302 link the flight path to various towns. This research finds that the flight path and jump zone are reasonable and should be a cornerstone in the analysis of this case.
-
They also used the information on the planes flight data recorder. this could probably be matched up to the flight path made by the Air Force. it's a lot of concrete to bust in changing the path IMHO.
-
The FBI also admitted that the flight path was wrong inasmuch as they adjusted the flight path and search area to bring it over the Washougal area after Palmer's report.
Where is information regarding this and when did they start another search in the 80's? quoting Ralph would not properly be speaking for the FBI in it's entirety? I don't believe the FBI has ever changed the official flight path?
-
From Tom's site titled "Research Conclusion"
The FBI flight path map passes the test. Agents working on the flight path in 1971 had the radar and flight path data which is lost today. The SAGE radar used to track Cooper's plane was relied upon to identify, locate and track incoming Russian bombers and threats to the United States, so there is no reason to assume they would get it wrong. Analysis of various features of this case rule out the theories that require a different flight path than the one portrayed on the FBI map. Lastly, the text descriptions in the FBI 302 link the flight path to various towns. This research finds that the flight path and jump zone are reasonable and should be a cornerstone in the analysis of this case.
I've attached a two page PowerPoint with some screen shots on the flight path. When I first got into this case, I really took an interest in the flight path, more so to determine jump time (8:12-8:13 etc.) and landing spot (Ariel, more south, etc.). I did not spend much time thinking about the money find at that point. With that said, I don't desire to get into a back and forth, but rather maybe use this as an opportunity to engage in some good dialogue on some of the little details. The little details matter sometimes, sometimes they don't. In this discussion about the placard, I think the FBI flight path is generally correct. Whether the placard was found to the east or west of it is not a huge deal to me, in that it would only have been a little east or west, therefore confirming that at this point in the flight that the FBI flight path was accurate. However, the correct flight path further into the flight is still a question to many people.
So, if you look at the attachment, you'll see screen shots of where I place the placard, and where another person places the placard. Our spots are different, but they are close. I'll defer to his spot over mine given his background in the case. Now, the other shot on that page is from Citizen Sleuths. I can't place their picture on the map. The terrain features (sand) just don't match up with what I've seen. I'd be curious to see if anyone with more time can maybe mess around with the GPS coordinates and the lat/long method and see what they come up with. Those coordinates are on the attachment too. I believe they are accurate, but I can not be certain (I got those offline a year ago and don't have the notes handy).
If my spot and the other person's spot are accurate, then the FBI flight path puts the placard east of the flight path. If CS is accurate, then it puts the placard west of the path.
The second slide has a pic of the map I played with a year ago. You'll see a straight line in pencil from Toutle to Pigeon Springs that is west of the placard find. Regardless, these coordinates put the placard find generally on the FBI flight path, and I don't feel the need to split hairs over if it was a little west or a little east.
Of note. I always thought the placard was metal. History did a show way back (the one with interviews from a passenger named Simmons). Himmelsbach was young too. They interview the hunter, and he says he picked up the placard, and folded it. Metal does not usually fold easily. The re-enactment makes it look like it was paper. Wind will do different things to paper than it will metal, of course. So maybe a rate of descent with wind speed calculation should be done given the actual material.
My understanding is that the hunter was hunting on family land, so he had a pretty good idea of where he was.
Long post. My apologies. I'd be curious to see what people come up with, if they even care. Probably just another rabbit hole. PDF not PP. PP was too big.
-
the two photo's differ due to position and altitude...
-
the two photo's differ due to position and altitude...
I don't see that. The first two are of a heavily wooded area. The one from CS shows a lot of light brown, which looks like sand to me. I don't think altitude and position account for this. If they are different spots, I'd be curious to know why.
-
the two photo's differ due to position and altitude...
I don't see that. The first two are of a heavily wooded area. The one from CS shows a lot of light brown, which looks like sand to me. I don't think altitude and position account for this. If they are different spots, I'd be curious to know why.
don't forget Tom's pics are a decade old. different seasons etc.
rechecking....
-
I'm waiting on more info from Tom. he explained that it was on private property and no cords were given. I recall a site years ago giving them but how accurate they are is not known...
I also sent him the file you made. perhaps he will pop on....
-
I'll also say that people are not infallible. Even experts. An example of this can be found in the Palmer Report. Dr. Palmer got it wrong as proven by Tom Kaye with the help of Mother Nature who stripped away a significant length of Tena Bar and afforded TK the opportunity to see the strata running the length of the beach in 2008.
The problem is that the FBI flight path appeared to involve some level of conjecture. That said, the actual evidence--placard find, money find--is concrete. Furthermore, the fact that the search area is several miles downstream from Tena Bar is concrete. And, the fact that not a shred of anything has been found in the search area after more than 47 years is also concrete.
These concrete facts tell a story. Unfortunately, it doesn't bode well for the FBI's flight path. Perhaps, just perhaps, the FBI got the flight path wrong just as they got the Tena Bar dredge layer analysis wrong?
Is Relativity wrong too? :rofl:
-
nothing concrete in any of this...
We have multiple radars watching 305 all the way to Norad. military aircraft chasing the plane, with radar. the Sage radar as well. The Air Force plotted the course given to the FBI. why or how could they be wrong with multiple radars? the placard in no way works for the original path, concrete against it?
I said this before. it's like reading an old cold case where 10 people say the suspect goes in the front door and now people believe they went in through the back?
Then you want to believe Roberts theory BUT, not the no pull part of it because the suspect needs to survive.....
In the middle of staining my french door....
I am unaware of anything that states SAGE radar was used.
The FBI also admitted that the flight path was wrong inasmuch as they adjusted the flight path and search area to bring it over the Washougal area after Palmer's report. Somebody got something wrong somewhere.
I do not need my suspect to live. That is backwards. The evidence--Tena Bar packets--indicate that Cooper lived. Plus the fact that nothing else--no body, no money, no parachute, no dummy reserve, no attache' case--was ever found also indicates Cooper lived.
I am here to make you aware!
Now you have been informed.
Never again can you claim to be "unaware of" . . .
Got any more doubts about SAGE ?
-
This is a very good and very important discussion. The entire case changes on the flight path alone. That said, I'll briefly state why I think the FBI flight path is wrong.
1) I'm assuming that TK's depiction of the placard find is accurate given that he obtained GPS coordinates from Carroll Hicks. The placard being found west of the FBI flight path is a major problem if you adhere to the FBI flight path model.
2) The money was found at Tena Bar. Outside of human intervention, the only remotely feasible way for the money to arrive at Tena Bar by natural means is for it to have ended up in the Columbia River upstream from Tena Bar. However, according to the FBI flight path the jet crossed the Columbia at 8:17PM. Moreover, factoring in the SW winds the jet would probably have needed to be at least one minute into Oregon before Cooper jumped in order to land in the Columbia River. This puts Cooper's jump time at 8:18PM. How is this possible if the FBI is also certain that he jumped at 8:12PM? Something doesn't add up here.
3) No one has ever found Cooper's body, his parachute, the dummy reserve, the attache' case or the rest of the money anywhere along or near the FBI flight path. Why? How is this possible especially if he no-pulled?
4) Put yourself in Cooper's shoes for a minute. It seems likely that he intended to jump near Seattle. That said, he was delayed and did not. Why then would he chose to jump into utter blackness knowing he has to walk out? Why wouldn't he wait until he was closer to an urban area before jumping?
5) Given that the jet had a "bomb" aboard, why would the jet have flown right over downtown Portland? Why would it have taken the circuitous route depicted in the FBI flight path versus simply travelling straight to the western suburbs of Portland from Maylay?
In my diseased mind the only way to rationalize all of this is that the FBI flight path is wrong. Furthermore, that the jet traveled to the west of the FBI's flight path.
-
Tom never gave any cords to the placard location. a site use to be up with the cords that appear to have been accurate.
The FBI has admitted the time frame of the jump could be off as we have read the search area goes all the way to the Columbia river. then you have a problem with the oscillation and pressure bump which is not on the transcripts. the pilots have stated on record that they didn't signal using the lights to mark a time because they were not sure Cooper bailed.
Tom has explained to me in the past that ham operators were listening in and helped with a location and time frame.
How concerned were they about the ground and the bomb. why not fly over the ocean if everyone was that worried about flying over populated area's? how populated was downtown Portland. it's the business center/buildings?
A lot of Roberts theory makes sense but did it really happen. can we rule out Cooper was black? if the air traffic controllers, Air Force radar (Sage) and military planes had no clue where they were how can we rule out Cooper being black. they could all be wrong?
The only option would be is a conspiracy which really makes no sense. this would involve a lot of people. they never even showed the map until Carr released it, so who was the map fooling all these years? are we stating if bombers came into this country they wouldn't know where they really were? the radar data is very hard to get around IMO along with traffic controllers saying they never left V23. this again means they were lying or didn't know how to operate the scope.
I see a lot more evidence the jump time is off vs the flight path.
Now, if you go east of the flight path you will run into similar arguments with Jerry and Ralph stating where the plane was that evening.
-
Castle appears to be correct with the cords and position of the placard. I was under the impression it was close to the Malay intersection? the cords show it further down the path?
-
From Tom's site titled "Research Conclusion"
The FBI flight path map passes the test. Agents working on the flight path in 1971 had the radar and flight path data which is lost today. The SAGE radar used to track Cooper's plane was relied upon to identify, locate and track incoming Russian bombers and threats to the United States, so there is no reason to assume they would get it wrong. Analysis of various features of this case rule out the theories that require a different flight path than the one portrayed on the FBI map. Lastly, the text descriptions in the FBI 302 link the flight path to various towns. This research finds that the flight path and jump zone are reasonable and should be a cornerstone in the analysis of this case.
I've attached a two page PowerPoint with some screen shots on the flight path. When I first got into this case, I really took an interest in the flight path, more so to determine jump time (8:12-8:13 etc.) and landing spot (Ariel, more south, etc.). I did not spend much time thinking about the money find at that point. With that said, I don't desire to get into a back and forth, but rather maybe use this as an opportunity to engage in some good dialogue on some of the little details. The little details matter sometimes, sometimes they don't. In this discussion about the placard, I think the FBI flight path is generally correct. Whether the placard was found to the east or west of it is not a huge deal to me, in that it would only have been a little east or west, therefore confirming that at this point in the flight that the FBI flight path was accurate. However, the correct flight path further into the flight is still a question to many people.
So, if you look at the attachment, you'll see screen shots of where I place the placard, and where another person places the placard. Our spots are different, but they are close. I'll defer to his spot over mine given his background in the case. Now, the other shot on that page is from Citizen Sleuths. I can't place their picture on the map. The terrain features (sand) just don't match up with what I've seen. I'd be curious to see if anyone with more time can maybe mess around with the GPS coordinates and the lat/long method and see what they come up with. Those coordinates are on the attachment too. I believe they are accurate, but I can not be certain (I got those offline a year ago and don't have the notes handy).
If my spot and the other person's spot are accurate, then the FBI flight path puts the placard east of the flight path. If CS is accurate, then it puts the placard west of the path.
The second slide has a pic of the map I played with a year ago. You'll see a straight line in pencil from Toutle to Pigeon Springs that is west of the placard find. Regardless, these coordinates put the placard find generally on the FBI flight path, and I don't feel the need to split hairs over if it was a little west or a little east.
Of note. I always thought the placard was metal. History did a show way back (the one with interviews from a passenger named Simmons). Himmelsbach was young too. They interview the hunter, and he says he picked up the placard, and folded it. Metal does not usually fold easily. The re-enactment makes it look like it was paper. Wind will do different things to paper than it will metal, of course. So maybe a rate of descent with wind speed calculation should be done given the actual material.
My understanding is that the hunter was hunting on family land, so he had a pretty good idea of where he was.
Long post. My apologies. I'd be curious to see what people come up with, if they even care. Probably just another rabbit hole. PDF not PP. PP was too big.
From what I can tell the plot that you point to is precisely the same location as the plot that TK shows. However, according to the FBI flight path the jet flew slightly east of that point. The jet flew directly from Maylay (Mayfield back then) over the intersection of the North Fork Toutle River and South Fork Toutle River, then a little further south it turned a few degrees south. The point is, there was a free-fall analysis done by R99 for TK and it shows the placard would have drifted at least 2.7 miles to the NE. Again, according to R99 this is a very conservative estimate and likely drifted much further.
-
The intersection was called "malay" in that period and is marked as that on the nautical chart. the plane flew southwest of malay never crossing the intersection. Robert said it's named something else now but still noted as malay on skyvector website.
-
The plane is west of V23 approaching Ed Carlson field on the west side approx. one half mile then turns and fly's by the malay intersection after rounding Carlson field.
-
This is a very good and very important discussion. The entire case changes on the flight path alone. That said, I'll briefly state why I think the FBI flight path is wrong.
1) I'm assuming that TK's depiction of the placard find is accurate given that he obtained GPS coordinates from Carroll Hicks. The placard being found west of the FBI flight path is a major problem if you adhere to the FBI flight path model.
2) The money was found at Tena Bar. Outside of human intervention, the only remotely feasible way for the money to arrive at Tena Bar by natural means is for it to have ended up in the Columbia River upstream from Tena Bar. However, according to the FBI flight path the jet crossed the Columbia at 8:17PM. Moreover, factoring in the SW winds the jet would probably have needed to be at least one minute into Oregon before Cooper jumped in order to land in the Columbia River. This puts Cooper's jump time at 8:18PM. How is this possible if the FBI is also certain that he jumped at 8:12PM? Something doesn't add up here.
3) No one has ever found Cooper's body, his parachute, the dummy reserve, the attache' case or the rest of the money anywhere along or near the FBI flight path. Why? How is this possible especially if he no-pulled?
4) Put yourself in Cooper's shoes for a minute. It seems likely that he intended to jump near Seattle. That said, he was delayed and did not. Why then would he chose to jump into utter blackness knowing he has to walk out? Why wouldn't he wait until he was closer to an urban area before jumping?
5) Given that the jet had a "bomb" aboard, why would the jet have flown right over downtown Portland? Why would it have taken the circuitous route depicted in the FBI flight path versus simply travelling straight to the western suburbs of Portland from Maylay?
In my diseased mind the only way to rationalize all of this is that the FBI flight path is wrong. Furthermore, that the jet traveled to the west of the FBI's flight path.
Once again you seem completely unaware of Cooper case evidence and ignore or deny all "evidence" in the DB Cooper case.
On 4/8-9/1976 a high level conference was held in San Francisco, on the Cooper case. Attendees included reps from the FBI, NWO cental figures, FAA, ATC, USAF, etc. A central issue discussed was the flight path and where Cooper actually left 305, in light of the fact all searches had proved negative. The flight path was re-evaluated all over again with presentations by various individuals and entities.
The 302 attached below details how the FBI planned to inform the media, following this "seminar". Principal people were assigned the task of informing the media about where central issues in the Cooper case now stood, following the San Francisco seminar. Himmelsbach was one of the people assigned to speak with the press and the foundations for that began being laid, coordinated from several FBI offices. Clyde Jabin of the UPI became one of the press people contacted.
Speaking with an FBI rep, Jabin wrote: "From a computer analysis of available information, including the plane's altitude, speed, and wind data, the FBI says it is 'positive' Cooper came down in a 24 square mile area 12 miles north of Portland" The FBI is saying the flight path and jump time of Cooper has been re-evaluated at the SF Conference, and is now being changed to an area 12 miles north of Portland
The variable in the timeline that was now being changed was the "timeline" of Cooper's departure.
Carr found and read these 302's in 2008-09 and he questioned on DZ if the timeline could be extended further. People analysing this matter in this discussion were R99, Sluggo, Snowmman, etc. Sluggo moved Cooper's DZ further south to the Orchard WA area. Sluggo said there were rumors of the FBI searching the Orchard area and Carr refused to comment publicly.
There is no evidence that 305 flew a straight line between Maylay and Canby! There is evidence that 305 crossed the Columbia near Hayden Island. In 1980 Cooper money was found at Tina Bar. In order for money to appear on Tina Bar it has to have originated in the Columbia basin if not in the Columbia itself. Since the money was last seen being roped around Cooper's waste, and Tina testified the bills offered her were put back in the bag, a simple adjustment of the timeline for Cooper bailing puts Cooper in the Columbia basin if not in the Columbia itself.
Second document attached in next post below -
-
San Francisco seminar and flight path/drop zone change announced - by Clyde Jabin
-
I give R99 a lot of credit with his background and as a stable good person. however, I just can't come to a conclusion by going against so much to make this theory work. too many involved to have got this that far off.
we have several going against the known flight path but for some reason we don't have any issue's coming from all who were there, as in civilian members going against military findings. everyone seems to have agreed and it's people outside of this circle that are not convinced? nobody from Portland or Seatac disagreeing with the location of 305 on that evening to each other or to the military..traffic controllers saying they never left the boundaries of V23. as Tom stated to me, how can the first part of the path be good and the rest bad?
I need a whole lot more to make this theory plausible IMHO.
-
I give R99 a lot of credit with his background and as a stable good person. however, I just can't come to a conclusion by going against so much to make this theory work. too many involved to have got this that far off.
we have several going against the known flight path but for some reason we don't have any issue's coming from all who were there, as in civilian members going against military findings. everyone seems to have agreed and it's people outside of this circle that are not convinced? nobody from Portland or Seatac disagreeing with the location of 305 on that evening to each other or to the military..traffic controllers saying they never left the boundaries of V23. as Tom stated to me, how can the first part of the path be good and the rest bad?
I need a whole lot more to make this theory plausible IMHO.
When I talked to R2 several times, he admitted that he looked away from his screen just as 305 crossed the Columbia; he was busy talking to the T33 and lining it up for a rendezvous with 305 'near Lake Oswego'. When he looked back at his screen 305 had crossed the Columbia and it was just slightly west of Portland, still on V23. The process of lining the T33 up to converge with 305 required R2 know with certainty where 305 was! I conveyed everything immediately to R99 ..
Prior to my talk with R2 I will admit that R99 and I both were hoping R2 would say something to justify a fly-over of Tina Bay by 305. That did not happen! It did not happen three times! Then a fourth time at the next interview! Then a fifth time, and on and on and on ... I was forced to accept the data at hand. There is just no way around it.
The only variable in question is the 'time' Cooper left the plane. That is the only variable the data in hand offers.
-
The best I can say is I flew the first parts of the flight path dozens of times and came up with about the same timing in each run..
I made it to Ed Carlson field at 7:59/8:00
I crossed the Lewis river at around 8:10/8:11
I crossed the Columbia at around 8:18/8:19
there is extra time inside the Lewis river down to the Columbia.
This was done by following the radio transcripts for speed/altitudes/fuel flow/temps. and the map for timing match ups.
I could not match the transcripts right out of the gate stating 14 miles DME 4 minutes into the flight. I was able to match the 19 miles DME which would put the plane passing McChord. I believe I was leveled off at 7,000 at that point. it takes some time to reach altitude in this configuration.
-
I give R99 a lot of credit with his background and as a stable good person. however, I just can't come to a conclusion by going against so much to make this theory work. too many involved to have got this that far off.
we have several going against the known flight path but for some reason we don't have any issue's coming from all who were there, as in civilian members going against military findings. everyone seems to have agreed and it's people outside of this circle that are not convinced? nobody from Portland or Seatac disagreeing with the location of 305 on that evening to each other or to the military..traffic controllers saying they never left the boundaries of V23. as Tom stated to me, how can the first part of the path be good and the rest bad?
I need a whole lot more to make this theory plausible IMHO.
When I talked to R2 several times, he admitted that he looked away from his screen just as 305 crossed the Columbia; he was busy talking to the T33 and lining it up for a rendezvous with 305 'near Lake Oswego'. When he looked back at his screen 305 had crossed the Columbia and it was just slightly west of Portland, still on V23. The process of lining the T33 up to converge with 305 required R2 know with certainty where 305 was! I conveyed everything immediately to R99 ..
Prior to my talk with R2 I will admit that R99 and I both were hoping R2 would say something to justify a fly-over of Tina Bay by 305. That did not happen! It did not happen three times! Then a fourth time at the next interview! Then a fifth time, and on and on and on ... I was forced to accept the data at hand. There is just no way around it.
The only variable in question is the 'time' Cooper left the plane. That is the only variable the data in hand offers.
I find this particularly interesting considering that according to the official FBI flight path the jet never flew west of Portland. In fact, it flew right over the top of it and just EAST of downtown.
-
The best I can say is I flew the first parts of the flight path dozens of times and came up with about the same timing in each run..
I made it to Ed Carlson field at 7:59/8:00
I crossed the Lewis river at around 8:10/8:11
I crossed the Columbia at around 8:18/8:19
there is extra time inside the Lewis river down to the Columbia.
This was done by following the radio transcripts for speed/altitudes/fuel flow/temps. and the map for timing match ups.
I could not match the transcripts right out of the gate stating 14 miles DME 4 minutes into the flight. I was able to match the 19 miles DME which would put the plane passing McChord. I believe I was leveled off at 7,000 at that point. it takes some time to reach altitude in this configuration.
I think your times are right in the ballpark, but thats just my personal opinion. I think all known events fit into that timeline. ............ I wish R99 was here!
-
I posted a lot of my conclusion on here. I just never got around to recording the flight path from Seatac to Portland. I might have some flights still in the black box. I haven't cranked it up in a long time. I'm not sure a jump time can actually be calculated doing a simulation since we don't really have an accurate jump time other than what they have already done. some of the things they did are rather odd. the 8:16 to 8:17 marks are not like the map shows. it's a hard roll to the west as if they seen PDX or something and turned, I don't know but it's an odd move. you can see it on the video I posted several times here.
-
I posted a lot of my conclusion on here. I just never got around to recording the flight path from Seatac to Portland. I might have some flights still in the black box. I haven't cranked it up in a long time. I'm not sure a jump time can actually be calculated doing a simulation since we don't really have an accurate jump time other than what they have already done. some of the things they did are rather odd. the 8:16 to 8:17 marks are not like the map shows. it's a hard roll to the west as if they seen PDX or something and turned, I don't know but it's an odd move. you can see it on the video I posted several times here.
This is part of what doesn't add up. Here this jet is flying just above stall speed (can't even make a standard rate turn) with a bomb aboard, yet it's flying this circuitous route and literally makes a hard right turn directing it over the suburbs of Vancouver, then makes a hard left turn to fly over the northern suburbs of Portland, then turns right again thereby ensuring that it flies right over downtown Portland. It simply makes no sense.
Add to this the placard find, Tena Bar, lack of anything found and the timing problems (which are significant) and I've come to the conclusion that the FBI got it wrong. Just as they got it wrong with the Palmer Report which was crafted by a knowledgeable and reputable person.
Let's face it, the only "evidence" we have for the flight path is the FBI saying "here it is, it was put together using Air Force radar." Okay, that's great--and normally sufficient--but at some point critical thought demands critical thought. After all, the FBI has messed up before.
My argument is that someone, got something wrong, somewhere. Isn't this obvious?
-
The plane was not flying just above stall speed. somewhere between 105 and 130 if not mistaken. the 727 was very stable at low speeds vs other commercial jets.
The Air Force made the map, so you are saying the Air Force got it wrong. George Harrison (NWO) got it wrong. air traffic controllers got it wrong. the C130 following the plane was wrong.
It's really not the FBI that you can blame any of this on? the only way to blame the FBI would be with a conspiracy.
The only planes having trouble remaining in the sky was the fighter jets.
-
It's those pesky radar's that one must prove were all faulty that evening. as I mentioned before. it appears both civilian and military came to the same conclusion using multiple radar's for tracking the plane.
This is similar to going against video evidence. very, very hard to dispute.
-
at some point critical thought demands critical thought.
This is typically done when you don't have a conclusion. we have a shit load of evidence on the flight path you wish to dismiss. direct evidence from pilots, traffic controllers, the military.
prove to me Cooper was not a black female? I think they got it wrong!
-
How populated was the area they circled around Seattle waiting to land with a bomb on board. why just Portland?
-
The plane was not flying just above stall speed. somewhere between 105 and 130 if not mistaken. the 727 was very stable at low speeds vs other commercial jets.
The Air Force made the map, so you are saying the Air Force got it wrong. George Harrison (NWO) got it wrong. air traffic controllers got it wrong. the C130 following the plane was wrong.
It's really not the FBI that you can blame any of this on? the only way to blame the FBI would be with a conspiracy.
The only planes having trouble remaining in the sky was the fighter jets.
I understand how the flight path was put together. The term "FBI flight path" is commonly used and envelops all sources that led to its creation. That said, I'm not sure anyone like George Harrison carries any particular weight.
Let's un-pack this.
Did they get it wrong? Yes. Remember, it was this same data they also used to put together the plot points and 8:11PM jump spot which has to be wrong if he ended up in the Columbia. This is an irrefutable fact. And, if they can get this wrong by a factor of 20% why are they incapable of getting anything else wrong?
How was the flight path derived? According to the FBI, via Air Force radar. That's it.
Now we also have R2 in Portland who was tasked with organizing the chase planes and took his eyes off the jet for a period before he came back to it at which point he noticed the jet had already crossed the Columbia River and was "slightly west (Georger's words)" of Portland. The FBI flight path never shows the jet slightly west of Portland. In fact, it was on top of Portland and slightly EAST of downtown Portland center.
Where did the C-130 pick up the jet? I see there is one that picked it up in Southern Oregon which is obviously of no value here.
I do not use words like "conspiracy" because I do not believe it was a conspiracy. I believe it was a mistake.
Regarding the stall speed? R99 says that it flew just above stall speed and Rat stated that they were very concerned about ice build up on the wings given their slow speed. Yet the jet is entering hard turns to ensure it flies over as many people, and as dense a populated area, as possible?
Again, someone, got something wrong, somewhere.
-
slightly west = Tbar
Ice on wings means nothing. deicing was turned on.
You want to believe all hell broke loose looking away from a screen for a moment?
you guys win. the plane flew over Tbar...I give up.
-
slightly west = Tbar
Ice on wings means nothing. deicing was turned on.
You want to believe all hell broke loose looking away from a screen for a moment?
you guys win. the plane flew over Tbar...I give up.
No Shutter, this has been an outstanding discussion and illustrates some of the dilemmas in this case. Anyone who has read the last few days' comments walks away with a couple of pretty articulate arguments for the respective flight paths. At the end of the day, I've simply tried to explain why--in my mind--the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test.
-
Has anyone ever since how a flat object fly's? that placard most likely went all over the place shifting direction and speed. no telling exactly where that thing would land. it would of likely cut through the sky in dozens of directions as it fell. this would make it hard to calculate where the placard really came from. it's like locating a leak in a roof. it will drip on one side of the house but actually be coming from the other side.
going against hard documented evidence blaming the FBI for work others did. that alone doesn't pass the smell test. this can really only conclude a massive cover up or conspiracy took place or we had a lot of morons watching the plane that evening.
how dangerous was it really flying over Portland. the airport is right in the middle of a populated area. what about crash concerns there? one minute of terror in the sky out of hours in the air? that's what you guys are fearing. the odds are pretty low IMHO.
the plane circled Seattle for a long period and zero concern.
I realize parts are missing from the transcripts but that doesn't mean it's due to shifting the path. why make a map they never really intended anyone to see?
This is very similar to suspects. he looks like Cooper, he was missing that evening. he's from the mid west etc. that doesn't make him Cooper!
-
Pieces of material with very low weight and lots of flat surface area (e.g. 727 placard) don't necessarily follow the normal ballistic drop trajectories.
How do I know? I once saw a fluttering candy bar wrapper in the air several thousand feet up as I descended in my parachute. It didn't come from prior jumpers as I was the first out on the first load of the day. I think there was a good possibility that it started out as ground litter, was picked up by the wind, got into some thermals and had been up there for some time.
I wonder if glider pilots occasionally see ground litter when circling in thermals?
I don't think there were thermals at night when Cooper made his jump, but a fluttering placard could have a very long hang time which means that winds aloft could take it a lot farther than a simple ballistic fall would lead you to expect.
377
-
Pieces of material with very low weight and lots of flat surface area (e.g. 727 placard) don't necessarily follow the normal ballistic drop trajectories.
How do I know? I once saw a fluttering candy bar wrapper in the air several thousand feet up as I descended in my parachute. It didn't come from prior jumpers as I was the first out on the first load of the day. I think there was a good possibility that it started out as ground litter, was picked up by the wind, got into some thermals and had been up there for some time.
I wonder if glider pilots occasionally see ground litter when circling in thermals?
I don't think there were thermals at night when Cooper made his jump, but a fluttering placard could have a very long hang time which means that winds aloft could take it a lot farther than a simple ballistic fall would lead you to expect.
377
So, yes, considering the location of the placard find and winds aloft--32 knots at 10K feet from SW--this would seem to suggest that it would be very odd indeed for the placard to land west of where it left the jet.
-
Another interesting question:
If the FBI flight path is accurate, and their location/time plot is off by 6-minutes, and Cooper by some matter of grave misfortune ended up landing in the Columbia River, he would actually hit water about one mile from the airport--again, this according to the FBI flight path. Could a person, either no-pull or under canopy, descend that close to the airport and not be detected by their radar?
-
Another interesting question:
If the FBI flight path is accurate, and their location/time plot is off by 6-minutes, and Cooper by some matter of grave misfortune ended up landing in the Columbia River, he would actually hit water about one mile from the airport--again, this according to the FBI flight path. Could a person, either no-pull or under canopy, descend that close to the airport and not be detected by their radar?
R2 says they werent looking at their radar when 305 crossed the Columbia! (which is hard to believe)
BTW, you still have to explain the condition of the money if Cooper buried pristine bills as you claim. What explains all of the cuts, tatters, and abraded bills that look like they were blasted with high pressure water or sand?
-
BTW, you still have to explain the condition of the money if Cooper buried pristine bills as you claim. What explains all of the cuts, tatters, and abraded bills that look like they were blasted with high pressure water or sand?
The better question is: What created all of this damage to the bills, yet did not destroy the rubber bands?
What else can it be other than the bills rotted in place?
Add to it, the Ingrams get a hold of the bills and "wash" them in the sink which most likely broke off a lot of the fragile edges.
-
Another interesting question:
If the FBI flight path is accurate, and their location/time plot is off by 6-minutes, and Cooper by some matter of grave misfortune ended up landing in the Columbia River, he would actually hit water about one mile from the airport--again, this according to the FBI flight path. Could a person, either no-pull or under canopy, descend that close to the airport and not be detected by their radar?
Some ATC radars have MTI (Moving Target Indication) filters that suppress echos from stationary or very slow targets (e.g. birds) that are not of interest to controllers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_target_indication
If the radar in question had MTI enabled, it would not have displayed Cooper descending under a canopy. if it did not have MTI enabled, then Cooper might have been visible but would have been of little interest as it would have been interpreted as a weak slow moving target (like a bird) and obviously not a powered aircraft that could pose a serious collision risk to other aircraft.
Most MTI systems in the Cooper era depended on a coherent radar transmitter using a Klystron instead of a Magnetron output tube. To perform Doppler Shift speed analysis one needs a coherent radar signal. More modern systems can figure out speed using incoherent radar signals and digital target tracking algorithms.
The placard find location had to be downwind of the jet's flight path.
377
-
Another interesting question:
If the FBI flight path is accurate, and their location/time plot is off by 6-minutes, and Cooper by some matter of grave misfortune ended up landing in the Columbia River, he would actually hit water about one mile from the airport--again, this according to the FBI flight path. Could a person, either no-pull or under canopy, descend that close to the airport and not be detected by their radar?
How did they get so far off as to not knowing the plane was 8 miles west?
How did the radar miss the Tbar jump..
How did the radar miss the jump around Ariel..
How did the radar work at all since it was 8 miles out of whack?
How did any planes land at PDX. must of been a nightmare? turned away for a moment and the plane was in Eugene?
It's amazing no collisions occurred with defective radars and operators?
-
How did they get so far off as to not knowing the plane was 8 miles west?
Is this accurate?
What I mean is this. Does the controller watching the blip on the screen have anything on the screen that shows precisely where the blip is in relation to other landmarks.. in other words, if there was a satellite image of the ground below the blip super-imposed on the radar screen that would be a good guide. However, if the radar screen is just black with a blip on it how does the controller known precisely where the jet is in relation to certain things?
Also, wasn't this information, and subsequent flight path, super-imposed on a map after the fact? Perhaps in real time the controller didn't know precisely where the jet was relative to other locations so as to be able to judge if the jet was close to Tena Bar.
-
BTW, you still have to explain the condition of the money if Cooper buried pristine bills as you claim. What explains all of the cuts, tatters, and abraded bills that look like they were blasted with high pressure water or sand?
The better question is: What created all of this damage to the bills, yet did not destroy the rubber bands?
What else can it be other than the bills rotted in place?
Add to it, the Ingrams get a hold of the bills and "wash" them in the sink which most likely broke off a lot of the fragile edges.
Huh? OK. Thanks for the infermations and re-creations.
-
For your consumption and critique the following link will bring you to a page where I have posted my just completed The 8:12 Arc Theory which describes where I think DB Cooper jumped and landed.
https://thecoopercase.com/pages/the-8-12-arc-theory
Cheers!
-
For your consumption and critique the following link will bring you to a page where I have posted my just completed The 8:12 Arc Theory which describes where I think DB Cooper jumped and landed.
https://thecoopercase.com/pages/the-8-12-arc-theory
Cheers!
It’s a theory with a lot of presumptions that have no FACTS to back it up ! It would be great if we knew for a fact that Cooper jumped at exactly 8:12 ! Also when did Tina Bar become an “ Island “ ? Also why would it be necessary for Cooper to swim across the Columbia IF he survived the jump ? There are two bridges that cross the Columbia on nearby Hayden Island ! Also I asked you many months ago why would Cooper bury the equivalent of 1.2 Million dollars in the sand on a public beach frequently occupied by local fishermen when there was plenty of unoccupied wooded area all around Tina Bar ? You replied it was easy to bury the loot in the sand along the beach ! It was at this point I tuned you out as obviously you didn’t have any clue as the texture of Columbia river sand on a wet rainy day in November ! This is NOT soft beach sand in Newport Beach, California! Cooper would need a shovel and we know he didn’t have a shovel ! Sorry but I can’t get past the preposterous idea of anyone working out all the details involved in this hyjacking and them burying all his loot on a public beach ! It’s your theory and it is whatever you care to believe.
-
For your consumption and critique the following link will bring you to a page where I have posted my just completed The 8:12 Arc Theory which describes where I think DB Cooper jumped and landed.
https://thecoopercase.com/pages/the-8-12-arc-theory
Cheers!
It’s a theory with a lot of presumptions that have no FACTS to back it up ! It would be great if we knew for a fact that Cooper jumped at exactly 8:12 ! Also when did Tina Bar become an “ Island “ ? Also why would it be necessary for Cooper to swim across the Columbia IF he survived the jump ? There are two bridges that cross the Columbia on nearby Hayden Island ! Also I asked you many months ago why would Cooper bury the equivalent of 1.2 Million dollars in the sand on a public beach frequently occupied by local fishermen when there was plenty of unoccupied wooded area all around Tina Bar ? You replied it was easy to bury the loot in the sand along the beach ! It was at this point I tuned you out as obviously you didn’t have any clue as the texture of Columbia river sand on a wet rainy day in November ! This is NOT soft beach sand in Newport Beach, California! Cooper would need a shovel and we know he didn’t have a shovel ! Sorry but I can’t get past the preposterous idea of anyone working out all the details involved in this hyjacking and them burying all his loot on a public beach ! It’s your theory and it is whatever you care to believe.
I agree ! What EU has come up with is not a flight path but a movie script! Bring in Mothra, Modonna, and the Seven Gnomes of King Arthur.
-
You can't base facts from a hunch. I don't follow this "arc" deal. how are you determining 3 miles to Amboy and the other locations?
The jet arrived near the Malay intersection and made a turn at Toledo at 7:59 PM.
Did the plane go in reverse at this point? malay is southeast of Toledo....
-
Where to start???
First, the jet didn't go over the Maylay intersection and didn't go over Toledo...it went around the airport near both of them so that's what I mean.
Second, the arc is the line that represents where the jet would be at 8:12 PM (Cooper's jump time) depending upon the direction it headed from Malay.
Third, is it worth even commenting about the likelihood that Cooper would land on Sauvie Island 3 miles south of St. Helens and walk all the way down to I-5, cross the bridge to Vancouver, then walk all the way up to Tena Bar? That isn't likely just as swimming directly across the Columbia River from Sauvie Island isn't likely...hence, he didn't land in Oregon, he landed in Washington State.
Fourth, yes Tena Bar is on what is essentially an island, or peninsula, or whatever you want to call it. The point is DB Cooper would have to cross water to get to Tena Bar if coming from too far west, too far north, or too far east...which is...you got it, where the 8:12 arc is.
Fifth, in fact I'm very familiar with Tena Bar. It's a beach with sand on it. Perhaps you should refer back to the 1980 footage of the FBI agents digging up the beach. It is not made of some sort of special sand-concrete that is impossible to dig a hole without a shovel, yet lets paper currency bury itself three feet deep.
Finally, how do you not agree that the 8:12 jump time, location of the placard find, location of the money find, direction of the Columbia River's flow and the speed and direction from which the wind was blowing on November 24, 1971 are facts?
-
You can't base facts from a hunch. I don't follow this "arc" deal. how are you determining 3 miles to Amboy and the other locations?
The jet arrived near the Malay intersection and made a turn at Toledo at 7:59 PM.
Did the plane go in reverse at this point? malay is southeast of Toledo....
Toledo is 7 miles from my home. Larry Mason was the Manager of the Airport until his retirement last year. I have talked to him as he was a pilot for United Airlines and flew copilot with my late Uncle Erv. They do naked skydiving from the Toledo airport ! They asked me IF I was interested! Lol I’ve never talked any Cooper with him as we only talked about his days flying with Uncle Erv.
-
Eric, the wind direction is the only fact you have! the rest is pure speculation based on a flight path that might work but has no evidence to back it up. the placard is not enough based on no way to determine how it fell.
The theory is too far off IMO for calculation errors. that leaves a conspiracy. a very large one
-
You can't base facts from a hunch. I don't follow this "arc" deal. how are you determining 3 miles to Amboy and the other locations?
The jet arrived near the Malay intersection and made a turn at Toledo at 7:59 PM.
Did the plane go in reverse at this point? malay is southeast of Toledo....
Toledo is 7 miles from my home. Larry Mason was the Manager of the Airport until his retirement last year. I have talked to him as he was a pilot for United Airlines and flew copilot with my late Uncle Erv. They do naked skydiving from the Toledo airport ! They asked me IF I was interested! Lol I’ve never talked any Cooper with him as we only talked about his days flying with Uncle Erv.
the path went around Ed Carlson field. if that's the airport you are talking about?
-
You can't base facts from a hunch. I don't follow this "arc" deal. how are you determining 3 miles to Amboy and the other locations?
The jet arrived near the Malay intersection and made a turn at Toledo at 7:59 PM.
Did the plane go in reverse at this point? malay is southeast of Toledo....
Toledo is 7 miles from my home. Larry Mason was the Manager of the Airport until his retirement last year. I have talked to him as he was a pilot for United Airlines and flew copilot with my late Uncle Erv. They do naked skydiving from the Toledo airport ! They asked me IF I was interested! Lol I’ve never talked any Cooper with him as we only talked about his days flying with Uncle Erv.
the path went around Ed Carlson field. if that's the airport you are talking about?
Yes one and the same airport.
-
Yes, I'm talking about Ed Carlson Field.
Also, the conspiracy would be if the Hicks' family provided the wrong location for the placard find, the Ingram's provided the wrong location for the money find, the pilot's provided the wrong "pressure bump" time, the FBI provided the wrong Malay arrival time, Mother Nature was just messing with us and shifted the wind from the southwest at the spot of the placard departure, and, I really don't know what to say about the river flow because it seems quite apparent that the river flows to the Pacific and not the other way around.
These are some very basic facts.
-
what is the timing of the pressure bump? I didn't know one was known?
the placard is where it landed. no test has ever been done to see what it would do. it would be a different story if it had weight to it and would tend to float or change directions. take a look at the map of Mcnally. his crap was all over the place from 10,000 feet.
-
Where to start???
First, the jet didn't go over the Maylay intersection and didn't go over Toledo...it went around the airport near both of them so that's what I mean.
Second, the arc is the line that represents where the jet would be at 8:12 PM (Cooper's jump time) depending upon the direction it headed from Malay.
Third, is it worth even commenting about the likelihood that Cooper would land on Sauvie Island 3 miles south of St. Helens and walk all the way down to I-5, cross the bridge to Vancouver, then walk all the way up to Tena Bar? That isn't likely just as swimming directly across the Columbia River from Sauvie Island isn't likely...hence, he didn't land in Oregon, he landed in Washington State.
Fourth, yes Tena Bar is on what is essentially an island, or peninsula, or whatever you want to call it. The point is DB Cooper would have to cross water to get to Tena Bar if coming from too far west, too far north, or too far east...which is...you got it, where the 8:12 arc is.
Fifth, in fact I'm very familiar with Tena Bar. It's a beach with sand on it. Perhaps you should refer back to the 1980 footage of the FBI agents digging up the beach. It is not made of some sort of special sand-concrete that is impossible to dig a hole without a shovel, yet lets paper currency bury itself three feet deep.
Finally, how do you not agree that the 8:12 jump time, location of the placard find, location of the money find, direction of the Columbia River's flow and the speed and direction from which the wind was blowing on November 24, 1971 are facts?
Once again, you’re fabricating your own facts ! Who says Cooper landed on Sauvie Island besides you ? I’ve fished on and around Sauvie Island from the 50’s. Also I saw the 1980 FBI digging ! In case you weren’t paying attention, they used shovels and backhoes ! Burying 20 lbs of money in hard sand on a public beach with no shovel doesn’t make sense to me !
-
what is the timing of the pressure bump? I didn't know one was known?
the placard is where it landed. no test has ever been done to see what it would do. it would be a different story if it had weight to it and would tend to float or change directions. take a look at the map of Mcnally. his crap was all over the place from 10,000 feet.
Now we are splitting hairs here. Call it the "oscillation stop," "pressure bump," time when Rat said "our friend may have left us," we all get it...it was 8:12.
Also, there was a very brisk breeze from the southwest, the placard is going to be carried along with the breeze and travel to the northeast. How can it not?
Finally, I did end the theory by stating it is theoretically possible that the FBI was correct about all of it and that Cooper landed in the FBI search area, yet managed to escape with everything that he jumped with. Of course, this would also mean that Cooper traveled to Tena Bar to bury 6K. In my diseased mind, that doesn't really make any sense.
-
Who says Cooper landed on Sauvie Island besides you ?
This is now officially getting painful. I did not say that Cooper landed on Sauvie Island. I said he did not land on Sauvie Island. Rather he landed east of Sauvie Island on the 8:12 arc which either puts him in the Columbia River downstream from Tena Bar, or, on Bachelor Island.
-
Who says Cooper landed on Sauvie Island besides you ?
This is now officially getting painful. I did not say that Cooper landed on Sauvie Island. I said he did not land on Sauvie Island. Rather he landed east of Sauvie Island on the 8:12 arc which either puts him in the Columbia River downstream from Tena Bar, or, on Bachelor Island.
What measurable "facts" do you base this on? Give us your facts and your numbers, please.
/The area of a sector can be expressed using its central angle or its arc length. ... If A = area of the sector, and s = arc length, then . Solving the proportion for A gives: Segment of a Circle: The segment of a circle is the region bounded by a chord and the arc subtended by the chord./
-
Who says Cooper landed on Sauvie Island besides you ?
This is now officially getting painful. I did not say that Cooper landed on Sauvie Island. I said he did not land on Sauvie Island. Rather he landed east of Sauvie Island on the 8:12 arc which either puts him in the Columbia River downstream from Tena Bar, or, on Bachelor Island.
What measurable "facts" do you base this on? Give us your facts and your numbers, please.
/The area of a sector can be expressed using its central angle or its arc length. ... If A = area of the sector, and s = arc length, then . Solving the proportion for A gives: Segment of a Circle: The segment of a circle is the region bounded by a chord and the arc subtended by the chord./
First off, let me apologize to Kermit for being snarky in my response to his post. I'm simply trying say that I do not believe Cooper landed in Oregon or the Columbia River. Rather, I believe he landed in the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
Second, although I am graphically challenged I will attempt to put together a map with the important spots noted along with the 8:12 arc.
-
Rat also said he believes Cooper jumped 5-10 minutes after the last contact with Cooper. that gives a time of 8:15.
After speaking with Tom Kaye I didn't take into consideration of the placard spinning all the way down. lots of variables with the placard as I have mentioned. nothing concrete.
-
Tom also spoke with the traffic controller stating they didn't leave V23.
-
where the chase planes were staged—and the Canby intersection.
what does this mean?
-
Who says Cooper landed on Sauvie Island besides you ?
This is now officially getting painful. I did not say that Cooper landed on Sauvie Island. I said he did not land on Sauvie Island. Rather he landed east of Sauvie Island on the 8:12 arc which either puts him in the Columbia River downstream from Tena Bar, or, on Bachelor Island.
What measurable "facts" do you base this on? Give us your facts and your numbers, please.
/The area of a sector can be expressed using its central angle or its arc length. ... If A = area of the sector, and s = arc length, then . Solving the proportion for A gives: Segment of a Circle: The segment of a circle is the region bounded by a chord and the arc subtended by the chord./
First off, let me apologize to Kermit for being snarky in my response to his post. I'm simply trying say that I do not believe Cooper landed in Oregon or the Columbia River. Rather, I believe he landed in the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
Second, although I am graphically challenged I will attempt to put together a map with the important spots noted along with the 8:12 arc.
Apology accepted as apparently I misread what you were saying. Cooper could have bailed and landed safely in a lot of different areas as unfortunately the exact time he bailed and also the exact flight location cannot be verified to anyone’s satisfaction. We all get a little snippy sometimes regarding this Cooper mystery so I apologize to anyone I offended along the way !
-
This is damaging evidence when it comes to moving the flight path. he has been consistent since 1971.
-
This is damaging evidence when it comes to moving the flight path. he has been consistent since 1971.
That's interesting. That is the exact opposite of what R2 said about the Portland radar op! He said the Portland op wasnt even watching his screen!
-
where is R2?
-
where is R2?
Seattle.
-
If a special target like a hijacking was approaching there airspace I'd bet several controllers were watching?
-
If a special target like a hijacking was approaching there airspace I'd bet several controllers were watching?
A whole group of people. Keep in mind they (Portland) were also handling incoming traffic - Bohan for one.
OK. where are the western and eastern limits of V23 at Portland ? I forget - will pull up a chart.
-
they can handle several planes at one time. you specified they were not watching while crossing the Columbia. this was the area of the possible jump zone.
-
they can handle several planes at one time. you specified they were not watching while crossing the Columbia. this was the area of the possible jump zone.
If we knew the coordinates for 8:05 we could calculate it out ...
Where is Ratczk when he says he could see the lights of Vancouver/Portland coming up - is that at 8:05?
-
they can handle several planes at one time. you specified they were not watching while crossing the Columbia. this was the area of the possible jump zone.
If we knew the coordinates for 8:05 we could calculate it out ...
Where is Ratczk when he says he could see the lights of Vancouver/Portland coming up - is that at 8:05?
That was mentioned in the interview not the transcripts..don't know where they were at that time.
-
they can handle several planes at one time. you specified they were not watching while crossing the Columbia. this was the area of the possible jump zone.
If we knew the coordinates for 8:05 we could calculate it out ...
Where is Ratczk when he says he could see the lights of Vancouver/Portland coming up - is that at 8:05?
That was mentioned in the interview not the transcripts..don't know where they were at that time.
Maybe that position has never been fixed. This is where I miss not being able to search DZ ... there are notes about this there.
As luck would have it we dont have the position and time of the T33 intercept near Oswego either.
-
the cords can be taken from the flight path map. you can look at the area just past Ariel and see V23. you have 4 miles on each side of the center line of any airway.
Let me get the cords for 8:05
-
the cords can be taken from the flight path map. you can look at the area just past Ariel and see V23. you have 4 miles on each side of the center line of any airway.
Let me get the cords for 8:05
ok ... so if the Op at Portland says 1-2 miles east of V23 center line then its still within V23.
-
the cords can be taken from the flight path map. you can look at the area just past Ariel and see V23. you have 4 miles on each side of the center line of any airway.
Let me get the cords for 8:05
ok ... so if the Op at Portland says 1-2 miles east of V23 center line then its still within V23.
yes...
Here is an approx. location of the 8:05 position N46°11.92' W122°39.32'
-
the cords can be taken from the flight path map. you can look at the area just past Ariel and see V23. you have 4 miles on each side of the center line of any airway.
Let me get the cords for 8:05
ok ... so if the Op at Portland says 1-2 miles east of V23 center line then its still within V23.
yes...
Here is an approx. location of the 8:05 position N46°11.92' W122°39.32'
ok let me go play with this ...
-
Here -
-
I'm not sure the cords are accurately crossing over on Google...
-
I'm not sure the cords are accurately crossing over on Google...
I know ... let me post this concerning the 302 mention of a radar op at PDX saying they were east of V23 CL.. The red is V23 I think ... the deviation from V23 centerline is shown here ....
Note the times and their positions ...
-
They are still in the limits of the airway...
-
They are still in the limits of the airway...
Yes but right at the east edge 1-2 miles? Thats what the op said in the 302?
-
They are still in the limits of the airway...
Yes but right at the east edge 1-2 miles? Thats what the op said in the 302?
He's talking about the jump time which would be around 8:11 and shows the flight east of V23 but not by much as it merges back on centerline at 8:12
-
The 8:15 location appears to be the furthest from the airway at around 4 miles east of the line.
-
They are still in the limits of the airway...
Yes but right at the east edge 1-2 miles? Thats what the op said in the 302?
He's talking about the jump time which would be around 8:11 and shows the flight east of V23 but not by much as it merges back on centerline at 8:12
Yes - agree - I dont quite see the logic of the guy in the 302. If 305 is east of the CL near or just above PDX that does not guarantee that it was in the EAST side of V23 the whole way down, or when C bailed. I dont see the logic or the connection ?? Explain..
-
The 8:12 location is on the centerline and from that point on it stays east of the centerline...
-
The 8:12 location is on the centerline and from that point on it stays east of the centerline...
Let me look at a couple of larger scale maps that show the whole fp with V23 deviations ...
-
.I think his point was if they went by the center of V23 for a east or west position they would be off since the plane was east of the center..."one to two miles"
-
.I think his point was if they went by the center of V23 for a east or west position they would be off since the plane was east of the center..."one to two miles"
found files . will post tomorrow
-
What direction did 305 take off from Seattle? Cooper could have gotten hold of a sectional chart easily, and known where V-23 or one of the other Victor Airways were, but did he do anything that would indicate he knew what the direction would be the first 10-15 miles or so? Taking off heading south is a big difference than taking off going east and then turning south.
-
The jet took off south from Seattle--I believe 16 R.
I cleaned up some of my numbers and adjusted them online for my 8:12 Arc Theory which shows that the jet arrives at a point 8 miles southwest of Amboy at 8:12 PM which is the furthest east the jet could have been given the constraint I placed on the flight path because of the placard find. My western-most flight path for the jet still puts it over St. Helens, OR.
I'm working on a couple of images to add to the page as well.
My overall point is to illustrate that Cooper could not have landed upstream from Tena Bar unless the FBI is way off on their times. Which means, if they're way off on their times why can't they be off on the flight path?
Again, my understanding is that the Air Force handed the FBI the flight path. Furthermore, that it was crafted based upon...we don't know...the document says "radar." That's it. I would be very interested to analyse the precise data and methodology that the Air Force used to construct the flight path because something doesn't add up.
-
Putting speculation in the air Force is not a good idea. You are trying to go against hard evidence then use some of it?
The placard could of spun almost straight down or turned directions. You don't know what it did just as anyone else.
Are we to assume our country was in grave danger with the air Force not able to use two different radar systems?
-
I still find it odd that georger Harrison had faith in the air Force tracking as well as the commercial controllers. Data from the flight recorder, the sage radar to help pinpoint a location. Then you also have the pilots.
As I have mentioned. It's like video evidence. Lots of it from different sources. Nobody knows how the money got there so using it as fact shouldn't apply. It's very troubling but taking some of the evidence you reject is worse. You can't have it both ways.
-
I still find it odd that georger Harrison had faith in the air Force tracking as well as the commercial controllers. Data from the flight recorder, the sage radar to help pinpoint a location. Then you also have the pilots.
As I have mentioned. It's like video evidence. Lots of it from different sources. Nobody knows how the money got there so using it as fact shouldn't apply. It's very troubling but taking some of the evidence you reject is worse. You can't have it both ways.
I have never seen anything that actually describes what went into deriving the flight path other than "radar." Perhaps someone can show me something else.
Also, we don't know how it was done. Was it a series of calculations? Was it a recorded blip overlaying a map? Was it something else entirely? I don't know. Perhaps someone can explain precisely how the flight path was crafted.
Normally I would defer and say, "Yes, the flight path is correct." However, the one thing I cannot overlook is the physical evidence. Specifically, where the placard was found and where the money was found. These things can't be f'd up by someone making a mistake. Either the items were found where reported or they were not. Moreover, they must adhere to the laws of physics. The money couldn't flow 10 miles upstream. The placard can't drop straight down if the entire atmosphere it is dropping through is moving to the northeast at 30 knots.
If you believe the FBI got it all correct then we have it that Cooper landed in the search area. Okay, then how did the money end up on Tena Bar? Why has absolutely nothing been found in the search area? Why would Cooper jump into utter darkness dressed in a suit?
Believe it or not, the FBI, the Air Force, the guy who put the flight path together at the Air Force, Dr. Leonard Palmer, the president of the United States, me, you, all of us are capable of making mistakes. This does not mean that everything the FBI assumed or calculated was wrong. Rather, it simply means they may have messed up in this one area. Indeed, perhaps the flight from Seattle to Reno is 85% accurate, but the 15% that is slightly askew is the part we're all debating here.
Proud American and US Air Force notwithstanding, at some point I have to say "I'm not convinced that someone didn't make a mistake somewhere" with the flight path because what I do know, doesn't add up.
-
When you don't have answers it doesn't mean to make things up. The money has no facts surrounding it's placement. The same for the placard . It's in the flight path range and you have no way of knowing how it got there. Floating stats won't work since it more than likely did not float or drift. Could of floated and it could of spiraled straight down.
-
I've updated the page with my 8:12 Arc Theory by cleaning up some of the stats and adding three maps. Note that the maps were created by me, therefore they kind of suck.
https://thecoopercase.com/pages/the-8-12-arc-theory
Cheers!
-
Putting speculation in the air Force is not a good idea. You are trying to go against hard evidence then use some of it?
The placard could of spun almost straight down or turned directions. You don't know what it did just as anyone else.
Are we to assume our country was in grave danger with the air Force not able to use two different radar systems?
The USAF actually did a placard/card drop study! There is a pdf but I didnt keep the url.
-
I still find it odd that georger Harrison had faith in the air Force tracking as well as the commercial controllers. Data from the flight recorder, the sage radar to help pinpoint a location. Then you also have the pilots.
As I have mentioned. It's like video evidence. Lots of it from different sources. Nobody knows how the money got there so using it as fact shouldn't apply. It's very troubling but taking some of the evidence you reject is worse. You can't have it both ways.
I have never seen anything that actually describes what went into deriving the flight path other than "radar." Perhaps someone can show me something else.
Also, we don't know how it was done. Was it a series of calculations? Was it a recorded blip overlaying a map? Was it something else entirely? I don't know. Perhaps someone can explain precisely how the flight path was crafted.
Normally I would defer and say, "Yes, the flight path is correct." However, the one thing I cannot overlook is the physical evidence. Specifically, where the placard was found and where the money was found. These things can't be f'd up by someone making a mistake. Either the items were found where reported or they were not. Moreover, they must adhere to the laws of physics. The money couldn't flow 10 miles upstream. The placard can't drop straight down if the entire atmosphere it is dropping through is moving to the northeast at 30 knots.
If you believe the FBI got it all correct then we have it that Cooper landed in the search area. Okay, then how did the money end up on Tena Bar? Why has absolutely nothing been found in the search area? Why would Cooper jump into utter darkness dressed in a suit?
Believe it or not, the FBI, the Air Force, the guy who put the flight path together at the Air Force, Dr. Leonard Palmer, the president of the United States, me, you, all of us are capable of making mistakes. This does not mean that everything the FBI assumed or calculated was wrong. Rather, it simply means they may have messed up in this one area. Indeed, perhaps the flight from Seattle to Reno is 85% accurate, but the 15% that is slightly askew is the part we're all debating here.
Proud American and US Air Force notwithstanding, at some point I have to say "I'm not convinced that someone didn't make a mistake somewhere" with the flight path because what I do know, doesn't add up.
/I have never seen anything that actually describes what went into deriving the flight path other than "radar." Perhaps someone can show me something else./
The AF and NWO didnt produce a manual, video, or community college course you can take. Here were some of the people involved - most now deceased. You missed the main course which was on DZ 2008-09.
-
V23 deviations ... a victor airway is eight miles wide ... Thanks Farflung!
-
More on V23 ...
-
I've updated the page with my 8:12 Arc Theory by cleaning up some of the stats and adding three maps. Note that the maps were created by me, therefore they kind of suck.
https://thecoopercase.com/pages/the-8-12-arc-theory
Cheers!
If you really want to try to get a accurate account of what the actual weather conditions were on November 24: 1971, why do we seem to accept false information. I lived in Portland on that exact evening. As a 28 year Mailcarrier who always had a outdoor walking route, I can attest that the weather was nothing unusual for that time of the year in Portland or Seattle ! All the FBI and other witnesses statements are purely BS ! Let’s just go to both Portland and Seattle weather bureau reports for that date. The report says high of 51 and low of 44 ! Also wind at 9 MPH and precipitation of .19. These figures are actually almost exactly the average precipitation and temperatures range for that time of the year. I also saw it broken down by the hour on the wind velocity. It read 6 pm at 7 MPH and 9 pm at 10 MPH. HIGH WIND at 14 MPH ! I checked two two different weather services and they are almost identical as was Seattle. No snow ! No frigid temperatures! No high velocity winds ! When my wife came here to Washington from spending 37 years in Las Vegas, she would say “ It’s pouring outside “ ! I would have to correct her and tell her “ in Oregon and Washington, that is not called pouring.... it’s not even raining... it’s sprinkling outside “. My point is that different people see weather in all sort of opinions ! Let’s stick to the facts ! The weather on November 24,1971 was a normal day in the NORTHWEST!
-
I've updated the page with my 8:12 Arc Theory by cleaning up some of the stats and adding three maps. Note that the maps were created by me, therefore they kind of suck.
https://thecoopercase.com/pages/the-8-12-arc-theory
Cheers!
If you really want to try to get a accurate account of what the actual weather conditions were on November 24: 1971, why do we seem to accept false information. I lived in Portland on that exact evening. As a 28 year Mailcarrier who always had a outdoor walking route, I can attest that the weather was nothing unusual for that time of the year in Portland or Seattle ! All the FBI and other witnesses statements are purely BS ! Let’s just go to both Portland and Seattle weather bureau reports for that date. The report says high of 51 and low of 44 ! Also wind at 9 MPH and precipitation of .19. These figures are actually almost exactly the average precipitation and temperatures range for that time of the year. I also saw it broken down by the hour on the wind velocity. It read 6 pm at 7 MPH and 9 pm at 10 MPH. HIGH WIND at 14 MPH ! I checked two two different weather services and they are almost identical as was Seattle. No snow ! No frigid temperatures! No high velocity winds ! When my wife came here to Washington from spending 37 years in Las Vegas, she would say “ It’s pouring outside “ ! I would have to correct her and tell her “ in Oregon and Washington, that is not called pouring.... it’s not even raining... it’s sprinkling outside “. My point is that different people see weather in all sort of opinions ! Let’s stick to the facts ! The weather on November 24,1971 was a normal day in the NORTHWEST!
Yes those were the ground conditions.
5000 feet along V23 ? ... 10,000 feet? Hominid's work was detailed. The FBI released ten pages of the WX data used to calculate the drop. Hom had access to those pages and interpolated them.
To some extent, the meandering (drift) of the flight path recounts the weather being encountered while the plane is being flown under highly loaded conditions. (wheels down, flaps down, etc) Carrying a guy with a bomb who has been issuing his own sets of orders/requests! Now, put yourself in R2's shoes trying to predict where 305 is going to be for a T33 intercept south or somewhere southwest of PDX ... near Lake Oswego? The T33 wants to get a visual on 305 to assess the situation ... with the 305 having reported 'the subject may have left us' ?
This flight path looks like the path of a plane in distress vs some 'straight line non-deviating' flight path supposedly flown between Toledo and Canby. ? Is this the difference between reality vs. fiction?
-
With a alternate path how can one state the jump time is real but the path is wrong?
Who is completely satisfied 8:12 is the golden jump time?
Where is the evidence suggesting multiple radar operators were all wrong at the same time?
Are we dismissing the 302's that line up with the path, the Air Force and Paul Solderlind, Lee, Harrison?
95% of the path is correct?
Were the pilots lacking instrumentation qualifications?
If the pilots failed to signal as they were suppose to and state they weren't sure Cooper left the plane are we to use 8:12 because.....?
Has everyone agreed to dismiss the easterly flight path Ralph and Jerry believe...skip it?
It's ok to fly around Seattle for a long period but unheard of to fly over a portion of Portland lasting approx. 2 minutes?
I like R99's theory, but believing it is another story. the pesky things above stop me. it appears to me (evidence wise) that they agreed that V23 was the route to take. we would have more radio chatter missing since no evidence can be found of 305 changing course or deviating from V23.
This flight path looks like the path of a plane in distress
Tom made a similar comment like this...
-
Through all these discussions recently, I still have 8:13 pm in the back of my head. That's what Rataczak told me in 2009, and he was adamant and consistent throughout a 70-muinute conversation.
Just saying. Let's not get totally wedded to 8:12 pm.
-
Just saying. Let's not totally wedded to 8:12 pm.
Thi is similar to evidence with a suspect. some things are a must in order to work....it has to be...last time I checked, nobody really has a clue when he jumped.
-
I just plotted the GPS coordinates for the placard find and the FBI's flight path on that leg. What I discovered is that the placard was found 8/10ths of a mile (at it's closest) SW of the FBI flight path. Ironically, this is precisely into the wind head on. Simply put, the placard would have to leave the jet at this point on the FBI flight path and travel 8/10ths of a mile into the wind. How is this possible? Short answer, it isn't.
-
I just plotted the GPS coordinates for the placard find and the FBI's flight path on that leg. What I discovered is that the placard was found 8/10ths of a mile (at it's closest) SW of the FBI flight path. Ironically, this is precisely into the wind head on. Simply put, the placard would have to leave the jet at this point on the FBI flight path and travel 8/10ths of a mile into the wind. How is this possible? Short answer, it isn't.
The flight path has a + - for error. I've forgotten how much but will find out shortly.
-
I'm on a job site that has a lift. I made some placards from a for sale sign. Very thin plastic. Have about out 10 mph wind. The card doesnt drift much. I am making some video of the test...
-
Below is an image I mocked up displaying my 8:12 Arc Theory tolerances along with the FBI's flight path and 8:12 jump time displayed. (NOTE: I realize the FBI actually works with an 8:11 jump time on their map and builds tolerances around that point).
Also, while it's not obvious on this map, the placard find is .8 miles west--at its closest point--of the FBI flight path.
-
Placard update .I have done 3 tests so far. I first let the placard just drift and the next card I put a spin on it. The spin always goes straight down. Why wouldn't there be a chance of this happening 5 miles west?
-
Below is an image I mocked up displaying my 8:12 Arc Theory tolerances along with the FBI's flight path and 8:12 jump time displayed. (NOTE: I realize the FBI actually works with an 8:11 jump time on their map and builds tolerances around that point).
Also, while it's not obvious on this map, the placard find is .8 miles west--at its closest point--of the FBI flight path.
NO! "(NOTE: I realize the FBI actually works with an 8:11 jump time on their map and builds tolerances around that point)". You dont get what a flight path is and how the socalled FBI path was constructed at the time. All of that technical history is just irrelevant to your purpose and narrative. It is what it is. Please stop trying to rewrite history you know nothing about.
-
I know Georger, I don't know anything. Yeah, okay.
Well, what I do know is this...
There are two--what appear to be original--FBI maps. They are posted below...
-
Furthermore, the white map was used as part of the report that describes how the search area was constructed. A color version is on Sluggo's site which I've attached below...
-
Everyone has this problem. It's basically a blwn up version of the 8:11 location
-
Now, the document below (page one) describes the constructing of the search area and the FBI path...
-
Next, if you read the document you'll notice that point #1 describes the probable flight path as going from C-D-E-S...
-
Furthermore, you'll notice that the jet turns south at Point E.
Well, the problem is that on the yellow FBI flight path map it shows the jet making the turn at just north of Point S, which is 2.3 NM south of Point E.
Also, on the white map, it shows that the flight continues along this path through Point S. However, on the yellow FBI map, it shows that the jet turns again and follows down center line V23 which are points W3-J-F-W4.
Here's my question: Which one is correct? I thought the maps and the plotting were infallible, yet we have an obvious discrepancy here. Why?
-
Eric they gave a certain amount East and west. That's how it's done. Today they could be extremely accurate but still give a variable.
-
This is a difference of 2.64 SM regarding the turn, not to mention the jet not turning down center line V23, rather heading due south through Point S. Like I keep saying, something doesn't add up. There is too much variance (2.64 SM). Why?
-
Eric, you need to get a grip here..the blown up portion showing the possible jump area is the same plots on the map. slight turns are there just as it shows.
The map is calculations of possible exit locations and time. none of them are "right" it's calculations of possibilities to determine where to look for Cooper on the ground. you need to look at the map without the green lines. it's covering the X's
You need to stop trying so hard to disprove the whole case to make a theory work. you can't think straight in this mode...
-
Eric, you need to get a grip here..the blown up portion showing the possible jump area is the same plots on the map. slight turns are there just as it shows.
The map is calculations of possible exit locations and time. none of them are "right" it's calculations of possibilities to determine where to look for Cooper on the ground. you need to look at the map without the green lines. it's covering the X's
You need to stop trying so hard to disprove the whole case to make a theory work. you can't think straight in this mode...
Here's the timeline.
19:45 PST Flt 305 reports 19 NM DME out of SEA at 7,000 ft. No comm.. with Cooper but have an aft stair light. Pilot Comm. with Flt-Ops MSP
Passing Toutle at: around 2001-2002 time stamps on flight path?
So stairs had been had been open about 15 mins prior to placard leaving - just a guess.
All the placard position does is slightly confirm the flight path at about 2000-2005 ? It has no effect on where Cooper jumped except as one event happening prior to Cooper leaving in the 2010-2015 time period.
-
Eric, you need to get a grip here..the blown up portion showing the possible jump area is the same plots on the map. slight turns are there just as it shows.
The map is calculations of possible exit locations and time. none of them are "right" it's calculations of possibilities to determine where to look for Cooper on the ground. you need to look at the map without the green lines. it's covering the X's
You need to stop trying so hard to disprove the whole case to make a theory work. you can't think straight in this mode...
All I have to do is prove one part of the FBI flight path is incorrect to bring the rest into question. This is classic Debate 101.
I have proven that there are discrepancies in the two FBI maps: One equals 2.64 SM, the other we're not sure because the jet just continues south as opposed to turning down the V23 center line. Both versions cannot be true.
With respect to the jump time: Didn't anyone own a damn watch? No one with a clock on the wall? Rat clearly stated "mark this time down on your map."
I'm not just pulling $#!+ out of thin air. I am basing my analysis upon the facts (placard find, money find, river flow, etc.) That's all I can do. Now if someone wants argue that the truth is in disguise based upon these facts then that's okay. However, at that point I'm going to turn around and say, "There is someone helplessly arguing a case regardless of the facts."
-
I have proven that there are discrepancies in the two FBI maps: One equals 2.64 SM
show this?
-
The plane meets up with centerline at 8:12...
-
You don't have facts with the money find without knowing exactly how it got there, the same for the placard. you are basing facts on assumptions and speculation. the river flow has nothing to do with the flight path.
-
The plane meets up with centerline at 8:12...
I'm not debating the time, I'm debating the path.
-
The plane meets up with centerline at 8:12...
I'm not debating the time, I'm debating the path.
where is it skewed?
-
I have proven that there are discrepancies in the two FBI maps: One equals 2.64 SM
show this?
Point E is 2.64 SM north of the spot north of Point S where the V23 center line comes into play.
-
what are you trying to claim?
-
You don't have facts with the money find without knowing exactly how it got there, the same for the placard. you are basing facts on assumptions and speculation. the river flow has nothing to do with the flight path.
These are all critical.
1) The money arrived on Tena Bar somehow. It either arrived via natural method, or, human intervention. There are no other options short of the Holy One getting involved. In order for the money to have arrived via natural method a whole series or remarkable things have to take place. That said, it had to be deposited upstream from Tena Bar. This is impossible if Cooper jumped at 8:12. Unless, the FBI was very off on the jump time, or, the FBI was very off on the jet location. Otherwise, human intervention is the only other choice.
2) The placard arrived after being blown from the jet at 10K feet up. It fell to earth for several minutes in an atmosphere that was flowing briskly to the northeast. We (me, you, the FBI, everyone) are able to reverse engineer this to determine where the jet was when it flew out the back. That is a perfectly legitimate endeavor to ascertain the jet location at that moment in time.
3) The river flow pertains to the money on Tena Bar. So, yes, that is very important.
Let me be clear on this point. Something doesn't add up. There has to be bad data here somewhere. That is also a fact. All of these data points cannot be accurate.
-
what are you trying to claim?
I am simply saying that I believe the FBI flight path is wrong.
-
It is also important for me to add that this is a quality debate. Both of us have presented data (facts) to support our positions. Therefore, a robust debate, even disagreement, is a positive thing.
-
I can't stress enough as to speculation/hunch/assumptions, what ever term you use can't equal fact. you are correct. lots of problems but they can't be solved with missing data or facts.
I did 6 tests today from about 35-40 feet. the placard will float away if it tumbles. if it spins it corkscrews pretty much straight down. it appears to have several ways of getting to the ground which only allows one for each path. it would have to float to be the alternate path and basically corkscrew downward to be on the official path. either path can't have it both ways.
have to upload the video...
-
The FBI has admitted the jump time is probably wrong. the pilots give a time frame down to 8:15. there is no facts here to claim.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzxZSWq-mgc
-
pretty consistent with both samples...drift and spin test
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=862bUs8cQtE
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzxZSWq-mgc
I like it! Both vids. ;) ;)
-
The test shows me multiple ways to the ground. this was from a stationary point. the card made it's exit into the jet stream hauling ass. if it went into a spin I don't know the terminal on it but could explain some of the damage when it hit the tree's. I'm sure some of it was Cooper's doing.
similar to a skydiver making a good jump or going into a spin, or tumble.
-
Thanks, Shut. Good to see palm trees, again. Sigh.
-
The test shows me multiple ways to the ground. this was from a stationary point. the card made it's exit into the jet stream hauling ass. if it went into a spin I don't know the terminal on it but could explain some of the damage when it hit the tree's. I'm sure some of it was Cooper's doing.
similar to a skydiver making a good jump or going into a spin, or tumble.
Lots of unknowns. In any event, its within the zone of V23.
-
what are you trying to claim?
I am simply saying that I believe the FBI flight path is wrong.
The USAF analysis group could not determine exactly when and where Cooper jumped because, fundamentally, the crew screwed up and reported late and they didn't know where they had been when they scrambled to reverse engineer where they were at the time, or even what the exact time was.
If the Cook interview of Anderson is true, which may or may not be the case, the crew debated what signs (pressure bump) meant until finally (2-3 mins later) Rataczak abruptly radioed the company saying they thought Cooper had left.
None of that has anything to do with radar data determining the flight. That only has to do with uncertainty with where Cooper bailed and the time - and that is why the first LaCenter search map is constructed as it is. Its a probability map! The more time they wasted after 8:05-8:13 discussing the matter the closer to the Columbia they were ... and then years later Cooper money turns up on one of the beaches of the Columbia!
Nothing in that scenario means the original flight path is wrong. What it means is the crew's reporting of Cooper bailing was delayed with no time and position known with any accuracy.
-
I think the crew made several critical errors. one, not reporting the pressure bump or exit point correctly and two, not looking in the back to see if he left. most, if not all the copycat flights had the crew check for exit.
-
I think the crew made several critical errors. one, not reporting the pressure bump or exit point correctly and two, not looking in the back to see if he left. most, if not all the copycat flights had the crew check for exit.
If the Anderson interview is true, that is exactly what Anderson says happened.
-
I just got off the phone with Tom Kaye. he said lots of notes were in the files from reports of the jump time. ham operators were listening in as well. he seems satisfied with the 8:12 time.
He also liked the placard test. his comment is what made me think of it about the card possibly spinning down to the ground.
-
what are you trying to claim?
I am simply saying that I believe the FBI flight path is wrong.
The USAF analysis group could not determine exactly when and where Cooper jumped because, fundamentally, the crew screwed up and reported late and they didn't know where they had been when they scrambled to reverse engineer where they were at the time, or even what the exact time was.
If the Cook interview of Anderson is true, which may or may not be the case, the crew debated what signs (pressure bump) meant until finally (2-3 mins later) Rataczak abruptly radioed the company saying they thought Cooper had left.
None of that has anything to do with radar data determining the flight. That only has to do with uncertainty with where Cooper bailed and the time - and that is why the first LaCenter search map is constructed as it is. Its a probability map! The more time they wasted after 8:05-8:13 discussing the matter the closer to the Columbia they were ... and then years later Cooper money turns up on one of the beaches of the Columbia!
Nothing in that scenario means the original flight path is wrong. What it means is the crew's reporting of Cooper bailing was delayed with no time and position known with any accuracy.
Wouldn't all of this be on the flight recorders? The pressure bump, crew conversations about it, the crew finally calling it in?
It's stuff like this that doesn't make sense. Either they utilized info from the jet or not. If they did they could determine precisely when the crew thought Cooper had jumped.
-
I think the crew made several critical errors. one, not reporting the pressure bump or exit point correctly and two, not looking in the back to see if he left. most, if not all the copycat flights had the crew check for exit.
If the Anderson interview is true, that is exactly what Anderson says happened.
what do you mean?
-
Eric, if you recall it's even in the transcripts about the possibility of his exit. they didn't know until they landed whether or not he was still with them. they were suppose to flash the lights to mark the spot but failed to because they weren't sure.
I don't know if the flight recorder had the ability of pressure. the records state it was used for speed, direction and altitude. some do and some don't.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlY5W7be5jU
-
If not mistaken the flight recorders are on a loop and over run older recordings. they typically need the last minutes of discussion on tape.
-
Here are a couple of other questions I've pondered at length:
1) It seems unlikely that the placard was torn out of the jet by a gust of wind (although I suppose it's possible). That said, what purpose would DBC have in mind if he ripped it off?
2) There are significant pieces of the airstairs' side panels that were missing (torn away) when the jet landed in Reno. I have never read anything about any of these pieces being found. Furthermore, I assume that the most likely time that these pieces tore away was either when the jet landed in Reno, or when Cooper jumped given the "diving board" effect that occurred with the airstairs. Why wouldn't have any of these pieces been found in the FBI search area? I would assume that if law enforcement came across something like this in the middle of nowhere they would note it.
Any thoughts, anyone?
-
Cooper was frustrated trying to get the stairs down. I believe Cooper was responsible for the placard and possibly threw on the stairs..
the material on the stairs are not identifiable. the placard had writing on it...
-
The stairs were damaged due to a constant wind load beating on them for hours down to Reno. they are not made to be abused in the sky. they open and close for loading and unloading passengers.
-
I thought the maps and the plotting were infallible, yet we have an obvious discrepancy here. Why?
I don't think anyone believes this. look on the map and you will see "estimate"
The flight map can be off by one minute north and south and I believe one half mile east and west. If the map is off on the jump calculations how will that affect the search? do you believe they went right to where the estimate tells them he landed? they checked the entire area. not just where the estimate shows.
I agree that it can boil down to calculation errors, but not by almost 10 miles.
Tom Kaye said lots of information regarding the jump time was documented in the files. one map is the flight path and the other is a location of a possible LZ. they might differ from each other but it doesn't mean it's completely wrong.
does it make sense that Cooper wore loafers, should we shift it around and get a pair of boots on the plane.
We have now seen the placard can get to the ground in multiple ways. is the drift infallible?
The most damaging parts I see is the traffic controllers (multiple) stating where the plane was. this appears to line up with the flight path. is the path perfect, exact. doubtful. is the timing off, probably. was the drift distance right of where Cooper could of landed (infallible) doubtful. it's an estimate only. it gave them something to go by. a target area.
Can we really move the path because nothing was found? if we searched all around Tbar and Caterpillar island and find nothing do we discount R99's theory based on "nothing found" If we search west of Ridgefield and find nothing do we discount this as well or only discount in the original search area's?
with missing data it's very hard to come to a conclusion. manufacturing things isn't going to help either.
we need to hear things like the traffic controllers stating they weren't sure the plane left V23 or the Air Force saying the path is an educated guess. this doesn't appear to be the case.
-
Looking at the photo provided it appears it's possible they did check all the way to the Columbia. ridgefield would be in area 2 in the map in the photo. I can't tell if it goes all the way to the Columbia.
-
To lend more credibility to my “the placard is very important” claim, I am presenting the following information.
First of all, Sandia Laboratories did extensive research on free-falling rectangular plates in 1968 for the US government. A PDF copy of their report can be found at https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a395124.pdf .
The report brings out some important info including that during their testing, which involved multiple drops from 2,000 feet and 10,000 feet, they demonstrated that all such objects eventually rotate and that this rotation along with ever-shifting access provides lift and causes the placards to move forward. In fact, the 10,000 foot drops showed the plates traveled 6,000 feet (over a mile) under static weather conditions. Moreover, it provides some beyond-my-pay-grade formulas to determine movement of such plates.
R99 used this report in the analysis he did for Tom Kaye on the placard find. Robert made five assumptions:
1) The placard was 6” X 6” = .25 sq. ft.
2) The placard weighed 1 ounce.
3) The wind was from 225 at 18 knots.
4) The jet was at 10,000 feet when the placard flew out the back.
5) The elevation of the placard find was 1,500 feet.
Utilizing this data R99 determined that the placard traveled “conservatively” 2.68 NM, in other words just over 3 SM.
Last night I closely reviewed pictures of the placard and asked him to revisit his distance based upon what I observed, which includes:
1) The placard was about 6” X 4” = .167 sq. ft.
2) The placard weighed about 1/3 of an ounce. (This is rough based upon the fact that it is 61% the size of a #10 business envelop, which when holding four 8.5” X 11” sheets of paper is just under 1 oz. according to the USPS.)
3) The wind average was approximately 24 knots.
4) The elevation of the placard find was approximately 1,300 feet (according to Google Earth).
Extrapolating these numbers merely in a linear fashion you arrive at a drift for the placard of 8-9 SM. Which, if you look on my 8:12 Arc Theory, puts it in the same location as my Western-most flight path and also in the same location as R99’s Maylay-Canby flight path theory.
-
The data is pretty much based on dropping the card and drifting. the card went out the back of a plane at high speeds. any data on that? any data on what the card will do when it hits the jet stream? this is basing it on a perfect drift from 10,000.
my card was 6 x 6 and weighs about an ounce. it showed different characteristics. this is a fact. if the card did spiral downward then it is going to line up basically with the area of it's exit.
If I give you all kinds of specs on how straight a 22 caliber bullet will fly and shoot the gun in high winds. what do you think will happen to all the data I gave to prove how straight a 22 will fly?
-
I've mentioned this before. it's like looking into an old cold case where multiple people seen the suspect go into the front door to commit the crime and decades later someone saying it makes more sense for the suspect to have went through the backdoor where he wouldn't have been seen and using that as fact.
I can't tell you how the card got where it was found. but several things lead me to believe how it got there. variables are at play here and when you have variables it makes it hard to state things as fact.
You are trying to discredit the entire radar system (two of them) based on your facts. discounting lots of people who were there and tell a different story with no reason to lie or be that far off with something they do on a daily basis. I'm shocked no collisions ever occurred around Portland. not one which you would expect with planes flying around almost 8 miles off course?
-
The data is pretty much based on dropping the card and drifting. the card went out the back of a plane at high speeds. any data on that? any data on what the card will do when it hits the jet stream? this is basing it on a perfect drift from 10,000.
my card was 6 x 6 and weighs about an ounce. it showed different characteristics. this is a fact. if the card did spiral downward then it is going to line up basically with the area of it's exit.
If I give you all kinds of specs on how straight a 22 caliber bullet will fly and shoot the gun in high winds. what do you think will happen to all the data I gave to prove how straight a 22 will fly?
As I said before, the AF did a study on paper, plastic, etc being dropped. Hom found the study and referred it to me. Im too busy to look for it. It wont matter to the Cooper zealots anyway. They will just make up their own account.
-
If you base the theory on a drift then it does have credibility. that would have to be set in stone though which we are finding out is not correct. theories are always good. when you start using them as fact is when it's starts becoming a problem.
I can take an insert from the 302's that state the search area goes all the way to the Columbia and turn around and tell you that he "more than likely" splashed in the river and died. the money ended up on the beach years later. end of story. I have the money at the river, evidence the jump zone goes to the Columbia. it has to be. it makes sense, or he lost the money over the river and lived. still makes sense? lots of bodies are never recovered from the Columbia, it's a fact, so this fits. I just need a neat name to call the theory.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O966ZBEZTb4
-
What you're telling me is that the placard dropped either straight down or, perhaps, even drifted southwest into the wind about a mile. After all, if the FBI's flight path is accurate, that's what appears to have happened.
-
Eric, try to keep up? the flight path is an estimate, just as it states right on the map. it has a margin of error built into it forward and backwards and side to side. can be one minute plus or minus and around one half mile side to side. I'm not telling you anything. I'm explaining that variables are at play with the placard. we don't know what the placard did. it suggests that it possibly spiraled downward since the only available evidence is the path.
The map was made by the USAF. the times were calculated onto the X's in order to try and located the possible, I'm possible jump time. the time and area was changed over time due to information coming in, possible error's as stated by a traffic controller. McChord was responsible for tracking anything that threatens our safety. to believe these guys threw something together doesn't fly with me.
The jump map seems to use the 8:11 location while many use the 8:12 location and as Bruce claims Rat said 8:13 as well as 5 - 10 minutes after Cooper's last communication. that gives a time frame to 8:15. ham operators were listening in and gave input to help locate the time. the FDR, helped with speed, altitude, and heading. the traffic controllers state they never left V23. I don't think any of the pilots say this either.
The money location is not a fact in anything other than belonging to part of the $200,000. if you can't prove without a doubt how that money got on Tbar you certainly can not use it as fact to anything else. even if it's proven to be a plant it doesn't move the path or if it came out of the Columbia.
when I see the placard can spiral downward vs drifting. it opens new windows for more explanations. it makes it harder to prove where and how it got there. we do know it's in the area of the path itself. if it was 5 miles west of the path we would now know it spiraled.
again, I'm not telling you anything. I'm not trying to discredit the theory. if anything I'm trying to resolve issues by doing simulations and testing theories. I'm going by known evidence and sorting it out. I will give my opinion based on what has been presented.
-
R99's theory makes a lot of sense in many ways, but did it really happen. it goes against a huge amount of evidence and people. either it was completely wrong or a huge coverup is at play. the FBI is known for covering things up. they want him dead more than anything so they don't look foolish. the escape from Alcatraz was no different. 3 guys disappear from a escape proof prison. documents surface years later of a raft found and a car stolen the next day.
did this happen here, I don't know but it would involve a lot of people..
-
We're just going to have to agree to disagree about the placard. The thing drifted. It had no choice. It's simple physics. Even if Cooper no-pulled he would have drifted. This is why the search area extends to the northeast. The placard didn't drop from 40 feet, it dropped from 10,000 feet. Zero drift=no way in hell.
Regarding the tolerances, I understand that. I also understand that the 8:12 minute involves approximately 3 miles of movement along the path. That's a lot of real estate.
The jet crossed the river at 8:17 according to the FBI. Considering that they're going with an 8:11 drop time, that is way the hell off if he landed near PDX in the river.
In closing, what I do know is that nothing has been found where the FBI said stuff should be found.
-
You go against me with words when I actually showed what the card can do, really? you have all figured out...
I have nothing further to say...
-
You go against me with words when I actually showed what the card can do, really? you have all figured out...
I have nothing further to say...
Shutter, this isn't me saying this, the report I provided a link to above discusses this.
When you first spin the placard it cuts through the cross-wind like a saw until it enters a rotating wobbling kind of action. As the report states, regardless of how the placard (plate) is initially dropped, eventually it enters the same type of pattern. Moreover, it says as the speed of the object increases in velocity it increases its lift as well as "decreases" its drag, which they note is counter-intuitive but makes sense mathematically.
Either way, enough said on the subject.
-
Plates in the air drop with no disturbance.
32" x 27 x .69
48" x 18" x .50 weighing up 44 lbs?
Really guys?
That was a controlled test with plates much larger and released from the back of the helicopter to minimize any disturbance.
those plates and speed would be dramatic as they fell. 44 lbs.......44 lbs vs one ounce lol.
-
I'd like to return to the subject of the revised LZ that Georger mentioned a few pages ago, based upon the FBI conference held several years after the skyjacking. What I read was that Orchard, WA - about 12 miles north of Portland - was the new launch point.
My question is: where do we now think Cooper landed? Yes, a little to the northeast of Orchard, but do we have any specificity? Georger, any thoughts? Anyone?
-
It's the far edge of the pilots stating he jumped 5-10 minutes after his last contact....
-
So, Shut, are you saying that the Orchards, WA launch point is the furthest south 305 could have traveled under the current time frames?
Further review: If Cooper deployed he would have drifted how far, exactly? 3-5 miles to the northeast? Winds were approximately 30 mph at 10,000 feet? Yes? That would have put Cooper in the Hockinson area, far to the south of Amboy/Ariel, et. al.
I'll be calling Tom McDowell soon, to hear what he has to say about this development. He was the commander of the search team for the Clark County Sheriff's Department.
Could be time for a new tromp in the woods....
-
This is not a new theory. Sluggo and Carr did it if I'm not mistaken. this is going by what Rat said in regards to Cooper jumping somewhere between 5-10 minutes after the last contact at 8:05. I believe the area was searched anyway? the grid I see from the photo is large and sectioned.
-
Further review: If Cooper deployed he would have drifted how far, exactly? 3-5 miles to the northeast? Winds were approximately 30 mph at 10,000 feet? Yes? That would have put Cooper in the Hockinson area, far to the south of Amboy/Ariel, et. al.
Yes, is it true. I haven't a clue.
-
Further review: If Cooper deployed he would have drifted how far, exactly? 3-5 miles to the northeast? Winds were approximately 30 mph at 10,000 feet? Yes? That would have put Cooper in the Hockinson area, far to the south of Amboy/Ariel, et. al.
Yes, is it true. I haven't a clue.
I think they thought Hockinson to Orchard. Sluggo wanted to investigate cemeteries in the Orchard area?
-
The 8:15 location is just north of Orchard. I never really looked into this angle..
-
So, Shut, are you saying that the Orchards, WA launch point is the furthest south 305 could have traveled under the current time frames?
Further review: If Cooper deployed he would have drifted how far, exactly? 3-5 miles to the northeast? Winds were approximately 30 mph at 10,000 feet? Yes? That would have put Cooper in the Hockinson area, far to the south of Amboy/Ariel, et. al.
I'll be calling Tom McDowell soon, to hear what he has to say about this development. He was the commander of the search team for the Clark County Sheriff's Department.
Could be time for a new tromp in the woods....
Sluggo said a number of things inr eply to Carr that were mysterious - one post he asked Carr if the Feds had a new search in the Orchard area! ... at first nobody picked up on this .... Carr replied 'cant talk here'. What's that add up to?
The next thing Sluggo surfaced with an interest in searching cemeteries in the Orchard area. ! Some at DZ ridiculed that idea... who knows what all of that adds up to except it was part of an overall attempt to push the jump time south by minutes. I have always thought that was one of the reasons the FBI and Carr even went public and opened this up for public discussion, especially on a jumper website with a bunch of technical people available!
-
searching cemeteries for what reason. bodies, or names on stones, or the general area?
-
searching cemeteries for what reason. bodies, or names on stones, or the general area?
Unclaimed bodies was what I recall. This is why several people ridiculed Sluggo at the time - he took it for a few days then had a negative reaction and didnt post for a while .
Sluggo then asked Carr straight out: 'Have you and the FBI already searched this area or are you searching it now and cant talk about it?' That stunned everyone. Carr replied he couldnt talk about it and would get back, then he requested Sluggo to call him privately.
-
My guess is you could find out any unclaimed bodies by going to the county. they would have all bodies in the county? not sure on the time frame they keep bodies.
-
Let me post this map. Note the time and place 2012. It says oscillations began!
What does Cooper do if he's on the stairs and he hasnt jumped yet? There are two turns coming up - does he delay - what? Does he wait until the last turn and things stabilize at ... 2015? At this point he could wind up in the Columbia?
-
My guess is you could find out any unclaimed bodies by going to the county. they would have all bodies in the county? not sure on the time frame they keep bodies.
I never got to talk to Sluggo privately but he and Carr were talking privately --- who knows what was said.
-
I've said it for years that it's possible they were trying to shake him up but the pilots have never made any claims of this. Rat made a comment of dumping him in the ocean. I would of said something if I did that. I don't know if it happened or not. they could roll left and right waving the wings soft enough to shake him up this way too. might cause him to come back in, I don't know...
-
I've said it for years that it's possible they were trying to shake him up but the pilots have never made any claims of this. Rat made a comment of dumping him in the ocean. I would of said something if I did that. I don't know if it happened or not. they could roll left and right waving the wings soft enough to shake him up this way too. might cause him to come back in, I don't know...
Thats exactly what a lot of people think. And they waited until he was on the stairs and they knew it and they had a turn to make. Or they just turned to shake him off? Others doubt this because of the risk of his bomb going off.
I personally think he bailed in this time frame, one way or another. I think he always intended to jump close to Vancouver-Portland. If the Anderson interview is true then that is exactly what happened and when.
-
Just like everything else. it's a crap shoot. it might of worked and he splashed, or it never happened because Cooper might of came back in saying do that again and "I'll do the job" and then he could of already been gone......
-
Just like everything else. it's a crap shoot. it might of worked and he splashed, or it never happened because Cooper might of came back in saying do that again and "I'll do the job" and then he could of already been gone......
Tina asked him specifically before she left what he was going to do with the bomb - the whole crew wanted to know. He said in effect he would disarm it when he left.
-
I think he said he would disarm it or take it with him...
-
I think he said he would disarm it or take it with him...
yes ... agree.
-
perhaps he blew up and vaporized on the way down... :rofl:
-
perhaps he blew up and vaporized on the way down... :rofl:
Maybe Janet saw it! ;)
-
There is something radically wrong and missing, in the record of this hijacking!
They had to know when he had the stairs open, he was going to bail! It was OBVIOUS! that escaping that plane was his primary goal, to the completion of his job. He said no funny stuff get the show on the road. Nobody in their right minds was expecting him to actually jump near Seattle, or ride the plane all the way to Reno ... The standing order from Nyrop to the crew was "cooperate to get rid of him asap". They were not allowed to simply take him out over the ocean and dump him ... Cooper himself is NOT going to bail into the wilderness ... and the only next place after Seattle is is the turns and the slowing they have to make to navigate around Vancouver-Portland. I think Cooper knew that all along and that was his plan.
And either the crew and everyone else were oblivious to this option and what Cooper was doing, OR we are missing all of the important communications that actually occurred between the plane and the Company etc in the 8:10-8:20 time period when the plane begins its turns to navigate V23 at Vancouver-Portland.
We have almost nothing to document this time period! Why is that?
-
Anybody have contact info for Sluggo that is up-to-date? If so, please let him know I would like contact. Thanks.
brucesmith At rainierconnect Dot com.
-
There is something radically wrong and missing, in the record of this hijacking!
They had to know when he had the stairs open, he was going to bail! It was OBVIOUS! that escaping that plane was his primary goal, to the completion of his job. He said no funny stuff get the show on the road. Nobody in their right minds was expecting him to actually jump near Seattle, or ride the plane all the way to Reno ... The standing order from Nyrop to the crew was "cooperate to get rid of him asap". They were not allowed to simply take him out over the ocean and dump him ... Cooper himself is NOT going to bail into the wilderness ... and the only next place after Seattle is is the turns and the slowing they have to make to navigate around Vancouver-Portland. I think Cooper knew that all along and that was his plan.
And either the crew and everyone else were oblivious to this option and what Cooper was doing, OR we are missing all of the important communications that actually occurred between the plane and the Company etc in the 8:10-8:20 time period when the plane begins its turns to navigate V23 at Vancouver-Portland.
We have almost nothing to document this time period! Why is that?
I think it could boil down to Cooper catching them completely off guard. they gave indication of him on the stairs in the transcripts. the jump seems to be a mystery or they were talking on the "company phone" they failed to signal or even check the plane to see if he left...(chickens?) or were they told not to go back into the cabin. Cooper said it, but did NWO?
Later in the transcripts they make a statement of no communication in the last 55 minutes. this was made at 8:52? then the Marshal wants them to slowly climb in altitude to make him drowsy. apparently, they still had no idea if he was on or off the plane. they also try to make contact using the inter-phone. the last attempt was 0046 (10:30 ish?)
I'm guessing Reno had there hands full wondering if he bailed several miles before the airport and checking the plane. must of been a cluster for a while trying to figure everything out. I'm sure they quickly briefed the crew to find out where he could of left the plane and started working on a search area. Time goes by and more info comes in.
Perhaps it's time to open a thread and go through the case step by step as it happened. a recreation from start to finish?
-
There is something radically wrong and missing, in the record of this hijacking!
They had to know when he had the stairs open, he was going to bail! It was OBVIOUS! that escaping that plane was his primary goal, to the completion of his job. He said no funny stuff get the show on the road. Nobody in their right minds was expecting him to actually jump near Seattle, or ride the plane all the way to Reno ... The standing order from Nyrop to the crew was "cooperate to get rid of him asap". They were not allowed to simply take him out over the ocean and dump him ... Cooper himself is NOT going to bail into the wilderness ... and the only next place after Seattle is is the turns and the slowing they have to make to navigate around Vancouver-Portland. I think Cooper knew that all along and that was his plan.
And either the crew and everyone else were oblivious to this option and what Cooper was doing, OR we are missing all of the important communications that actually occurred between the plane and the Company etc in the 8:10-8:20 time period when the plane begins its turns to navigate V23 at Vancouver-Portland.
We have almost nothing to document this time period! Why is that?
I think it could boil down to Cooper catching them completely off guard. they gave indication of him on the stairs in the transcripts. the jump seems to be a mystery or they were talking on the "company phone" they failed to signal or even check the plane to see if he left...(chickens?) or were they told not to go back into the cabin. Cooper said it, but did NWO?
Later in the transcripts they make a statement of no communication in the last 55 minutes. this was made at 8:52? then the Marshal wants them to slowly climb in altitude to make him drowsy. apparently, they still had no idea if he was on or off the plane. they also try to make contact using the inter-phone. the last attempt was 0046 (10:30 ish?)
I'm guessing Reno had there hands full wondering if he bailed several miles before the airport and checking the plane. must of been a cluster for a while trying to figure everything out. I'm sure they quickly briefed the crew to find out where he could of left the plane and started working on a search area. Time goes by and more info comes in.
Perhaps it's time to open a thread and go through the case step by step as it happened. a recreation from start to finish?
Key moments -
19:54 PST Flt 305 reports: Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him and [she] thinks he will jump. Pilot Comm. with Flt-Ops MSP
19:54 PST Flt Ops MSP advised that they have a direct phone patch hooked up on 131.8 MHz. Flt-Ops MSP Comm. with Flt-Ops MSP
They are ready to report on Cooper bailing ...
20:05 PST Pilot reports that he has tried twice to contact Cooper unsuccessfully, then he came on the PA system and said everything is OK. Pilot Comm. with Flt-Ops MSP
20:12 PST Flt 305 advises they are getting some oscillations in the cabin, Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. Pilot Comm. with Flt-Ops MSP [on the revised chart 11-08, this position is moved south of original FBI search map position]
20:20 PST Flt Ops MSP request Go to 131.8 MHz. Flt-Ops MSP Attempted Comm. with Flt 305
20:20 PST Flt-Ops SEA advises Flt 305 is already on that frequency Flt-Ops SEA Comm. between Flt-Ops MSP and Flt-Ops SEA
By now according to Anderson they knew he was gone and Ratczk has radioed it in ...
BIG LAPSE WITH NO COMMS REPORTED!
20:33 PST Flt 305 reports still at 10,000 ft.
20:33 to 21:43 PST
21:00 = 9:00pm This period is uneventful? Comms. consists of Radar Station hand-offs, altimeter settings etc, The last altimeter setting was at Montague, CA at 21:41 PST. So they were near the OR/CA border just SW of Klamath Falls when they changed altitude.
-
The flt Path discussion has been taken here: https://themountainnewswa.net/2018/11/25/db-cooper-cooperites-celebrate-the-47th-anniversary-of-the-skyjacking-with-conference/
:congrats:
-
Flyjack is implying the jump occurred at 8:09 based on looking over the flight data recorder with a microscope. there is clearly 5 minutes between Cooper's last contact and the crew reporting the oscillation. this can't be changed. if the time's were not on the transcripts then something of value could be noted.
They report the oscillation and not the pressure bump.
The plane was in fact in the same area as the transcripts show at around 8:10 according to simulations. Flyjack is correct it could be off by a minute but that also applies to being off a minute ahead as well. calculation are very handy but simulation will help further the calculations.
I will have to look again but I only recall the 302 talking about the auto pilot and not the "little Bobs" these are what was seen with the microscope and could be anything from wind or turbulence causing the auto pilot to make adjustments. I believe it was Scott who did feel a change in pitch while Cooper was on the stairs.
The original search area began there until more data came in moving the search area south.
Flyjack no longer comments here so I replied to him which I have a right to do....
-
I had some time to kill yesterday as my wife had a appointment in nearby Castle Rock. I took a ride up to the area of the Placard find location. It’s quite a few miles East of I 5. I’m not sure exactly how many miles “ as the crow flies “, but it’s quite a jaunt via wheels. Silver Lake is 7 to 8 miles, Toutle is 10 miles and it’s S E of Toutle. The area has been heavily hunted and logged over the last 47 years so it’s doubtful anything Cooper related is still lying around. I think Carroll Hicks has passed away but I’ve never got the name of his hunting partner. I am friends with several who grew up in Toutle and Longview/Kelso area. I encountered several logging trucks exiting the area stacked high so there’s plenty of logging activity as we speak.
-
Flyjack is implying the jump occurred at 8:09 based on looking over the flight data recorder with a microscope. there is clearly 5 minutes between Cooper's last contact and the crew reporting the oscillation. this can't be changed. if the time's were not on the transcripts then something of value could be noted.
They report the oscillation and not the pressure bump.
The plane was in fact in the same area as the transcripts show at around 8:10 according to simulations. Flyjack is correct it could be off by a minute but that also applies to being off a minute ahead as well. calculation are very handy but simulation will help further the calculations.
I will have to look again but I only recall the 302 talking about the auto pilot and not the "little Bobs" these are what was seen with the microscope and could be anything from wind or turbulence causing the auto pilot to make adjustments. I believe it was Scott who did feel a change in pitch while Cooper was on the stairs.
The original search area began there until more data came in moving the search area south.
Flyjack no longer comments here so I replied to him which I have a right to do....
More 302 stuff. When are we going to get to see these 302's?
I assume little bobs seen through a microscope on a FDR would refer to change in altitude? Little bobs in what?
Little Bob as plane passed over Camp Washington at 8:06 ? Where is Camp Washington?
What is a 'little bob' of some parameter for a 727 flying under the configs 305 was flying? Is there a BIG BOB? Little bobs seen only under a microscope ... BIG BOBs lift crew out of their seats?
What happened to 'could see the lights of Vancouver coming up at ..." ? Is that now nullified by a 'little bob' or a 'big bob' over Camp Washington at 8:06'?
What FDR data/parameters are being discussed in these 302's?
*If it was known/proved by somebody that 305 was over at Camp Washington at 8:06 then why is the Search map so big and extending all the way into Oregon? Why didnt they just go to Camp Washington, knock on a door, and ask "Is Cooper here?" :rofl:
** What exactly is Flyjack seeing today that everyone missed back then ??
BTW: That FDR only measured speed, altitude and direction, magnetic deviation. It did not measure pressure. So the 'little bobs' are 'bobilations' in what?
-
For God's sake share these 302's! That is standard protocol in any analysis.
What are the dates of these 302 ... and their whole contact?
PUBLISH THE 302'S !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Georger, I just got home this very second.. the 302's are in the FBI vault. I haven't been there yet to pull them out.
-
Georger, I just got home this very second.. the 302's are in the FBI vault. I haven't been there yet to pull them out.
no rush!
-
here is one...
-
here is one...
Man... if we could get that guy's entire analysis of the FDR, we'd probably get an accurate time for the jump... Where is *that* document...
-
here is one...
Man... if we could get that guy's entire analysis of the FDR, we'd probably get an accurate time for the jump... Where is *that* document...
All the data concerning the flight path is missing....
-
I had some time to kill yesterday as my wife had a appointment in nearby Castle Rock. I took a ride up to the area of the Placard find location. It’s quite a few miles East of I 5. I’m not sure exactly how many miles “ as the crow flies “, but it’s quite a jaunt via wheels. Silver Lake is 7 to 8 miles, Toutle is 10 miles and it’s S E of Toutle. The area has been heavily hunted and logged over the last 47 years so it’s doubtful anything Cooper related is still lying around. I think Carroll Hicks has passed away but I’ve never got the name of his hunting partner. I am friends with several who grew up in Toutle and Longview/Kelso area. I encountered several logging trucks exiting the area stacked high so there’s plenty of logging activity as we speak.
That's my sense, Kermit - that the placard was found a long ways east of I-5. Now the question is, where was 305? How far east of I-5 was the plane?
That issue seems to still be in doubt.
-
What does I-5 have to do with the flight path?
-
I have decided to get back into the simulator cockpit again. some interest as come to my attention from others and the work is incomplete and needs to be documented. I will probably need help this time. in order to document any time stamping on a map might require two people. it has to be someone with aviation experience with map reading. I'm not sure the simulator will document the path itself that can be plotted after the flight. it has a blackbox but I don't know much about it....
I think a map showing exactly where the plane was during the flight will be just as valuable as showing a video of the flight itself. the map will show minute by minute plots.
That's where I stand at the moment. it's been bothering me for some time now and I believe the time is right to get it right...
Shutter
-
I have to check and see if the apps I have on the tablet to run the simulator with real time aviation maps still work. lots of cobwebs to get out of the system to fire it up and get into operation and then run some accuracy tests again. I have forgotten a lot but I'm sure it will all come running back. :chr2:
-
here is one...
I guess this is one of the cluster of 302s dated 12/2 to 12/9. After earlier documents at 11/24, 25, 26 ...
Again I ask: what FDR parameter does the 'little bob' at 8:09 refer to? Altitude?
And the assessed position of 305 at 8:09 in these docs is where ..... ?
Recall that at the 1976 Conference the DZ was moved clear down to "12 miles north of Portland" !
-
The last paragraph...
I'm not sure how they looked at the data. it's typically on foil. someone familiar with these boxes needs to answer that question. it scratches the data on the foil like a lie detector would.
-
The last paragraph...
I'm not sure how they looked at the data. it's typically on foil. someone familiar with these boxes needs to answer that question. it scratches the data on the foil like a lie detector would.
But what parameter does the little bob refer to? Change in what?
-
Pitch in the aircraft..nose up/down
-
It's hard to say since it would pick up anything that counters the auto-pilot. that would be wind and turbulence that could cause "little Bobs" the auto-pilot is constantly making adjustments to keep it on the course it was given.
-
It's hard to say since it would pick up anything that counters the auto-pilot. that would be wind and turbulence that could cause "little Bobs" the auto-pilot is constantly making adjustments to keep it on the course it was given.
Is this during the period and the place where they said they had Turbulence ?
BTW its the pressure bump that is associated with Cooper leaving. FDR's dont measure pressure directly.
-
Turbulence can happen anywhere. bad area's are known and they will try to go around it.
-
It's hard to say since it would pick up anything that counters the auto-pilot. that would be wind and turbulence that could cause "little Bobs" the auto-pilot is constantly making adjustments to keep it on the course it was given.
Is this during the period and the place where they said they had Turbulence ?
BTW its the pressure bump that is associated with Cooper leaving. FDR's dont measure pressure directly.
correct, but they used a microscope to see the small movements on the data.
It's odd they use the information but expand it further south at the same time?
-
It's hard to say since it would pick up anything that counters the auto-pilot. that would be wind and turbulence that could cause "little Bobs" the auto-pilot is constantly making adjustments to keep it on the course it was given.
Is this during the period and the place where they said they had Turbulence ?
BTW its the pressure bump that is associated with Cooper leaving. FDR's dont measure pressure directly.
correct, but they used a microscope to see the small movements on the data.
It's odd they use the information but expand it further south at the same time?
yes we had all of this before ... including the microscope ... I just dont remember what the conclusion was if any ...
-
I see Flyjacks point but if the FDR had a clock at the bottom they should of been able to match everything, including the bump. not sure what the bump would do to the plane.
-
This must of been before they spoke to the pilots. didn't Scott say the plane pitched downward slightly...the document says they might not of known...
-
gotta hit the sack...I'll check in the morning...
-
gotta hit the sack...I'll check in the morning...
R99 reminds us about the flight comms (email last night):
All:
First, it should be noted that there are two entries in the notes by the NWA station personnel at SEATAC.
One states that at 8:22 PM PST the airliner was 23 DME miles south of the PDX VORTAC (Portland VORTAC, now the Battleground VORTAC). This is probably the time that the printed teletype copy of the message was sent on the ARNIC system.
The second entry states that at 8:18 PM PST the airliner was 23 DME miles south of the PDX VORTAC. This is probably the time that the actual voice message was received over the phone patch.
By 8:18 PM PST, the airliner was 20+ nautical miles past Tina Bar and about 7 minutes after the presumed Cooper jump time. As I remember it, the crew heard the sound of the rear stairs slamming shut and then 5 or 10 minutes later realized that the sound probably represented the time of Cooper's jump.
The two redacted sections between 8:13 PM and 8:33 PM probably concerned the flight crew and the Seattle ATC people discussing Cooper's probable jump time and location over the ATC radio frequencies.
During this time frame, the flight crew was probably discussing the same thing with the FBI and NWA personnel over the ARINC radio system. A study by Fred Poynter at the WSHM indicates that a number of those ARINC teletype messages are also missing.
Both the Seattle ATC transcripts and the ARINC teletype messages have been redacted or deleted for this time period.
Robert
-
I thot 377 had already identified which FDR was on 305? I cant find it in my notes and the search engine at DZ is useless - turns up nothing! Flyjack now says the FDR may have been a model .....
'I found the 727 had the flight recorder in the ventral stair cavity, the Fairchild Flight Data Recorder Model F-5424 was the one that kept coming up for the 727’s of that era in searches.. Seems to be the most common but no evidence that model was in NORJAK.. other models are similar. It could measure up to 5 parameters,, pressure altitude, indicated air speed, magnetic heading and vertical accelerations. These things do not have a timestamp, they sync with radio transmissions and use ground comms to create a timeline'
If Cooper bailed at 8:09 somewhere north of Ariel as now contended, what sense do these comms make?
20:05 PST Pilot reports that he has tried twice to contact Cooper unsuccessfully, then he came on the PA system and said everything is OK. Pilot Comm. with Flt-Ops MSP
20:12 PST Flt 305 advises they are getting some oscillations in the cabin, Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. Pilot Comm. with Flt-Ops MSP
This puts oscillations and bump occurring AFTER a jump at 8:09?
Why wouldnt there be a LITTLE BOB or a BIG BOB for oscillations and bump whereas there is a LITTLE BOB for Cooper leaving the stairs ? Or did the 20:12 event actually happen at 8:09?
This is getting very complicated - again. :rofl:
I guess we can now wipe pieces of history off the monument! Hell I never could read hieroglyphics anyway! "Could see the lights of Vancouver coming up" turns out to be an straight out lie. In his next post Flyjack will eliminate the pilots and the crew ... and scores of others, from the DB Cooper Hijacking. There must be a new 302 on that somewhere. :rofl:
-
I believe the area you show was the first location to search. the model FDR 305 had wasn't really put under a microscope as a option. it's actually how the foil was read. see the photo provided shows the microscope table used for viewing the foil. it had 5 parameters. Pressure altitude, indicated airspeed, magnetic heading, vertical acceleration (load factor) and
microphone (radio) keying versus time
I can't get the photo small enough. here is the link with the photo I tried to provide..
https://www.asasi.org/papers/2006/Role_of_Flight_Recording_Campbell.pdf
also, I'm not completely sold on the transcripts having any redacted material. it would be visible where they covered the data. this would be removing the data, or hiding it..this would be grounds for a conspiracy to cover up. if they simply didn't want anyone to read the data they would cover it (redact it). again, this suggests they flat out removed it..that's not how they redact things.
-
Hi 377
any idea what this means?
microphone (radio) keying versus time
and your take on the photo below...
-
I believe the area you show was the first location to search. the model FDR 305 had wasn't really put under a microscope as a option. it's actually how the foil was read. see the photo provided shows the microscope table used for viewing the foil. it had 5 parameters. Pressure altitude, indicated airspeed, magnetic heading, vertical acceleration (load factor) and
microphone (radio) keying versus time
I can't get the photo small enough. here is the link with the photo I tried to provide..
https://www.asasi.org/papers/2006/Role_of_Flight_Recording_Campbell.pdf
also, I'm not completely sold on the transcripts having any redacted material. it would be visible where they covered the data. this would be removing the data, or hiding it..this would be grounds for a conspiracy to cover up. if they simply didn't want anyone to read the data they would cover it (redact it). again, this suggests they flat out removed it..that's not how they redact things.
Are these the photos you want, in the pdf?
I looked but cant find any good microscope view of a foil tape.
-
foil tape
-
Hi 377
any idea what this means?
microphone (radio) keying versus time
and your take on the photo below...
The core of the argument is that 8:09 real time is 8:12 TTY or keying time. The FDR records all true keying events in 'true time'. That's my understanding ?
What bothers me about this equivalence (with a dz north of Ariel!) is it conflicts with other statements made by the crew. For one, there is no way Rataczak can be seeing the lights of Vancouver coming up, from 8:09 = north of Ariel ...... unless Ratczk has the vision of an eagle!
Do we now change all communications timestamps to reflect this difference? Subtract 3 mins from every TTY timestamp?
BTW, where is the foil tape today? Or is it LOST too! :nono:
-
Anybody have contact info for Sluggo that is up-to-date? If so, please let him know I would like contact. Thanks.
brucesmith At rainierconnect Dot com.
A certain member of this site (not me) has been in contact with Sluggo within the past month or so. Post your reasons for wanting to contact Sluggo and perhaps that member might be willing to assist you. But don't count on it for reasons that probably won't be posted here.
-
What does I-5 have to do with the flight path?
Nothing, but the placard was found about 9.5 statute miles straight east of I-5.
ADDENDUM: Eric Ulis and I have been doing some work on the flight path recently and it develops that the placard was found about 0.7 nautical miles WEST and up wind of the FBI flight path. This should be the silver spike into the heart of that flight path.
-
What does I-5 have to do with the flight path?
Nothing, but the placard was found about 9.5 statute miles straight east of I-5.
WELCOME HOME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :congrats:
-
Placard update .I have done 3 tests so far. I first let the placard just drift and the next card I put a spin on it. The spin always goes straight down. Why wouldn't there be a chance of this happening 5 miles west?
Just remember that the entire air mass was moving to the northeast even if your tests suggest that the placard was descending straight down with respect to that air mass.
-
How did they get so far off as to not knowing the plane was 8 miles west?
Is this accurate?
What I mean is this. Does the controller watching the blip on the screen have anything on the screen that shows precisely where the blip is in relation to other landmarks.. in other words, if there was a satellite image of the ground below the blip super-imposed on the radar screen that would be a good guide. However, if the radar screen is just black with a blip on it how does the controller known precisely where the jet is in relation to certain things?
Also, wasn't this information, and subsequent flight path, super-imposed on a map after the fact? Perhaps in real time the controller didn't know precisely where the jet was relative to other locations so as to be able to judge if the jet was close to Tena Bar.
Your last sentence is correct. It is unlikely that the controller's radar display included anything other than what appears on the IFR enroute charts. That is, no topographical information such as is included on the aircraft VFR sectional charts would be on his screen.
-
How did they get so far off as to not knowing the plane was 8 miles west?
Is this accurate?
What I mean is this. Does the controller watching the blip on the screen have anything on the screen that shows precisely where the blip is in relation to other landmarks.. in other words, if there was a satellite image of the ground below the blip super-imposed on the radar screen that would be a good guide. However, if the radar screen is just black with a blip on it how does the controller known precisely where the jet is in relation to certain things?
Also, wasn't this information, and subsequent flight path, super-imposed on a map after the fact? Perhaps in real time the controller didn't know precisely where the jet was relative to other locations so as to be able to judge if the jet was close to Tena Bar.
Your last sentence is correct. It is unlikely that the controller's radar display included anything other than what appears on the IFR enroute charts. That is, no topographical information such as is included on the aircraft VFR sectional charts would be on his screen.
-
Also..
Found info dated 18 June 1964 that claims 727 flown "satisfactorily" with Airstairs lowered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201860.html?search=airstairs
Cooper and Rataczak argued about the aircraft taking off with the stairs unlocked and partially down. After agreeing to takeoff with the stairs up, Cooper told Tina that he knew that the aircraft could take off with the stairs deployed.
The FAA probably required Boeing to demonstrate that the aircraft could fly with the stairs deployed in flight. In my judgement, the FAA probably did not require that Boeing demonstrate that the aircraft could takeoff with the stairs down. In airline service, if they couldn't close the stairs, they would probably stay on the ground until the stairs were repaired and could be closed.
This suggests that Cooper's source of information for taking off with the stairs down came from somewhere other than Boeing.
-
Also..
Found info dated 18 June 1964 that claims 727 flown "satisfactorily" with Airstairs lowered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201860.html?search=airstairs
Cooper and Rataczak argued about the aircraft taking off with the stairs unlocked and partially down. After agreeing to takeoff with the stairs up, Cooper told Tina that he knew that the aircraft could take off with the stairs deployed.
The FAA probably required Boeing to demonstrate that the aircraft could fly with the stairs deployed in flight. In my judgement, the FAA probably did not require that Boeing demonstrate that the aircraft could takeoff with the stairs down. In airline service, if they couldn't close the stairs, they would probably stay on the ground until the stairs were repaired and could be closed.
This suggests that Cooper's source of information for taking off with the stairs down came from somewhere other than Boeing.
8:09 is now being suggested as the jump time, based on this. FJ says 8:09 FDR time is equivalent to 8:12 TTY time.
Any thoughts?
-
How did they get so far off as to not knowing the plane was 8 miles west?
Is this accurate?
What I mean is this. Does the controller watching the blip on the screen have anything on the screen that shows precisely where the blip is in relation to other landmarks.. in other words, if there was a satellite image of the ground below the blip super-imposed on the radar screen that would be a good guide. However, if the radar screen is just black with a blip on it how does the controller known precisely where the jet is in relation to certain things?
Also, wasn't this information, and subsequent flight path, super-imposed on a map after the fact? Perhaps in real time the controller didn't know precisely where the jet was relative to other locations so as to be able to judge if the jet was close to Tena Bar.
Your last sentence is correct. It is unlikely that the controller's radar display included anything other than what appears on the IFR enroute charts. That is, no topographical information such as is included on the aircraft VFR sectional charts would be on his screen.
Even in 1971, I understand that the controllers could eliminate weather information from their displays that would normally appear on radar. That is, the display that the controller was looking at showed information that had been processed by a computer from the raw radar data. And the controller had the ability to determine what was shown on his screen.
-
Also..
Found info dated 18 June 1964 that claims 727 flown "satisfactorily" with Airstairs lowered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201860.html?search=airstairs
Cooper and Rataczak argued about the aircraft taking off with the stairs unlocked and partially down. After agreeing to takeoff with the stairs up, Cooper told Tina that he knew that the aircraft could take off with the stairs deployed.
The FAA probably required Boeing to demonstrate that the aircraft could fly with the stairs deployed in flight. In my judgement, the FAA probably did not require that Boeing demonstrate that the aircraft could takeoff with the stairs down. In airline service, if they couldn't close the stairs, they would probably stay on the ground until the stairs were repaired and could be closed.
This suggests that Cooper's source of information for taking off with the stairs down came from somewhere other than Boeing.
8:09 is now being suggested as the jump time, based on this. FJ says 8:09 FDR time is equivalent to 8:12 TTY time.
Any thoughts?
The times shown on the radio transcripts are GMT times (now known as Universal Times, I think) and are the most accurate times available. Previous posts here indicate that a "clock" was part of the FDR and it probably wasn't showing GMT time. It is unlikely that there was a common "event" shown on the FDR and in the transcripts that could be used to determine what the GMT time was. But the jump was at about 8:11 PM PST GMT time.
-
Also..
Found info dated 18 June 1964 that claims 727 flown "satisfactorily" with Airstairs lowered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201860.html?search=airstairs
Cooper and Rataczak argued about the aircraft taking off with the stairs unlocked and partially down. After agreeing to takeoff with the stairs up, Cooper told Tina that he knew that the aircraft could take off with the stairs deployed.
The FAA probably required Boeing to demonstrate that the aircraft could fly with the stairs deployed in flight. In my judgement, the FAA probably did not require that Boeing demonstrate that the aircraft could takeoff with the stairs down. In airline service, if they couldn't close the stairs, they would probably stay on the ground until the stairs were repaired and could be closed.
This suggests that Cooper's source of information for taking off with the stairs down came from somewhere other than Boeing.
8:09 is now being suggested as the jump time, based on this. FJ says 8:09 FDR time is equivalent to 8:12 TTY time.
Any thoughts?
The times shown on the radio transcripts are GMT times (now known as Universal Times, I think) and are the most accurate times available. Previous posts here indicate that a "clock" was part of the FDR and it probably wasn't showing GMT time. It is unlikely that there was a common "event" shown on the FDR and in the transcripts that could be used to determine what the GMT time was. But the jump was at about 8:11 PM PST GMT time.
Flyjack is saying the FDR measured the jump as a 'little bob' seen under a microscope on the FDR tape at - 8:09. From this he concludes the dz is north of Ariel as shown below ...
-
Also..
Found info dated 18 June 1964 that claims 727 flown "satisfactorily" with Airstairs lowered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201860.html?search=airstairs
Cooper and Rataczak argued about the aircraft taking off with the stairs unlocked and partially down. After agreeing to takeoff with the stairs up, Cooper told Tina that he knew that the aircraft could take off with the stairs deployed.
The FAA probably required Boeing to demonstrate that the aircraft could fly with the stairs deployed in flight. In my judgement, the FAA probably did not require that Boeing demonstrate that the aircraft could takeoff with the stairs down. In airline service, if they couldn't close the stairs, they would probably stay on the ground until the stairs were repaired and could be closed.
This suggests that Cooper's source of information for taking off with the stairs down came from somewhere other than Boeing.
8:09 is now being suggested as the jump time, based on this. FJ says 8:09 FDR time is equivalent to 8:12 TTY time.
Any thoughts?
The times shown on the radio transcripts are GMT times (now known as Universal Times, I think) and are the most accurate times available. Previous posts here indicate that a "clock" was part of the FDR and it probably wasn't showing GMT time. It is unlikely that there was a common "event" shown on the FDR and in the transcripts that could be used to determine what the GMT time was. But the jump was at about 8:11 PM PST GMT time.
Flyjack is saying the FDR measured the jump as a 'little bob' seen under a microscope on the FDR tape at - 8:09. From this he concludes the dz is north of Ariel as shown below ...
I don't think that is a logical conclusion. Unless the aircraft had an "event marker" (such as used in flight testing), and it didn't, the FDR time of 8:09 may have occurred when the aircraft was still on the ground in Seattle or who knows where else it could have been.
-
Also..
Found info dated 18 June 1964 that claims 727 flown "satisfactorily" with Airstairs lowered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201860.html?search=airstairs
Cooper and Rataczak argued about the aircraft taking off with the stairs unlocked and partially down. After agreeing to takeoff with the stairs up, Cooper told Tina that he knew that the aircraft could take off with the stairs deployed.
The FAA probably required Boeing to demonstrate that the aircraft could fly with the stairs deployed in flight. In my judgement, the FAA probably did not require that Boeing demonstrate that the aircraft could takeoff with the stairs down. In airline service, if they couldn't close the stairs, they would probably stay on the ground until the stairs were repaired and could be closed.
This suggests that Cooper's source of information for taking off with the stairs down came from somewhere other than Boeing.
8:09 is now being suggested as the jump time, based on this. FJ says 8:09 FDR time is equivalent to 8:12 TTY time.
Any thoughts?
The times shown on the radio transcripts are GMT times (now known as Universal Times, I think) and are the most accurate times available. Previous posts here indicate that a "clock" was part of the FDR and it probably wasn't showing GMT time. It is unlikely that there was a common "event" shown on the FDR and in the transcripts that could be used to determine what the GMT time was. But the jump was at about 8:11 PM PST GMT time.
Flyjack is saying the FDR measured the jump as a 'little bob' seen under a microscope on the FDR tape at - 8:09. From this he concludes the dz is north of Ariel as shown below ...
I don't think that is a logical conclusion. Unless the aircraft had an "event marker" (such as used in flight testing), and it didn't, the FDR time of 8:09 may have occurred when the aircraft was still on the ground in Seattle or who knows where else it could have been.
Interesting! Thanks and good night.
-
Pieces of material with very low weight and lots of flat surface area (e.g. 727 placard) don't necessarily follow the normal ballistic drop trajectories.
How do I know? I once saw a fluttering candy bar wrapper in the air several thousand feet up as I descended in my parachute. It didn't come from prior jumpers as I was the first out on the first load of the day. I think there was a good possibility that it started out as ground litter, was picked up by the wind, got into some thermals and had been up there for some time.
I wonder if glider pilots occasionally see ground litter when circling in thermals?
I don't think there were thermals at night when Cooper made his jump, but a fluttering placard could have a very long hang time which means that winds aloft could take it a lot farther than a simple ballistic fall would lead you to expect.
377
I have seen full pages from newspapers in thermals at 7000 or 8000 feet above the surface. I spent several minutes trying to snag it with my glider's wing tip. But ever time my wing tip got to within a few feet of it, the newspaper would make a wild movement and get out of the way. Apparently the wing tip affected the flow field several feet in front of the wing and caused the newspaper to move.
-
Also..
Found info dated 18 June 1964 that claims 727 flown "satisfactorily" with Airstairs lowered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201860.html?search=airstairs
Cooper and Rataczak argued about the aircraft taking off with the stairs unlocked and partially down. After agreeing to takeoff with the stairs up, Cooper told Tina that he knew that the aircraft could take off with the stairs deployed.
The FAA probably required Boeing to demonstrate that the aircraft could fly with the stairs deployed in flight. In my judgement, the FAA probably did not require that Boeing demonstrate that the aircraft could takeoff with the stairs down. In airline service, if they couldn't close the stairs, they would probably stay on the ground until the stairs were repaired and could be closed.
This suggests that Cooper's source of information for taking off with the stairs down came from somewhere other than Boeing.
This is a very interesting comment and observation.
It is worth noting that Cooper initially demanded the jet take-off with the airstairs down. Then the pilots debated that the jet couldn't take-off in that configuration which led Cooper to relent. However, Cooper changed his mind and once again demanded that the jet take-off with the airstairs deployed. It was at this point that the pilots debated with him some more and Cooper finally agreed to let the jet take-off with the airstairs up.
My point is that Cooper "really" wanted to take-off with the airstairs deployed which I interpret as Cooper wanting to jump in the outskirts of Seattle.
-
Placard update .I have done 3 tests so far. I first let the placard just drift and the next card I put a spin on it. The spin always goes straight down. Why wouldn't there be a chance of this happening 5 miles west?
Just remember that the entire air mass was moving to the northeast even if your tests suggest that the placard was descending straight down with respect to that air mass.
I'm going on record again as stating that this (the placard find location) is a very critical clue regarding the flight path. Frankly, I am amazed at how the placard find has been completely overlooked for decades. I can only attribute this to the fact that a year later the money was found and the Palmer Report was issued which got everyone thinking Washougal. Essentially the placard find got left in the dust.
Well no more.
The placard was found 0.8 statute miles SW of the FBI's flight path. In other words, into the wind. This inconvenient fact makes the FBI's flight path impossible.
I discussed this with 377 yesterday and he stated there is no possible way for the placard to fall into the wind. He stated that with a steerable parachute the most a parachutist can overcome is a 5 knot breeze. Anything beyond that you will always land downwind. Something like a placard, which possesses no rudder or controls, will always land downwind. Again this is according to 377.
377 added, if the placard find location is accurate, this establishes that the flight path is off by several miles. My extrapolation of R99's very conservative numbers and estimates, per Tom Kaye's request, puts the drift at 7-8 NM to the NE. I do not think that it is a coincidence that this flight path would put the jet slightly west of Tena Bar.
-
Also..
Found info dated 18 June 1964 that claims 727 flown "satisfactorily" with Airstairs lowered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1964/1964%20-%201860.html?search=airstairs
Cooper and Rataczak argued about the aircraft taking off with the stairs unlocked and partially down. After agreeing to takeoff with the stairs up, Cooper told Tina that he knew that the aircraft could take off with the stairs deployed.
The FAA probably required Boeing to demonstrate that the aircraft could fly with the stairs deployed in flight. In my judgement, the FAA probably did not require that Boeing demonstrate that the aircraft could takeoff with the stairs down. In airline service, if they couldn't close the stairs, they would probably stay on the ground until the stairs were repaired and could be closed.
This suggests that Cooper's source of information for taking off with the stairs down came from somewhere other than Boeing.
This is a very interesting comment and observation.
It is worth noting that Cooper initially demanded the jet take-off with the airstairs down. Then the pilots debated that the jet couldn't take-off in that configuration which led Cooper to relent. However, Cooper changed his mind and once again demanded that the jet take-off with the airstairs deployed. It was at this point that the pilots debated with him some more and Cooper finally agreed to let the jet take-off with the airstairs up.
My point is that Cooper "really" wanted to take-off with the airstairs deployed which I interpret as Cooper wanting to jump in the outskirts of Seattle.
or, he wanted to jump right there and then, on the tarmac! Or even on the day before. Or even on the day before that at Minneapolis. !
In fact, you know what!? I interpret Cooper wanting to take off with the stairs down as meaning, he wanted to take off with the stairs down. Some simply think he just wanted a way to get out of the plane in case he needed to? Had nothing to do with jumping, well not jumping in the parachute sense. ;)
There is nothing worse than being locked up in a tin can you cant get out of! It's almost like being in jail. Angry guys outside want to kill you! Angry guys in the cockpit want to kill you! There is nothing worse than being locked up with no means of escape!
Hey! Say something that makes sense for a change? If the plane had landed in DesMoines some would be claiming he wanted to jump in the suburbs of DesMoines! Everybody and everything has to be somewhere. That doesnt mean that 'somewhere' is the destination. :chr2:
-
Anybody have contact info for Sluggo that is up-to-date? If so, please let him know I would like contact. Thanks.
brucesmith At rainierconnect Dot com.
A certain member of this site (not me) has been in contact with Sluggo within the past month or so. Post your reasons for wanting to contact Sluggo and perhaps that member might be willing to assist you. But don't count on it for reasons that probably won't be posted here.
I'd like to chat with Sluggo about the search, if any, that was conducted on the ground in the area far to the south of LZ-A, the Amboy-Ariel area. This "new" area would be about 3 miles or so northeast of Orchards, WA, and would include the Hockinson area, up to the Yacolt area.
It is my understanding that Sluggo and Larry Carr discussed this dimension of the case shortly before LC took leave of Seattle and Norjak.
-
Everyone should know by now that I'm very skeptical about things. we seem to be taking parts of evidence as fact and other parts as completely wrong. the placard is troubling without a doubt but doesn't mean the flight went a completely different direction. we are all basing the path as exact when it's not. winds tend to act differently around mountainous area's. looking over the weather around Washington shows it changes often.
Concerns surround the placard itself and it's discovery. if it remained in the same spot for 7 years. it's odd that it wasn't covered by the elements over time. especially in a forest. was the radar that far off, or was the controllers wrong when they said it never left V23? people keep claiming the FBI is wrong. it's actually the Air Force who would be wrong. they supplied the map.
while looking at 302's and see the possible jump area leads all the way to the Columbia is not enough for me to start telling everyone he landed in the river and the money washed up on Tbar. I have yet to see any transcripts that were "redacted" this would clearly show this being done. removing parts of the transcripts is what seems to be the truth when trying to explain this and not redacting them. we are basing this mainly around a one ounce card that never moved for 7 years. flying over Portland with a bomb is about the same as circling Seattle much longer with a bomb. what purpose does this serve hiding the actual path. the map wasn't shown for decades to fool anyone?
-
Little Bobs and Big Bobs vs Turbulencia:
Well it did not take long. Claimers who want to link Little Bob 8:09 with Cooper bailing should take note of the ARCHIVE OF KNOWELDGE which conceals several reports of TURBULENCIA occurring ~8:03 - ~8:10 REPORTED BY A NUMBER OF PEOPLE INCLUDING PILOTS ... Scott and Rataczak, ... re-
i ...3) The information about turbulence being the reason Scott tried to contact Cooper on the PA (for the apparent 2005 exchange) is new. I've never heard turbulence being the reason before. In fact, this turbulence thing is weird. We were told about a "curtsy" or adjustment of trim needed. We all thought this was caused by the stairs. But now we're hearing about air turbulence as the reason Scott wanted Cooper contacted at 8:05. Cooper has requested the plane be 'slowed and stabilized', Scott is trying to comply and decides to contact Cooper ... http://news.google.com/...st+pack&ie=UTF-8
ii......weve known about this hack mark in the FDR tape for years. The channel was altitude. There was never anything to attribute it to Cooper jumping. The plane was in turbulence at the time. That is in all of the interviews.
iii...She joined Scott and the co-pilot in the cockpit. Later, the plane ran into turbulence. testimony
iv...Data used were: Aircraft position from USAF radar data from McChord AFB furnished by Captain REDACTED ...
Time correlation from the above USAF radar information and from the NWA communications network tape recording. ... Airplane airspeed and altitude from the airplane's flight recorder. No timing data from the FDR. Irrelevant. Periods of reported turbulence were noted.
v...here's the exact text that talks about the data used. I just realized it really emphasized that military radar was used. (Although ARTCCs can be joint military/FAA, I think now the radar used for the flight path reallly was McChord, not ARTCC, although ARTCC seemed to track it...which probably says McChord also had no range difficulties tracking 305)
page 272:
Aircraft position from USAF radar data from McChord AFB furnished by Captain REDACTED
...
Time correlation from the above USAF radar information and from the NWA communications network tape recording.
...
Airplane airspeed and altitude from the airplane's flight recorder.
Tom Kaye: See, the flight recorder data used was apparently just airspeed and altitude? So I guess that resolves my question of how the data was merged. Now that I remember, my question of "merging" was before Ckret released these pages. So these pages resolved my question of how data was "merged". There was no merging of data. Data was combined, but not modified based on multiple sources of info.
It also points out that the radar data is first-order. No big reason to search for the flight recorder data until you get radar data.
-
Sounds right to me...
-
The FDR in that plane required a microscope table in order to read the foil. they had some sort of timing at that point or wouldn't have noted 8:09 which could of been anything. they believed the search area should be moved 3 miles north which makes sense but then they claim to move the search all the way to the Columbia from the center of the original jump point. that alone is a very wild thing to state while believing the 8:09 position was above Lake Merwin.
-
Sounds right to me...
Im just quoting from the records/testimony.
BTW I have a folder on the FDR etc - somewhere. Organizing files for retrieval is a major problem or me in this NORJAK thing. But I finally have an excellent search program that can find almost anything in my files ... its just a matter of time and willpower.
To be continued ...
-
The FDR in that plane required a microscope table in order to read the foil. they had some sort of timing at that point or wouldn't have noted 8:09 which could of been anything. they believed the search area should be moved 3 miles north which makes sense but then they claim to move the search all the way to the Columbia from the center of the original jump point. that alone is a very wild thing to state while believing the 8:09 position was above Lake Merwin.
I know - I have been following it daily ...
I am very glad to have R99 back! :chr2:
-
The flight path reminds me a lot of the Palmer Report.
Palmer, expert or not, was wrong. The strata he identified as 1974 dredge material was not. This mistake effectively made the truth regarding the money find impossible to discover for 28 years. Why? Because according to him the packets of cash had to arrive after August 1974. This severely limited the likely options, including the truth.
The truth is, I could have questioned Palmer's Report in 1980 and stated I think he's wrong for any number of reasons. For example, the rubber band issue. Also, the fact we were dealing with three independent packets of cash that just coincidentally happened to self-bury themselves together. Or the fact that nothing else was found (stinking corpse, cash blowing in the wind, parachutes, attache case, etc.). In turn, everyone would have commented, "Exactly what are your credentials Eric? Dr. Palmer is an expert." Yet, I would have turned out to be right as later proved by Tom Kaye and his group in 2008.
This flight path strikes me as a very familiar story. It reminds me of the Palmer Report. My point is, using terms like "expert," "Air Force," "SAGE," and the like sounds impressive, but when nasty little evidence starts materializing that suggests something is wrong someone needs to ask the Air Force or FBI the question, "Now tell me again how you arrived at this flight path?"
-
can you provide the scientific proof Palmer was wrong. I question it as well but I'm not in that field to state for a fact that it's wrong.
-
Do you have the Palmer report?
-
My problem going against Palmer is artifacts found in the levels of sand. older rusted objects show up as you go down. I find it odd that the dredge layer would still be there but I'm not really sure. we also don't know how bad the erosion was in 1980 vs today. if it was that bad the money location should of been long gone if buried in 71. I'm not sure any of us can tell this board anything scientific without yearly samples or documenting the beach levels using a transit.
Did you ask the Fazio's how they put the sand on the beach in 74?
-
This flight path strikes me as a very familiar story. It reminds me of the Palmer Report. My point is, using terms like "expert," "Air Force," "SAGE," and the like sounds impressive, but when nasty little evidence starts materializing that suggests something is wrong someone needs to ask the Air Force or FBI the question, "Now tell me again how you arrived at this flight path?"
It's not meant to sound impressive. it's reality. you guys do that, not the other way around. when you have "qualified" good enough? people telling you that the plane didn't leave a certain area you have to believe that person. "nasty little evidence" sound like the kettle calling the pot black thingy, no?
what would the Sage radar be, amateur but not "nasty little evidence"?
Traffic controllers are prone to being off on locating planes in the sky similar to a armchair investigator basing facts with speculation?
transcripts matching parts of the flight. typical armchair weekenders jotting things down?
You need to show me where the traffic controllers were wrong looking right at a screen in real time. I'll admit, and have in the past that the placard is troubling. none of us can prove that 7 years later was the exact location that card has always been. if it was a metal plate it would be a different story. it weighs nothing. one ounce. was it up in the trees for several years. can you prove that, or that it didn't move? these are "nasty little things" to consider. I do like the theory but it has problems. it's like you trying to tell me I never lived in Ohio when I can show plenty of proof.
-
Tom Kaye said that given the erosion he was able to identify the same layer (the layer identified by Palmer as '74 dredge) along the beach which he says is actually a natural layer.
There obviously has been a significant amount of erosion...I've posted a pic below. The picture was taken by me this January. The dirt access road is at the top of the bluff. In fact, if you recall the picture from the helicopter in 1980 that shows the agents digging with the FBI car parked on the access road...the car would be on the road in this picture. It's difficult to tell but the initial drop off from the road is about 2.5 feet I would guess. Then it slopes down a little and drops off another 6-12 inches. Then it continues to slope and drops off another 3 inches or so to the actual beach which is sandy and slopes into the water. You can see how the strata levels have been uncovered here up to and including portions underneath the access road which obviously weren't from any dredge.
Richard showed me on Tena Bar that the spoils would run like a slurry back down onto the beach and much of it back into the Columbia. After it dried, the Fazio's would then use their spreaders to push the sand along the beach. This is well documented in the high altitude pics of Tena from that era. The significant beach erosion started after the dredge spoils were no longer placed on the beach.
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0111/7146/3226/files/Tena_Bar_Erosion_Sm.jpg?31)
-
It really can't be shown from the air in regards to erosion. I thought that as well until Hominid pointed out that the tides will be different in the pics obviously taken at different times during the day or even seasons when the tides are really high. Meyer couldn't even get on the beach. it was covered.
-
Tom Kaye said that given the erosion he was able to identify the same layer (the layer identified by Palmer as '74 dredge) along the beach which he says is actually a natural layer.
There obviously has been a significant amount of erosion...I've posted a pic below. The picture was taken by me this January. The dirt access road is at the top of the bluff. In fact, if you recall the picture from the helicopter in 1980 that shows the agents digging with the FBI car parked on the access road...the car would be on the road in this picture. It's difficult to tell but the initial drop off from the road is about 2.5 feet I would guess. Then it slopes down a little and drops off another 6-12 inches. Then it continues to slope and drops off another 3 inches or so to the actual beach which is sandy and slopes into the water. You can see how the strata levels have been uncovered here up to and including portions underneath the access road which obviously weren't from any dredge.
Richard showed me on Tena Bar that the spoils would run like a slurry back down onto the beach and much of it back into the Columbia. After it dried, the Fazio's would then use their spreaders to push the sand along the beach. This is well documented in the high altitude pics of Tena from that era. The significant beach erosion started after the dredge spoils were no longer placed on the beach.
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0111/7146/3226/files/Tena_Bar_Erosion_Sm.jpg?31)
lighter bigger version ...
-
One of Tom's erosion photos ... see larger version on his website.
-
I had some time to kill yesterday as my wife had a appointment in nearby Castle Rock. I took a ride up to the area of the Placard find location. It’s quite a few miles East of I 5. I’m not sure exactly how many miles “ as the crow flies “, but it’s quite a jaunt via wheels. Silver Lake is 7 to 8 miles, Toutle is 10 miles and it’s S E of Toutle. The area has been heavily hunted and logged over the last 47 years so it’s doubtful anything Cooper related is still lying around. I think Carroll Hicks has passed away but I’ve never got the name of his hunting partner. I am friends with several who grew up in Toutle and Longview/Kelso area. I encountered several logging trucks exiting the area stacked high so there’s plenty of logging activity as we speak.
Ive been wanting to ask you something - - -
As a longtime resident and mailman at Portland, did you ever hear anything like the 'Janet story', any witness reports like it, or anything about Janet and her husband and their account?
-
Turbulence at 8:05 - 8:09 timestamp ...
Its interesting Scott remembered this specifically. I suppose they were trying to line Cooper up to jumping, stabilizing the aircraft etc ... they wanted him gone, no doubt about that! Tina had come forward earlier and said she thought he was getting ready to jump. Turbulence hits at 8:05-09 so Scott calls back to ask if he is ok. More minutes pass. Scott calls back at 8:10 but no answer. Then Cooper answers abruptly saying 'everything is ok'. Then oscillations and a bump? Is that the correct order of these events on someone's timescale? Its interesting Scott doesnt call back asking if everything is ok at 8:15? ATC suggests they might want to go back and check on the bomb but apparently that never happened either? The implicit assumption by everyone (I think) is that Cooper has jumped and is gone by: 8:15?
And I still cant place "and the lights of Vancouver were coming up" into this chain of events.
-
And I still cant place "and the lights of Vancouver were coming up" into this chain of events.
I only read about it on forums and threads. possibly a myth. they do state "Portland proper" in the 302's.
-
And I still cant place "and the lights of Vancouver were coming up" into this chain of events.
I only read about it on forums and threads. possibly a myth. they do state "Portland proper" in the 302's.
Wasn't it Carr who mentioned that he thought Rataczak meant they we're approaching Vancouver as opposed to Portland? That certainly makes sense.
-
And I still cant place "and the lights of Vancouver were coming up" into this chain of events.
I only read about it on forums and threads. possibly a myth. they do state "Portland proper" in the 302's.
Wasn't it Carr who mentioned that he thought Rataczak meant they we're approaching Vancouver as opposed to Portland? That certainly makes sense.
Sounds like another statement taken out of context over time.
-
And I still cant place "and the lights of Vancouver were coming up" into this chain of events.
I only read about it on forums and threads. possibly a myth. they do state "Portland proper" in the 302's.
Wasn't it Carr who mentioned that he thought Rataczak meant they we're approaching Vancouver as opposed to Portland? That certainly makes sense.
Sounds like another statement taken out of context over time.
No, I believe I heard Carr say this himself during a radio show or on TV. I cannot remember. Maybe I read it.
-
I had some time to kill yesterday as my wife had a appointment in nearby Castle Rock. I took a ride up to the area of the Placard find location. It’s quite a few miles East of I 5. I’m not sure exactly how many miles “ as the crow flies “, but it’s quite a jaunt via wheels. Silver Lake is 7 to 8 miles, Toutle is 10 miles and it’s S E of Toutle. The area has been heavily hunted and logged over the last 47 years so it’s doubtful anything Cooper related is still lying around. I think Carroll Hicks has passed away but I’ve never got the name of his hunting partner. I am friends with several who grew up in Toutle and Longview/Kelso area. I encountered several logging trucks exiting the area stacked high so there’s plenty of logging activity as we speak.
Ive been wanting to ask you something - - -
As a longtime resident and mailman at Portland, did you ever hear anything like the 'Janet story', any witness reports like it, or anything about Janet and her husband and their account?
I have NEVER heard or read anything CREDIBLE during the time immediately after the Cooper Hyjacking. This brings up the question in my mind as how is this possible ? I have a pretty good idea but nobody here really cares ! To me it seems like way too many are trying to rewrite History rather than actually going back in time to 1971 and try to figure out how he did it. It’s far easier to change the flight plan and make entire story all about Tina Bar ! Funny how until the money was found at Tina Bar, NOBODY was talking about the plane dying over Tina Bar or St. Helens etc. Here we are 47 years later and now suddenly all the information provided in 1971 is erroneous!
Most of the so called experts here have no idea what Portland was like in 1971.
-
I have NEVER heard or read anything CREDIBLE during the time immediately after the Cooper Hyjacking. This brings up the question in my mind as how is this possible ? I have a pretty good idea but nobody here really cares ! To me it seems like way too many are trying to rewrite History rather than actually going back in time to 1971 and try to figure out how he did it. It’s far easier to change the flight plan and make entire story all about Tina Bar ! Funny how until the money was found at Tina Bar, NOBODY was talking about the plane dying over Tina Bar or St. Helens etc. Here we are 47 years later and now suddenly all the information provided in 1971 is erroneous!
Most of the so called experts here have no idea what Portland was like in 1971.
Of course "so called experts" are going to factor in new evidence. That would be ridiculous not to consider the only evidence found outside of the jet (placard and money).
I asked R99 to re-analyze his placard free-fall analysis based upon updated data related to wind conditions, placard size and weight. He just informed me of his results. I will let him speak to them on the forum if he so chooses. I will tell you the drift of that placard is a major obstacle that must be explained if you are a proponent of the FBI's flight path (Air Force derived flight path, I get it).
Once again, what actual evidence is there that the FBI flight path is accurate? The answer is zilch. Just some guy who somehow put the thing together. Also, apparently R2, who was in Seattle (or Portland?) and wasn't looking at the radar at the time the jet crossed the Columbia, who was staging a chase place intercept "west" of Portland."
On the other hand, I'll point to the placard, the money, and the "nothing has ever been found along the FBI flight path for over 47 years" fact to support my argument that the FBI flight path is wrong.
By the way, I asked earlier about the jet being on autopilot...am I to understand that it was taking a grand tour of the Amboy, Washougal, Vancouver and downtown Portland scenic route all while flying on autopilot?
-
First of all. I think you need to stop resorting to the belief everything was thrown together. then you need to explain when the auto-pilot was on and when it was off. while your at it explain what tour the plane took over Amboy that is 5 NM from the known flight path and other locations miles off of the path as well.
I've been speaking with traffic controllers about this and they are looking into what I have explained to them. I've also looked into weather and winds. I have received answers that don't agree with your analysis based on actual winds in the area vs what stations state at the time. then they question the placard being untouched for 7 years with no data to support how long it's been at the location found.
"At the risk this isn't a gag or a scene from "Without a Paddle"...great movie...
Winds in mountainous areas are crazy, a stable wind is a joke and predictable winds are more so a joke. So trying to piece together the wind from a night decades ago is nigh impossible in a specific area. At least in my experience, we are at the base of the Sierra Nevadas and our wind can be 20G45KTS from a different direction every 5 minutes."
I explained that the card was found less than a mile west of the known estimated path with winds in the opposite direction.
"Which is why I don’t put much value in its location. There’s 7 years of variables that no one knows there."
Some agreed...but question the time frame
"I mean, it sounds like it was about where it should be based on everything. Something that’s an once being found within a mile of the airway centerline after 7 years?"
Others are agreeing that it's not odd to be found somewhere around the path against the wind direction. too many variables that have to be considered. you want to completely agree with most of the flight path you make fun of saying it's basically a joke and discard a small area that fits a placard in winds based on an estimate for that area. that's kind of what you are accusing everyone else of. guessing, estimating? it's a joke, but yours is not? the FDR gives heading. is that wrong too? do we discard the altitude and speed. all a joke? is the jump time close. how can you use data you don't trust to make it a fact?
Instead of trying to drive things down peoples throats I'm out looking for answers. I don't trust anything and find looking into things are more reasonable than claiming everything is wrong. just about everything in this case is disappearing before my eye's based on theories. the bomb was wrapped in red plastic. the money was planted, the path is wrong. the description of Cooper is wrong. Cooper has a chipped or crooked tooth, a scar on the back of his hand. the Amboy chute was Cooper's. Cossey was killed to silence him.
I'm currently in discussion on several sites and will continue to speak with multiple people surrounding controllers, pilots, meteorologist to try and make some sense out of all of this. it shouldn't be a matter of who is right or wrong. it's a matter of FACT.
-
I am convinced the evidence points to a flight path far to the west.
That said, I am going to look into conducting a couple of experiments.
1) Take a similar size placard up to 10K feet in the same area under what are reported to have been the conditions on 11/24/71 and drop the placard with a GPS tracking device. Let's see where it goes. 377 verified that there are exceptionally small tracking devices that could be used for this type of experiment.
2) Place a similar placard in the woods and give it a year. Let's see how far it migrates.
This should give us a pretty solid idea of whether my theory is accurate or not.
Also, according to my theory, the placard dislodged at a point approximately 8 NM southwest of where the placard was found. The elevation at this point is approximately 1300 feet. The placard find spot, 8 NM away, was also at an elevation of about 1300 feet. The land it traveled over was essentially a plain, not the Alps.
-
I am convinced the evidence points to a flight path far to the west.
That said, I am going to look into conducting a couple of experiments.
1) Take a similar size placard up to 10K feet in the same area under what are reported to have been the conditions on 11/24/71 and drop the placard with a GPS tracking device. Let's see where it goes. 377 verified that there are exceptionally small tracking devices that could be used for this type of experiment.
2) Place a similar placard in the woods and give it a year. Let's see how far it migrates.
This should give us a pretty solid idea of whether my theory is accurate or not.
Also, according to my theory, the placard dislodged at a point approximately 8 NM southwest of where the placard was found. The elevation at this point is approximately 1300 feet. The placard find spot, 8 NM away, was also at an elevation of about 1300 feet. The land it traveled over was essentially a plain, not the Alps.
That's the idea! this is exactly how you do it to prove a theory vs telling someone over and over. I'm not sure about attaching anything to the card but they make things pretty small now.
However, I'm certainly not sold that this is your theory vs R99's....
-
I have NEVER heard or read anything CREDIBLE during the time immediately after the Cooper Hyjacking. This brings up the question in my mind as how is this possible ? I have a pretty good idea but nobody here really cares ! To me it seems like way too many are trying to rewrite History rather than actually going back in time to 1971 and try to figure out how he did it. It’s far easier to change the flight plan and make entire story all about Tina Bar ! Funny how until the money was found at Tina Bar, NOBODY was talking about the plane dying over Tina Bar or St. Helens etc. Here we are 47 years later and now suddenly all the information provided in 1971 is erroneous!
Most of the so called experts here have no idea what Portland was like in 1971.
Of course "so called experts" are going to factor in new evidence. That would be ridiculous not to consider the only evidence found outside of the jet (placard and money).
I asked R99 to re-analyze his placard free-fall analysis based upon updated data related to wind conditions, placard size and weight. He just informed me of his results. I will let him speak to them on the forum if he so chooses. I will tell you the drift of that placard is a major obstacle that must be explained if you are a proponent of the FBI's flight path (Air Force derived flight path, I get it).
Once again, what actual evidence is there that the FBI flight path is accurate? The answer is zilch. Just some guy who somehow put the thing together. Also, apparently R2, who was in Seattle (or Portland?) and wasn't looking at the radar at the time the jet crossed the Columbia, who was staging a chase place intercept "west" of Portland."
On the other hand, I'll point to the placard, the money, and the "nothing has ever been found along the FBI flight path for over 47 years" fact to support my argument that the FBI flight path is wrong.
By the way, I asked earlier about the jet being on autopilot...am I to understand that it was taking a grand tour of the Amboy, Washougal, Vancouver and downtown Portland scenic route all while flying on autopilot?
Let’s hear about all your new evidence ! The placard was there since 1978 ! The weather hasn’t changed on the night of Nov 24, 1971 ! The weather, Wind, precipitation, temperature is widely reported and documented by a number of weather bureaus ! The only thing I know that has changed is so called present day experts trying to alter
Everything 47 years AFTER the facts ! I’ve spent most of my life in Portland area and I’m only aware of 2 incidents involving aircraft incidents in Portland. One was,caused by a pilot making a serious decision which caused his plane to crash in vicinity of 160 th and Burnside in 1978 killing 10. Another incident had a major carrier landing a plane at Troutdale Airport by mistake ! Both incidents 100% pilot error. It’s funny that in all these years the Air Traffic controllers never had any problem knowing where all these planes were until the night of Nov 24, 1971. Now suddenly 47 years after the fact, apparently they were just plain stupid and had no clue where this high jacked plane was ? Our air defense in McCord Airbase had no clue, our pilots were lost , my own Air National Guard Unit at PDX had no clue, Air Traffic Control at PDX had no clue ! However you seem to be able to locate almost exactly where the plane was ! Unbelievable! You also know that the placard traveled like exactly 8 Miles ! Wow ! Sorry but I’m still looking for all your new FACTUAL evidence that wasn’t found 47 years ago ?
-
I had some time to kill yesterday as my wife had a appointment in nearby Castle Rock. I took a ride up to the area of the Placard find location. It’s quite a few miles East of I 5. I’m not sure exactly how many miles “ as the crow flies “, but it’s quite a jaunt via wheels. Silver Lake is 7 to 8 miles, Toutle is 10 miles and it’s S E of Toutle. The area has been heavily hunted and logged over the last 47 years so it’s doubtful anything Cooper related is still lying around. I think Carroll Hicks has passed away but I’ve never got the name of his hunting partner. I am friends with several who grew up in Toutle and Longview/Kelso area. I encountered several logging trucks exiting the area stacked high so there’s plenty of logging activity as we speak.
Ive been wanting to ask you something - - -
As a longtime resident and mailman at Portland, did you ever hear anything like the 'Janet story', any witness reports like it, or anything about Janet and her husband and their account?
I have NEVER heard or read anything CREDIBLE during the time immediately after the Cooper Hyjacking. This brings up the question in my mind as how is this possible ? I have a pretty good idea but nobody here really cares ! To me it seems like way too many are trying to rewrite History rather than actually going back in time to 1971 and try to figure out how he did it. It’s far easier to change the flight plan and make entire story all about Tina Bar ! Funny how until the money was found at Tina Bar, NOBODY was talking about the plane dying over Tina Bar or St. Helens etc. Here we are 47 years later and now suddenly all the information provided in 1971 is erroneous!
Most of the so called experts here have no idea what Portland was like in 1971.
You may be correct. Thanks ...
-
I have NEVER heard or read anything CREDIBLE during the time immediately after the Cooper Hyjacking. This brings up the question in my mind as how is this possible ? I have a pretty good idea but nobody here really cares ! To me it seems like way too many are trying to rewrite History rather than actually going back in time to 1971 and try to figure out how he did it. It’s far easier to change the flight plan and make entire story all about Tina Bar ! Funny how until the money was found at Tina Bar, NOBODY was talking about the plane dying over Tina Bar or St. Helens etc. Here we are 47 years later and now suddenly all the information provided in 1971 is erroneous!
Most of the so called experts here have no idea what Portland was like in 1971.
Of course "so called experts" are going to factor in new evidence. That would be ridiculous not to consider the only evidence found outside of the jet (placard and money).
I asked R99 to re-analyze his placard free-fall analysis based upon updated data related to wind conditions, placard size and weight. He just informed me of his results. I will let him speak to them on the forum if he so chooses. I will tell you the drift of that placard is a major obstacle that must be explained if you are a proponent of the FBI's flight path (Air Force derived flight path, I get it).
Once again, what actual evidence is there that the FBI flight path is accurate? The answer is zilch. Just some guy who somehow put the thing together. Also, apparently R2, who was in Seattle (or Portland?) and wasn't looking at the radar at the time the jet crossed the Columbia, who was staging a chase place intercept "west" of Portland."
On the other hand, I'll point to the placard, the money, and the "nothing has ever been found along the FBI flight path for over 47 years" fact to support my argument that the FBI flight path is wrong.
By the way, I asked earlier about the jet being on autopilot...am I to understand that it was taking a grand tour of the Amboy, Washougal, Vancouver and downtown Portland scenic route all while flying on autopilot?
Let’s hear about all your new evidence ! The placard was there since 1978 ! The weather hasn’t changed on the night of Nov 24, 1971 ! The weather, Wind, precipitation, temperature is widely reported and documented by a number of weather bureaus ! The only thing I know that has changed is so called present day experts trying to alter
Everything 47 years AFTER the facts ! I’ve spent most of my life in Portland area and I’m only aware of 2 incidents involving aircraft incidents in Portland. One was,caused by a pilot making a serious decision which caused his plane to crash in vicinity of 160 th and Burnside in 1978 killing 10. Another incident had a major carrier landing a plane at Troutdale Airport by mistake ! Both incidents 100% pilot error. It’s funny that in all these years the Air Traffic controllers never had any problem knowing where all these planes were until the night of Nov 24, 1971. Now suddenly 47 years after the fact, apparently they were just plain stupid and had no clue where this high jacked plane was ? Our air defense in McCord Airbase had no clue, our pilots were lost , my own Air National Guard Unit at PDX had no clue, Air Traffic Control at PDX had no clue ! However you seem to be able to locate almost exactly where the plane was ! Unbelievable! You also know that the placard traveled like exactly 8 Miles ! Wow ! Sorry but I’m still looking for all your new FACTUAL evidence that wasn’t found 47 years ago ?
You can rest assured that the controllers knew exactly where the airliner was when it was talking to the Seattle controllers. What is your explanation for the 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC transcript and the complete absence of information in those transcripts that would show the location of the airliner? Do you have a logical explanation that dates back to 1971.
As I have explained repeatedly on this site since its creation, if you want to see how air traffic controllers operated in 1971 all you have to do is read the Oakland Center and Reno transcripts. That is textbook air traffic control for the 1971 time period. I suggest you read those transcripts.
Shutter posted an FBI document a few days back that stated the airliner was on autopilot during the time it was in the Portland/Vancouver area. In 1971 autopilots could fly specific headings or track inbound or outbound on VORTAC radials. Autopilots were for "straight and level" flight. This means that the airliner was not changing directions ever 60 seconds, and if it was on V-23 it would be tracking the airway centerline. If it was not V-23 and tracking the V-23 centerline it would be flying headings as directed by Seattle Center controllers.
In addition to the placard, there are a number of other things that rule against the FBI flight path and Cooper landing in the Washougal watershed.
On the subject of "experts", how about listing your aeronautical expertise and other qualifications for your statements. In my own aeronautical engineering experience, the term "expert" was used as a pejorative. I doubt if I have ever heard an engineer describe him/herself as an "expert".
-
The auto pilot can be adjusted several ways. you can manipulate the pitch and roll with certain settings.
It can also track a VOR course or Localizer course in NAV LOC. Neither worked particularly well. It was often easier to use Heading Select and track the course manually.
it's able to capture and fly an ILS glideslope. That feature worked pretty well. It couldn't land the plane, so you'd have to kick the autopilot off at minimums and take over manually.
The pilots would be the one to ask on how they set up the auto pilot.
You can fly on auto pilot and maintain altitude and adjust roll and pitch as desired. the plane can be programmed to hold altitude and speed. two things that were critical demands by the hijacker..nothing about deviations east and west.
Andrade, can you confirm this with pops?
-
Some of the things the pilots don't really make sense but it's possible stress played a roll in there judgment. I can't really speak for the pilots and give you all the reasons. they were probably worried about altitude and speed and used the auto pilot as insurance.
Perhaps before it's too late the pilots, or now, the pilot should be contacted.
-
I don't remember what pilot stated the trim had to be adjusted with the oscillation or bump, don't know which one but would imply the autopilot was off. the document states they used the autopilot most of the time over Washington and down south. the document states if the autopilot was on they might not of known of any changes which goes against the statement given.
-
I can see that the flight path discussion is a very controversial one. That makes perfect sense.
To be clear, I did not come up with the idea of a western path. That said, to the best of my knowledge there have only been three of us who have strongly advocated such a path--which by definition means the FBI flight path (Air Force) is wrong.
1] Tosaw factored in Tena Bar and considered that nothing had been found along the FBI flight path to arrive at a western path.
2] R99 factored in Tena Bar, the correlation between Maylay and Canby, the not-likely circuitous FBI path near Portland, the flow of the Columbia River near Tena Bar, and the placard to some degree to arrive at a western path.
3] I put a lot of weight on both Tena Bar and the placard find, and also considered the 8:12 jump time, the role of the Columbia River in all of this, the fact that nothing has been found along the FBI flight path, the "doesn't make sense" circuitous FBI path near Portland, and the fact that the FBI had erred previously via the Palmer Report, to arrive at what I call the 8:12 Arc Theory which points to a western flight path.
All of this said, Tosaw and R99 both believe DBC no-pulled. I believe Tosaw said he ended up in the river, and R99 believes he ended up on Caterpillar Island. I, on the other hand, believe DBC survived and landed in the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
I do not consider Tosaw, R99 or myself crackpots or drawn to conspiracies. I think the methodology that each of us has applied to arrive at a western path makes sense.
On the other hand, from what I can tell Shutter is the strongest--at least most vocal--advocate for the FBI path. This of course is based upon the Air Force's capabilities and the testimony of R2 in Seattle. That makes sense, is compelling and by default should be the accepted flight path.
However, Tosaw, R99 and I have, for reasons explained above, concluded that the default (Air Force) path must be wrong.
-
I can see that the flight path discussion is a very controversial one. That makes perfect sense.
To be clear, I did not come up with the idea of a western path. That said, to the best of my knowledge there have only been three of us who have strongly advocated such a path--which by definition means the FBI flight path (Air Force) is wrong.
1] Tosaw factored in Tena Bar and considered that nothing had been found along the FBI flight path to arrive at a western path.
2] R99 factored in Tena Bar, the correlation between Maylay and Canby, the not-likely circuitous FBI path near Portland, the flow of the Columbia River near Tena Bar, and the placard to some degree to arrive at a western path.
3] I put a lot of weight on both Tena Bar and the placard find, and also considered the 8:12 jump time, the role of the Columbia River in all of this, the fact that nothing has been found along the FBI flight path, the "doesn't make sense" circuitous FBI path near Portland, and the fact that the FBI had erred previously via the Palmer Report, to arrive at what I call the 8:12 Arc Theory which points to a western flight path.
All of this said, Tosaw and R99 both believe DBC no-pulled. I believe Tosaw said he ended up in the river, and R99 believes he ended up on Caterpillar Island. I, on the other hand, believe DBC survived and landed in the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
I do not consider Tosaw, R99 or myself crackpots or drawn to conspiracies. I think the methodology that each of us has applied to arrive at a western path makes sense.
On the other hand, from what I can tell Shutter is the strongest--at least most vocal--advocate for the FBI path. This of course is based upon the Air Force's capabilities and the testimony of R2 in Seattle. That makes sense, is compelling and by default should be the accepted flight path.
However, Tosaw, R99 and I have, for reasons explained above, concluded that the default (Air Force) path must be wrong.
Im not sure Tosaw did subscribe to a 'western' fp vs the FBI fp.
What did Tosaw say, specifically ... and why did he say it ?
Do you require that 305 must be outside the 4 mile western side of V23 in order to qualify as a 'western flight path' ?
-
I have NEVER heard or read anything CREDIBLE during the time immediately after the Cooper Hyjacking. This brings up the question in my mind as how is this possible ? I have a pretty good idea but nobody here really cares ! To me it seems like way too many are trying to rewrite History rather than actually going back in time to 1971 and try to figure out how he did it. It’s far easier to change the flight plan and make entire story all about Tina Bar ! Funny how until the money was found at Tina Bar, NOBODY was talking about the plane dying over Tina Bar or St. Helens etc. Here we are 47 years later and now suddenly all the information provided in 1971 is erroneous!
Most of the so called experts here have no idea what Portland was like in 1971.
Of course "so called experts" are going to factor in new evidence. That would be ridiculous not to consider the only evidence found outside of the jet (placard and money).
I asked R99 to re-analyze his placard free-fall analysis based upon updated data related to wind conditions, placard size and weight. He just informed me of his results. I will let him speak to them on the forum if he so chooses. I will tell you the drift of that placard is a major obstacle that must be explained if you are a proponent of the FBI's flight path (Air Force derived flight path, I get it).
Once again, what actual evidence is there that the FBI flight path is accurate? The answer is zilch. Just some guy who somehow put the thing together. Also, apparently R2, who was in Seattle (or Portland?) and wasn't looking at the radar at the time the jet crossed the Columbia, who was staging a chase place intercept "west" of Portland."
On the other hand, I'll point to the placard, the money, and the "nothing has ever been found along the FBI flight path for over 47 years" fact to support my argument that the FBI flight path is wrong.
By the way, I asked earlier about the jet being on autopilot...am I to understand that it was taking a grand tour of the Amboy, Washougal, Vancouver and downtown Portland scenic route all while flying on autopilot?
Let’s hear about all your new evidence ! The placard was there since 1978 ! The weather hasn’t changed on the night of Nov 24, 1971 ! The weather, Wind, precipitation, temperature is widely reported and documented by a number of weather bureaus ! The only thing I know that has changed is so called present day experts trying to alter
Everything 47 years AFTER the facts ! I’ve spent most of my life in Portland area and I’m only aware of 2 incidents involving aircraft incidents in Portland. One was,caused by a pilot making a serious decision which caused his plane to crash in vicinity of 160 th and Burnside in 1978 killing 10. Another incident had a major carrier landing a plane at Troutdale Airport by mistake ! Both incidents 100% pilot error. It’s funny that in all these years the Air Traffic controllers never had any problem knowing where all these planes were until the night of Nov 24, 1971. Now suddenly 47 years after the fact, apparently they were just plain stupid and had no clue where this high jacked plane was ? Our air defense in McCord Airbase had no clue, our pilots were lost , my own Air National Guard Unit at PDX had no clue, Air Traffic Control at PDX had no clue ! However you seem to be able to locate almost exactly where the plane was ! Unbelievable! You also know that the placard traveled like exactly 8 Miles ! Wow ! Sorry but I’m still looking for all your new FACTUAL evidence that wasn’t found 47 years ago ?
You can rest assured that the controllers knew exactly where the airliner was when it was talking to the Seattle controllers. What is your explanation for the 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC transcript and the complete absence of information in those transcripts that would show the location of the airliner? Do you have a logical explanation that dates back to 1971.
As I have explained repeatedly on this site since its creation, if you want to see how air traffic controllers operated in 1971 all you have to do is read the Oakland Center and Reno transcripts. That is textbook air traffic control for the 1971 time period. I suggest you read those transcripts.
Shutter posted an FBI document a few days back that stated the airliner was on autopilot during the time it was in the Portland/Vancouver area. In 1971 autopilots could fly specific headings or track inbound or outbound on VORTAC radials. Autopilots were for "straight and level" flight. This means that the airliner was not changing directions ever 60 seconds, and if it was on V-23 it would be tracking the airway centerline. If it was not V-23 and tracking the V-23 centerline it would be flying headings as directed by Seattle Center controllers.
In addition to the placard, there are a number of other things that rule against the FBI flight path and Cooper landing in the Washougal watershed.
On the subject of "experts", how about listing your aeronautical expertise and other qualifications for your statements. In my own aeronautical engineering experience, the term "expert" was used as a pejorative. I doubt if I have ever heard an engineer describe him/herself as an "expert".
First off, welcome back ! Your expertise is acknowledged and well documented! Unlike yourself, at no time have I ever claimed to possess ANY aeronautical expertise. My post is very simple ! I acknowledge the fact that there were many brilliant minds at work in 1971 who came up with the flight path. I accept your theory as a distinct POSSIBILITY but I’m not about to accept it as a fact ! That’s what makes the Cooper Caper so captivating. Theories, stories, opinions and very few facts keep the mystery alive 47 years and counting.
I asked a question which nobody has responded to. Carroll Hicks who was hunting in 1978 and found the Placard was NOT hunting alone. For safety reasons, I also have never hunted alone. The reports I have read said He and his hunting partner were collecting garbage that was littered around the woods and picked up the placard. They took it with them before they realized it might be connected to the Cooper hyjacking. Does anyone know the name of the other hunter ? I have several friends who grew up in the area and were avid hunters. Toutle is a very small town and there’s a very good possibility that my friend might know the other hunter. My purpose is to try to contact the other hunter in hopes of gaining more information on exactly where placard was found. I used to hunt the exact same area in Heppner, Oregon and could identify the exact location even today.
-
If I'm not mistaken, there was a reference to Tosaw believing Cooper landed within 1000 feet of Tena Bar in a newspaper article written about his Columbia River search.
-
If I'm not mistaken, there was a reference to Tosaw believing Cooper landed within 1000 feet of Tena Bar in a newspaper article written about his Columbia River search.
Lets find exact quotes from him ... one question in my mind is: did he talk to Maj Dawson? People whop worked for him say he quoted or cited Rataczak a lot.
-
I have NEVER heard or read anything CREDIBLE during the time immediately after the Cooper Hyjacking. This brings up the question in my mind as how is this possible ? I have a pretty good idea but nobody here really cares ! To me it seems like way too many are trying to rewrite History rather than actually going back in time to 1971 and try to figure out how he did it. It’s far easier to change the flight plan and make entire story all about Tina Bar ! Funny how until the money was found at Tina Bar, NOBODY was talking about the plane dying over Tina Bar or St. Helens etc. Here we are 47 years later and now suddenly all the information provided in 1971 is erroneous!
Most of the so called experts here have no idea what Portland was like in 1971.
Of course "so called experts" are going to factor in new evidence. That would be ridiculous not to consider the only evidence found outside of the jet (placard and money).
I asked R99 to re-analyze his placard free-fall analysis based upon updated data related to wind conditions, placard size and weight. He just informed me of his results. I will let him speak to them on the forum if he so chooses. I will tell you the drift of that placard is a major obstacle that must be explained if you are a proponent of the FBI's flight path (Air Force derived flight path, I get it).
Once again, what actual evidence is there that the FBI flight path is accurate? The answer is zilch. Just some guy who somehow put the thing together. Also, apparently R2, who was in Seattle (or Portland?) and wasn't looking at the radar at the time the jet crossed the Columbia, who was staging a chase place intercept "west" of Portland."
On the other hand, I'll point to the placard, the money, and the "nothing has ever been found along the FBI flight path for over 47 years" fact to support my argument that the FBI flight path is wrong.
By the way, I asked earlier about the jet being on autopilot...am I to understand that it was taking a grand tour of the Amboy, Washougal, Vancouver and downtown Portland scenic route all while flying on autopilot?
Let’s hear about all your new evidence ! The placard was there since 1978 ! The weather hasn’t changed on the night of Nov 24, 1971 ! The weather, Wind, precipitation, temperature is widely reported and documented by a number of weather bureaus ! The only thing I know that has changed is so called present day experts trying to alter
Everything 47 years AFTER the facts ! I’ve spent most of my life in Portland area and I’m only aware of 2 incidents involving aircraft incidents in Portland. One was,caused by a pilot making a serious decision which caused his plane to crash in vicinity of 160 th and Burnside in 1978 killing 10. Another incident had a major carrier landing a plane at Troutdale Airport by mistake ! Both incidents 100% pilot error. It’s funny that in all these years the Air Traffic controllers never had any problem knowing where all these planes were until the night of Nov 24, 1971. Now suddenly 47 years after the fact, apparently they were just plain stupid and had no clue where this high jacked plane was ? Our air defense in McCord Airbase had no clue, our pilots were lost , my own Air National Guard Unit at PDX had no clue, Air Traffic Control at PDX had no clue ! However you seem to be able to locate almost exactly where the plane was ! Unbelievable! You also know that the placard traveled like exactly 8 Miles ! Wow ! Sorry but I’m still looking for all your new FACTUAL evidence that wasn’t found 47 years ago ?
You can rest assured that the controllers knew exactly where the airliner was when it was talking to the Seattle controllers. What is your explanation for the 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC transcript and the complete absence of information in those transcripts that would show the location of the airliner? Do you have a logical explanation that dates back to 1971.
As I have explained repeatedly on this site since its creation, if you want to see how air traffic controllers operated in 1971 all you have to do is read the Oakland Center and Reno transcripts. That is textbook air traffic control for the 1971 time period. I suggest you read those transcripts.
Shutter posted an FBI document a few days back that stated the airliner was on autopilot during the time it was in the Portland/Vancouver area. In 1971 autopilots could fly specific headings or track inbound or outbound on VORTAC radials. Autopilots were for "straight and level" flight. This means that the airliner was not changing directions ever 60 seconds, and if it was on V-23 it would be tracking the airway centerline. If it was not V-23 and tracking the V-23 centerline it would be flying headings as directed by Seattle Center controllers.
In addition to the placard, there are a number of other things that rule against the FBI flight path and Cooper landing in the Washougal watershed.
On the subject of "experts", how about listing your aeronautical expertise and other qualifications for your statements. In my own aeronautical engineering experience, the term "expert" was used as a pejorative. I doubt if I have ever heard an engineer describe him/herself as an "expert".
First off, welcome back ! Your expertise is acknowledged and well documented! Unlike yourself, at no time have I ever claimed to possess ANY aeronautical expertise. My post is very simple ! I acknowledge the fact that there were many brilliant minds at work in 1971 who came up with the flight path. I accept your theory as a distinct POSSIBILITY but I’m not about to accept it as a fact ! That’s what makes the Cooper Caper so captivating. Theories, stories, opinions and very few facts keep the mystery alive 47 years and counting.
I asked a question which nobody has responded to. Carroll Hicks who was hunting in 1978 and found the Placard was NOT hunting alone. For safety reasons, I also have never hunted alone. The reports I have read said He and his hunting partner were collecting garbage that was littered around the woods and picked up the placard. They took it with them before they realized it might be connected to the Cooper hyjacking. Does anyone know the name of the other hunter ? I have several friends who grew up in the area and were avid hunters. Toutle is a very small town and there’s a very good possibility that my friend might know the other hunter. My purpose is to try to contact the other hunter in hopes of gaining more information on exactly where placard was found. I used to hunt the exact same area in Heppner, Oregon and could identify the exact location even today.
Tom has the names . . .
-
Im not sure Tosaw did subscribe to a 'western' fp vs the FBI fp.
What did Tosaw say, specifically ... and why did he say it ?
Do you require that 305 must be outside the 4 mile western side of V23 in order to qualify as a 'western flight path' ?
This may be the article I remember
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1985-06-21-8502090856-story.html
...it has Tosaw saying that he thinks Cooper's body is within 3000 feet of the money find because of the dredging operation. It does not explicitly state that he (Tosaw) thinks that the jet flew over Tena Bar which is what I would consider the Western Flight Path.
-
On page 93 of Tosaw's book, he includes a graphic showing the plane's route, Victor 23.
On p. 107 and 108, he talks about his interview with Paul Soderlind. Soderlind drew a search grid, and that included the Columbia River. From this, Tosaw theorized that Cooper landed in the Columbia. Tosaw doesn't even suggest a no-pull, he believes Cooper deployed his parachute and landed in the water.
Tosaw did not advocate a Western flight path.
-
This is for Shutter:
The Old Man doesn't believe the auto-pilot was used at the time of the jump. "You don't use an autopilot when you're doing something abnormal. Landing gear down, tailgate open is not normal. It Rataczak said he was flying the plane, he was flying the plane."
He also said the "bumps" would look the same whether the auto-pilot was on or whether a human was at the controls. "Both do the same thing, correct back to your line"
-
On page 93 of Tosaw's book, he includes a graphic showing the plane's route, Victor 23.
On p. 107 and 108, he talks about his interview with Paul Soderlind. Soderlind drew a search grid, and that included the Columbia River. From this, Tosaw theorized that Cooper landed in the Columbia. Tosaw doesn't even suggest a no-pull, he believes Cooper deployed his parachute and landed in the water.
Tosaw did not advocate a Western flight path.
What is shown on page 93 of Tosaw's book is NOT a V-23 flight path. It is NOT a V-23E flight path either. The money find location shown on that diagram is WRONG. If Cooper had landed in the Columbia River or the Washougal watershed, there are valid reasons why the money would never had made it to Tina Bar in the first place.
And the statements on 107 and 108 and the radar data DO NOT support Solderlind's statements.
-
On page 93 of Tosaw's book, he includes a graphic showing the plane's route, Victor 23.
On p. 107 and 108, he talks about his interview with Paul Soderlind. Soderlind drew a search grid, and that included the Columbia River. From this, Tosaw theorized that Cooper landed in the Columbia. Tosaw doesn't even suggest a no-pull, he believes Cooper deployed his parachute and landed in the water.
Tosaw did not advocate a Western flight path.
It may well be that R99 and I are the only two advocating the Western Path.
-
This is for Shutter:
The Old Man doesn't believe the auto-pilot was used at the time of the jump. "You don't use an autopilot when you're doing something abnormal. Landing gear down, tailgate open is not normal. It Rataczak said he was flying the plane, he was flying the plane."
He also said the "bumps" would look the same whether the auto-pilot was on or whether a human was at the controls. "Both do the same thing, correct back to your line"
Ok, makes sense. they mention adjusting the trim. you wouldn't do that if the autopilot was on...
-
Im not sure Tosaw did subscribe to a 'western' fp vs the FBI fp.
What did Tosaw say, specifically ... and why did he say it ?
Do you require that 305 must be outside the 4 mile western side of V23 in order to qualify as a 'western flight path' ?
This may be the article I remember
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1985-06-21-8502090856-story.html
...it has Tosaw saying that he thinks Cooper's body is within 3000 feet of the money find because of the dredging operation. It does not explicitly state that he (Tosaw) thinks that the jet flew over Tena Bar which is what I would consider the Western Flight Path.
It says nothing about the flight path - nothing.
-
On page 93 of Tosaw's book, he includes a graphic showing the plane's route, Victor 23.
On p. 107 and 108, he talks about his interview with Paul Soderlind. Soderlind drew a search grid, and that included the Columbia River. From this, Tosaw theorized that Cooper landed in the Columbia. Tosaw doesn't even suggest a no-pull, he believes Cooper deployed his parachute and landed in the water.
Tosaw did not advocate a Western flight path.
Thats right - he simply said Cooper jumped into the Columbia and died .. somewhere near where the money was found. That 'somewhere' turns out to be a large area, from the end of Hayden Island all the way up to Tina Bar.
-
On page 93 of Tosaw's book, he includes a graphic showing the plane's route, Victor 23.
On p. 107 and 108, he talks about his interview with Paul Soderlind. Soderlind drew a search grid, and that included the Columbia River. From this, Tosaw theorized that Cooper landed in the Columbia. Tosaw doesn't even suggest a no-pull, he believes Cooper deployed his parachute and landed in the water.
Tosaw did not advocate a Western flight path.
What is shown on page 93 of Tosaw's book is NOT a V-23 flight path. It is NOT a V-23E flight path either. The money find location shown on that diagram is WRONG. If Cooper had landed in the Columbia River or the Washougal watershed, there are valid reasons why the money would never had made it to Tina Bar in the first place.
And the statements on 107 and 108 and the radar data DO NOT support Solderlind's statements.
Can someone show the Tosaw flight path in his book?
-
He believes Cooper drowned....
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlCEufz1b7k
-
Here is the flight path published in Tosaw's book. The fp crosses at the eastern tip of Hayden Island. It has no resemblance to V23 or any other published flight path including the proposed Eastern flight path which supposedly crossed at the Troutdale airport. For those who recall that was the flight path endorsed by Ralph Himmelsbach and Jerry Thomas.
Did Tosaw subscribe to this flight path or is it just an gratuitous illustration ?
-
Here is the flight path published in Tosaw's book. The fp crosses at the eastern tip of Hayden Island. It has no resemblance to V23 or any other published flight path including the proposed Eastern flight path which supposedly crossed at the Troutdale airport. For those who recall that was the flight path endorsed by Ralph Himmelsbach and Jerry Thomas.
Did Tosaw subscribe to this flight path or is it just an gratuitous illustration ?
The dashed flight path on the right is a close, yet simplified, approximation of the FBI flight path over the Columbia. I cannot read what the solid line just west of the flight path is labeled. That doesn't match anything. Is that Tosaw's flight path or something else entirely?
-
Again, on page 93, Tosaw labels the dotted line "victor 23 flight path"
And yes, it's a terrible graphic that doesn't give the actual V23 corridor nor does it appear to be based on the FBI map. The quality of the graphic is immaterial, Tosaw was, for lack of a better term, an orthodox researcher when it came to the flight path.
-
Again, on page 93, Tosaw labels the dotted line "victor 23 flight path"
And yes, it's a terrible graphic that doesn't give the actual V23 corridor nor does it appear to be based on the FBI map. The quality of the graphic is immaterial, Tosaw was, for lack of a better term, an orthodox researcher when it came to the flight path.
How so ? Please enlighten us.
The question on the table is: did Tosaw have a specific flight path someone gave him, that was the basis of his searches? So far, I doubt it. He gave the impression he did but Im not convinced anyone gave him any special information.
In his work on the Kinnick case he actually did an FOIA request to obtain the daily log of the USS Lexington - with that he was able to find the coordinates of where Kinnick's plane had gone down, and he conducted his search accordingly. But so far, Im not sure he had any special information when he conducted his Cooper searches? There is no question that he talked to Rataczak at length but what did Rataczak actually give him that was any different than what Rataczak had to give anyone else?
By the same token here is a chart from a famous newspaper showing the money find location.
-
Again, on page 93, Tosaw labels the dotted line "victor 23 flight path"
And yes, it's a terrible graphic that doesn't give the actual V23 corridor nor does it appear to be based on the FBI map. The quality of the graphic is immaterial, Tosaw was, for lack of a better term, an orthodox researcher when it came to the flight path.
How so ? Please enlighten us.
By the same token here is a chart from a famous newspaper showing the money find location.
So Tena Bar is actually on the EAST side of Portland/Vancouver! We have been looking on the wrong side of town all these years.
-
This is for Shutter:
The Old Man doesn't believe the auto-pilot was used at the time of the jump. "You don't use an autopilot when you're doing something abnormal. Landing gear down, tailgate open is not normal. It Rataczak said he was flying the plane, he was flying the plane."
He also said the "bumps" would look the same whether the auto-pilot was on or whether a human was at the controls. "Both do the same thing, correct back to your line"
Ok, makes sense. they mention adjusting the trim. you wouldn't do that if the autopilot was on...
Yes you would do that in 1971.
-
Again, on page 93, Tosaw labels the dotted line "victor 23 flight path"
And yes, it's a terrible graphic that doesn't give the actual V23 corridor nor does it appear to be based on the FBI map. The quality of the graphic is immaterial, Tosaw was, for lack of a better term, an orthodox researcher when it came to the flight path.
How so ? Please enlighten us.
By the same token here is a chart from a famous newspaper showing the money find location.
So Tena Bar is actually on the EAST side of Portland/Vancouver! We have been looking on the wrong side of town all these years.
Wow! Looks like Tina Bar is sitting right smack dab at Troutdale Airport ! Ridiculous!
-
This is for Shutter:
The Old Man doesn't believe the auto-pilot was used at the time of the jump. "You don't use an autopilot when you're doing something abnormal. Landing gear down, tailgate open is not normal. It Rataczak said he was flying the plane, he was flying the plane."
He also said the "bumps" would look the same whether the auto-pilot was on or whether a human was at the controls. "Both do the same thing, correct back to your line"
Ok, makes sense. they mention adjusting the trim. you wouldn't do that if the autopilot was on...
Yes you would do that in 1971.
Do what in 1971?
-
This is for Shutter:
The Old Man doesn't believe the auto-pilot was used at the time of the jump. "You don't use an autopilot when you're doing something abnormal. Landing gear down, tailgate open is not normal. It Rataczak said he was flying the plane, he was flying the plane."
He also said the "bumps" would look the same whether the auto-pilot was on or whether a human was at the controls. "Both do the same thing, correct back to your line"
Ok, makes sense. they mention adjusting the trim. you wouldn't do that if the autopilot was on...
Yes you would do that in 1971.
Do what in 1971?
Adjust the trim tabs. The airplane in question, N467US, made its first flight on April 9, 1965 and was delivered to Northwest Airlines on April 22, 1965.
So it had a 1965 or earlier technology autopilot. Billions of dollars have been spent on improving flight control systems since that time. And it looks like Boeing has now developed a system that can fight with the pilots and win.
-
My point is if the autopilot was on. the pilot wouldn't have to adjust the trim?
-
All,
I was having dinner with my science friend Bruce the other night and he asked about Cooper. I told him there was a big discussion about the flight path and the placard drift rate. Bruce is retired from JPL, created the first clear air turbulence instrument and was on the team that discovered the ozone hole. He described the boundary layer over land (as opposed to water) as going from 0-3000 feet or so and it is in this layer that the winds typically are in a different direction from winds aloft. He said the way to answer the question is get the radiosonde data from those dates in that area and it would show the winds from ground to 12K+ feet or so. It turns out that the data is tricky to get and condense into readable form so I had to bribe him with a steak dinner and now we have the data!
The two closest locations were Salem just south of Portland and Quillayute Bruce said was just west of Seattle. They launch twice a day at 5pm and 5am so that is the data we have. I had him pull a second random day Nov 11 for comparison and you can see that the winds then were actually east near the ground. Nov 24 looks pretty consistent all the way down but seems to be more southerly than we had estimated. Now you can do a proper analysis. :)
Tom Kaye
-
All,
I was having dinner with my science friend Bruce the other night and he asked about Cooper. I told him there was a big discussion about the flight path and the placard drift rate. Bruce is retired from JPL, created the first clear air turbulence instrument and was on the team that discovered the ozone hole. He described the boundary layer over land (as opposed to water) as going from 0-3000 feet or so and it is in this layer that the winds typically are in a different direction from winds aloft. He said the way to answer the question is get the radiosonde data from those dates in that area and it would show the winds from ground to 12K+ feet or so. It turns out that the data is tricky to get and condense into readable form so I had to bribe him with a steak dinner and now we have the data!
The two closest locations were Salem just south of Portland and Quillayute Bruce said was just west of Seattle. They launch twice a day at 5pm and 5am so that is the data we have. I had him pull a second random day Nov 11 for comparison and you can see that the winds then were actually east near the ground. Nov 24 looks pretty consistent all the way down but seems to be more southerly than we had estimated. Now you can do a proper analysis. :)
Tom Kaye
And this suggests what vis-a-vis 'discussion about the flight path and the placard drift rate'. ?
-
All,
I was having dinner with my science friend Bruce the other night and he asked about Cooper. I told him there was a big discussion about the flight path and the placard drift rate. Bruce is retired from JPL, created the first clear air turbulence instrument and was on the team that discovered the ozone hole. He described the boundary layer over land (as opposed to water) as going from 0-3000 feet or so and it is in this layer that the winds typically are in a different direction from winds aloft. He said the way to answer the question is get the radiosonde data from those dates in that area and it would show the winds from ground to 12K+ feet or so. It turns out that the data is tricky to get and condense into readable form so I had to bribe him with a steak dinner and now we have the data!
The two closest locations were Salem just south of Portland and Quillayute Bruce said was just west of Seattle. They launch twice a day at 5pm and 5am so that is the data we have. I had him pull a second random day Nov 11 for comparison and you can see that the winds then were actually east near the ground. Nov 24 looks pretty consistent all the way down but seems to be more southerly than we had estimated. Now you can do a proper analysis. :)
Tom Kaye
Yes, indeed we can do a proper analysis now. Quillayute is also known as known as Quileute according to Wiki. And Quileute is on US 101 a few miles south of Sequim and northwest of the Seattle area.
Georger, stay tuned and I'll have something this weekend. I need a day or so to digest everything and get these M/S (Meters per Second) units into good old American MPH (Miles Per Hour) units that the powers in DC will approve.
-
Others in the aviation field are saying similar things when I approached them with this issue..
It is possible for the winds at surface and aloft to be going in different directions. Generally, as you go up, the direction of the wind direction gradually "spirals", but it's not unheard of for them to be very different.
I pretty much already knew this..
Then, telling them the card was found 7 years later..
Which is why I don’t put much value in its location. There’s 7 years of variables that no one knows there.
-
Looks like Bohan was mistaken with his fierce winds out of the south at PDX, unless he experienced a very strange anomaly.
-
BELOW IS A POST I JUST ADDED TO BRUCE'S MOUNTAIN NEWS SITE:
The placard and money find are not manufactured evidence. They are real. They tell a story. They do not have an agenda. They cannot lie or be wrong. They are facts.
Our challenge is to read the tea leaves properly.
The problem for those who want to now argue that the wind was actually from some other direction are going to run into is the same problem that they’re having right now explaining the official “winds were from the SW” narrative. That is to say, if someone could prove, for example, that the winds were blowing from the east that night, in that spot, for some strange reason, I’m going to reverse engineer the numbers and prove that the jet was flying 10 miles east of the placard find. And, someone is now going to have to explain how the FBI got the flight path wrong, albeit in the opposite direction.
The problem with the argument being presented by some advocating the FBI flight path is that there is no room for any wind at all. The only way the placard ends up where it ends up–if the FBI flight path is accurate–is if there was NO wind that night. Well, I ain’t buying it. In fact, that is manufactured evidence.
-
I really don't care what you buy. you are going against known evidence based on a card YOU can't confirm has been in the same location for 7 years prior to being found. then you move the path at random. you are basing it on winds that you believe are set in stone which we are learning are not. winds are very unpredictable at the least. especially at different levels. simply "not buying it" shows failure to even research any facts surrounding weather, winds or anything that could support or bust a theory. looking at the winds that evening and calling it quits is not how things go in my book.
the path could be 3 miles east or west. nobody can confirm that either. the radar will be inaccurate the further away it is. but when it's right on top of a major airport saying where the plane was is pretty damn hard to get around, period! saying you "don't buy it" is hard to swallow but you want everyone to swallow the money was planted and the path was wrong?
I can start saying the wind caused a false reading on the stairs and that's why I believe he didn't jump where they marked it. Cooper jumped at 8:05. it makes sense. they didn't even search that area and that's why nothing was found? it's pretty simple. the oscillation was simply wind.
I don't research to better one side. I research to find answers. I'm not one sided on anything. it appears that way due to the evidence at hand. i had questions about the path. so I thought of the simulator. I didn't do it to prove it was wrong. I did for answers. some of you guys look solely on dismissing, ignoring hard evidence to back a theory. even the autopilot. nobody knows when it was on or off. they claim it was on for most of Washington. you want to suggest it was on where the plane wasn't flying basically straight for most of Washington. the turns around the jump zone? that whole area doesn't make sense, but answers lie with the pilots who might answer those questions that might end up making sense. can I put mystery into this claiming the pilots might of taken pills that affected his senses. did they drug test them?
You want to claim a reason why nothing was found based on nothing found in another location. he could hide the chute under some branches but couldn't bury it or hide anything good enough anywhere else?
It's okay to fly around over Seattle for long periods but not Portland for two minutes?
The card is set in stone where it was found?
You decide the plane turns before malay one mile after Toledo where the plane hardly has enough time to recover from the first turn? R99 makes more sense flying straight to Malay. how many paths can we have? I count four now.
Rat claims the location can be found looking over the records while talking with the company. not the tower. maybe they told him not to broadcast the information, I don't know?
-
This is getting too personal, why?
Speaking strictly for myself, I do not like being characterized as biased. As ignoring evidence. As manufacturing evidence. As having a "suspect", "agenda," or having to make "something fit" into a narrative. If there is one thing I am, it is intellectually honest.
We have three things that we know for sure:
1) Where the placard was found.
2) Where the money was found.
3) That nothing else has ever been found.
I start with that. I work from there. I attempt to decipher the evidence, understand what it's telling me, and piece it all together.
I assume I'm not alone in recognizing that some things simply do not add up? What does this mean? It tells me, someone got something wrong somewhere. And yes, this may include the Air Force/FBI's cherished flight path.
After 47+ years, there are no sacred cows as far as assumptions are concerned. I question everything.
-
I agree 100% with the 3 points you written. my point of the term "manufactured evidence" is not meant to be offensive. if that is what you believe, I'm sorry. it's not how I intended to imply it. the points you provided have not been confirmed as fact of there placement. if you use these points, nothing can be written as fact while using them. if that makes sense. even if he planted the money, it doesn't change the path. it's nothing but speculation. it can't be anything else. the theory can not survive without facts..
-
As I mentioned on TMN. I'm out trying to make sense of all of this. the first person I contacted was Tom. email and phone. my job, if you look at it that way is finding answers. I can't tell you the path is accurate to any degree, but I can tell you it strongly suggests that. it's the main reason I did the simulator. (skeptical) but not to disprove but to find answers.
As I also mention on TMN that I wouldn't stop and claim the path was wrong if I found a critical error. I would seek out better knowledge to confirm my findings and proceed from there. I'm a sim pilot, not a real one. who's going to believe me?
-
As I mentioned on TMN. I'm out trying to make sense of all of this. the first person I contacted was Tom. email and phone. my job, if you look at it that way is finding answers. I can't tell you the path is accurate to any degree, but I can tell you it strongly suggests that. it's the main reason I did the simulator. (skeptical) but not to disprove but to find answers.
As I also mention on TMN that I wouldn't stop and claim the path was wrong if I found a critical error. I would seek out better knowledge to confirm my findings and proceed from there. I'm a sim pilot, not a real one. who's going to believe me?
To be sure, each one of us has a manner in which we approach challenges, mysteries, puzzles, etc. I certainly think your approach is valid and compelling.
This is probably an appropriate time to mention that I have theorized about DBC landing on Bachelor Island and stashing the missing evidence (parachutes and attache' case) there for awhile. During this time I have been actively organizing a search of my target area which will commence within three weeks.
I have obtained the appropriate permissions and arranged the logistics for the search which will include traveling by boat to and from the island (the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge would not grant me permission to cross their off-limit areas to access Bachelor Island). Additionally, we'll be using magnetic locators and ground-penetrating radar from a drone.
Finally, I have been working to broadcast a LIVE STREAM of the search on the DB Cooper Channel on YouTube. The stream would be accessible to anyone with internet access for FREE. I hope to have the logistics worked out regarding this LIVE STREAM within the next week.
-
I try to attack the data..that's why I asked why it was so odd nothing was found in the original search area while you post a reason why it's not been found in another area. then the fact of his survival is still in question. many believe it's a timing issue vs the wrong path. timing is critical in the air to land. again, lots of variables..
I think it's possible Cooper caught them with there pants down. it doesn't mean they got everything wrong, Cooper got them...if he survived. when I hear the FBI claiming they really don't know where he jumped doesn't tell me the path is wrong as much as it tells me he fooled them. Cooper didn't choose any path. he simply said fly south to Mexico.
While looking for info on the path in the 302's I seen a page concerning tracking a hijacker electronically if it happened again. that tells me again they don't know where he jumped or missed him and Cooper still won. that's if he did survive, of course.
-
I actually have thought quite a bit about the timing. In fact, there are two components regarding the timing. First, there is where the jet was along the flight path at a given moment. Second, there is when DBC actually jumped.
I ultimately felt comfortable that the first point regarding the location of the jet along the flight path (irrespective of the path) was probably accurate. In other words, the FBI stating that the jet turned at Malay at 7:59 strikes me as legit. After all, there aren't too many ways to screw this up.
On the second point regarding when DBC jumped, I likewise felt it was likely that he jumped when they felt the "pressure bump." Also, that this time was probably 8:12 or very close to that time.
Of course, both of these assumptions on my part--and the FBI--may be wrong.
Needless to say, the previous assumptions, along with other factors, cause me to believe that DBC almost certainly survived. In fact, I would put the odds at close to 100%.
Of course, none of these things can be known with absolute certainty. What can? That said, if the "absolute certainty" standard is applied too rigorously it's inevitable that paralysis will set in and nothing will get resolved.
-
I'm talking about matching the timing with the plane's actual location. even if it's off they still checked the area above and below the Lewis river. some places they didn't due to the terrain. if Cooper was in those area's, he would be a no pull..
We are missing pieces to the puzzle. that doesn't mean they are because Ralph was right and the plane was further east. connecting the missing dots also doesn't mean they were off from the get go. we could evaluate everything much better if we had what they have but it's simply not the case. most mysteries have conclusions of conspiracies and things completely wrong once the real story is found. sometimes they are right. this is a huge part of the puzzle. most of the case appears to have been or being replaced. it's becoming a new crime. the Amboy chute was Cooper's. the bomb was made of red tape. Cooper's description is wrong. the path is wrong. everything is wrong? this concerns me a great deal.
-
most of the case appears to have been or being replaced. it's becoming a new crime. the Amboy chute was Cooper's. the bomb was made of red tape. Cooper's description is wrong. the path is wrong. everything is wrong? this concerns me a great deal.
This is a valid point. The challenge is striking a balance between not-getting-carried-away with thinking-outside-of-the-box.
-
The corners of the box are now missing :rofl:
-
If you have any questions about 71 vintage radiosondes the guy who runs this online museum is the man.
http://radiosondemuseum.org/
For some reason thousands of brand new radiosondes were sold surplus for pennies. I bought several different kinds for $1 each in the late 1960s and early 70s. Most were mfd by VIZ. They had no NAV gear but did contain aneroid altitude/baro sensor, UHF radio transmitter, temp sensor and other stuff. Later ones had LORAN C receivers which were superseded by GPS receivers. The NAV receivers eliminated the need for ground based radar tracking of balloon position.
377
-
Another person with demonstrated avionics skills, says:
"I see nothing inconsistent between the info about placard find location and the
"FBI" flight path, largely because neither is precise and we also don't have precise info
on the atmospheric conditions at the applicable time and position."
The person above ran his own analysis equally complete to what R99 has run, or any other individual. There are just too many unknowns ... did the placard ice up or was it moisture loaded which would affect its trajectory. The aerodynamic options available are too many and unknown. All of that said -
""I see nothing inconsistent between the info about placard find location and the
"FBI" flight path, largely because neither is precise and we also don't have precise info
on the atmospheric conditions at the applicable time and position."
-
Another person with demonstrated avionics skills, says:
"I see nothing inconsistent between the info about placard find location and the
"FBI" flight path, largely because neither is precise and we also don't have precise info
on the atmospheric conditions at the applicable time and position."
The person above ran his own analysis equally complete to what R99 has run, or any other individual. There are just too many unknowns ... did the placard ice up or was it moisture loaded which would affect its trajectory. The aerodynamic options available are too many and unknown. All of that said -
""I see nothing inconsistent between the info about placard find location and the
"FBI" flight path, largely because neither is precise and we also don't have precise info
on the atmospheric conditions at the applicable time and position."
I still haven't had time to redo the analysis using Tom's new information. But I will get to it in the next few days and it will be more complex than the previous ones.
Your friend is right that neither the FBI flight path nor the placard analysis is precise. However, I did a rather thorough analysis of the atmospheric conditions in the Portland/Vancouver area about 10 years ago and found that they were about two percent more dense than the standard conditions for a given altitude.
At Tom's suggestion, the effects of moisture on the placard were considered in the original analysis. Believe it or not, there is information online about the effects of moisture on falling objects. I'll comment on this further in the forthcoming analysis.
-
Another person with demonstrated avionics skills, says:
"I see nothing inconsistent between the info about placard find location and the
"FBI" flight path, largely because neither is precise and we also don't have precise info
on the atmospheric conditions at the applicable time and position."
The person above ran his own analysis equally complete to what R99 has run, or any other individual. There are just too many unknowns ... did the placard ice up or was it moisture loaded which would affect its trajectory. The aerodynamic options available are too many and unknown. All of that said -
""I see nothing inconsistent between the info about placard find location and the
"FBI" flight path, largely because neither is precise and we also don't have precise info
on the atmospheric conditions at the applicable time and position."
I still haven't had time to redo the analysis using Tom's new information. But I will get to it in the next few days and it will be more complex than the previous ones.
Your friend is right that neither the FBI flight path nor the placard analysis is precise. However, I did a rather thorough analysis of the atmospheric conditions in the Portland/Vancouver area about 10 years ago and found that they were about two percent more dense than the standard conditions for a given altitude.
At Tom's suggestion, the effects of moisture on the placard were considered in the original analysis. Believe it or not, there is information online about the effects of moisture on falling objects. I'll comment on this further in the forthcoming analysis.
Yes - my source left some source material also:
AVAILABLE RESOURCES ABOUT FALLING PLATES/CARDS
"Chaotic dynamics of falling disks", Field and buds, avail at
http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/62793
Actual doc URL:
http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/62793/1/388252a0.pdf
Cornell News re. the falling paper:
http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Oct04/falling_paper.hrs.html
LiveScience article: http://www.livescience.com/51-study-leaves-fall.html
Z. Jane Wang's Analysis of transitions between fluttering, tumbling and steady
descent of falling cards:
http://dragonfly.tam.cornell.edu/publications/S0022112005005847a.pdf
Her research group site where multiple docs are avail:
http://dragonfly.tam.cornell.edu/
re. Falling Paper:
http://dragonfly.tam.cornell.edu/publications/2004_PRL_Pesavento_Wang.pdf
Unsteady Aerodynamics of .... plates
http://dragonfly.tam.cornell.edu/publications/S002211200500594Xa.pdf
and:
[PDF]Free-Fall Rotation and Aerodynamic Motion of Rectangular Plates
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a395124.pdf
by AC Bustamante - 1968 - Cited by 2 - Related articles
Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque ... The aerodynamic motion of rectangular plates observed in 18 free- fall drop tests is analyzed and described. In most of the drops, the plates autorotated; the autorotation was independent of the plates'.
The above seems to have been taken down but I will send you a copy if you want it. Jane Wang's Analysis above comes highly recommended.
-
We should also probably consider the effects of rain pushing the card to the ground with additional force etc.
Tom
-
The card was damaged complicating things further. you could put the plane to the west end of the airway and still be in the ballpark.
It's likely Cooper tore it off the door in frustration. I'm going to make a card that will match the one found and see if it reacts any different. I doubt the terminal would of caused the damage or the force of exit?
-
I don't think the card could get iced either. wasn't cold enough at altitude where the rain would be. the cold temps were above the clouds.
-
I don't think the card could get iced either. wasn't cold enough at altitude where the rain would be. the cold temps were above the clouds.
Ive lost track of where they reported icing but they did ... is that in the same time frame as aft stair light going on and the card being torn off .. in the Toutle area?
-
I know it's on the transcripts over Oregon. can't remember where else. I don't think the card has time since it's not at the same altitude for long periods. it's falling. if they were above the clouds as they should of been they shouldn't of had an icing issue...they might of been skirting on them, don't know....
since the card was so thin perhaps it could of iced up......
-
I thought the icing became an issue when they climbed over 10K to clear the Donner Pass area over to Reno.
-
I thought the icing became an issue when they climbed over 10K to clear the Donner Pass area over to Reno.
was way before that...I'll find it momentarily...I believe they discussed it just past Portland.
-
9:28 which is just past Eugene they report "Engine anti-icing on for appreciable length of time, wing AI on intermittently"
-
9:28 which is just past Eugene they report "Engine anti-icing on for appreciable length of time, wing AI on intermittently"
Thanks. OK, I think this is much to do about nothing. The placard at Toutle cannot be used to fix the flight path at Portland because there are just too many variables/unknowns involved. I think the most that can be done is to prove the plane was inside V23 as it passed near Toutle and that is about all that can ever be proved.
-
9:28 which is just past Eugene they report "Engine anti-icing on for appreciable length of time, wing AI on intermittently"
Thanks. OK, I think this is much to do about nothing. The placard at Toutle cannot be used to fix the flight path at Portland because there are just too many variables/unknowns involved. I think the most that can be done is to prove the plane was inside V23 as it passed near Toutle and that is about all that can ever be proved.
I absolutely disagree with this assessment.
The atmosphere that winter night was measured. It is going to have been relatively stable and consistent in the sense that it's not like the type of purely erratic weather behavior experienced during the summer heating periods that spawn tornadoes and other violent weather. Therefore, anything, even a basketball, dropped from 10,000 feet up is going to take a somewhat predictable path downward.
It is not necessary to determine precisely where the jet was--although that would be nice. Rather, all you have to focus on is the likelihood that the placard separated from the jet near the FBI's flight path. If you can walk away relatively certain that the jet should have been removed from the placard by several miles that is enough to suggest that the FBI flight path is incorrect.
-
9:28 which is just past Eugene they report "Engine anti-icing on for appreciable length of time, wing AI on intermittently"
Thanks. OK, I think this is much to do about nothing. The placard at Toutle cannot be used to fix the flight path at Portland because there are just too many variables/unknowns involved. I think the most that can be done is to prove the plane was inside V23 as it passed near Toutle and that is about all that can ever be proved.
I absolutely disagree with this assessment.
The atmosphere that winter night was measured. It is going to have been relatively stable and consistent in the sense that it's not like the type of purely erratic weather behavior experienced during the summer heating periods that spawn tornadoes and other violent weather. Therefore, anything, even a basketball, dropped from 10,000 feet up is going to take a somewhat predictable path downward.
It is not necessary to determine precisely where the jet was--although that would be nice. Rather, all you have to focus on is the likelihood that the placard separated from the jet near the FBI's flight path. If you can walk away relatively certain that the jet should have been removed from the placard by several miles that is enough to suggest that the FBI flight path is incorrect.
Baloney. a basketball was not dropped from 305. :rofl: Come up with some other fantastical metaphor in Cooper lore.
-
I don't think a basketball would be the best thing to argue with 8)
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trW9rxpSBxA
-
Baloney. a basketball was not dropped from 305. :rofl: Come up with some other fantastical metaphor in Cooper lore.
Actually, I'll flip this around to you:
Name a single item that can free-fall from 10,000 feet up and not be affected by the surrounding atmosphere it's falling through. Even sound and light itself will be impacted to some degree as they make there way to the surface.
Yet, the placard is somehow immune? It is a worthless endeavor to attempt to learn something from where it was discovered? We should just give up because it's too hard?
-
Well, I would have to test them vs tell you what could or couldn't drop at any given direction or spot? you, me, everyone here has no idea when and where the card dropped. you, me, and everyone here has no idea how long it has been in the location found. we can guess but that doesn't mean it's a fact.
-
It appears the people who have no sides to this disagree with the theory. I haven't found one yet to agree. still looking though. Georger seems to be running into the same wall.
-
If you look at flight path theories, I think R99 still has the best yet. it's straight forward. no swimming across the river or hiding things under a few branches, walking up/down the beach etc. it's simple and to the point. I may not agree with all the points but it has substance/meaning. no speculation.
-
Well I certainly agree that I am the only person I'm aware of that has approached this thing in the manner I have approached it as spelled out by my 8:12 Arc Theory.
Furthermore, apparently I'm the only person who thinks the placard find location and the Tena Bar money find spot are critical in determining what likely happened--i.e., where the jet flew, where DBC jumped, where DBC landed, how DBC got out of the area, and how the three packets of twenties ended up on Tena Bar.
I realize I'm on an island here. Nonetheless, I stand by my analysis and theory.
-
That's fine. I'm not here to change anyone's mind. I'm here to find answers..answers change minds. lets hope I don't have to send a life raft over....
-
That's fine. I'm not here to change anyone's mind. I'm here to find answers..answers change minds. lets hope I don't have to send a life raft over....
Not to worry, the Bachelor Island Slough is about 18 inches deep.
-
[quote author=EU link=topic=5.msg29679#msg29679 date=155536967
Furthermore, apparently I'm the only person who thinks the placard find location and the Tena Bar money find spot are critical in determining what likely happened--i.e., where the jet flew, where DBC jumped, where DBC landed, how DBC got out of the area, and how the three packets of twenties ended up on Tena Bar.
I realize I'm on an island here. Nonetheless, I stand by my analysis and theory.
[/quote]
Eric, you are not as isolated as you suggest. Actually, a basketball dropped from 10,000 feet would probably be the most predictable object of all. Just stay tuned for a few more days.
-
I can see that the flight path discussion is a very controversial one. That makes perfect sense.
To be clear, I did not come up with the idea of a western path. That said, to the best of my knowledge there have only been three of us who have strongly advocated such a path--which by definition means the FBI flight path (Air Force) is wrong.
1] Tosaw factored in Tena Bar and considered that nothing had been found along the FBI flight path to arrive at a western path.
2] R99 factored in Tena Bar, the correlation between Maylay and Canby, the not-likely circuitous FBI path near Portland, the flow of the Columbia River near Tena Bar, and the placard to some degree to arrive at a western path.
3] I put a lot of weight on both Tena Bar and the placard find, and also considered the 8:12 jump time, the role of the Columbia River in all of this, the fact that nothing has been found along the FBI flight path, the "doesn't make sense" circuitous FBI path near Portland, and the fact that the FBI had erred previously via the Palmer Report, to arrive at what I call the 8:12 Arc Theory which points to a western flight path.
All of this said, Tosaw and R99 both believe DBC no-pulled. I believe Tosaw said he ended up in the river, and R99 believes he ended up on Caterpillar Island. I, on the other hand, believe DBC survived and landed in the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
I do not consider Tosaw, R99 or myself crackpots or drawn to conspiracies. I think the methodology that each of us has applied to arrive at a western path makes sense.
On the other hand, from what I can tell Shutter is the strongest--at least most vocal--advocate for the FBI path. This of course is based upon the Air Force's capabilities and the testimony of R2 in Seattle. That makes sense, is compelling and by default should be the accepted flight path.
However, Tosaw, R99 and I have, for reasons explained above, concluded that the default (Air Force) path must be wrong.
Im not sure Tosaw did subscribe to a 'western' fp vs the FBI fp.
What did Tosaw say, specifically ... and why did he say it ?
Do you require that 305 must be outside the 4 mile western side of V23 in order to qualify as a 'western flight path' ?
I’ve just finished reading Tosaw’s book. This is now my 4 th book regarding Cooper. Actually perhaps fifth if I count the awesome fiction book written by William Sullivan “ D B COOPER’s Parachute “.
Tosaw’s book is actually very short with a lot of photos. However it’s very clear that he thought Cooper landed in the Columbia River and drowned. It’s also apparent that he was convinced the entire loot went with him and that the money found at Tina Bar was via dredge ! He talked to all the flight crew and worked with Rataczak quite a bit as he thanks him for helping him in writing this book. With his numerous photos I was able to clearly note that Tosaw actually had no concrete idea exactly where the flight plan was or any real confidence where Cooper bailed. There is a photo on page 123 of him on Blake Payne’s 27 foot boat dragging the Columbia River NEAR the I 5 Bridge. The
I 5 Bridge as well as the Railroad Bridge crosses the Columbia at Hayden Island which is about 8 miles upriver of Tina Bar ! Also then again there are notations of him dragging the Columbia River in front of Tina Bar and waving to Tipper as they make their turn on the river ! Tipper is one of several fisherman that was present on the day the
Ingram’s found the money on Tina Bar. It comes as no surprise to me that Tosaw came up with Zilch ! The Mighty Columbia is a huge and wide River and it appears his search area was close to a 8 mile stretch of a mile wide River.
All this comes also in light of the fact he was working closely with the actual Co-Pilot ! Good Luck trying to learn much from reading his book. Like everyone else, he makes a lot of unproven assumptions !
-
[quote author=EU link=topic=5.msg29679#msg29679 date=155536967
Furthermore, apparently I'm the only person who thinks the placard find location and the Tena Bar money find spot are critical in determining what likely happened--i.e., where the jet flew, where DBC jumped, where DBC landed, how DBC got out of the area, and how the three packets of twenties ended up on Tena Bar.
I realize I'm on an island here. Nonetheless, I stand by my analysis and theory.
MY POST -
What likely happened vs. what did happen.
The issue is the FBI fp vs. some alleged fp: that 305 flew west of V23 a straight line btwn Toledo and Canby and there is no testimony that happened.
R2 was explicit. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland, in order for him to line up 305 and the T33 for a rendezvous south of Portland near Lake Oswego. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland. In fact he said he turned away from his screen while waiting for 305 to complete its turn ...
With a straight line fp there is no turn at Portland!
Placard is irrelevant.
-
MY POST -
What likely happened vs. what did happen.
The issue is the FBI fp vs. some alleged fp: that 305 flew west of V23 a straight line btwn Toledo and Canby and there is no testimony that happened.
R2 was explicit. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland, in order for him to line up 305 and the T33 for a rendezvous south of Portland near Lake Oswego. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland.
With a straight line fp there is no turn at Portland!
Here is the problem: The FBI flight path DOES NOT show the jet flying west of Portland. In fact, it makes a turn around PDX and flies EAST of downtown Portland.
-
MY POST -
What likely happened vs. what did happen.
The issue is the FBI fp vs. some alleged fp: that 305 flew west of V23 a straight line btwn Toledo and Canby and there is no testimony that happened.
R2 was explicit. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland, in order for him to line up 305 and the T33 for a rendezvous south of Portland near Lake Oswego. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland.
With a straight line fp there is no turn at Portland!
Here is the problem: The FBI flight path DOES NOT show the jet flying west of Portland. In fact, it makes a turn around PDX and flies EAST of downtown Portland.
blah bl;ah bl;ah b;ah b;ah .............................................. this has become very annoying and pointless!
-
MY POST -
What likely happened vs. what did happen.
The issue is the FBI fp vs. some alleged fp: that 305 flew west of V23 a straight line btwn Toledo and Canby and there is no testimony that happened.
R2 was explicit. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland, in order for him to line up 305 and the T33 for a rendezvous south of Portland near Lake Oswego. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland.
With a straight line fp there is no turn at Portland!
Here is the problem: The FBI flight path DOES NOT show the jet flying west of Portland. In fact, it makes a turn around PDX and flies EAST of downtown Portland.
blah bl;ah bl;ah b;ah b;ah .............................................. this has become very annoying and pointless!
Georger, by your own statements in an e-mail to me several years ago, FBI Agent Himmelsbach was in an Army helicopter in an attempt to intercept the airliner. I have no idea what they would have done if they had managed to intercept it, but they didn't even see it above the overcast.
But you specifically wrote that the helicopter stayed on the west side of Portland and even flew up to the Woodland area. In his book, Himmelsbach stated that he saw his neighborhood on the west side of Portland. The T-33, which had taken off from Portland International and flown west, stayed on the west side of Portland while trying to intercept the airliner.
There is absolutely nothing to suggest that the airliner was actually over Portland or on the east side of Portland.
-
MY POST -
What likely happened vs. what did happen.
The issue is the FBI fp vs. some alleged fp: that 305 flew west of V23 a straight line btwn Toledo and Canby and there is no testimony that happened.
R2 was explicit. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland, in order for him to line up 305 and the T33 for a rendezvous south of Portland near Lake Oswego. He waited until 305 had made its turn on the west side of Portland.
With a straight line fp there is no turn at Portland!
Here is the problem: The FBI flight path DOES NOT show the jet flying west of Portland. In fact, it makes a turn around PDX and flies EAST of downtown Portland.
blah bl;ah bl;ah b;ah b;ah .............................................. this has become very annoying and pointless!
Georger, by your own statements in an e-mail to me several years ago, FBI Agent Himmelsbach was in an Army helicopter in an attempt to intercept the airliner. I have no idea what they would have done if they had managed to intercept it, but they didn't even see it above the overcast.
But you specifically wrote that the helicopter stayed on the west side of Portland and even flew up to the Woodland area. In his book, Himmelsbach stated that he saw his neighborhood on the west side of Portland. The T-33, which had taken off from Portland International and flown west, stayed on the west side of Portland while trying to intercept the airliner.
There is absolutely nothing to suggest that the airliner was actually over Portland or on the east side of Portland.
So? I dont understand your point. Himms was acting on the info he had at the time - who knows where that info came from. What has this got to do with the placard and moving the flight path to Tina Bar ....
-
I guess it depends on what is considered west or the west side of Portland. in 1971 not much was around the area except downtown Portland. north of that had housing but the majority was east.
-
I guess it depends on what is considered west or the west side of Portland. in 1971 not much was around the area except downtown Portland. north of that had housing but the majority was east.
These distinctions people are making btwn west of Portland west side of Portland, west end of PDX, downtown Portland ... none of these positions reflect (or prove) a straight line route from Toledo to Canby (over Tina Bar) which is what R99 and Ulis want. The FBI flight path and all testimony to date reflect the plane flying within V23 as it turned and went by Portland. There is nothing about passing Portland that suggests a straight line flight between Toledo & Canby (over Tina Bar). All of the witchcraft about the placard notwithstanding!
-
I guess it depends on what is considered west or the west side of Portland. in 1971 not much was around the area except downtown Portland. north of that had housing but the majority was east.
These distinctions people are making btwn west of Portland west side of Portland, west end of PDX, downtown Portland ... none of these positions reflect (or prove) a straight line route from Toledo to Canby (over Tina Bar) which is what R99 and Ulis want. The FBI flight path and all testimony to date reflect the plane flying within V23 as it turned and went by Portland. There is nothing about passing Portland that suggests a straight line flight between Toledo & Canby (over Tina Bar). All of the witchcraft about the placard notwithstanding!
In view of your knowledge about the FBI flight path, how about explaining what those x-marks which lie on a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections mean.
Shutter has a good point in that since 1971 the west side of Portland (say west of the Portland International Airport), has been built up much more than the east side.
-
If what Georger said is true, that pilot Andy Anderson didn't record the exact time of the "bump," then the case is totally reliant on the recollections of the pilots as to when they thought he bailed out. And with all the confusion going on in the cockpit, the exact time will never be known. The "missing minutes" are the key to Cooper's landing area.
I think it's all in the timing. I have flown the path from Seattle to Portland. it can be done in the time frame they give. other options are being looked at. the money location must be some sort of clue in the path of the plane, or the jump time. if they are off on the timing, lots of water is around the jump zone. Robert99 has a pretty good theory, but we need some more to go on. perhaps he will chime in and discuss it in his words.
The money find at Tina Bar is the key to solving what happened to Cooper. If sufficiently accurate information on the flight path location becomes available, it will quite likely be possible to give a very small area for Cooper's landing (or impact). By small area, I mean quite a bit less than one-half of a square mile. It is also quite likely that a meaningful statement can be made on Cooper's condition immediately after he returns to earth (dead or alive?).
The unique geographical and topographical conditions that exist in the Tina Bar area are such that severe limitations exist on what the flight path had to be, and whether Cooper was a pull or no-pull, in order for the money to get to Tina Bar. And if accurate flight path information, such as that in the un-redacted Seattle ATC transcripts, becomes available, I will be delighted to go out on a limb and amplify on the above.
Shutter is absolute right about the further south the airliner got from the Woodland area, the more water it would be flying over. If the flight crew bypassed Portland on the west side, the airliner would essentially be almost directly over the Columbia River as it passed Tina Bar.
In addition, new tests on the money could be run to help verify a specific scenario. These are tests beyond the scope and capability of what Tom was able to do -
OK, https://citizensleuths.com/flightpath.html
-
I'm not experienced a lot with plotting maps but it appears the plotting was done in red ink. black X's/crosses seem to alert those about certain events. 8:05 position, as well as the 8:10 position. the plots at the turn toward Portland might just be inaccurate plots. Hominid claims scratch lines can be see with the proper software. I haven't tried anything yet to validate that assumption.
I'm guessing the black X's/crosses were added after the map was made. red one's are probably underneath. why they put them in the two intersections in black? I don't know. they might of discussed the possibility of that route. you would tend to believe the same pen would of been used at it's conception. they have had that map for decades and who knows how many people used it or marked on it for any given reason. we do that today with photo's and maps. some are wrong and could imply the wrong idea when someone finds them online.
Making the minute marks in red and connecting them in black makes sense so you can see the marks. who ever made the red X's/crosses didn't follow the path. they are straight (up/down/left/right) who ever did the intersection markings followed the airways instead of making them straight. if you follow...
-
I have obviously been very vocal about my belief that the FBI Flight Path is wrong.
With that in mind, I have considered how this is possible and where the error originated. This got me thinking about a few things.
First, it seems universal that everyone agrees with the flight up to the Maylay intersection.
Second, where R99 and I begin to disagree with the FBI’s Flight Path starts with the Maylay intersection and the turn made at that spot.
Third, it seems that everyone universally agrees with the flight path from Canby down to Reno.
Simply put, the area in question—for R99 and me— is the portion from Maylay to Canby.
I have a theory and here it goes:
The FBI Flight Path shows a quite sharp turn at Maylay that ultimately brings the jet over the V23 center line—in other words, east of the V23 center line.
Perhaps this is where an error occurred. Perhaps the jet didn’t make such a sharp turn at Maylay and actually turned just enough to fly parallel to the V23 center line during the first segment after the turn—a nautical mile or so to the west. Then going forward everything else is accurate in terms of the number of degrees that the jet turns as its direction changes.
With this in mind, I mocked up a map (below) that depicts the FBI Flight Path with the blue line and depicts my Theorized Flight Path with the yellow line.
It’s interesting that the Theorized Flight Path brings the jet to a point that could account for the drift of the placard, brings the jet to the west of Tena Bar (noted on the map with a pin drop), and lines up with the unexplained red Xs on the FBI map.
The portion over the Portland area is obviously not exactly the same; however, in both maps the jet does appear to fly a little bit more freely as it lines up and heads toward Canby.
Of course I realize this is a pretty bold theory. But, it may explain where the error (if there was one) originated.
-
I have obviously been very vocal about my belief that the FBI Flight Path is wrong.
With that in mind, I have considered how this is possible and where the error originated. This got me thinking about a few things.
First, it seems universal that everyone agrees with the flight up to the Maylay intersection.
Second, where R99 and I begin to disagree with the FBI’s Flight Path starts with the Maylay intersection and the turn made at that spot.
Third, it seems that everyone universally agrees with the flight path from Canby down to Reno.
Simply put, the area in question—for R99 and me— is the portion from Maylay to Canby.
I have a theory and here it goes:
The FBI Flight Path shows a quite sharp turn at Maylay that ultimately brings the jet over the V23 center line—in other words, east of the V23 center line.
Perhaps this is where an error occurred. Perhaps the jet didn’t make such a sharp turn at Maylay and actually turned just enough to fly parallel to the V23 center line during the first segment after the turn—a nautical mile or so to the west. Then going forward everything else is accurate in terms of the number of degrees that the jet turns as its direction changes.
With this in mind, I mocked up a map (below) that depicts the FBI Flight Path with the blue line and depicts my Theorized Flight Path with the yellow line.
It’s interesting that the Theorized Flight Path brings the jet to a point that could account for the drift of the placard, brings the jet to the west of Tena Bar (noted on the map with a pin drop), and lines up with the unexplained red Xs on the FBI map.
The portion over the Portland area is obviously not exactly the same; however, in both maps the jet does appear to fly a little bit more freely as it lines up and heads toward Canby.
Of course I realize this is a pretty bold theory. But, it may explain where the error (if there was one) originated.
Yours shall be known as the Elvis flight path! It is laughable. No doubt you intend to SELL IT TO YOUR LAST DYING BREATH!
-
Yours shall be known as the Elvis flight path! It is laughable. No doubt you intend to SELL IT TO YOUR LAST DYING BREATH!
And so it shall be known from this point forward, the Elvis Flight Path.
-
https://www.kvue.com/article/news/nation-now/you-can-now-bid-to-buy-elvis-presleys-private-jet-sold-as-is/465-317441ff-77b3-4a20-a99b-5e992753e92f
377
-
https://www.kvue.com/article/news/nation-now/you-can-now-bid-to-buy-elvis-presleys-private-jet-sold-as-is/465-317441ff-77b3-4a20-a99b-5e992753e92f
377
I see this and I think, "what a shame."
Like N467US, it should have been better preserved.
-
I'm not experienced a lot with plotting maps but it appears the plotting was done in red ink. black X's/crosses seem to alert those about certain events. 8:05 position, as well as the 8:10 position. the plots at the turn toward Portland might just be inaccurate plots. Hominid claims scratch lines can be see with the proper software. I haven't tried anything yet to validate that assumption.
I'm guessing the black X's/crosses were added after the map was made. red one's are probably underneath. why they put them in the two intersections in black? I don't know. they might of discussed the possibility of that route. you would tend to believe the same pen would of been used at it's conception. they have had that map for decades and who knows how many people used it or marked on it for any given reason. we do that today with photo's and maps. some are wrong and could imply the wrong idea when someone finds them online.
Making the minute marks in red and connecting them in black makes sense so you can see the marks. who ever made the red X's/crosses didn't follow the path. they are straight (up/down/left/right) who ever did the intersection markings followed the airways instead of making them straight. if you follow...
I bit the bullet and purchased a high quality full-sized poster of the map. What a difference, it's much easier to see all the markings. It's clear that the red marks are perfectly perpendicular, one horizontal mark and one vertical mark. This map was done on a drafting table (or a similar setup) by someone using a t square and triangle. They were probably working from lat&long data rather than trying to match up to a photo of the SAGE radar screen. There just isn't a lot of room for error here. If the map maker was using a readout of radar data, then we can't "massage" the map more than the +-1 mile we've been told about before.
-
The case at hand is who drew this thing? R99, Ulis, ??? ? What exactly is this thing supposed to represent and by what authority? I added the red line which is an approximation of the theoretical straight line btwn Malay and Canby central to R99's west path ... if that is still his west path? :-\
-
I don't see any sharp turn at the Malay intersection. it fly's past it. I'm not sure where you got data thinking everyone believes the path up to the Malay intersection. I see a lot of questions surrounding the timing vs the wrong path by different people. then you have some believing the plane was further east.
You read reports of people hearing a loud plane around the time of the supposed jump believing the plane was flying lower than 10k. I think it could of been the fighters making that noise. no reports from anyone on the west side of either Vancouver or Portland. 302's state the fighters were 5 miles behind them and noted the sudden changes in the flight.
If the jump zone was further away from a major airport I could see a lot of room for error. they were on top of PDX basically.
-
I don't see any sharp turn at the Malay intersection. it fly's past it. I'm not sure where you got data thinking everyone believes the path up to the Malay intersection. I see a lot of questions surrounding the timing vs the wrong path by different people. then you have some believing the plane was further east.
You read reports of people hearing a loud plane around the time of the supposed jump believing the plane was flying lower than 10k. I think it could of been the fighters making that noise. no reports from anyone on the west side of either Vancouver or Portland. 302's state the fighters were 5 miles behind them and noted the sudden changes in the flight.
If the jump zone was further away from a major airport I could see a lot of room for error. they were on top of PDX basically.
Let's unpack the above:
First, there was a turn at Malay. Now when I say Malay I understand that it wasn't literally at the intersection, rather it was around the airport. My point is that this is where the veracity of the FBI Flight Path comes into question for R99 and me. I am unaware of anyone questioning the flight path leading up to Maylay with the exception of the Reca folks who put the jet over Cle Elum.
Moreover, this turn at Maylay is sharp in the sense that it brings the jet from the west side of the V23 center line to the east of the V23 center line. The Elvis Flight Path theory simply has the jet turn at Maylay and remain west of the V23 center line as it flies parallel to the V23 center line.
Second, I am unaware of any fighters actually having the jet insight over Washington State. I have heard that they couldn't follow it because it was travelling too slow. Of course, this is ridiculous. The fighters are perfectly capable of intercepting slow flying aircraft, even as slow as a Cessna 152. Does anyone have anything that verifies that the McChord fighters had a visual on 305 over Washington State? If so, how does this jive with my understanding that NORAD nixed Major Dawson's idea of the 106s flying close to 305?
Third, what sudden turn to the east are we talking about that is followed by a turn to the right? There is nothing like this on the FBI Flight Path. In fact, after the turn at Maylay the jet as depicted as making several subtle turns to the west as it flies a large arc pattern before it turns east to travel center line V23. This turn occurs at 8:12.
-
By the way Georger, the Elvis Flight Path map was drawn by me. That should be clear from the original post I made. R99 had nothing to do with it.
Under what authority do I draw the Elvis Flight Path? Uhhhhh, it's just a map designed to illustrate a theory. Perhaps, just perhaps, it's actually correct.
Cheers!
-
I'm not experienced a lot with plotting maps but it appears the plotting was done in red ink. black X's/crosses seem to alert those about certain events. 8:05 position, as well as the 8:10 position. the plots at the turn toward Portland might just be inaccurate plots. Hominid claims scratch lines can be see with the proper software. I haven't tried anything yet to validate that assumption.
I'm guessing the black X's/crosses were added after the map was made. red one's are probably underneath. why they put them in the two intersections in black? I don't know. they might of discussed the possibility of that route. you would tend to believe the same pen would of been used at it's conception. they have had that map for decades and who knows how many people used it or marked on it for any given reason. we do that today with photo's and maps. some are wrong and could imply the wrong idea when someone finds them online.
Making the minute marks in red and connecting them in black makes sense so you can see the marks. who ever made the red X's/crosses didn't follow the path. they are straight (up/down/left/right) who ever did the intersection markings followed the airways instead of making them straight. if you follow...
I bit the bullet and purchased a high quality full-sized poster of the map. What a difference, it's much easier to see all the markings. It's clear that the red marks are perfectly perpendicular, one horizontal mark and one vertical mark. This map was done on a drafting table (or a similar setup) by someone using a t square and triangle. They were probably working from lat&long data rather than trying to match up to a photo of the SAGE radar screen. There just isn't a lot of room for error here. If the map maker was using a readout of radar data, then we can't "massage" the map more than the +-1 mile we've been told about before.
This whole map was probably prepared some time after the hijacking and by persons unknown at the present time.
It is highly unlikely that USAF personnel prepared the FBI flight path since the 302s state that the USAF personnel turned over "tapes" and not "maps". Some else had to find a machine to read the tapes and then do the analysis to determine the flight path.
While I may be slightly prejudiced, I think the USAF personnel would have done a better job. They would certainly not have the airliner traveling three nautical miles in one minute and then traveling six nautical miles in the very next minute.
Could you possibly post the high quality map of the Portland area, even if you have to do it in several segments?
-
Haven't mentioned it yet but, Hi Robert!, good to have you back.
I can't scan the poster, at least not with my equipment, as I made it several times larger than the original the scan was based on. I used Sluggo's website as the source material, the scans he had are the best I could find. I might make another one as, according to the poster shop, it could be made even bigger without getting too pixelated.
-
I don't have it handy at the moment but there are 302's stating the map came from the Air Force. it also states that Seattle (Seatac)recording of the path.
-
The FBI Flight Path shows a quite sharp turn at Maylay that ultimately brings the jet over the V23 center line
I read this morning where you claimed you never said this, but it appears you changed the wording..
I go by the 302's. Dawson made statements years later. the 302's mention tailing the plane. intercepting a plane is not following it. what is the stall speed on the F-106, with or without afterburners? it will burn a lot of fuel with them on..
How much of this do you really think they just made up? I tell Blevins all the time that he should get it together and solve all the other myteries. shouldn't take you guys no time at all?
-
By the way Georger, the Elvis Flight Path map was drawn by me. That should be clear from the original post I made. R99 had nothing to do with it.
Under what authority do I draw the Elvis Flight Path? Uhhhhh, it's just a map designed to illustrate a theory. Perhaps, just perhaps, it's actually correct.
Cheers!
The FBI fp is based on data. That is its "authority".
Your fp shows a number of turns - why, based on what? You mention the chase planes. What is your data for that?
Maybe by the end of the month we will have 20 new flight path charts based on other people's theories.
Data is the gold standard in these matters - not people's theories.
-
By the way Georger, the Elvis Flight Path map was drawn by me. That should be clear from the original post I made. R99 had nothing to do with it.
Under what authority do I draw the Elvis Flight Path? Uhhhhh, it's just a map designed to illustrate a theory. Perhaps, just perhaps, it's actually correct.
Cheers!
The FBI fp is based on data. That is its "authority".
Your fp shows a number of turns - why, based on what? You mention the F106's. What is your data for that?
Maybe by the end of the month we will have 20 new flight path charts based on other people's theories.
Data is the gold standard in these matters - not people's theories.
You need to read my original post. It clearly explains my methodology and why there are turns in the Elvis Flight Path.
I do not understand your question about the 106s. My understanding is that the 106s were not able to follow 305.
-
The FBI Flight Path shows a quite sharp turn at Maylay that ultimately brings the jet over the V23 center line
I read this morning where you claimed you never said this, but it appears you changed the wording..
I go by the 302's. Dawson made statements years later. the 302's mention tailing the plane. intercepting a plane is not following it. what is the stall speed on the F-106, with or without afterburners? it will burn a lot of fuel with them on..
How much of this do you really think they just made up? I tell Blevins all the time that he should get it together and solve all the other myteries. shouldn't take you guys no time at all?
I do not understand the opening sentence. I didn't claim anything or change any wording. I merely explained what I meant by calling it a sharp turn at Malay.
I personally have not read any 302s regarding F-106s trailing the jet over Washington State. I'm not saying they don't exist. I just haven't seen any. Moreover, my understanding, from somewhere, was that the fighters did not have a visual on 305 or see DBC jump. If someone can direct me to a complete 302--not just a cut out section--I'd like to see it.
-
By the way Georger, the Elvis Flight Path map was drawn by me. That should be clear from the original post I made. R99 had nothing to do with it.
Under what authority do I draw the Elvis Flight Path? Uhhhhh, it's just a map designed to illustrate a theory. Perhaps, just perhaps, it's actually correct.
Cheers!
The FBI fp is based on data. That is its "authority".
Your fp shows a number of turns - why, based on what? You mention the F106's. What is your data for that?
Maybe by the end of the month we will have 20 new flight path charts based on other people's theories.
Data is the gold standard in these matters - not people's theories.
You need to read my original post. It clearly explains my methodology and why there are turns in the Elvis Flight Path.
I do not understand your question about the 106s. My understanding is that the 106s were not able to follow 305.
The chase planes. I am late for an appointment. Maybe you will be President of the United States or Bulgaria when I return - who knows!
After you have solved Cooper will you be revising General Relativity?
-
I have heard that they couldn't follow it because it was travelling too slow. Of course, this is ridiculous.
That implies the 106's couldn't follow the jet..that's correct.the planes had to zig zag complaining they couldn't follow due to the low speed. they were 5 miles behind but were linked to the SAGE watching there path. the idea was to get close to possibly see his departure but the plan didn't work. the C130 ended up following the plane. as for visual, don't know...
I just posted a 302 concerning the "chase planes" that would be the 106's...
-
Also, what small airport are they referring to near where DBC jumped?
-
Why would the 106s have to zig zag when 305 was travelling at 170kts?
-
What needs to be done is all the data surrounding the path need to be dated. a pattern shows the changing of area's due to new information coming in.
-
I'll tell you what we need.
1) All of the data used to create the flight path.
2) The un-redacted radio communications from Seattle.
-
I'll tell you what we need.
1) All of the data used to create the flight path.
2) The un-redacted radio communications from Seattle.
according to your statements. you don't need anything? I don't think anything would convince you..
-
Reacted typically means covering the data showing something is actually there. this would be removing the dialog. that's a conspiracy..the 302's are redacted..
-
Here is a 302 discussing the SAGE...
-
I'll tell you what we need.
1) All of the data used to create the flight path.
2) The un-redacted radio communications from Seattle.
according to your statements. you don't need anything? I don't think anything would convince you..
At this point I need a lot more than some guy's word. The days of "Here's the flight path" are not going to cut it after 47 years of zilch.
That said, let's start with the actual data used to re-create the path.
Regarding the redacted comment: All I know is that something is redacted. Furthermore, that the redacted info could help pinpoint the jet's location according to R99. It doesn't mean that there was a conspiracy. It means what it means--items are redacted so we don't have access to all of the information.
-
Another
-
At this point I need a lot more than some guy's word. The days of "Here's the flight path" are not going to cut it after 47 years of zilch.
Most ridiculous statement I've heard yet....once again, you think this was just a joke investigation but you trump them in a month?
-
These two posts imply two things:
1) SAGE was involved with plotting the flight path.
2) McChord crunched the data to create the flight path.
-
These two posts imply two things:
1) SAGE was involved with plotting the flight path.
2) McChord crunched the data to create the flight path.
Yup, probably did it on the way out from his shift...that "one guy"
-
I suppose this is where I differ from a lot of people.
After 47 years, I don't care who provided the info. I don't care if it was hand-delivered by a four-star General or the President of the United States. I need some questions answered.
If others choose to take the Air Force at their word at this point, have at it. If you want to continue to believe that they're infallible, have at it.
As for me I maintain what I've said many times before: Somebody made a mistake somewhere at sometime.
-
You cherry pick things. one second you try and discredit the USAF and the next take a Major for his word. didn't he work with those clowns?
-
It's not cherry picking at all. If you re-watch my Daily DB Cooper Bite I state very clearly that this is one man's testimony, he may be wrong, or it may have been reported incorrectly, but it is worth considering when other factors are brought to bare.
I brought it up because it conflicts with the official story. It conflicts with R2. And, this was the guy responsible for coordinating the chase plane effort for the Air Force. Simply ignoring the comment is cherry picking.
-
Flying the Convair F-106 Delta Dart
https://www.f-106deltadart.com/history.htm (excerpt below)
Ask any pilot who has piloted the Six and he will quite readily tell you that it was one of the best aircraft he had ever flown. In typical delta-winged control configuration (equipped with elevons' instead of horizontal stabilizer and elevators), the Six felt much the same as any conventionally designed aircraft in flight, according to Six pilots familiar with other conventionally winged aircraft. The Six handled well at low speeds as well as high ones, even when operating at or near specified minimums. General flight characteristics of the Six fitted with the supersonic rated external fuel tanks are essentially the same as in clean' configuration, except that control at lower speeds is somewhat more demanding. Advantages of the delta wing with its high surface area included excellent performance at high altitudes, and agile turning ability at intermediate and lower altitudes. Furthermore, the Six was a straightforward and "honest" aircraft when flown within the parameters of its flight envelope. As with any advanced high-performance aircraft, however, flying beyond the envelope could occasionally become a hazardous undertaking. An indication of the structural integrity of the airframe was to be found in the fact that the original fuselage airframe lifespan of about 4,000 hours had been doubled, with no indications of its exceeding its lifetime limitations ever having been reached, in extensive ongoing structural testing.
Pilots flying the Six have described the plane's commendable feather light pitch responsiveness and its approach to a stall as being straightforward with progressive light, medium, and heavy buffeting leading to well indicated lateral instability that induced nose yaw. Any increase in angle of attack beyond the critical limit at this point and adverse yaw induced by any aileron input initiated a violent roll & pitch- up condition known as post-stall. The next step beyond this was a severe oscillation about all three axes and the likelihood of an imminent flat spin. All of these responses were predictably clear, and more than enough progressive warning of exceeding the flight specifications was given. Checks on the Six were a Mach 2 restriction, a 752 KIAS "Q" limit, and a skin temperature limit (the "AM3 gray" color that the Sixes were painted was to protect the skin from effects of high temperature, and was not solely for aesthetic effect).
377
-
Flying the Convair F-106 Delta Dart
https://www.f-106deltadart.com/history.htm (excerpt below)
Ask any pilot who has piloted the Six and he will quite readily tell you that it was one of the best aircraft he had ever flown. In typical delta-winged control configuration (equipped with elevons' instead of horizontal stabilizer and elevators), the Six felt much the same as any conventionally designed aircraft in flight, according to Six pilots familiar with other conventionally winged aircraft. The Six handled well at low speeds as well as high ones, even when operating at or near specified minimums. General flight characteristics of the Six fitted with the supersonic rated external fuel tanks are essentially the same as in clean' configuration, except that control at lower speeds is somewhat more demanding. Advantages of the delta wing with its high surface area included excellent performance at high altitudes, and agile turning ability at intermediate and lower altitudes. Furthermore, the Six was a straightforward and "honest" aircraft when flown within the parameters of its flight envelope. As with any advanced high-performance aircraft, however, flying beyond the envelope could occasionally become a hazardous undertaking. An indication of the structural integrity of the airframe was to be found in the fact that the original fuselage airframe lifespan of about 4,000 hours had been doubled, with no indications of its exceeding its lifetime limitations ever having been reached, in extensive ongoing structural testing.
Pilots flying the Six have described the plane's commendable feather light pitch responsiveness and its approach to a stall as being straightforward with progressive light, medium, and heavy buffeting leading to well indicated lateral instability that induced nose yaw. Any increase in angle of attack beyond the critical limit at this point and adverse yaw induced by any aileron input initiated a violent roll & pitch- up condition known as post-stall. The next step beyond this was a severe oscillation about all three axes and the likelihood of an imminent flat spin. All of these responses were predictably clear, and more than enough progressive warning of exceeding the flight specifications was given. Checks on the Six were a Mach 2 restriction, a 752 KIAS "Q" limit, and a skin temperature limit (the "AM3 gray" color that the Sixes were painted was to protect the skin from effects of high temperature, and was not solely for aesthetic effect).
377
Like you said 377, with SAGE you simply plug the data into the 106, sit back and let the fighter fly you right to the target. Did this happen with 305?
-
NOBODY, takes everything as fact. at least from what I see. it's not the point of taking anyone's word. it's going by known evidence. a lot of it doesn't fit into your theory. nobody said anything was "infallible". you are speaking for others who never made that claim or imply we all did.
It can be turned onto you as well. you want us to believe a few possible error's on a map you don't trust to begin with is wrong and, only, you can tell us where it's right. only you can move the path where you see fit?
R99 has a very simple theory surrounding this. I don't believe it, but he's been working hard for years on it and I value what he says more than most on this forum. that doesn't make him right either though. I don't see him trying to reach out to the world screaming all of this.
The whole case is surrounded with mystery. that doesn't mean it's all bullshit or open to just "plug and play" with it as one desires.
Lets say the wind were just as perfect as they claim it was in direction. you base this card on certain tests done which I fully agree with. now, what characteristics will the card have torn up the way it was found. you KNOW for CERTAIN it will have no effect, correct? you know the card tumbled, correct? you know exactly what the area looks like where the card was found, how many trees were in the area. the odds of it being in that spot for 7 years. you have all of that, right? lets not forget what the wind was/is in that area on the ground, got it covered, right? you can't use the flight path, it's fake, or inaccurate so how can you use anything from it? how do you know the plane was around Toledo at all. the map some guy did 47 years ago, seriously? who were these clowns doing the weather? they were not on V23 at all, right? radar? the guy turned away from the screen once? the radar means nothing, so you can't even prove the plane was anywhere around Toledo? if you believe the radar is correct in that spot 62 NM away from Seattle. then you will have serious trouble in Portland with the radar, no?
Just because I voice out louder than others doesn't mean I read the 302's as if it was the bible!. I'm amazed how you make it out to be thrown together but use the very same evidence you slam? one guy made the map 47 years ago, that you use to support fact?
-
"THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE:
After Flight 305 took off from Sea-Tac Airport heading south it was followed by two F-106 fighter Delta Dart jets from the nearby McChord Air Force Base. These jets were piloted by airmen of the 318th Fighter Interceptor Squadron. Their instructions were to stay well back and not spook Cooper. In addition, the Delta Darts were wholly inappropriate for the job. As high speed interceptors they struggled to fly as slowly as the Boeing and were forced to use sweeping S-shaped flight patterns. Consequentially the pilots spent far more time trying to keep their jets in the air than watching out for Cooper and his parachute. To the embarrassment of the United States Air Force neither of the pilots tailing Flight 305 saw Cooper parachute out. This failure was initially explained by the bad weather over the Ariel region but later aviation specialists acknowledged that it would have been near impossible to see Cooper leave the Boeing 727 at any point on the flight path. At the time the United States Air Force had a vested interest in supporting the ‘bad weather’ jump zone as was a plausible reason for their failure and drew attention away from the fact that the F-106 Delta Darts had been the wrong aircraft for the job."
According to records. the plane was 5 miles behind 305.
-
"Somebody got something wrong somewhere."
What does the above statement mean? Bare in mind it doesn't say, "The entire flight path is wrong." It doesn't say, "Everything that everyone said or did is wrong." It doesn't say, "This is one great big conspiracy."
It says, "Somebody got something wrong somewhere."
I am merely trying to figure out who, what and where.
Once again, I'm suggesting a "portion' or "segment" of the flight path is incorrect. Therefore, I am not contradicting myself by believing that the jet departed Seattle at 7:36 and flew straight away to Maylay and arrived at 7:59 per the FBI.
If something else is found--parachute, attache' case, money--I wonder how likely it is that it will be where it "should" be according to the FBI and the flight path? If I had to hazard a guess I'd say 1%.
-
You can't be claiming you are looking for answers while posting exactly what happened? that's what you are doing. theories are one thing. you are promoting this theory as fact and downplaying everything possible to make it float.
If I found something supporting any theory. I would gladly post it. who ever it is. why do you think I did the simulation. because I believe the path, or live by it? why would I test the placard? why would I be involved in the case. because Cooper survived? I'm looking for answers. not assumptions. how many of you guys can be right?
it's like people trying to cram 2+2 = 5 sometimes. it doesn't work.
-
If something else is found--parachute, attache' case, money--I wonder how likely it is that it will be where it "should" be according to the FBI and the flight path? If I had to hazard a guess I'd say 1%.
Based on radar data from Portland, Seattle and McChord, along with radio transcripts and flight data, chase planes, and, pilot testimony. what percentage would you give with the path being wrong in one area?
Your question surrounds assumption, as usual...
-
I think I finally understand the conflict here.
You think I'm trying to convince people I'm right. That is simply not the case.
I am telling people what I think and giving them the reasons why. Whether it's the flight path, Tena Bar, placard, or Sheridan as DBC, I am giving my thoughts and explaining my rationale. If some are convinced by my logic, that's great. If some are not convinced, point out something, and cause me to rethink something and learn something new, that's even better.
-
I think several people have told you about things that are wrong with the theory and you return with not agreeing or try and discredit the facts.
Variables of the placard.
Shift the path at Toledo. R99 is going by a mark made on the map. you just moved it?
nothing in the 302's about parts explained.
Ignoring the amount of people involved in different parts of the case. (one guy)
Using what you believe is an old worn out map that's wrong to support a theory.
Just a few things mentioned above. the same pattern occurs with suspects. descriptions are often wrong. yes, when the crime is only seconds long. they are against the description but proudly post the suspect beside the sketch?
I can't tell you how the placard got where it was found. you can? plenty of variables have been given, and ignored. 47 year old weather data probably from one guy! see, I can do it too....
-
My placard test wasn't really meant to show exactly how the card went straight down. it shows different characteristics. it's very possible tumbling is not the only option. sure it will still drift. how far. I don't know. will it act differently damaged? I'm trying to find out. is it light enough to tumble like the pamphlets released from planes once they exit?
I haven't weighed my cards or thickness. they are thin but might weigh over an ounce. we don't know the actual weight, right? getting it to spiral did call for me to throw it into the air but that's how it was basically introduced going out the back of the plane.
I was 40 feet up and the card tumbled about 125 feet. that should be somewhere around 5 miles. wind was around 7-10 mph.
-
For all -
Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory
The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...
A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.
-
For all -
Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory
The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...
A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.
Excellent! Eric and I have theories to explain how the placard got to where it was found and how the money got to where it was found. The placard and money are facts (data).
-
Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?
We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.
1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.
At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel.
-
Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?
We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.
1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.
At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel.
I agree, you 'shouldn't have to explain my theory' - because you have no theory. A theory is based on some data. So where is your "data" ? Numbers and such. Facts.
You may have a weak hypothesis. Otherwise all you have is an idea or a claim or a sermon ... but you have no theory. You apparently dont know what a "theory" requires. The way you throw the word around it could mean anything! Fortunately we have about 4000 years of civilisation to back up what a "theory" is. You arent telling science anything new. Only zealots and crazy people do that, on DB Cooper internet forums! Just the facts Mam ;)
-
For all -
Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory
The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...
A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.
Excellent! Eric and I have theories to explain how the placard got to where it was found and how the money got to where it was found. The placard and money are facts (data).
And you will say the data is in your previous publications? Previously you said your data could not 'prove' a west path. So what changed?
Stubbornness is not a theory! It's a social-physcological stance.
I will look forward to your proving your new revised theory, based on a revised version of your old work; if that is what this is.
-
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel.
Of course one should have to explain a theory. especially when it's based on assumption vs fact. not one thing found after 47 years has been ruled as fact in it's placement. "explaining" is part of theory?
If you feel you don't have to "explain" anything. everyone should be in agreement with your logic?
Here is what you want most to believe as fact vs theory.
The map is wrong based on markings on the map that appear to have no reason.
The map is wrong based on a card found 7 years after it's exit from an unverified position.
The map is wrong because it flew over a portion of Portland. it appears to have been justified with flying over Seattle, Vancouver and other cities along the path.
The radar data (multiple) was inaccurate (extremely faulty) in the planes location except from Seattle to Toledo, and south of Portland. the radar was again working in perfect condition.
The money was planted on the beach.
The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path. (placard, radar data, pilot testimony?)
How could the above be exempt from explanation, or further review?
-
Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?
We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.
1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.
At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel.
From EU: "Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."
Part of me is thinking this is getting old, but another part enjoys the fact that we on this group still find things to talk about, so I'm good with seeing this dialogue.
One comment: If you are in the 1% minority of believers, then I don't see how the other 99% need to explain their theory. It is the prevailing theory. Are we in a courtroom with EU as the defense attorney and only need to prove reasonable doubt? I believe you are close to getting there, in terms of reasonable doubt. However, we are not trying to convict here. One hole in the prosecution's argument in court might be a win for the defense, but finding one slight problem with the flight path or missing comms from the plane does not mean that the prevailing theory is wrong. And even if it is, it does not mean another theory is correct. I feel like we are in a statistics class doing hypothesis testing here. Rejecting the null etc.
We know where the plane was generally. What if it did fly over Tina Bar? So what? What does that mean? Maybe that he landed in water, therefore increasing his chances of death. The flight path would have been real useful right when he jumped, and the landing zone as well. 47 years later it does not carry as much weight. It's interesting, but is it impactful? Even Himmelsbach said that "following the money" meant to look for people who had a significant change in lifestyle.
Good discussion though, good to see new theories.
-
I like the way that fcastle analyzes this situation. But I think there is a flaw there too.
Whether 99% or 1% subscribe to a certain belief is irrelevant. Just because you're in the 99% crowd does not mean you are immune from justifying a certain belief. After all, as it stands right now we don't know what happened to DB Cooper. And at some point even the 99% need to consider that maybe they're wrong.
I have put forward a theory. I have explained the reason for the theory, the evidence I use, and my methodology. What else can I do? Not theorize at all? Not question that which should be obvious by now: i.e., Something doesn't add up.
An analogy is looking for my car keys. I swear I remember walking in through the garage and placing them on the kitchen counter the last time I drove the car. Yet, after 30 minutes of looking all over the kitchen counter, and on the floor, I cannot find them. 99% seem satisfied with saying, "I remember walking in and placing them on the kitchen counter. And, me being a witness to my own actions lends credibility to my belief and me." Yet, eventually, after what is now an hour of looking for the damn car keys I'm going to stop and actually ponder the notion that I made a mistake. Perhaps my memory of what happened is wrong based upon what I usually do or because I got distracted or for some other reason. Perhaps, just perhaps, I actually left the keys in the ignition, or in my jeans, or in the office, or threw them in the trash. Yes eventually, even me, a solid 99%er, who knows I left the keys on the kitchen counter, is going to have to ask myself, "Why do I think I left the keys on the kitchen counter? Is it possible I am wrong? Where would I have made the mistake?" After all, I want to find my damn keys.
-
I like the way that fcastle analyzes this situation. But I think there is a flaw there too.
Whether 99% or 1% subscribe to a certain belief is irrelevant. Just because you're in the 99% crowd does not mean you are immune from justifying a certain belief. After all, as it stands right now we don't know what happened to DB Cooper. And at some point even the 99% need to consider that maybe they're wrong.
I have put forward a theory. I have explained the reason for the theory, the evidence I use, and my methodology. What else can I do? Not theorize at all? Not question that which should be obvious by now: i.e., Something doesn't add up.
An analogy is looking for my car keys. I swear I remember walking in through the garage and placing them on the kitchen counter the last time I drove the car. Yet, after 30 minutes of looking all over the kitchen counter, and on the floor, I cannot find them. 99% seem satisfied with saying, "I remember walking in and placing them on the kitchen counter. And, me being a witness to my own actions lends credibility to my belief and me." Yet, eventually, after what is now an hour of looking for the damn car keys I'm going to stop and actually ponder the notion that I made a mistake. Perhaps my memory of what happened is wrong based upon what I usually do or because I got distracted or for some other reason. Perhaps, just perhaps, I actually left the keys in the ignition, or in my jeans, or in the office, or threw them in the trash. Yes eventually, even me, a solid 99%er, who knows I left the keys on the kitchen counter, is going to have to ask myself, "Why do I think I left the keys on the kitchen counter? Is it possible I am wrong? Where would I have made the mistake?" After all, I want to find my damn keys.
I'm with you on the 99% vs 1% thing, given that the case has not been solved yet. The 1% could be right. I personally feel that suspects like Reca, Rackstraw, McCoy are the 1% and have so many non-starters and glaring flaws that it should be those camps that prove to us why they are DB Cooper versus us having to disprove them all the time. Rackstraw and McCoy were only 28. We all know the holes in Reca's story. However, with the flight path, there just does not seem to be glaring flaws or non-starters, therefore the prevailing theory still stands in my mind. Flyjack has done some good work on the placard in the plane and what it was made of etc, how Cooper might have ripped off the access door.
I've stated before that I never really spent much time thinking about Tena Bar, I was more into the drop zone and how he would have escaped and spent the money. For us who are into the little details, it would be great to find parts of the briefcase or the money.
I think some of the money went into circulation, and if it were 1971, this group here could find at least one bill.
-
I'm with you on the 99% vs 1% thing, given that the case has not been solved yet. The 1% could be right. I personally feel that suspects like Reca, Rackstraw, McCoy are the 1% and have so many non-starters and glaring flaws that it should be those camps that prove to us why they are DB Cooper versus us having to disprove them all the time. Rackstraw and McCoy were only 28. We all know the holes in Reca's story. However, with the flight path, there just does not seem to be glaring flaws or non-starters, therefore the prevailing theory still stands in my mind. Flyjack has done some good work on the placard in the plane and what it was made of etc, how Cooper might have ripped off the access door.
I've stated before that I never really spent much time thinking about Tena Bar, I was more into the drop zone and how he would have escaped and spent the money. For us who are into the little details, it would be great to find parts of the briefcase or the money.
I think some of the money went into circulation, and if it were 1971, this group here could find at least one bill.
Very well said.
-
The placard was found at:
46°14’38.4″N 122°41’01.3″W
until Elvis plucks his magic twanger on his cell phone and claims another location.
Elvis' numbers are ? _______________________________________________ ?
-
For all -
Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory
The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...
A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.
Excellent! Eric and I have theories to explain how the placard got to where it was found and how the money got to where it was found. The placard and money are facts (data).
And you will say the data is in your previous publications? Previously you said your data could not 'prove' a west path. So what changed?
R99 REPLIES: You should read those previous publications. Maybe you could learn something. Please cite chapter and verse for your comment, "Previously you said that your data could not 'prove' a west path." I was pointing out flaws in the FBI flight path 10 years ago.
Stubbornness is not a theory! It's a social-physcological stance.
R99 REPLIES: Indeed, stubbornness is not a theory! And I trust that you are receiving appropriate treatment for your "social-physcological stance" (whatever that is).
I will look forward to your proving your new revised theory, based on a revised version of your old work; if that is what this is.
R99 REPLIES: You need to read the original posts about this on Dropzone. And they started in early 2009.
R99 replies are given above.
-
For all -
Theory | Definition of Theory by Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory
The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. ...
A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data.
Excellent! Eric and I have theories to explain how the placard got to where it was found and how the money got to where it was found. The placard and money are facts (data).
And you will say the data is in your previous publications? Previously you said your data could not 'prove' a west path. So what changed?
R99 REPLIES: You should read those previous publications. Maybe you could learn something. Please cite chapter and verse for your comment, "Previously you said that your data could not 'prove' a west path." I was pointing out flaws in the FBI flight path 10 years ago.
Stubbornness is not a theory! It's a social-physcological stance.
R99 REPLIES: Indeed, stubbornness is not a theory! And I trust that you are receiving appropriate treatment for your "social-physcological stance" (whatever that is).
I will look forward to your proving your new revised theory, based on a revised version of your old work; if that is what this is.
R99 REPLIES: You need to read the original posts about this on Dropzone. And they started in early 2009.
R99 replies are given above.
Sad. Newton turned to Alchemy too! He never recovered - :rofl:
Will you have an office at Graceland? How much for an autograph? :bravo:
Your replacement is Robert M Blevins!
-
NEW - BASIC - NON CONTROVERSIAL:
What victor did 305 take from PDX to Seattle ? What was the regular route for this flight? Anyone know for sure?
-
"Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?
We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.
1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.
At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."
This is actually very simple:
1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.
2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).
3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.
Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.
-
NEW - BASIC - NON CONTROVERSIAL:
What victor did 305 take from PDX to Seattle ? What was the regular route for this flight? Anyone know for sure?
Try V-23 for the PDX to SEA segment. There was also a V-23E direct from the Portland VORTAC (now known as the Battleground VORTAC) to the Seattle VORTAC which is located on the SEATAC airport. What was formerly known as V-23E is now known as V-495. The distance on V-23 from the Portland VORTAC to the Seattle VORTAC was 105 nautical miles and 102 nautical miles on V-23E.
For the trip south, the airliner headed straight down the centerline of V-23 to the Malay Intersection. The Seattle VORTAC was/is located between the runways of the SEATAC airport. The airliner passed within a few hundred feet of it about the time it passed the end of the runway as it took off. So it was essentially on the centerline of V-23 from takeoff to the Malay Intersection.
-
This is actually very simple:
1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.
2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).
3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.
Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.
I appreciate the thorough analysis provided above.
To be sure, yes the flight path may be accurate and the timing drastically off--to the tune of 6 or 7 minutes--or DB Cooper may have landed precisely where the FBI searched, and he survived, and for reasons not quite apparent decided to bury the money on Tena Bar.
The wind direction info from Tom Kaye is meaningless. It pertains to readings from Salem, OR--which is 90 miles to the south--and west of Seattle which is 100 miles to the north.
All of that said, the dramatic series of events that would have to take place--Cooper lands exactly in the middle of Columbia, three packets separate from the rest of ransom but stay together, three packets have to self-bury for years, no smelly corpse is noticed drifting out to sea, no parachute canopy or attache' case is ever discovered, on and on and on--is too fantastical for my taste. I believe the simplest and most direct explanation, the one that I have talked about at length, is the most likely scenario and truth to the matter.
Of course, I may be wrong. That said, I do believe the truth looks a lot more like my version than the other versions.
Good post andrade1812.
-
Cooper, or the Hobo that murdered him, could have buried the money at Tena bar too. Again, it's a problem that doesn't require a radical solution. I used to believe Cooper buried the money at Tina Bar because he felt some guilt about what he did and decided to bury the "tip" he tried to give the stews as a form of penitence.
I would even consider moving the flight path to the west a few miles, since (from one of Hominid's posts) the original mapmaker started making crosses to the west before striking them and re-positioning to the east.
Regardless, I believe the best method is to find the simplest explanation that explains the data, and working from there, rather than creating a complex one that happens to fit the data and doubling down on it.
-
What I would very much like to know is how the flight path was constructed. Does anyone here know? Was it a matter of crunching numbers to arrive at coordinates that were then plotted on a map? Was it something more simplistic? I'd really like to here from someone who actually knows--not just surmises--how the flight path was drawn up.
-
"Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?
We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.
1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.
At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."
This is actually very simple:
1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.
2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).
3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.
Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.
1. When Tom Kaye asked me to do the placard analysis in 2011, he gave me the GPS coordinates for the location where it was found. It was my understanding at that time, and still is, that the family of the hunter who found the placard took Tom to the exact spot where it was found and he recorded the location on his GPS. I assumed for the analysis that the winds were from the southwest (225 degrees) and made an estimate for the wind velocity at 10,000 feet. For the surface winds, I used the 8:00PM sequence report of winds at the Portland International Airport. And the winds at PIA never exceeded about 12 MPH that entire day and evening. We don't need a statistical analysis since the GPS coordinates are accurate to within a very small number of feet.
2 & 3. All kinds of scenarios can be imagined. However, if Cooper or the money bag had landed in the east-west segment of the Columbia River, they would have gone pass Tina Bar on the west side of the river and probably in the shipping channel which is close to the western shore of the river. They definitely would not have ended up at Tina Bar.
The airliner only flew on one flight path. Victor airways today are eight nautical miles wide (four nautical miles on each side of the centerline). On a direct flight from the Malay to Canby Intersections, the airliner would never be more than seven nautical miles from the V-23 centerline. Tina Bar is only about five nautical miles from the V-23 centerline. So Tina Bar itself is close to being under V-23.
-
What runway did 305 use out of Portland?
-
"Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?
We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.
1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.
At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."
This is actually very simple:
1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.
2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).
3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.
Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.
Good summary of the known facts.
-
Cooper, or the Hobo that murdered him, could have buried the money at Tena bar too. Again, it's a problem that doesn't require a radical solution. I used to believe Cooper buried the money at Tina Bar because he felt some guilt about what he did and decided to bury the "tip" he tried to give the stews as a form of penitence.
I would even consider moving the flight path to the west a few miles, since (from one of Hominid's posts) the original mapmaker started making crosses to the west before striking them and re-positioning to the east.
Regardless, I believe the best method is to find the simplest explanation that explains the data, and working from there, rather than creating a complex one that happens to fit the data and doubling down on it.
Ive always said the money itself gives some clues - like any corpse does!
-
What runway did 305 use out of Portland?
Himmelsbach states that it landed on runway 28L on arrival. That is probably the same runway on which it departed.
-
"Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?
We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.
1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.
At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."
This is actually very simple:
1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.
2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).
3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.
Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.
Several points -
I dont know how anyone could argue with radar plots, unless they had their own radar data?
What happened along a radar plot and its time stamps is another matter. But the placard find on the ground fits within a probability zone along the radar plot.
I remember people asking if the pilots had ever flown 'this route' before and the answer was "no" ? If 305 flew V23 north from PDX to SEA then technically the answer was "yes" ? :D Maybe that's one of the reasons V23 was chosen 'to return on' ?
One of the reason for choosing V23, it is said, was because it was the lowest elevation route - which fit the needs at hand including Cooper's demands. Does any other route south fit those requirements? Those requirements were important at the time.
-
"Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?
We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.
1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.
At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."
This is actually very simple:
1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.
2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).
3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.
Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.
Several points -
I dont know how anyone could argue with radar plots, unless they had their own radar data?
What happened along a radar plot and its time stamps is another matter. But the placard find on the ground fits within a probability zone along the radar plot.
I remember people asking if the pilots had ever flown 'this route' before and the answer was "no" ? If 305 flew V23 north from PDX to SEA then technically the answer was "yes" ? :D Maybe that's one of the reasons V23 was chosen 'to return on' ?
One of the reason for choosing V23, it is said, was because it was the lowest elevation route - which fit the needs at hand including Cooper's demands. Does any other route south fit those requirements? Those requirements were important at the time.
Only V-23 was discussed for the flight south. It does have lower terrain than V-23E but I don't believe this factor was mentioned by the pilots or anyone else. You might check the ground elevations close to the Pacific if that is a matter of interest to you.
No one knows where those radar plots in the FBI flight path came from. But they were not automatically plotted on that map. Someone marked that flight path on the map using information from some unknown source.
-
"Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?
We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.
1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.
At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?
It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."
This is actually very simple:
1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.
2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).
3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.
Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.
Several points -
I dont know how anyone could argue with radar plots, unless they had their own radar data?
What happened along a radar plot and its time stamps is another matter. But the placard find on the ground fits within a probability zone along the radar plot.
I remember people asking if the pilots had ever flown 'this route' before and the answer was "no" ? If 305 flew V23 north from PDX to SEA then technically the answer was "yes" ? :D Maybe that's one of the reasons V23 was chosen 'to return on' ?
One of the reason for choosing V23, it is said, was because it was the lowest elevation route - which fit the needs at hand including Cooper's demands. Does any other route south fit those requirements? Those requirements were important at the time.
Only V-23 was discussed for the flight south. It does have lower terrain than V-23E but I don't believe this factor was mentioned by the pilots or anyone else. You might check the ground elevations close to the Pacific if that is a matter of interest to you.
No one knows where those radar plots in the FBI flight path came from. But they were not automatically plotted on that map. Someone marked that flight path on the map using information from some unknown source.
so who plotted this computer generated map ? using what data from whom?
-
Possibly Paul S. or Harrison?
Possibly got the info from here....
-
Possibly Paul S. or Harrison?
Possibly got the info from here....
whats the date on that document? (must run ... am on laundry duty tonight ........ woe is me!)
-
Have to find it again. I'll get back to you..
-
The map supplied below was made or dated 12-4-71 sent out of Minneapolis....
-
The map supplied below was made or dated 12-4-71 sent out of Minneapolis....
Where did you get that? Is there a hi res version you could email - please do if you can.
-
It's in the FBI vault..part 13 of 13..starting on page 306. you have to download it to view it.
-
Possibly Paul S. or Harrison?
Possibly got the info from here....
whats the date on that document? (must run ... am on laundry duty tonight ........ woe is me!)
November 29, 1971.
There are several errors in that document. The writer apparently does not realize that the SEATAC tower and the Seattle Air Traffic Control Center are entirely separate organizations and that it was the Center, and not the SEATAC tower, that controlled the flight south from just a few seconds after it took off from SEATAC. The writer also mentions "radar transcripts" when in fact he means the Seattle Center's radio transcripts. It is those unredacted Center radio transcripts that we have been trying to get without success.
-
The map supplied below was made or dated 12-4-71 sent out of Minneapolis....
This map is interesting because it is different than the other FBI maps. Specifically, the 1972 FBI Jump Zone Map (white) and the FBI Flight Path Map (yellow). So we now have a third map called the December 4 Map (white).
The December 4 Map notes an 8:10 jump time, while the 1972 Map notes an 8:11 jump time. The most likely jump line (A-B) on both the December 4 Map and the 1972 Map are separated by about 6 NM with the December 4 Map showing a primary jump spot north of the Lewis River. Also, both of the white maps show a "most-likely" flight path about 2NM west of the flight path depicted on the yellow map. Not to mention the yellow map shows a turn down center line V23 at 8:12 where as the 1972 map shows the jet continuing almost due south at that point.
-
Things happen for a reason. we can't automatically assume. I haven't had time to look at the map. if they are above the Lewis river as the prime spot then they probably went by the 8:09 time from the FDR showing the "little Bob".
They are trying to piece the flight together. this is 1971 and not today's technology.
-
They went by the 8:10 mark on the December 4 Map. They went by the 8:11 mark on the 1972 Map. I'm not sure what changed and caused them to move the jump back one minute. Nonetheless, that one minute does not account for the 6NM downrange movement of the jump spot.
-
Rat said he might of jumped 5-10 minutes after the last contact. that puts the possibility to the 8:15 mark.
-
Does anyone have the long/lat coordinates for marks on the FBI map?
-
do you want them from the first plot?
-
I will start plotting some every night...here are the coords from 7:54 to 8:10
7:54 plot N46°40.12' W122°42.19'
7:55 plot N46°39.13' W122°43.09'
7:56 plot N46°36.24' W122°43.51'
7:57 plot N46°33.18' W122°45.90'
7:58 plot N46°30.12' W122°48.12'
7:59 plot N46°28.33' W122°49.36'
8:00 plot N46°25.27' W122°47.17'
8:01 plot N46°22.14' W122°43.96'
8:02 plot N46°18.07' W122°42.22'
8:03 plot N46°15.10' W122°41.51'
8:05 plot N46°12.03' W122°39.09'
8:06 plot N46°9.07' W122°39.06'
8:07 plot N46°6.10' W122°38.11'
ADDED
8:08 plot N46°3.13' W122°36.96'
8:09 plot N45°59.09' W122°36.13'
8:10 plot N45°56.80' W122°36.17'
-
Dude, you're awesome. Thank you. :chr2:
-
What I've done is put portions of the map in paint and straight line the marks to the degree's on the sides then mark them on Skyvector for the Long./Lat numbers. (vertical and horizontal lines)
I cross check this system by plotting Ed Carlson, silver lake, Portland and Lake Merwin. all the coords matched so these should be pretty accurate to the map. you might want to take a look around the placard. it shows the plane less than 500 feet east of the placard. 8:03 the plane take a southerly path then goes a little to the east at the 8:05 plot.
I used the map that doesn't have the green lines so I could see the radar plots easier..
-
I'm going to ask the question again to see if perhaps someone who is reading the site privately but not posting has an answer. If so, I am easy to reach via email per the address mentioned at the end of my Daily DB Cooper Bite videos:
In 1971, how was a flight path put together after the fact?
I've read multiple comments that state SAGE radar, along with data from the jet's flight recorder, along with radio transcripts was used to craft the flight path.
If this is true, my question is WHY? If SAGE is the "be-all end-all" why is anything else needed? What does flight recorder data or radio transcript data bring to the party?
This is very important, because if there are multiple components that come together from multiple sources, then all of this data is thrown in the mix to generate the flight path "after the fact," this provides for more opportunities for a mistake to be made.
Anyone? Any actual knowledge of how this flight path was constructed?
-
I'm going to ask the question again to see if perhaps someone who is reading the site privately but not posting has an answer. If so, I am easy to reach via email per the address mentioned at the end of my Daily DB Cooper Bite videos:
In 1971, how was a flight path put together after the fact?
I've read multiple comments that state SAGE radar, along with data from the jet's flight recorder, along with radio transcripts was used to craft the flight path.
If this is true, my question is WHY? If SAGE is the "be-all end-all" why is anything else needed? What does flight recorder data or radio transcript data bring to the party?
This is very important, because if there are multiple components that come together from multiple sources, then all of this data is thrown in the mix to generate the flight path "after the fact," this provides for more opportunities for a mistake to be made.
Anyone? Any actual knowledge of how this flight path was constructed?
Nope!
-
Tom told me a lot of things last night in our conversation. the map wasn't just "thrown" together. he has a lot more info than we do. I'm trying to piece everything together so some sort of reasoning can take place.
-
It's a loaded question since we don't have all the details yet. We all know that, and short of a video of someone making the map the radical skeptics can always claim we're just mindless FBI apologists (or something). However, and it was Hominid who first came up with this, we can tell a lot about the map just by giving it a close examination. The map has red markings corresponding to exact lat/long positions. The marks are perfectly perpendicular, meaning the markings were done on a set up like a drafting table with a square and triangle. Likely, this marks were made from a single source, most likely a readout of the radar data. The map has a military GEOREF connotation on it, suggesting it was made by someone familiar with the system. We have documentation that the map came from the military, so this fits. The heavy grease pen (or felt tip pen, I can't tell) was made by someone else much later. Probably the FBI since they would be concerned with a continuous flight path. There, not difficult. The map is significant and likely tells us the actual radar data from the night of the skyjacking.
-
When you look at the map using the coords provided you will see the placard is 468 feet west of the the map.
-
When you look at the map using the coords provided you will see the placard is 468 feet west of the the map.
I'm not sure how the coordinates were derived but my version was taken directly from the FBI yellow map. I painstakingly plotted each turn from the yellow map to Google Earth. There is plenty of identifying information on the yellow map to pinpoint the turn locations very accurately. The straight lines are obviously no issue. The placard coordinate, which is also a GPS location, is 8/10ths of a mile SW upwind from the FBI Flight Path.
-
It's a loaded question since we don't have all the details yet. We all know that, and short of a video of someone making the map the radical skeptics can always claim we're just mindless FBI apologists (or something). However, and it was Hominid who first came up with this, we can tell a lot about the map just by giving it a close examination. The map has red markings corresponding to exact lat/long positions. The marks are perfectly perpendicular, meaning the markings were done on a set up like a drafting table with a square and triangle. Likely, this marks were made from a single source, most likely a readout of the radar data. The map has a military GEOREF connotation on it, suggesting it was made by someone familiar with the system. We have documentation that the map came from the military, so this fits. The heavy grease pen (or felt tip pen, I can't tell) was made by someone else much later. Probably the FBI since they would be concerned with a continuous flight path. There, not difficult. The map is significant and likely tells us the actual radar data from the night of the skyjacking.
Then what is all of this talk about using flight recorder data and transcript conversations between the crew and Northwest Operations and Seattle Center? How were the plots derived? What about the three red plots hanging out in the open in west Portland?
-
How did you make your longitude and latitude marking from both maps?
-
I used the long. & lat. marking from both aviation maps. the FBI map and Skyvector. I plotted different locations on the FBI map and crossed them over to Google and found them accurate.
-
How did you make your longitude and latitude marking from both maps?
I used the actual FBI Yellow Map which incorporates a lot of detail in it including tributaries, small roads, etc.
I would identify a precise point on the yellow map and then plot the same spot on GoogleMaps. Then drafting a straight line between two points was easy using GoogleMaps. Of course, it also provided the ability to measure precise distances.
-
The way I've done it is much more accurate.
-
GoogleMaps shows a closest point "placard-to-flight path" of 4,319 feet.
-
I've checked the several times....
-
Do you have a slight-right turn at Sightly--just south of Toutle?
-
The degree markings on the sectional map is what I used to cross over to Skyvector that has the same system. I fix the plot and put the center crosshair over the location and the coords register at the top right.
sectional maps are only good for about 6 months I believe but that's due to airway changes and obstructions if I'm correct.
-
Do you have a slight-right turn at Sightly--just south of Toutle?
I have every turn seen with the coords. this includes the jog between 8:02 and 8:05. the placard is between those two..
-
The 20:02 point being the turn at the "21 degrees 30 minutes east" line on the yellow map?
-
If you look at the 8:02...8:03...8:05 plots you will see the plane drifts east from 8:02 position. it jogs more easterly from 8:03 to 8:05. I was thinking some southerly jog was there but it's not.
-
"Then what is all of this talk about using flight recorder data and transcript conversations between the crew and Northwest Operations and Seattle Center? How were the plots derived? What about the three red plots hanging out in the open in west Portland?"
These would have been used to pinpoint the timing of the jump, which is dramatically marked in black right next to Ariel on the map by the BigBlackPen guy. It's possible they used the other information to come up with the timestamps on the map, but I believe these would have been part of the data readout.
Those hanging plots out to the west are interesting, but they are each exactly 5 minutes west of the fp. Hominid believed the RedPen guy had an issue reading the printout. Here is what he said: "They are each plotted exactly 5 minutes of longitude to the west of the correct positions. This was no doubt a result of the fact that the minute marks are not labelled."
On the sectional, the minute marks aren't labelled and so it would be easy to start on the wrong square. Nothing there to hang a conspiracy on, I assure you.
-
On the sectional, the minute marks aren't labelled and so it would be easy to start on the wrong square. Nothing there to hang a conspiracy on, I assure you.
I do not use the words "conspiracy" or "plant" in this case. I'm much more likely to use "error" and "buried".
-
Semantics.
-
It appears that the marks could be nothing but an error.
-
Semantics.
"Conspiracy" and "plant" imply malice.
-
I want to get a better reading on the area around the placard. I used a thicker solid line to mark with. using a thinner line as I did the other plots gives me a better reading on positions. I'm going to recheck all coords. these are the new coords for that area along with the yellow map showing the plots. I'm rechecking again...
8:02 plot N46°18.07' W122°42.22'
8:03 plot N46°15.10' W122°41.51'
8:05 plot N46°12.03' W122°39.09'
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Yz64Yd3RRR3kzUIZp6AoSJIOCaoDAPHB/view?usp=sharing
-
I see what everyone means with posting photo's and exceeding the limit. I was on XP that didn't produce photo's like windows 8/10 does. I had no trouble in the past posting them. that's why I put them in Google Drive.
-
I want to get a better reading on the area around the placard. I used a thicker solid line to mark with. using a thinner line as I did the other plots gives me a better reading on positions. I'm going to recheck all coords. these are the new coords for that area along with the yellow map showing the plots. I'm rechecking again...
8:02 plot N46°18.07' W122°42.22'
8:03 plot N46°15.10' W122°41.51'
8:05 plot N46°12.03' W122°39.09'
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Yz64Yd3RRR3kzUIZp6AoSJIOCaoDAPHB/view?usp=sharing
I just plotted your spot at 8:02 and 8:05 and drew a straight line between the two. I arrive at a distance of 2302 feet between the flight path and placard find at its closest point. Again, this is directly into the wind.
-
Your 8:02 point is 0.36SM from mine. Your 8:05 point is 1SM from mine. In the case of both of your spots they're plotted slightly west and south of mine.
-
I'm getting different readings? it now shows the placard west of the path...with these new coords..
-
here is what it's reading here?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Gl_9qyHWOz9D06LT23i3Hk943C8fkgkw/view?usp=sharing
-
I see where part of your info is different than mine. You have the jet arriving at a point at 8:03 that is west of my 8:03 point. This is because I have the jet flying directly between 8:02 and 8:05.
-
then you are missing a plot?
-
I'm using the red crosses on the map..radar plots.
-
The 8:03 plot is very close to being on a straight line from 8:02 to 8:05...probably 300 feet to the west.
The primary differences in our plots are subtle, but yours are slightly west of mine which would move the flight path closer to the placard. As I noted I still show a distance of approximately 2000 feet with yours whereas mine is about 4200 feet.
Our placard find plots are identical.
-
I'm showing under 500 feet...
-
closeup view...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mbAb51QB6iBhpKOMbCNFvHA7KCVyYQPO/view?usp=sharing
-
Using your 8:03 plot and 8:05 plot and drawing a straight line between I show the placard at 471 feet NE of the flight path.
It seems to me that your 8:03 plot is too far west. If you note on the yellow map, the 8:03 plot is very close to the west-to-east halfway point between 8:02 and 8:05. I'm talking about the distance east that 8:05 is to 8:02.
Using your points, the 8:03 plot is about 20% of the distance east between 8:02 and 8:05.
I realize this is not very clear. My point is that it appears that your 8:03 plot is too far west.
-
After reviewing the coords again. it appears it's about 1,500 feet east of the card...that's about .3 miles...
-
I haven't checked these numbers yet but this is the best I can do. I used two crosshairs to zero in on the plot. the inside corners are where the plot lines are at the top and side. followed by the crosshair from Skyvector. you can see the coords given by Skyvector in the upper right of the photo. I give up past this point :rofl:
The coords for 8:03
N46°15.02' W122°41.22'
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tbSn_E_QeBjowWbHjDoq4FSe-kosTb9L/view?usp=sharing
The coords for 8:05
N46°11.12' W122°38.79'
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1G4FGOkSEuwcMhQwwRiOwvLmtAdwIgmAD/view?usp=sharing
-
3 or 4 days ago I was in the area of the placard find. Weyerhaeuser owns a lot of the forest rights and Locked gates hindered my exploration. I’m still trying to locate the other hunter who accompanied Carroll Hicks who passed away quite a few years ago. Georger says Tom Kaye knows but I contacted Tom and he doesn’t know the name of the other hunter. Does anyone know who the other hunter was ? As I mentioned before, I have a friend who grew up In Toutle and might know the hunter if I knew his name.
-
I think the only option is to contact the family...
-
I think the only option is to contact the family...
How is it even possible that there are 2 hunters who found the placard from flight 305 and nobody from the FBI interviewed the second hunter ? The second hunter might remember a lot more details of where the placard was found !
-
I think the only option is to contact the family...
How is it even possible that there are 2 hunters who found the placard from flight 305 and nobody from the FBI interviewed the second hunter ? The second hunter might remember a lot more details of where the placard was found !
The Hicks family. perhaps they would know who the friend was?
-
I think the only option is to contact the family...
How is it even possible that there are 2 hunters who found the placard from flight 305 and nobody from the FBI interviewed the second hunter ? The second hunter might remember a lot more details of where the placard was found !
The Hicks family. perhaps they would know who the friend was?
Much to do about nothing imho. The placard is not going to prove the whole flight path or when Cooper bailed, in any event. Does anyone seriously believe Hick's friend is going to issue NEW information and say the placard was found .... outside Dallas Texas!? :rofl:
-
Yes Georger. Dallas. Grassy Knoll. H. Howard Hunt. Carlos Marcello. David Ferry. Oswald and clones 1 through 4. Duane of course knew all the players.
The only physical clue we have as to when Cooper left the aircraft is the pressure bump. Placard is not really relevant to determining jumper exit point.
377
-
I think the only option is to contact the family...
How is it even possible that there are 2 hunters who found the placard from flight 305 and nobody from the FBI interviewed the second hunter ? The second hunter might remember a lot more details of where the placard was found !
The Hicks family. perhaps they would know who the friend was?
Much to do about nothing imho. The placard is not going to prove the whole flight path or when Cooper bailed, in any event. Does anyone seriously believe Hick's friend is going to issue NEW information and say the placard was found .... outside Dallas Texas!? :rofl:
First off this guy was actually a hunting buddy who was there when the placard was found. As I recall they were picking up litter and had simply put the placard in their pocket and had no reason to mark the exact spot where it was found. His memory could actually be far better then Carroll Hicks. I had a hunting partner who had a terrible sense of direction and never had any idea where he was. The placard find location is one of ONLY two items ever recovered from the hyjacking. If you or others think the placard find location is meaningless, so be it.
I happen to think it’s relevant to at least giving a clue as to where the aircraft was flying SHORTLY before Cooper bailed. Many people have combed over Tina Bar site ad Nauseum but to my knowledge very few have ever been to the placard location. I find it interesting and the area is awesome !
-
First off this guy was actually a hunting buddy who was there when the placard was found. As I recall they were picking up litter and had simply put the placard in their pocket and had no reason to mark the exact spot where it was found. His memory could actually be far better then Carroll Hicks. I had a hunting partner who had a terrible sense of direction and never had any idea where he was. The placard find location is one of ONLY two items ever recovered from the hyjacking. If you or others think the placard find location is meaningless, so be it.
I happen to think it’s relevant to at least giving a clue as to where the aircraft was flying SHORTLY before Cooper bailed. Many people have combed over Tina Bar site ad Nauseum but to my knowledge very few have ever been to the placard location. I find it interesting and the area is awesome !
I agree that the placard is very important. Furthermore, it has been largely overlooked as a valid piece of evidence that could clarify a flight path. I believe the reason it has been ignored for all of these years is because the Tena Bar money find was shortly thereafter and that immediately took over the spotlight.
Shutter, I have obtained the necessary info from Weyerhaeuser to gain access to the placard find spot. My primary objective will be to get a feel for the lay of the land, take pictures and perhaps leave a piece of a similar item behind to study any migration patterns that may occur over the course of the year.
-
Kermit, I see your point and could be a valid one. on the other hand it depends on how well they knew the area where they hunt. I lived in the country for years and was in the woods almost everyday. we could find spots easily by remembering the surroundings. they would have to be off by miles to make any real difference with the location given. Hicks did claim he hunted there for years..
Eric, that sounds good. I had a feeling it wouldn't be a big deal or some sort of "Area 51" location where it's restricted to access.
-
Don’t get me wrong, the placard find is significant. My point is that it’s mostly relevant to figuring out the flight path and not of much use in determining the exit point. The placard is a very significant find.
377
-
First off this guy was actually a hunting buddy who was there when the placard was found. As I recall they were picking up litter and had simply put the placard in their pocket and had no reason to mark the exact spot where it was found. His memory could actually be far better then Carroll Hicks. I had a hunting partner who had a terrible sense of direction and never had any idea where he was. The placard find location is one of ONLY two items ever recovered from the hyjacking. If you or others think the placard find location is meaningless, so be it.
I happen to think it’s relevant to at least giving a clue as to where the aircraft was flying SHORTLY before Cooper bailed. Many people have combed over Tina Bar site ad Nauseum but to my knowledge very few have ever been to the placard location. I find it interesting and the area is awesome !
I agree that the placard is very important. Furthermore, it has been largely overlooked as a valid piece of evidence that could clarify a flight path. I believe the reason it has been ignored for all of these years is because the Tena Bar money find was shortly thereafter and that immediately took over the spotlight.
Shutter, I have obtained the necessary info from Weyerhaeuser to gain access to the placard find spot. My primary objective will be to get a feel for the lay of the land, take pictures and perhaps leave a piece of a similar item behind to study any migration patterns that may occur over the course of the year.
Placard find in 1978. Month? Money find Feb 1980. Shortly thereafter? They came from the same plane on the same flight path. Jesus in the toast?
-
Kermit, I see your point and could be a valid one. on the other hand it depends on how well they knew the area where they hunt. I lived in the country for years and was in the woods almost everyday. we could find spots easily by remembering the surroundings. they would have to be off by miles to make any real difference with the location given. Hicks did claim he hunted there for years..
Eric, that sounds good. I had a feeling it wouldn't be a big deal or some sort of "Area 51" location where it's restricted to access.
I had a cousin who knew them - they were part of a hunting party of five guys that hunted the area every year. The name of the town where they met yearly was posted to DZ years ago. There is nothing complicated about this. The name of the other guy may be in newspaper articles of the time - I thot TK had the names but who knows ... I guess not. I thot TK met with one of them or the family?
I need to go feed the camels - :rofl:
-
PING 377 ---
In the current chute confusion, if Cooper used one of Cossey's chute, do we know the model, and how does this change your thought from years ago that 'Cooper chose the best chute of the bunch of back packs for the jump' - is that still valid or gone with the wind?
-
I currently think Cooper had 2 main chutes to choose from although that pot is being stirred. I think he jumped a C9 28 foot flat circular canopy otherwise known as a “round”. Purists tell me that the solid white C9 type canopies had a different model number: C8. Originally I thought that the two main chutes Cooper could choose from were a sport or perhaps civilian emergency canopy and a C9 type military canopy. In my opinion, the military canopy would be by far the better choice as most civilian or sport canopies had a maximum opening speed of 150 miles an hour. The C9 can withstand much higher opening speeds. As more info came in, I came to believe that the two choices Cooper had were likely a 26 foot Navy conical and a 28 foot round military C9. Both are excellent and super tough emergency canopies. Either would have been a good choice.
I’ve also said that Cooper could’ve just made a lucky random choice and known nothing about the parachutes contained within the rigs. If one canopy was better than the other he had a 50% chance of getting the right one.
377
-
2001 they describe Coopers chute in the document below...
-
First off this guy was actually a hunting buddy who was there when the placard was found. As I recall they were picking up litter and had simply put the placard in their pocket and had no reason to mark the exact spot where it was found. His memory could actually be far better then Carroll Hicks. I had a hunting partner who had a terrible sense of direction and never had any idea where he was. The placard find location is one of ONLY two items ever recovered from the hyjacking. If you or others think the placard find location is meaningless, so be it.
I happen to think it’s relevant to at least giving a clue as to where the aircraft was flying SHORTLY before Cooper bailed. Many people have combed over Tina Bar site ad Nauseum but to my knowledge very few have ever been to the placard location. I find it interesting and the area is awesome !
I agree that the placard is very important. Furthermore, it has been largely overlooked as a valid piece of evidence that could clarify a flight path. I believe the reason it has been ignored for all of these years is because the Tena Bar money find was shortly thereafter and that immediately took over the spotlight.
Shutter, I have obtained the necessary info from Weyerhaeuser to gain access to the placard find spot. My primary objective will be to get a feel for the lay of the land, take pictures and perhaps leave a piece of a similar item behind to study any migration patterns that may occur over the course of the year.
Just to clarify what I stated a few days ago. I was there in the area just 6 days ago. There’s a sign saying a Discovery Pass is required PLUS there was a locked gate preventing entry and a Weyerhaeuser sign on it. It obviously isn’t a restrictive area BUT perhaps this is closed on a seasonal basis so you might want to check with Weyerhaeuser about the locked gate. I had a 4 wheel drive vehicle but road looked well traveled and in good condition.
-
I watched the In Search Of program with Cooper again. Hicks claims once he got back he emptied his pockets of trash and showed it to his friend. sounds like they were separated when he found the placard. I also noticed how the placard is exactly like the one given to the FBI. it's a very good reproduction to be that detailed? also shows a large tear from the bottom center going up. you can see part of it on the photo provided by the FBI..
-
In post number 1751 on this thread, Tom Kaye presented radiosonde data for Salem, Oregon (which is about 45 Nautical Miles south of Portland International Airport) and a location that is northwest of Seattle (more than 120 Nautical Miles from Portland International Airport). Unfortunately, some of this data appears to have been affected due to a malfunction of the radiosonde equipment.
Consequently, some judgment was needed in interpreting the radiosonde data. But after all things were considered, the wind direction was essentially from 225 degrees from 4000 feet to 10,000 feet and the wind speed varied between 31 and 35 knots (Nautical Miles Per Hour) over that same range. These supposedly accurate wind speeds are somewhat greater than the predicted winds aloft speeds for the Portland area for the same time frame that is of interest here. However, the wind speed of 31 knots from 225 degrees at 10,000 feet agrees quite well with the 32 knots from 215 degrees that I had arrived at during the flight path analysis for that altitude.
For the present analysis, four altitude segments were used and the time for the placard to descend through each of those segments was calculated and used to determine the horizontal distance that the placard traveled during those times. The horizontal distances were summed and totaled 6.8 Nautical Miles. This places the separation point for the placard about 1.3 Nautical Miles WEST of a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections. Earlier calculations using estimate data placed the separation point about 1.0 nautical miles EAST of a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections.
In the initial placard calculations in 2011, Tom Kaye suggested evaluating the influence that rain would have on the descent of the placard. There is no information on any weather above the 5000 foot overcast. But there were light rain showers in the Portland area. Surprisingly, there is quite a bit of information on the internet about the influence of rain on falling objects. At one end of the scale, large rain drops would increase the rate of descent. At the other end of the scale, light or misty rainfall would slow the rate of descent. Since the available weather information indicated only light rain below 5000 feet, the rainfall effects were ignored and were conservative in any event.
The end result of the placard analysis is that it separated at a point that was close to, either EAST or WEST of, a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections. And that straight line passes about 1000 feet to the WEST of the money find location at Tina Bar.
While there was light rain and several cloud layers including a complete overcast at 5000 feet in the Portland area, the weather was reasonably good and improving as indicated by the sea level pressure being above standard and increasing at all points south of Seattle. In addition, the air temperatures were below standard and the overall result was that the atmospheric density in the Portland area was about two percent above the standard density.
-
In post number 1751 on this thread, Tom Kaye presented radiosonde data for Salem, Oregon (which is about 45 Nautical Miles south of Portland International Airport) and a location that is northwest of Seattle (more than 120 Nautical Miles from Portland International Airport). Unfortunately, some of this data appears to have been affected due to a malfunction of the radiosonde equipment.
Consequently, some judgment was needed in interpreting the radiosonde data. But after all things were considered, the wind direction was essentially from 225 degrees from 4000 feet to 10,000 feet and the wind speed varied between 31 and 35 knots (Nautical Miles Per Hour) over that same range. These supposedly accurate wind speeds are somewhat greater than the predicted winds aloft speeds for the Portland area for the same time frame that is of interest here. However, the wind speed of 31 knots from 225 degrees at 10,000 feet agrees quite well with the 32 knots from 215 degrees that I had arrived at during the flight path analysis for that altitude.
For the present analysis, four altitude segments were used and the time for the placard to descend through each of those segments was calculated and used to determine the horizontal distance that the placard traveled during those times. The horizontal distances were summed and totaled 6.8 Nautical Miles. This places the separation point for the placard about 1.3 Nautical Miles WEST of a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections. Earlier calculations using estimate data placed the separation point about 1.0 nautical miles EAST of a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections.
In the initial placard calculations in 2011, Tom Kaye suggested evaluating the influence that rain would have on the descent of the placard. There is no information on any weather above the 5000 foot overcast. But there were light rain showers in the Portland area. Surprisingly, there is quite a bit of information on the internet about the influence of rain on falling objects. At one end of the scale, large rain drops would increase the rate of descent. At the other end of the scale, light or misty rainfall would slow the rate of descent. Since the available weather information indicated only light rain below 5000 feet, the rainfall effects were ignored and were conservative in any event.
The end result of the placard analysis is that it separated at a point that was close to, either EAST or WEST of, a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections. And that straight line passes about 1000 feet to the WEST of the money find location at Tina Bar.
While there was light rain and several cloud layers including a complete overcast at 5000 feet in the Portland area, the weather was reasonably good and improving as indicated by the sea level pressure being above standard and increasing at all points south of Seattle. In addition, the air temperatures were below standard and the overall result was that the atmospheric density in the Portland area was about two percent above the standard density.
This is outstanding work.
I have argued that one need only look at the FBI and Boeing free-fall analysis conducted when they established a search area. It clearly showed that they expected a significant drift to the northeast.
This analysis provided by R99 is very problematic for the FBI's flight path. I do not know how it cannot be. The placard is an extremely important piece of evidence that should have been considered to a much greater degree than was actually the case. To be sure, there are other variables to factor, specifically, seven years of being on the ground. That said, if I had to hazard a guess, it would be that placard migration would be minimal on the forest floor, and to the east if anything given the general direction of airflow and the jetstream in that region.
-
Basing a parachute is entirely different from a card weighing less than an ounce. then you base the card from controlled testing. cards, plates, different size objects will behave differently. I'm now questioning the thickness of the placard. the card is not easily found either. Hominid might be right that it was exclusive to NWO.
My other concern is the tears and cuts in the card itself and how that would react vs a perfect 6x6 or 5x5 card. will it tumble in the condition it was in. you can't say one way or the other without some sort of testing or seeing the actual card itself.
Late for work...will continue later today..
-
Basing a parachute is entirely different from a card weighing less than an ounce. then you base the card from controlled testing. cards, plates, different size objects will behave differently. I'm now questioning the thickness of the placard. the card is not easily found either. Hominid might be right that it was exclusive to NWO.
My other concern is the tears and cuts in the card itself and how that would react vs a perfect 6x6 or 5x5 card. will it tumble in the condition it was in. you can't say one way or the other without some sort of testing or seeing the actual card itself.
Late for work...will continue later today..
Parachutes did not have anything to do directly with this analysis. The 2011 analysis lists a source for the characteristics of tumbling plates as they fall. That data has been used in all of these analyses.
-
Basing a parachute is entirely different from a card weighing less than an ounce. then you base the card from controlled testing. cards, plates, different size objects will behave differently. I'm now questioning the thickness of the placard. the card is not easily found either. Hominid might be right that it was exclusive to NWO.
My other concern is the tears and cuts in the card itself and how that would react vs a perfect 6x6 or 5x5 card. will it tumble in the condition it was in. you can't say one way or the other without some sort of testing or seeing the actual card itself.
Late for work...will continue later today..
Parachutes did not have anything to do directly with this analysis. The 2011 analysis lists a source for the characteristics of tumbling plates as they fall. That data has been used in all of these analyses.
Is there a reference to this tumbling plates analysis?
What does 'tumbling plate' mean? I have a feeling lots of variables are being fudged!
-
In post number 1751 on this thread, Tom Kaye presented radiosonde data for Salem, Oregon (which is about 45 Nautical Miles south of Portland International Airport) and a location that is northwest of Seattle (more than 120 Nautical Miles from Portland International Airport). Unfortunately, some of this data appears to have been affected due to a malfunction of the radiosonde equipment.
Consequently, some judgment was needed in interpreting the radiosonde data. But after all things were considered, the wind direction was essentially from 225 degrees from 4000 feet to 10,000 feet and the wind speed varied between 31 and 35 knots (Nautical Miles Per Hour) over that same range. These supposedly accurate wind speeds are somewhat greater than the predicted winds aloft speeds for the Portland area for the same time frame that is of interest here. However, the wind speed of 31 knots from 225 degrees at 10,000 feet agrees quite well with the 32 knots from 215 degrees that I had arrived at during the flight path analysis for that altitude.
For the present analysis, four altitude segments were used and the time for the placard to descend through each of those segments was calculated and used to determine the horizontal distance that the placard traveled during those times. The horizontal distances were summed and totaled 6.8 Nautical Miles. This places the separation point for the placard about 1.3 Nautical Miles WEST of a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections. Earlier calculations using estimate data placed the separation point about 1.0 nautical miles EAST of a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections.
In the initial placard calculations in 2011, Tom Kaye suggested evaluating the influence that rain would have on the descent of the placard. There is no information on any weather above the 5000 foot overcast. But there were light rain showers in the Portland area. Surprisingly, there is quite a bit of information on the internet about the influence of rain on falling objects. At one end of the scale, large rain drops would increase the rate of descent. At the other end of the scale, light or misty rainfall would slow the rate of descent. Since the available weather information indicated only light rain below 5000 feet, the rainfall effects were ignored and were conservative in any event.
The end result of the placard analysis is that it separated at a point that was close to, either EAST or WEST of, a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections. And that straight line passes about 1000 feet to the WEST of the money find location at Tina Bar.
While there was light rain and several cloud layers including a complete overcast at 5000 feet in the Portland area, the weather was reasonably good and improving as indicated by the sea level pressure being above standard and increasing at all points south of Seattle. In addition, the air temperatures were below standard and the overall result was that the atmospheric density in the Portland area was about two percent above the standard density.
This is outstanding work.
I have argued that one need only look at the FBI and Boeing free-fall analysis conducted when they established a search area. It clearly showed that they expected a significant drift to the northeast.
This analysis provided by R99 is very problematic for the FBI's flight path. I do not know how it cannot be. The placard is an extremely important piece of evidence that should have been considered to a much greater degree than was actually the case. To be sure, there are other variables to factor, specifically, seven years of being on the ground. That said, if I had to hazard a guess, it would be that placard migration would be minimal on the forest floor, and to the east if anything given the general direction of airflow and the jetstream in that region.
Elvis, there was no FBI analysis! How many times until you get the history straight? It matters. Then you talk about the Boeing free-fall analysis - I assume you are talking about the Boeing sky divers club analysis?
At this point I think I need to question your credentials for doing any analysis of anyone's analysis in these matters. So let me ask: did Elvis skydive with his cape? Maybe you have an analysis of that! ;)
-
The tumbling plate date is from plates in excess of 40 lbs and no disturbance.
-
Basing a parachute is entirely different from a card weighing less than an ounce. then you base the card from controlled testing. cards, plates, different size objects will behave differently. I'm now questioning the thickness of the placard. the card is not easily found either. Hominid might be right that it was exclusive to NWO.
My other concern is the tears and cuts in the card itself and how that would react vs a perfect 6x6 or 5x5 card. will it tumble in the condition it was in. you can't say one way or the other without some sort of testing or seeing the actual card itself.
Late for work...will continue later today..
Parachutes did not have anything to do directly with this analysis. The 2011 analysis lists a source for the characteristics of tumbling plates as they fall. That data has been used in all of these analyses.
Is there a reference to this tumbling plates analysis?
What does 'tumbling plate' mean? I have a feeling lots of variables are being fudged!
For the 2011 and subsequent analyses, the drag coefficient for the placard was estimated to be 1.0 based on information in Sandia Laboratories Report SC-RR-68-132, August 1968, title: Free-Fall Rotation and Aerodynamic Motion of Rectangular Plates. The major points in the report are that all of their rectangular plates, which were made of wood, started to rotate about one or more axes after falling a relative short distance and that the drag coefficient was always in the vicinity of 1.0 regardless of how the plates tumbled. I printed a copy of this report in 2011.
There used to be a direct link to the above report, but it can now apparently still be accessed by Googling the report and following some links. The above report is apparently the same one that Georger is referring to at the bottom of his post number 1770 on this thread. Georger gives a link so it can probably be accessed through that link also.
Any "fudging" involved ignoring wind speeds that appeared to be excessively high and were reduced to more realistic values using a number of other sources as guidelines. Apparently, some of the radiosonde equipment malfunctioned as mentioned in my most recent analyses. Reducing these wind speeds to lower values prevented the estimated separation point for the placard being further WEST.
If you think there was any "fudging" to support a western flight path then make your case and show your work. And you had damn well better be ready to defend your allegations.
Robert99
-
The tumbling plate date is from plates in excess of 40 lbs and no disturbance.
Anything going through the downwash of a Boeing 727, whether it be a placard or 377 (who has commented on this before), is going to be disturbed about all axes.
If I remember correctly, the plates in the Sandia Report were dropped from helicopters. Nevertheless, they started to tumble about one or more axes in a relatively short distance.
-
Correct, the problem is the plates are 50 times the size of the placard and weigh over 40 pounds? to me, it's like taking a Corvette and racing a VW. no contest... the data should be in the ballpark of the item in question. I believe you have some data that matches the card or similar. that's what should be presented IMO.
-
I showed a video I did with a similar piece of plastic. by releasing it the card started to tumble. when I put a spin on it, similar to the jet wash the card went into a spin. I don't know if it would do that all the way down so I'm taking the testing further. if it works out in the direction you believe. you have more data to back it up. if it doesn't hold up. then questions will come into play. I'm not doing this to prove anything but what can possibly be proven...
-
It was basically a quick test to see what the card would do. a first step. next will be a card damaged like the one found. I did a quick test of that the other day and it reacted differently. these are things that could end up helping. it's part of testing a theory. the card didn't like strong winds. I can say that. I didn't do any video on the second round because it wasn't very high. only about 20 plus feet.
video below is from 40 feet..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzxZSWq-mgc
-
I believe the plates were metal. they are heavy coming in at over 40 lbs. they show the plates rotating, as in rocking back and fourth and then turning sideways. they show terminal up to 104 feet per second. they dropped them from different positions. I see mentions of spiraling as well. I just don't see the similarities?
48" x 18" .50 thick. 44 +- 1/4 lbs.
They remained in a flat position for 50 to 90 seconds before autorotational mode took place..
-
I believe the plates were metal. they are heavy coming in at over 40 lbs. they show the plates rotating, as in rocking back and fourth and then turning sideways. they show terminal up to 104 feet per second. they dropped them from different positions. I see mentions of spiraling as well. I just don't see the similarities?
48" x 18" .50 thick. 44 +- 1/4 lbs.
They remained in a flat position for 50 to 90 seconds before autorotational mode took place..
I don't know where you obtained the above information but it definitely did not come from the Sandia Report. Those plates were wood and did not weigh anywhere close to 44 pounds nor did they reach a speed of 104 feet per second which is more than 60 nautical miles per hour.
And all of them started rotating shortly after being dropped. Even a metal plate would start rotating soon after being dropped.
-
The PDF was posted by Eric several weeks ago..Sandia's Labratories August 1968. Free-fall rotation and aerodynamics.
It must be similar to what you have. this test was also done with a helicopter but used metal plates. that's why I was questioning the data.
You were using "Sandia" often so I assumed you were talking about the same PDF I got from Eric's post. 2,000 foot drops as well as 10,000 etc.
-
Yes, it has the same number SC-RR-68-132
August 1968
Rectangular plates...wood is never referred to as plates.
-
Cover page...
-
One of the plates dropped. not the size with the car in the background...other photo;s show what happened to the plates on impact..some bowed, others bent on corners etc.
-
Metal plates that size and weight would get those terminals...
-
I don't believe the report references any particular material. However, when describing the damage that some of the plates endured they use the words "bowed" and "splintered."
-
explain the weight of the the plate if it was wood? wood bends and bows? I didn't see "splintered"
-
explain the weight of the the plate if it was wood? wood bends and bows? I didn't see "splintered"
Page 37
Table III, Impact Characteristics
Test # 258-20
"Badly bowed and splintered"
-
I see a reference to splintered now..it's still too heavy for wood given the size. regardless if it was made of steel. they don't compare to a small one ounce plastic ripped card.
-
They go into such detail and fail to tell what it's made of. I've never seen wood referred to as plates. it still doesn't match what we are trying to figure out..the characteristics would differ.
Placard 6 x 6 = 1 ounce
Plate 48' x 18" x .50 thick = 44 lbs
-
explain the weight of the the plate if it was wood? wood bends and bows? I didn't see "splintered"
Take a look at Test No. 258-20 in table 3 on page 37 of the report. It lists the "Condition of Plate Following Impact" as "Badly Bowed and Splintered". Other test in that table list the condition of the plate following impact as being "badly damaged", "badly bowed", "destroyed", "plate split", etc..
The dimensions of the two plates used in the tests are given in table 1 on page 9 of the report as follows:
No. 1, 32 by 27 by 0.69 inches with a weight of 40 pounds.
No. 2, 48 by 18 by 0.50 inches with a weight of 44 pounds.
You were right about the weights and I don't find a reference to the material at this moment but it is certainly not going to be metal.
These plates were dropped from a stationary helicopter at altitude. What happens to the plates before they start rotating is not relevant here. It is only the drag coefficient after the rotation starts that applies to the placard. Remember that the placard goes through the 727's downwash and it is going to be rotating like crazy from that point.
The Sandia Report is available here <https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a395124.pdf>.
-
I was amazed how detailed everything is and yet they failed to describe the test samples?
-
I see too many variables. it still becomes a theory where the placard went after it left the plane..
I did notice Hicks saying "while in the brush" which would tend to trap things in place. but I don't know about seasonal and what the grounds look like through the year. then what the placard looks like. they made a perfect reproduction of the placard. very good for that period. I did notice the tear was more than I thought. it appears to be glued down to the file paper covering most of the tear. I don't know if they gave the damn thing back. I'll ask Tom. I don't believe it was there when he was looking over the evidence. Hicks also claims to have folded it up before putting it in his pocket. that's extremely thin. perhaps decal thin. Hominid believes it was glued in place.
-
These plates were dropped from a stationary helicopter at altitude. What happens to the plates before they start rotating is not relevant here. It is only the drag coefficient after the rotation starts that applies to the placard. Remember that the placard goes through the 727's downwash and it is going to be rotating like crazy from that point.
This would be based on a perfect card. the placard is far from perfect in it's condition. especially, if the tear is as long as shown in the episode of In Search Of..
-
I was amazed how detailed everything is and yet they failed to describe the test samples?
It was apparently some kind of very hard wood.
Using the dimensions and weights shown, plate 1 had a density of 116.0 pounds per cubic foot and plate 2 had a density of 176.0 pounds per cubic foot. This doesn't look realistic. But in any event, it is only the tumbling drag coefficient that applies to the placard analysis.
-
Hickory is very hard but I don't know if it's heavy.
-
A particularly desirable grade of hickory wood is known as calico hickory and this type of wood guarantees the reddish-brown heartwood and the creamy white sapwood on both faces of each piece. ... Hickory is exceptionally heavy, hard, strong and shock resistant, but flexible, with a coarse and straight grain.
-
The point is this: The placard was found WEST of the FBI flight path. Even if it's found right under the flight path it's a problem for the FBI Flight Path.
Why? Because even though I'm not a scientist, I've been walking the face of Mother Earth for 53 years, and I know when you drop a 1/3 oz. piece of plastic from 10K feet up into a wind of 31 KTS, the damn thing is going to blow with the wind.
R99's analysis shows a drift of about 8SM for the placard. The FBI shows a drift for Cooper of 5.6SM if Cooper opened the parachute immediately. This is commonsense.
-
did the chute have cuts and rips in it? and can you prove the chute drifted that distance?
-
If the path was actually 2 miles west of the path, now what?
Do we have data on a damaged ripped card?
-
Actually. the card didn't like heavy wind. I tossed some cards from a lower height than last time but it was windy (around 20 mph) and the cards didn't like the wind.
-
I asked Tom if he seen the placard at the Seattle office. he just replied with a no...
-
I suspected the card Hicks had on the episode of In Search Of was the real placard. when you watch the credits. it thanks Les Nelson, Cowlitz county sheriff. the placard was found in Cowlitz. they have the card and not the FBI. it says cowlitz county evidence on the photo with the agent holding the card.
What would the characteristics be with a large tear in it?
-
What would be the estimated terminal of the placard?
-
What would be the estimated terminal of the placard?
ok. That placard has no terminal v until it sheds its forward momentum and clears the 727 vortex wake behind the plane. That placard does not behave like the box dropped during the test flight. Remember, the plane is still moving ahead at 200mph even as the placard has separated from the plane. The hi velocity vortex from the plane and its engines will catch up with the placard which is now shedding velocity ... those forces could conceivably lift the placard up vertically at first and stall its descent, or make it travel in loops, or tear it apart ... until gravity becomes the dominant force on the placard.
I have always wondered if the placard looks like it does (half an original placard) because it was torn apart in the jet's vortex? May the other half is laying on the ground somewhere? That's a job for Kermit to find and solve!
This is not a single variable linear problem but a multi-variant problem for calculus! We have been trying to tell people that for a long time. Nobody is listening?
In the photo attached add another large vortex behind the plane (unseen in this photo) from the three engines all clustered. Those gases are propagating faster than any terminal v initially involved ... by a long long way! These vortexes behind the plane (as it is moving ahead) are propagating faster than any terminal-v the placard can ever have due to gravity! Now throw in winds and the direction of winds, once the placard manages to survive the vortexes and gets to less turbulent air which has no 'lift', so the plastic card (whats left of it) can begin to fall to have a terminal v. Then ask your question. ;)
Im not saying anything that R99, 377, TK, Hominid, etal dont already know.
-
What would be the estimated terminal of the placard?
The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.
It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute.
Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.
-
can anyone prove it wasn't raining? the card would drop like a rock being that thin..plus the tear in it. moisture at high altitude. 8:03 radio transmission was 19 degree's at 10k. ice..same area... lots of variables...
-
What would be the estimated terminal of the placard?
The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.
It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute.
Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.
What;s the down angle of the 727 engines - its downward thrust component at the time the placard was released? Any?
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
The placard may have experienced turbulent air when it was released. One more variable not mentioned: the plane is flying dirty - wheels down! Flaps ? That placard was not released into a smooth laminar flow. That placard may have been torn in two ...
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? ::)
But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? ::)
But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?
The short answer is "no" to all of your questions. The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes. The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft. The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast. But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.
-
The point is this: The placard was found WEST of the FBI flight path. Even if it's found right under the flight path it's a problem for the FBI Flight Path.
Why? Because even though I'm not a scientist, I've been walking the face of Mother Earth for 53 years, and I know when you drop a 1/3 oz. piece of plastic from 10K feet up into a wind of 31 KTS, the damn thing is going to blow with the wind.
R99's analysis shows a drift of about 8SM for the placard. The FBI shows a drift for Cooper of 5.6SM if Cooper opened the parachute immediately. This is commonsense.
So, your and R99's analysis says the winds were uniform and in the same direction from 10k feet to ground, both where the placard was released, and where Cooper jumped - which is in two different places miles apart.
And the the drift and terminal v of the placard and Cooper were more-or-less the same.
This is commonsense. Sort of like horses and zebras are the same. ;D
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? ::)
But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?
The short answer is "no" to all of your questions. The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes. The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft. The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast. But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.
Well there is, to your last but that is beyond the scope of this forum. I noticed five pdfs on this subject just today ...
How would flying wheels down affect the release of the placard ?
What is meant by down wash?
-
The point is this: The placard was found WEST of the FBI flight path. Even if it's found right under the flight path it's a problem for the FBI Flight Path.
Why? Because even though I'm not a scientist, I've been walking the face of Mother Earth for 53 years, and I know when you drop a 1/3 oz. piece of plastic from 10K feet up into a wind of 31 KTS, the damn thing is going to blow with the wind.
R99's analysis shows a drift of about 8SM for the placard. The FBI shows a drift for Cooper of 5.6SM if Cooper opened the parachute immediately. This is commonsense.
So, your and R99's analysis says the winds were uniform and in the same direction from 10k feet to ground, both where the placard was released, and where Cooper jumped - which is in two different places miles apart.
And the the drift and terminal v of the placard and Cooper were more-or-less the same.
This is commonsense. Sort of like horses and zebras are the same. ;D
It is more like saying that horses and zebras each have four legs.
-
The point is this: The placard was found WEST of the FBI flight path. Even if it's found right under the flight path it's a problem for the FBI Flight Path.
Why? Because even though I'm not a scientist, I've been walking the face of Mother Earth for 53 years, and I know when you drop a 1/3 oz. piece of plastic from 10K feet up into a wind of 31 KTS, the damn thing is going to blow with the wind.
R99's analysis shows a drift of about 8SM for the placard. The FBI shows a drift for Cooper of 5.6SM if Cooper opened the parachute immediately. This is commonsense.
So, your and R99's analysis says the winds were uniform and in the same direction from 10k feet to ground, both where the placard was released, and where Cooper jumped - which is in two different places miles apart.
And the the drift and terminal v of the placard and Cooper were more-or-less the same.
This is commonsense. Sort of like horses and zebras are the same. ;D
It is more like saying that horses and zebras each have four legs.
Cute but no cigar.
Guess we dont get answers to the rest. :(
From here on out its just a case of attrition, and who eats who first/last/forever.
-
The horses and zebras comment about four legs is right on.
My point about the parachute drift is not complicated. That is to say, if it was calculated that Cooper would drift 4NM to the NE if he deployed immediately, the placard should drift much further. Why? Because the descent rate of Cooper, at over 200 lbs., is going to be greater than the descent rate of the 1/3 oz. placard.
Also, yes, I assume the weather conditions where the placard separated were quite similar to the weather conditions where Cooper jumped. After all, they're quite close to each other. That is, of course, unless along with "super rubber bands" that can last for years in the elements, "super packets of twenties" that move together and bury themselves together, we now also have "super weather zones" where everything is reverse of everywhere else. I think I'll call this the Twilight Zone Theory.
In addition, whether the placard had a tear or not is inconsequential. Kind of like it doesn't matter whether the placard was printed with red ink versus black ink. The fundamentals are the weight, area, altitude, and atmospheric conditions.
Finally, to answer FLY's question on TMN: Yes, the placard drifted to close to where the FBI's Flight Path is pegged. It's not coincidence, it's fact. It is what it is. In fact, it would have been much more coincidental--and harder to believe--if this 1/3 of an ounce piece of plastic fell straight to the ground from nearly 2 miles up with virtually no drift at all in a 31 knot wind. Remember, according to all of the data available, including the stuff Tom Kaye provided a couple of weeks back, the winds were in the 31 knot range from about 215 degrees. Simply inventing your own weather in that one spot is not going to change the truth of the matter. Such arguments are intellectually bankrupt.
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
It looks dead on to me?
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
It looks dead on to me?
Neither picture looks like the one I have seen.
-
I don't know what to tell you. are you claiming the one on the left is not this photo or placard?
-
All I did was cut out the rest of the photo to place next to the clip from the show..I've only seen two photo's of the placard.
-
Here is the other picture...
Original caption: Cowlitz County Deputy sheriff Bob Nix points to area on map where a hunter found the plastic placard that he’s holding in his hand. Authorities have identified the placard as positively coming from a Boeing 727 jetliner. And they feel that it’s the first ‘new clue,’ in the ‘D.B. Cooper’ hijacking of seven years ago. Cooper, escaped by parachuting from the jet with $200,000. Photo via Getty Images.
-
Interesting that they say it came from a 727?
"Authorities have identified the placard as positively coming from a Boeing 727 jetliner"
It was planted. I'm sure of it... :rofl:
-
Here is the other picture...
Original caption: Cowlitz County Deputy sheriff Bob Nix points to area on map where a hunter found the plastic placard that he’s holding in his hand. Authorities have identified the placard as positively coming from a Boeing 727 jetliner. And they feel that it’s the first ‘new clue,’ in the ‘D.B. Cooper’ hijacking of seven years ago. Cooper, escaped by parachuting from the jet with $200,000. Photo via Getty Images.
and here's more pictures - we dont have the name of the Moleman conspirator shown - he obviously has mounted whats left of the placard to an evidence page, which inserts inside an evidence folder, covered with RED EVIDENCE sticky tape - Molemen always do that! ITS A CONSPIRACY!!!!! :rofl:
The photo on the right is the hand of the DEPUTY MOLEMAN standing outside! These molemen always travel in packs ...
Can Ulis and R99 estimate the winds in these photos? MOLEMEN prefer wind to conduct their conspiracies!
And here is the placard in the toast - which clearly shows molestation and conspiracy with the placard! What does this toast say about the flight path the winds and the dropzone ... and Cooper's identity?
-
I don't know of any other pics. would love to see them if they exist..
-
I don't know of any other pics. would love to see them if they exist..
I seem to remember a picture where it was the bottom portion that came off. The top of that portion was rather jagged and it may have had white and red colors.
-
I don't know of any other pics. would love to see them if they exist..
I seem to remember a picture where it was the bottom portion that came off. The top of that portion was rather jagged and it may have had white and red colors.
I've never seen a color version of the placard or one missing the bottom portion. how long ago do you recall?
-
I don't know of any other pics. would love to see them if they exist..
I seem to remember a picture where it was the bottom portion that came off. The top of that portion was rather jagged and it may have had white and red colors.
I've never seen a color version of the placard or one missing the bottom portion. how long ago do you recall?
About 8 or 10 years ago.
-
That was before me but I don't see a connection with it...
-
I don't know of any other pics. would love to see them if they exist..
I seem to remember a picture where it was the bottom portion that came off. The top of that portion was rather jagged and it may have had white and red colors.
I've never seen a color version of the placard or one missing the bottom portion. how long ago do you recall?
I have. Not sure where it was or if I even saved it - will look when I get time. But there is NO CONSPIRACY going on with the placard - that is total BS.
We may be confusing photos of the placard found by Hicks with other photos of the 727 placard, but I have seen somebody's color photo of this placard.
-
I don't think R99 is implying that. he's going by memory.
-
I don't think R99 is implying that. he's going by memory.
Im lost - cross posting -
-
I don't know of any other pics. would love to see them if they exist..
I seem to remember a picture where it was the bottom portion that came off. The top of that portion was rather jagged and it may have had white and red colors.
I've never seen a color version of the placard or one missing the bottom portion. how long ago do you recall?
About 8 or 10 years ago.
heres a color photo of it - it comes from CNN .......... but I had to search my whole computer to retrieve it!
-
same card on the same file paper...just in color..
-
same card on the same file paper...just in color..
Its a color photo!
-
I don't think R99 is implying that. he's going by memory.
I am saying that I seem to remember a color photograph of the placard from several years ago. It looked like it had been torn off but the pictures just posted here look like they have been cut off rather neatly.
-
It's the same placard on the same grey/black file paper in the other photo's. the one G posted seems to be condensed. this one is in color and noticeable features are there to confirm all the photo's are of the same card.
also, has the the same evidence tag at the bottom.
-
I think the most interesting thing about this discussion is the assertion that whomever had possession of the placard appeared to lend it to the producers of In Search Of for filming purposes. I must say, this is yet another indication of how sloppy this case got at times. It is inconceivable to me that this could happen. Moreover, considering that Tom Kaye and the CRT didn't see this item makes me wonder if it's been "lost or destroyed" too.
-
It was different times vs today. a lot of people mix this up. Taking a guess I would gather the sheriff could of been with the placard. it wasn't really something that important to handle. if it was checked for prints when it was found a year before the show. the value is minimal if it would even be used in court. they checked the area twice which pretty much exhausted any further leads it would give. it might be different if this was a murder case.
The placard was found in Cowlitz county. it's the property of Cowlitz county. I made a phone call yesterday but was told to call back on Monday. I'm going to ask if they still have it and if photo's can be provided. If they tell me it's there I can ask them if someone can come a look at the card. you could stop by while in the area concerning the placard location.
-
Flyjack also believes it's a reproduction. I'm asked him what he see's different.
-
It looks precisely the same. Even the tear. It's just that with someone holding the placard the right side of it sags which displays the full length of the tear which is not completely visible with the placard attached to the backing.
-
That's how I looked at it from the start. I thought it could be a reproduction but once I seen the sheriff was involved kind of gave more credibility. it could still be a very good reproduction. would of been easier to make a copy on paper. I doubt anyone would of noticed.....
-
Shut, when and if you make contact with the Cowlitz Sheriff's Department, please let me know. I'd love to take a look at the placard, and I'll be in the area at the end of May.
Or if they get cranky, I can make a special trip since Cowlitz is only two counties south of me and I can get there in 90 minutes.
-
I have a couple people eager as well. before anything is considered I have to see what they say tomorrow. it will be up to them to either allow it to be viewed or supply photo's, or even say no to all the above. lets see how far we can get tomorrow..then proceed with getting someone there if access is granted.
-
Shut, when and if you make contact with the Cowlitz Sheriff's Department, please let me know. I'd love to take a look at the placard, and I'll be in the area at the end of May.
Or if they get cranky, I can make a special trip since Cowlitz is only two counties south of me and I can get there in 90 minutes.
Why would the Cowlitz people have the placard or any info - NOW? This is 2019! The placard according to Eng now resides in Washington DC. :rofl:
-
They had the card from the start. it was logged as evidence in Cowlitz county. they controlled the evidence. it's possible they sent the card to them. Bob Nix from Cowlitz county is the guy holding the card. If the card isn't there anymore they might have records on the search and pictures.
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? ::)
But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?
The short answer is "no" to all of your questions. The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes. The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft. The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast. But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.
Well I am 10000% confused - based on your posts about terminal v of the placard.
You say:
(1) The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.
(2) It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute. Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.
So which is it? 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute.
Ulis says the placard is 1/3 of an ounce = .0625 lb. The mass of the falling object is involved in calculating terminal v. As I recall you said the tv of the parachutist was based on the person being 200 lbs. So, one object is .0625 lb. and the other is 200 lbs. Based on that one of the sky divers at DZ ran a terminal v calculation. His result was the placard has a Tv of 4.9 ft/sec = 294f/min = 3.3 miles per hour!
Why is the skydiver at DZ getting a different terminal v for the placard than you or Elvis Ulis?
Lastly, have you read this pdf Shutter sent to me? https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760014087.pdf You acknowledge that the 727 is notorious for having a pronounced back draft (enough to kill people on the ground and roll planes over at 4 nm following a 727). You claim that the placard somehow travel "fast" you say, and escaped the back draft of the 727 completely ... to go its merry way with an instant terminal v of either 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute, depending on the day of the week?
So let me ask this. Do you consider feathers and canon balls equal in the time each takes to fall from say 500 feet to the ground? In other words, are you assuming (like the feather vs canon ball) that the Constant of Gravitational Acceleration applies equally, to the placard and the 200 lb man under parachute, as in the feather vs canon ball example?
In fact Robert, I seem to remember you saying years ago that you did not believe the 'flight path' of 305 could ever be 'proven' by reliance on the placard, because of the uncertainties involved in the placard problem. So what has changed in the last several years? This placard is now assuming almost supernatural powers! Magical powers. It not only escapes the back draft from 305 powerful enough to send small aircraft traveling 4 nm behind into a tailspin. It leaves the plane "fast", to quote you, without damage? Fast how remains to be defined. And this satanic placard now has the Terminal velocity of a 200 pound man dropping under parachute!
Man proposes. The placard and God disposes! And the placard is now key to the flight path of 305! I guess we no longer need the radar tapes. :rofl:
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? ::)
But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?
The short answer is "no" to all of your questions. The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes. The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft. The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast. But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.
Well I am 10000% confused - based on your posts about terminal v of the placard.
You say:
(1) The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.
(2) It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute. Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.
So which is it? 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute.
Ulis says the placard is 1/3 of an ounce = .0625 lb. The mass of the falling object is involved in calculating terminal v. As I recall you said the tv of the parachutist was based on the person being 200 lbs. So, one object is .0625 lb. and the other is 200 lbs. Based on that one of the sky divers at DZ ran a terminal v calculation. His result was the placard has a Tv of 4.9 ft/sec = 294f/min = 3.3 miles per hour!
Why is the skydiver at DZ getting a different terminal v for the placard than you or Elvis Ulis?
Lastly, have you read this pdf Shutter sent to me? https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760014087.pdf You acknowledge that the 727 is notorious for having a pronounced back draft (enough to kill people on the ground and roll planes over at 4 nm following a 727). You claim that the placard somehow travel "fast" you say, and escaped the back draft of the 727 completely ... to go its merry way with an instant terminal v of either 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute, depending on the day of the week?
So let me ask this. Do you consider feathers and canon balls equal in the time each takes to fall from say 500 feet to the ground? In other words, are you assuming (like the feather vs canon ball) that the Constant of Gravitational Acceleration applies equally, to the placard and the 200 lb man under parachute, as in the feather vs canon ball example?
In fact Robert, I seem to remember you saying years ago that you did not believe the 'flight path' of 305 could ever be 'proven' by reliance on the placard, because of the uncertainties involved in the placard problem. So what has changed in the last several years? This placard is now assuming almost supernatural powers! Magical powers. It not only escapes the back draft from 305 powerful enough to send small aircraft traveling 4 nm behind into a tailspin. It leaves the plane "fast", to quote you, without damage? Fast how remains to be defined. And this satanic placard now has the Terminal velocity of a 200 pound man dropping under parachute!
Man proposes. The placard and God disposes! And the placard is now key to the flight path of 305! I guess we no longer need the radar tapes. :rofl:
Georger, I suggest that you read your own post above which is pure baloney.
It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute. You seem to recognize that there will be a difference in descent rates of feathers and cannon balls in the atmosphere. This principal is usually demonstrated in Physics 101 with an actual feather and small weight in a vacuum tube where their descent velocities will be the same. Then the tube pressure is increased to the ambient pressure and the drops are repeated. The feather is always the last one down.
If the calculations made by the DropZone skydiver were correct, and they are not, the placard would have drifted about 15+ miles downwind.
The remaining portion of your post is nonsense. You are claiming that I have made statements which are completely contradictory to anything I have said. I will get a copy of the NASA report and reply to your claims. For instance, you apparently don't understand the difference between wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts.
In the meantime, stop making false claims about what I have said. Surely you can find some other means, you might try facts if such exist, to support your commitment to the FBI flight path.
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? ::)
But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?
The short answer is "no" to all of your questions. The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes. The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft. The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast. But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.
Well I am 10000% confused - based on your posts about terminal v of the placard.
You say:
(1) The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.
(2) It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute. Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.
So which is it? 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute.
Ulis says the placard is 1/3 of an ounce = .0625 lb. The mass of the falling object is involved in calculating terminal v. As I recall you said the tv of the parachutist was based on the person being 200 lbs. So, one object is .0625 lb. and the other is 200 lbs. Based on that one of the sky divers at DZ ran a terminal v calculation. His result was the placard has a Tv of 4.9 ft/sec = 294f/min = 3.3 miles per hour!
Why is the skydiver at DZ getting a different terminal v for the placard than you or Elvis Ulis?
Lastly, have you read this pdf Shutter sent to me? https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760014087.pdf You acknowledge that the 727 is notorious for having a pronounced back draft (enough to kill people on the ground and roll planes over at 4 nm following a 727). You claim that the placard somehow travel "fast" you say, and escaped the back draft of the 727 completely ... to go its merry way with an instant terminal v of either 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute, depending on the day of the week?
So let me ask this. Do you consider feathers and canon balls equal in the time each takes to fall from say 500 feet to the ground? In other words, are you assuming (like the feather vs canon ball) that the Constant of Gravitational Acceleration applies equally, to the placard and the 200 lb man under parachute, as in the feather vs canon ball example?
In fact Robert, I seem to remember you saying years ago that you did not believe the 'flight path' of 305 could ever be 'proven' by reliance on the placard, because of the uncertainties involved in the placard problem. So what has changed in the last several years? This placard is now assuming almost supernatural powers! Magical powers. It not only escapes the back draft from 305 powerful enough to send small aircraft traveling 4 nm behind into a tailspin. It leaves the plane "fast", to quote you, without damage? Fast how remains to be defined. And this satanic placard now has the Terminal velocity of a 200 pound man dropping under parachute!
Man proposes. The placard and God disposes! And the placard is now key to the flight path of 305! I guess we no longer need the radar tapes. :rofl:
Georger, I suggest that you read your own post above which is pure baloney.
It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute. You seem to recognize that there will be a difference in descent rates of feathers and cannon balls in the atmosphere. This principal is usually demonstrated in Physics 101 with an actual feather and small weight in a vacuum tube where their descent velocities will be the same. Then the tube pressure is increased to the ambient pressure and the drops are repeated. The feather is always the last one down.
If the calculations made by the DropZone skydiver were correct, and they are not, the placard would have drifted about 15+ miles downwind.
The remaining portion of your post is nonsense. You are claiming that I have made statements which are completely contradictory to anything I have said. I will get a copy of the NASA report and reply to your claims. For instance, you apparently don't understand the difference between wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts.
In the meantime, stop making false claims about what I have said. Surely you can find some other means, you might try facts if such exist, to support your commitment to the FBI flight path.
The personal crap you dispense aside - let me search my old emails for your exact quotes from the past. How many years did it take for you to accept R2's account that 305 flew straight down the middle of V23? You carped about that like a child forever. You are still carping about it. What insults have you heaped on R2?
"Wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts". You will find the NASA/Ames pdf deals with all of them. In the meantime - learn how to spell. No doubt you will return with criticism of the NASA/Ames pdf too. ;)
Thanks for the "It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute." info. 700 feet per minute for the placard, but which direction! That is 11.6 f/s in the first second = 7.95 mph ? That is your definition of "fast"? Or are you going to take back that you said that too?
Let's see: In the same one second the Jet is moving 200 mph = 293.333 f/s . In the time the placard falls 1 sec (11.6 feet) the jet with its vortex will have moved 293.3 feet ahead and the radius of the back blast will have covered what expanding area as the jet continues to move ahead? The placard? All terminal v for that placard due to Gravity will cease instantly? Or will your placard falling at 11.6 f/s in the first second be out of the vortex zone? You have already said it will. Your exact word was "FAST".. the placard is moving fast at a mere 11.6 f/s, you said. So while the placard has dropped a mere 11.6 feet the plane will have moved a football field length ahead with its engine cluster back draft cone extending 300-500 feet (or more) behind, with high velocity gases. But you say the placard having moved 11.6 feet down will miss the blast zone. 8)
-
Boeing 747 & Boeing 727 - "Wake Turbulence Tests" - 1974:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8fV36OtrJw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFP4xl0V0mk
Sources of turbulence behind and around a 727 are: wing tip vortexes, engine cluster blast, aircraft body, wheel and flap configuration (flap settings affect turbulence behind the aircraft) ....
One thing that has always bothered me about the placard find is the statement 'it was found almost directly under the flight path'. What would explain such a finding? Some directive force at work? A faster descent rate than has been estimated to date? Greater placard mass than has been estimated to date? Was the placard attached to something heavier than the placard alone, a panel door or cover metal ...?
The TAG tests do not mention any interference from turbulence behind the aircraft. 377 said people parachuting from the back of a 727 noticed no interference from turbulence behind the aircraft. Still the placard was found 'almost directly under the flight path'. It raises questions ...
It is noteworthy to me that avionics engineer R99 hedges his proclamation that the 'placard left fast' when leaving the 727. I guess he is saying his estimated terminal v of a mere 11.67f/sec (700f/min = 7.9mph) is FAST ? It feels like he is ducking the issue of interference from any avionic forces to allow for an unencumbered free fall for the placard. Why else would he stipulate "fast" without defining "fast"? I am not comfortable with his explanation.
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? ::)
But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?
The short answer is "no" to all of your questions. The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes. The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft. The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast. But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.
Well I am 10000% confused - based on your posts about terminal v of the placard.
You say:
(1) The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.
(2) It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute. Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.
So which is it? 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute.
Ulis says the placard is 1/3 of an ounce = .0625 lb. The mass of the falling object is involved in calculating terminal v. As I recall you said the tv of the parachutist was based on the person being 200 lbs. So, one object is .0625 lb. and the other is 200 lbs. Based on that one of the sky divers at DZ ran a terminal v calculation. His result was the placard has a Tv of 4.9 ft/sec = 294f/min = 3.3 miles per hour!
Why is the skydiver at DZ getting a different terminal v for the placard than you or Elvis Ulis?
Lastly, have you read this pdf Shutter sent to me? https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760014087.pdf You acknowledge that the 727 is notorious for having a pronounced back draft (enough to kill people on the ground and roll planes over at 4 nm following a 727). You claim that the placard somehow travel "fast" you say, and escaped the back draft of the 727 completely ... to go its merry way with an instant terminal v of either 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute, depending on the day of the week?
So let me ask this. Do you consider feathers and canon balls equal in the time each takes to fall from say 500 feet to the ground? In other words, are you assuming (like the feather vs canon ball) that the Constant of Gravitational Acceleration applies equally, to the placard and the 200 lb man under parachute, as in the feather vs canon ball example?
In fact Robert, I seem to remember you saying years ago that you did not believe the 'flight path' of 305 could ever be 'proven' by reliance on the placard, because of the uncertainties involved in the placard problem. So what has changed in the last several years? This placard is now assuming almost supernatural powers! Magical powers. It not only escapes the back draft from 305 powerful enough to send small aircraft traveling 4 nm behind into a tailspin. It leaves the plane "fast", to quote you, without damage? Fast how remains to be defined. And this satanic placard now has the Terminal velocity of a 200 pound man dropping under parachute!
Man proposes. The placard and God disposes! And the placard is now key to the flight path of 305! I guess we no longer need the radar tapes. :rofl:
Georger, I suggest that you read your own post above which is pure baloney.
It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute. You seem to recognize that there will be a difference in descent rates of feathers and cannon balls in the atmosphere. This principal is usually demonstrated in Physics 101 with an actual feather and small weight in a vacuum tube where their descent velocities will be the same. Then the tube pressure is increased to the ambient pressure and the drops are repeated. The feather is always the last one down.
If the calculations made by the DropZone skydiver were correct, and they are not, the placard would have drifted about 15+ miles downwind.
The remaining portion of your post is nonsense. You are claiming that I have made statements which are completely contradictory to anything I have said. I will get a copy of the NASA report and reply to your claims. For instance, you apparently don't understand the difference between wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts.
In the meantime, stop making false claims about what I have said. Surely you can find some other means, you might try facts if such exist, to support your commitment to the FBI flight path.
R99 replies:
Oh my, another Georger tantrum.
The personal crap you dispense aside - let me search my old emails for your exact quotes from the past. How many years did it take for you to accept R2's account that 305 flew straight down the middle of V23? You carped about that like a child forever. You are still carping about it. What insults have you heaped on R2?
R99 replies:
I haven't heaped any insults on R2. I think he/she is absolute right that the airliner flew straight down the centerline of V-23, at least to the Malay Intersection.
"Wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts". You will find the NASA/Ames pdf deals with all of them. In the meantime - learn how to spell. No doubt you will return with criticism of the NASA/Ames pdf too. ;)
R99 replies:
Are you claiming my word checker doesn't know how to spell? Specifically, what are you referring to? It is entirely possible that I may criticize the NASA report, but I will read it first. I try to make it a point to read something before criticizing it. You should do the same.
Thanks for the "It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute." info. 700 feet per minute for the placard, but which direction! That is 11.6 f/s in the first second = 7.95 mph ? That is your definition of "fast"? Or are you going to take back that you said that too?
R99 replies:
A good working assumption is that both the placard and parachutist are moving downward (toward the center of the earth) once they are out of the aircraft's wake. Gravity works 24/7! As used here, the term "fast" means that the placard will be out of the slipstream in a matter of seconds, the exact number depending on a number of unpredictable variables.
Let's see: In the same one second the Jet is moving 200 mph = 293.333 f/s . In the time the placard falls 1 sec (11.6 feet) the jet with its vortex will have moved 293.3 feet ahead and the radius of the back blast will have covered what expanding area as the jet continues to move ahead? The placard? All terminal v for that placard due to Gravity will cease instantly? Or will your placard falling at 11.6 f/s in the first second be out of the vortex zone? You have already said it will. Your exact word was "FAST".. the placard is moving fast at a mere 11.6 f/s, you said. So while the placard has dropped a mere 11.6 feet the plane will have moved a football field length ahead with its engine cluster back draft cone extending 300-500 feet (or more) behind, with high velocity gases. But you say the placard having moved 11.6 feet down will miss the blast zone. 8)
R99 replies:
The airliner was actually moving about 225 MPH (or about 330 feet per second) with respect to the air mass, and so was the placard until it separated from the airliner. Your calculations above are apparently based on the assumption that the placard will have a zero forward speed immediately upon separating from the airliner. Such is not the case.
R99 replies are above.
A question for Georger. Were you on the crew at Berkeley (or USC)?
-
Let's gain a proper perspective on the placard find.
According to R99's analysis--which involved legit atmospheric data from November 24, 1971--the placard separated 8.6 SM west of the FBI Flight Path. The placard then drifted with the wind about 7.8 SM. Thereby putting the placard on the ground about 0.8 SM west of the FBI Flight Path.
You would think that it landed on the head of a needle from the tenor of the discussion about this lately.
Here we're asked to ponder the remarkable "coincidence" of the placard landing "near" the FBI Flight Path. However, we're not asked to ponder the remarkable "coincidence" that the jet happened to be flying exactly head-on into the wind at this one "special weather zone" which had a one-of-a-kind wind direction relative to the rest of the region on that very special day. Isn't it amazing how this "special weather zone" afforded the placard the remarkable opportunity to drift back over the flight path it just traced thereby landing 0.8 miles west of the FBI Flight Path?
-
basing this once again on the tumble?
That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.
Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? ::)
But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?
The short answer is "no" to all of your questions. The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes. The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft. The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast. But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.
Well I am 10000% confused - based on your posts about terminal v of the placard.
You say:
(1) The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.
(2) It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute. Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.
So which is it? 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute.
Ulis says the placard is 1/3 of an ounce = .0625 lb. The mass of the falling object is involved in calculating terminal v. As I recall you said the tv of the parachutist was based on the person being 200 lbs. So, one object is .0625 lb. and the other is 200 lbs. Based on that one of the sky divers at DZ ran a terminal v calculation. His result was the placard has a Tv of 4.9 ft/sec = 294f/min = 3.3 miles per hour!
Why is the skydiver at DZ getting a different terminal v for the placard than you or Elvis Ulis?
Lastly, have you read this pdf Shutter sent to me? https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760014087.pdf You acknowledge that the 727 is notorious for having a pronounced back draft (enough to kill people on the ground and roll planes over at 4 nm following a 727). You claim that the placard somehow travel "fast" you say, and escaped the back draft of the 727 completely ... to go its merry way with an instant terminal v of either 700 feet per minute or 1000 to 1200 feet per minute, depending on the day of the week?
So let me ask this. Do you consider feathers and canon balls equal in the time each takes to fall from say 500 feet to the ground? In other words, are you assuming (like the feather vs canon ball) that the Constant of Gravitational Acceleration applies equally, to the placard and the 200 lb man under parachute, as in the feather vs canon ball example?
In fact Robert, I seem to remember you saying years ago that you did not believe the 'flight path' of 305 could ever be 'proven' by reliance on the placard, because of the uncertainties involved in the placard problem. So what has changed in the last several years? This placard is now assuming almost supernatural powers! Magical powers. It not only escapes the back draft from 305 powerful enough to send small aircraft traveling 4 nm behind into a tailspin. It leaves the plane "fast", to quote you, without damage? Fast how remains to be defined. And this satanic placard now has the Terminal velocity of a 200 pound man dropping under parachute!
Man proposes. The placard and God disposes! And the placard is now key to the flight path of 305! I guess we no longer need the radar tapes. :rofl:
Georger, I suggest that you read your own post above which is pure baloney.
It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute. You seem to recognize that there will be a difference in descent rates of feathers and cannon balls in the atmosphere. This principal is usually demonstrated in Physics 101 with an actual feather and small weight in a vacuum tube where their descent velocities will be the same. Then the tube pressure is increased to the ambient pressure and the drops are repeated. The feather is always the last one down.
If the calculations made by the DropZone skydiver were correct, and they are not, the placard would have drifted about 15+ miles downwind.
The remaining portion of your post is nonsense. You are claiming that I have made statements which are completely contradictory to anything I have said. I will get a copy of the NASA report and reply to your claims. For instance, you apparently don't understand the difference between wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts.
In the meantime, stop making false claims about what I have said. Surely you can find some other means, you might try facts if such exist, to support your commitment to the FBI flight path.
R99 replies:
Oh my, another Georger tantrum.
The personal crap you dispense aside - let me search my old emails for your exact quotes from the past. How many years did it take for you to accept R2's account that 305 flew straight down the middle of V23? You carped about that like a child forever. You are still carping about it. What insults have you heaped on R2?
R99 replies:
I haven't heaped any insults on R2. I think he/she is absolute right that the airliner flew straight down the centerline of V-23, at least to the Malay Intersection.
"Wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts". You will find the NASA/Ames pdf deals with all of them. In the meantime - learn how to spell. No doubt you will return with criticism of the NASA/Ames pdf too. ;)
R99 replies:
Are you claiming my word checker doesn't know how to spell? Specifically, what are you referring to? It is entirely possible that I may criticize the NASA report, but I will read it first. I try to make it a point to read something before criticizing it. You should do the same.
Thanks for the "It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute." info. 700 feet per minute for the placard, but which direction! That is 11.6 f/s in the first second = 7.95 mph ? That is your definition of "fast"? Or are you going to take back that you said that too?
R99 replies:
A good working assumption is that both the placard and parachutist are moving downward (toward the center of the earth) once they are out of the aircraft's wake. Gravity works 24/7! As used here, the term "fast" means that the placard will be out of the slipstream in a matter of seconds, the exact number depending on a number of unpredictable variables.
Let's see: In the same one second the Jet is moving 200 mph = 293.333 f/s . In the time the placard falls 1 sec (11.6 feet) the jet with its vortex will have moved 293.3 feet ahead and the radius of the back blast will have covered what expanding area as the jet continues to move ahead? The placard? All terminal v for that placard due to Gravity will cease instantly? Or will your placard falling at 11.6 f/s in the first second be out of the vortex zone? You have already said it will. Your exact word was "FAST".. the placard is moving fast at a mere 11.6 f/s, you said. So while the placard has dropped a mere 11.6 feet the plane will have moved a football field length ahead with its engine cluster back draft cone extending 300-500 feet (or more) behind, with high velocity gases. But you say the placard having moved 11.6 feet down will miss the blast zone. 8)
R99 replies:
The airliner was actually moving about 225 MPH (or about 330 feet per second) with respect to the air mass, and so was the placard until it separated from the airliner. Your calculations above are apparently based on the assumption that the placard will have a zero forward speed immediately upon separating from the airliner. Such is not the case.
R99 replies are above.
A question for Georger. Were you on the crew at Berkeley (or USC)?
Give me some time to digest your bullshit. You really have gone to the Dark Side. So shabby.
Robert you really need to learn how to post a reply on the internet!
-
Let's gain a proper perspective on the placard find.
According to R99's analysis--which involved legit atmospheric data from November 24, 1971--the placard separated 8.6 SM west of the FBI Flight Path. The placard then drifted with the wind about 7.8 SM. Thereby putting the placard on the ground about 0.8 SM west of the FBI Flight Path.
You would think that it landed on the head of a needle from the tenor of the discussion about this lately.
Here we're asked to ponder the remarkable "coincidence" of the placard landing "near" the FBI Flight Path. However, we're not asked to ponder the remarkable "coincidence" that the jet happened to be flying exactly head-on into the wind at this one "special weather zone" which had a one-of-a-kind wind direction relative to the rest of the region on that very special day. Isn't it amazing how this "special weather zone" afforded the placard the remarkable opportunity to drift back over the flight path it just traced thereby landing 0.8 miles west of the FBI Flight Path?
Wow! What an amazing collection of emotionally charged adjectives! WTF are you talking about or trying to say?
-
Boeing 747 & Boeing 727 - "Wake Turbulence Tests" - 1974:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8fV36OtrJw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFP4xl0V0mk
Sources of turbulence behind and around a 727 are: wing tip vortexes, engine cluster blast, aircraft body, wheel and flap configuration (flap settings affect turbulence behind the aircraft) ....
One thing that has always bothered me about the placard find is the statement 'it was found almost directly under the flight path'. What would explain such a finding? Some directive force at work? A faster descent rate than has been estimated to date? Greater placard mass than has been estimated to date? Was the placard attached to something heavier than the placard alone, a panel door or cover metal ...?
The TAG tests do not mention any interference from turbulence behind the aircraft. 377 said people parachuting from the back of a 727 noticed no interference from turbulence behind the aircraft. Still the placard was found 'almost directly under the flight path'. It raises questions ...
It is noteworthy to me that avionics engineer R99 hedges his proclamation that the 'placard left fast' when leaving the 727. I guess he is saying his estimated terminal v of a mere 11.67f/sec (700f/min = 7.9mph) is FAST ? It feels like he is ducking the issue of interference from any avionic forces to allow for an unencumbered free fall for the placard. Why else would he stipulate "fast" without defining "fast"? I am not comfortable with his explanation.
I am not an avionics engineer and have never claimed to be one. I have three college degrees and one of them is a "Bachelor of Science in Aeronautical Engineering". In the field of Aeronautical Engineering, I was mainly interested in flight dynamics which includes performance and stability and control of flying machines.
I believe that 377 has an undergraduate degree in Electrical Engineering, but I don't know if he is an "avionics" engineer although he does apparently have plenty of experience with radios and other items that are in the avionics area. Maybe you were thinking of him.
-
Boeing 747 & Boeing 727 - "Wake Turbulence Tests" - 1974:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8fV36OtrJw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFP4xl0V0mk
Sources of turbulence behind and around a 727 are: wing tip vortexes, engine cluster blast, aircraft body, wheel and flap configuration (flap settings affect turbulence behind the aircraft) ....
One thing that has always bothered me about the placard find is the statement 'it was found almost directly under the flight path'. What would explain such a finding? Some directive force at work? A faster descent rate than has been estimated to date? Greater placard mass than has been estimated to date? Was the placard attached to something heavier than the placard alone, a panel door or cover metal ...?
The TAG tests do not mention any interference from turbulence behind the aircraft. 377 said people parachuting from the back of a 727 noticed no interference from turbulence behind the aircraft. Still the placard was found 'almost directly under the flight path'. It raises questions ...
It is noteworthy to me that avionics engineer R99 hedges his proclamation that the 'placard left fast' when leaving the 727. I guess he is saying his estimated terminal v of a mere 11.67f/sec (700f/min = 7.9mph) is FAST ? It feels like he is ducking the issue of interference from any avionic forces to allow for an unencumbered free fall for the placard. Why else would he stipulate "fast" without defining "fast"? I am not comfortable with his explanation.
I am not an avionics engineer and have never claimed to be one. I have three college degrees and one of them is a "Bachelor of Science in Aeronautical Engineering". In the field of Aeronautical Engineering, I was mainly interested in flight dynamics which includes performance and stability and control of flying machines.
I believe that 377 has an undergraduate degree in Electrical Engineering, but I don't know if he is an "avionics" engineer although he does apparently have plenty of experience with radios and other items that are in the avionics area.
Please dont beat me with your cane! Give me a chance to separate out your replies and read them! :rofl:
-
Flyjack found an interesting article surrounding the placard. they said they noticed the placard missing after the testing was done and not before.
"We took the plane up after the hijacking and simulated a drop by a parachute. we noticed the decal missing after that but not before. " they measure the placard at 8 x 11.
Another conflicting report says it was positively identified coming from a Boeing 727. leaving out, coming from flight 305.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ovNn5ZNbzha0QWkyOzTKO8Zg3PUzLNTT/view?usp=sharing
-
Flyjack again. finds CIA PDF on leaflet drops. this would be fit for the placard vs a 40 lb plate. it's showing an 8 1/2 x 11 leaflet dropping about 180 feet per minute or 3 feet per second.
The placard can't weigh much more than a piece of paper. reports are always "a thin plastic card" or referred to as a "decal"
Flyjack believes the door was attached to the placard. perhaps the jet wash did destroy it.
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP78-03639A000500080001-1.pdf
-
Another reference to about 3 feet per second.
"Relevant Fact— The placard was found about 13 miles east of Castle Rock. This is commensurate with the strong winds from the west. Its rate of fall would usually be around 2.5 feet per second. Put all the calculations together and it would drop about 9000 feet in an hour. Add the heavier weather, barometric pressure, and the intermittent downpour, and the rate of decent is doubled. Thus the placard could have been found as much as 22 miles or more east of where it dropped from the Boeing 727."
https://questersite.wordpress.com/2015/10/11/finding-d-b-cooper-part-2-the-first-clues/
-
The placard piece was about 4" X 6". I estimate the weight of the placard at 1/3 of an ounce--the plastic is heavier than paper. According to the USPS, four sheets of paper in a #10 business envelop is just under 1 ounce. Therefore, an 8.5" X 11" sheet of paper will be less than 1/5th of an ounce.
R99's calculations are the most accurate.
-
I thought the size or shape didn't matter? tears, cuts...all good? you are estimating again. we don't know how thin the card was. it's been described as a decal in some cases. the leaflets would match the description of the card..
-
Flyjack believes the door came off with the placard. it's possible the jet wash ripped it apart when it left the plane. the card has been damaged. no question about it. this could explain the damage.
-
I thought the size or shape didn't matter? tears, cuts...all good? you are estimating again. we don't know how thin the card was. it's been described as a decal in some cases. the leaflets would match the description of the card..
This is absolutely false.
Reply number 1995 in this thread, "The fundamentals are the weight, area, altitude, and atmospheric conditions."
-
The door was made out of plastic. I'm not sure of the configuration NWO had with the emergency release. they were different in other 727's according to Hominid.
-
The placard being attached to the door makes absolute sense. It explains how it left the jet. Moreover, the moment of most resistance is going to be when the placard and door hit the jet stream meaning it was likely torn off at that moment. This means the door itself is probably 3 or 4 miles to the southwest of the placard find.
-
I thought the size or shape didn't matter? tears, cuts...all good? you are estimating again. we don't know how thin the card was. it's been described as a decal in some cases. the leaflets would match the description of the card..
This is absolutely false.
Reply number 1995 in this thread, "The fundamentals are the weight, area, altitude, and atmospheric conditions."
Was any analysis was done on the damaged piece. it's not the original size and it has a streamer effect while dropping with the piece torn at the bottom middle up into the center of the card. the lighter side of the split will not stay equal with the other side. I've already seen this. it drops differently than a square does.
-
I will be looking for someone who will not be part of the debate and has knowledge of this type of work.
-
I thought the size or shape didn't matter? tears, cuts...all good? you are estimating again. we don't know how thin the card was. it's been described as a decal in some cases. the leaflets would match the description of the card..
This is absolutely false.
Reply number 1995 in this thread, "The fundamentals are the weight, area, altitude, and atmospheric conditions."
Was any analysis was done on the damaged piece. it's not the original size and it has a streamer effect while dropping with the piece torn at the bottom middle up into the center of the card. the lighter side of the split will not stay equal with the other side. I've already seen this. it drops differently than a square does.
I get that. I'll that I have to prove is that in a 31 knot wind from the southwest the placard is going to drift quite a distance during its nearly 2 mile journey to earth. That alone proves the FBI Flight Path at that point is off by several miles.
-
31 knots for how long?
-
Again, I have an inherent advantage in this debate because I do not have to prove my flight path is correct. I merely have to prove that the FBI Flight Path is wrong.
-
I noticed the card didn't like heavy winds?
-
You have not proven anything. these are only estimates without any real testing..all calculations. by the looks of things. it's possible the calculations are wrong. that's why we check things.
-
Obviously the best way to test this is to bring a torn piece of plastic up to 10K feet during a windy and moist evening and let it drop.
-
It doesn't have to be from that height. that I know. the bottom line is. someone who is knowledgeable about this needs to get involved. someone from the outside. no bias. someone that knows "you can't do this or you can't do that" that's what really needs to be done.
Figures from a 40 lb plate are acceptable but leaflet calculations mean nothing? I see a bit of a problem...
-
I don't know the results yet, if any. I filed a records report with Cowlitz county today. I'm asking for any documentation and photo's surrounding the placard find. none of the people I talked to today knew who Cooper was like the woman I spoke with yesterday, or Saturday. lost track.
-
The document Fly posted discusses auto rotation as one descent and flip-flop spiral etc. the two different ways I showed in my testing. then you will have sliding and rocking. it varies. you keep saying "it tumbled" end of story. that's not how it's done.
all the data is there for auto rotation and non rotation. 5,000 feet descent values. wind data. different size leaflets.
The leaflets have been dropped for years,decades. one would think the data would be more accurate than a test done 18 times?
-
The placard piece was about 4" X 6". I estimate the weight of the placard at 1/3 of an ounce--the plastic is heavier than paper. According to the USPS, four sheets of paper in a #10 business envelop is just under 1 ounce. Therefore, an 8.5" X 11" sheet of paper will be less than 1/5th of an ounce.
One sheet of paper weighs 0.158733 . 4 sheets would be .63 ounces. 100 sheets weigh approx 1 lb.
Metric would be 4.5 grams....per sheet
A typical envelope weighs 6.75 grams..0.2380992 ounces
-
Another reference to about 3 feet per second.
"Relevant Fact— The placard was found about 13 miles east of Castle Rock. This is commensurate with the strong winds from the west. Its rate of fall would usually be around 2.5 feet per second. Put all the calculations together and it would drop about 9000 feet in an hour. Add the heavier weather, barometric pressure, and the intermittent downpour, and the rate of decent is doubled. Thus the placard could have been found as much as 22 miles or more east of where it dropped from the Boeing 727."
https://questersite.wordpress.com/2015/10/11/finding-d-b-cooper-part-2-the-first-clues/
Yes.
“We took the Cooper plane up after the hijacking and simulated a drop by a parachutist,’’ he said.. “We noticed the decal was missing after that but not before.” See page seven (7).
https://ia802605.us.archive.org/9/items/The_Times_News_Idaho_Newspaper_1979_01_19/The_Times_News_Idaho_Newspaper_1979_01_19.pdf
That would account for no mention of the placard being missing at Reno or elsewhere. Any photos from the TAG team test that show the placard is still in the plane post-hijacking?
In addition several others are challenging the terminal-v assignment by R99 and Ulis. Two #s produced:
3 ft/sec = 180ft/min falling 8680 ft = 48 minutes
2 ft/sec = 120 ft/min falling 8680 ft = 72 minutes
You can read it on DZ.
I see nobody bothered to comment about the 727 turbulence videos I posted. So be it. It will come up again ... and again .... and again ....
Go back to the Colbert program video showing Eng packing up evidence to be shipped to Washington DC, as part of the case closing. Is the 727 placard shown?
Good night Elvis, wherever you are! ;D
-
You have to read the PDF. the values are wide in range. they break it down from many different size leaflets. wind data. auto rotating. non-rotating. calculate per 5,000 feet. everything is there..
-
The PDF is outstanding. So this is where our tax dollars go?
This proves that the placard didn't descend straight down or into a 31 KT wind. Not that I need anyone to prove it to me. It's just ridiculous to consider and is a waste of time to discuss further.
The question then becomes: How far did the placard drift?
To suggest a 3 ft/sec rate is wrong. As noted above, the placard is more than double the weight of the leaflet and has 1/4th of the surface.
The larger point, and only point that needs to be made, is that the placard find spot points to a flight path several miles west of the FBI Flight Path at that point.
In lieu of:
1) Significant placard migration on the ground to the west, or...
2) Proving that by some hard-to-quantify coincidence the placard dislodged from another 727 in the area, or...
3) The placard dislodged from N467US during testing (which would require the airstairs to be deployed over land), or...
4) This was a "special weather zone,"...
there is a major problem here. The FBI Flight Path cannot be accurate at that point. Moreover, it points to an actual flight path several miles to the west.
-
Another reference to about 3 feet per second.
"Relevant Fact— The placard was found about 13 miles east of Castle Rock. This is commensurate with the strong winds from the west. Its rate of fall would usually be around 2.5 feet per second. Put all the calculations together and it would drop about 9000 feet in an hour. Add the heavier weather, barometric pressure, and the intermittent downpour, and the rate of decent is doubled. Thus the placard could have been found as much as 22 miles or more east of where it dropped from the Boeing 727."
https://questersite.wordpress.com/2015/10/11/finding-d-b-cooper-part-2-the-first-clues/
Yes.
“We took the Cooper plane up after the hijacking and simulated a drop by a parachutist,’’ he said.. “We noticed the decal was missing after that but not before.” See page seven (7).
https://ia802605.us.archive.org/9/items/The_Times_News_Idaho_Newspaper_1979_01_19/The_Times_News_Idaho_Newspaper_1979_01_19.pdf
That would account for no mention of the placard being missing at Reno or elsewhere. Any photos from the TAG team test that show the placard is still in the plane post-hijacking?
In addition several others are challenging the terminal-v assignment by R99 and Ulis. Two #s produced:
3 ft/sec = 180ft/min falling 8680 ft = 48 minutes
2 ft/sec = 120 ft/min falling 8680 ft = 72 minutes
You can read it on DZ.
I see nobody bothered to comment about the 727 turbulence videos I posted. So be it. It will come up again ... and again .... and again ....
Go back to the Colbert program video showing Eng packing up evidence to be shipped to Washington DC, as part of the case closing. Is the 727 placard shown?
Good night Elvis, wherever you are! ;D
Georger,
Do you know how the 3.0 feet per second descent rate for the placard was calculated? If you or anyone else here knows how this number was determined, please post all the details. There is no way this number can be correct.
-
Flyjack originally posted the 3 foot drop. It's based on a larger leaflet. The smaller ones don't seem to change much. However, this appears to be the data needed. This will not prove much since we have a seven year gap. What if it show 15 mile drift? Do you move the path 15 miles?
Another site also quoted a 2-3 foot drop. How they figured that. I haven't a clue. I only posted what I seen.
-
Flyjack originally posted the 3 foot drop. It's based on a larger leaflet. The smaller ones don't seem to change much. However, this appears to be the data needed. This will not prove much since we have a seven year gap. What if it show 15 mile drift? Do you move the path 15 miles?
Another site also quoted a 2-3 foot drop. How they figured that. I haven't a clue. I only posted what I seen.
Until I see some logical basis for the 3.0 foot per second descent rate, I will just assume that major mistakes were made in the calculations. This isn't brain surgery but it does require some knowledge of how thing work.
-
Flyjack originally posted the 3 foot drop. It's based on a larger leaflet. The smaller ones don't seem to change much. However, this appears to be the data needed. This will not prove much since we have a seven year gap. What if it show 15 mile drift? Do you move the path 15 miles?
Another site also quoted a 2-3 foot drop. How they figured that. I haven't a clue. I only posted what I seen.
What I posted has nothing to do with FJ and any calcs he did ... like I just said, go with the pdf values you have.
I never said it did? I responded to Roberts question of where the figures came from!
-
Page 40 of the CIA document...you will find auto rotating and Non-autorotating..
-
Flyjack originally posted the 3 foot drop. It's based on a larger leaflet. The smaller ones don't seem to change much. However, this appears to be the data needed. This will not prove much since we have a seven year gap. What if it show 15 mile drift? Do you move the path 15 miles?
Another site also quoted a 2-3 foot drop. How they figured that. I haven't a clue. I only posted what I seen.
What I posted has nothing to do with FJ and any calcs he did ... like I just said, go with the pdf values you have.
I never said it did? I responded to Roberts question of where the figures came from!
I removed the offending posts! :o
-
Flyjack originally posted the 3 foot drop. It's based on a larger leaflet. The smaller ones don't seem to change much. However, this appears to be the data needed. This will not prove much since we have a seven year gap. What if it show 15 mile drift? Do you move the path 15 miles?
Another site also quoted a 2-3 foot drop. How they figured that. I haven't a clue. I only posted what I seen.
What I posted has nothing to do with FJ and any calcs he did ... like I just said, go with the pdf values you have.
I never said it did? I responded to Roberts question of where the figures came from!
I removed the offending posts! :o
Georger,
I never saw the post you are apparently referring to so I don't know what you were saying in the first place. I did take a look at the CIA report that Shutter posted and I would suggest that you do the same and specifically take a look at Table NA-3 on page 27.
Find the line that lists the ground rate of descent for 3.0 feet per second. Read across that line until you come to the entry for 10,000 feet altitude. That entry lists a time of 0.13 hours, which is 7.80 minutes, for a non-rotating placard to reach the ground from 10,000 feet. That is an average rate of descent of 1282 feet per minute which is about the same rate of descent as a round 1971 era parachute with a 200 pound load.
Things get worse. Look again at that 3.0 ground rate of descent. And note that it supposedly takes 0.03 hours, which is 1.8 minutes, to go from 0 altitude to ground level which is the same thing. I look forward to seeing your explanation of how that happens! I didn't bother reading further in that report.
I see nothing in that report that would support the FBI flight path.
-
Flyjack originally posted the 3 foot drop. It's based on a larger leaflet. The smaller ones don't seem to change much. However, this appears to be the data needed. This will not prove much since we have a seven year gap. What if it show 15 mile drift? Do you move the path 15 miles?
Another site also quoted a 2-3 foot drop. How they figured that. I haven't a clue. I only posted what I seen.
What I posted has nothing to do with FJ and any calcs he did ... like I just said, go with the pdf values you have.
I never said it did? I responded to Roberts question of where the figures came from!
I removed the offending posts! :o
Georger,
I never saw the post you are apparently referring to so I don't know what you were saying in the first place. I did take a look at the CIA report that Shutter posted and I would suggest that you do the same and specifically take a look at Table NA-3 on page 27.
Find the line that lists the ground rate of descent for 3.0 feet per second. Read across that line until you come to the entry for 10,000 feet altitude. That entry lists a time of 0.13 hours, which is 7.80 minutes, for a non-rotating placard to reach the ground from 10,000 feet. That is an average rate of descent of 1282 feet per minute which is about the same rate of descent as a round 1971 era parachute with a 200 pound load.
Things get worse. Look again at that 3.0 ground rate of descent. And note that it supposedly takes 0.03 hours, which is 1.8 minutes, to go from 0 altitude to ground level which is the same thing. I look forward to seeing your explanation of how that happens! I didn't bother reading further in that report.
I see nothing in that report that would support the FBI flight path.
Thats actually funny Rebert! I see nothing in that report that would support the FBI flight path, either. That report was not written to support or not support the FBI flight path. ;) Now you really are looking for Jesus in the Toast. But, is the toast looking to be saved?
I think I will start ignoring your egotistical venom. Bye! Maybe its you who needs to do some reading for a change ?
As I recall this, you spent years at Dropzone claiming the money arrived on Tina Bar, from the south end of TBar. Your old posts are still at DZ. You spent months/years trying to locate a creek or channel that could feed the money "slowly you said" to the south end of Tina Bar. You thought a west path could accommodate that. That was the basis for your earliest west path, as I recall this. Maybe now you will call me a liar about that!
Then when you joined forces with Elvis/Ulis your west path morphed. It now favored a more northern intersection with TBar to accommodate Ulis' claim that that the Ingram find is where DB Cooper (Sheridan Peterson) buried the money on Tina Bar.
The upshot of all this and what disturbs me is that you seem to be willing to shift your flight paths around to accommodate the latest-greatest theory being published in the "news". You and Ulis now use the placard to justify all of this. If what you claim this month is true why the change? Why didn't you pin your west path on the placard all along - clear back in 2008? In contrast the FBI etal have not changed their basic flight path in what, 40+ years! I mean compared to you the FBI seems to be less subject to the whims of change and the latest-greatest broadcaster in the Cooper Forum News cycle.
In the final analysis it is what it is. Maybe it will change again tomorrow for some reason.
Thanks and take care.
-
That chart doesn't seem to make sense. it continues with altitudes in the next figures directly below showing the last altitude of 50,000.
3.0 ft/sec at 50k takes .05?
.09 at 1,000 feet?
The figures remain the same for altitudes of 1,000 thru 9,000 feet?
Are these figures something to factor in with other figures vs what the actual number or conclusion is for these altitudes?
Three feet a second would be 180 feet per minute. not 700 feet as you calculated being similar to a parachute drift. how do they equal?
The chart is for non-rotation which appears to have changed from it "tumbling"
Chart below is just an example...
-
That chart doesn't seem to make sense. it continues with altitudes in the next figures directly below showing the last altitude of 50,000.
3.0 ft/sec at 50k takes .05?
.09 at 1,000 feet?
The figures remain the same for altitudes of 1,000 thru 9,000 feet?
Are these figures something to factor in with other figures vs what the actual number or conclusion is for these altitudes?
Three feet a second would be 180 feet per minute. not 700 feet as you calculated being similar to a parachute drift. how do they equal?
The chart is for non-rotation which appears to have changed from it "tumbling"
Chart below is just an example...
The chart you have posted shows various data for each altitude segment.
For example, if you drop leaflets at 1000 feet the data pertaining to that segment would be in the "5-0 height increment." Next, for a leaflet to travel through that entire segment--meaning 5k to 0 feet--it would take 0.49 hours. However, your placard drop would be only from 1K. Therefore it would take about 1/5th of the time, in other words, 0.9 hours. Moreover, the wind speed is 5 KTS during that segment, you would have a horizontal drift of 1/5th of 2.5 NM, and the azimuth angle is 170.
-
The chart was an example. I need to know how 700 ft/minute is the same as 3 feet per second as Robert explains in his last post. 3 feet per second could only be 180 per minute which would take 47 minutes to drop. This would be from around d 8500 feet.
-
700 ft per minute would be around 12 minutes to drop. 180 feet per minute would be around 47 minutes. 700 number puts the card dropping at around 11 feet per second..
-
Real world observation: I once passed a candy bar wrapper serval thousand feet up over Livermore CA. I was under a canopy, which happened to be a 28 ft C9 surplus round. I was descending a lot faster than the wrapper. It was fluttering and rotating. Since I was the first jumper out I had to assume it ascended from the ground in an updraft.
377
-
700 ft per minute would be around 12 minutes to drop. 180 feet per minute would be around 47 minutes. 700 number puts the card dropping at around 11 feet per second..
Shutter, you seem to have missed the point that the 700 feet per minute is the vertical descent rate with respect to the air mass and not the horizontal movement caused by the wind. And as shown in the chart I discussed a few posts back (#2065), the average vertical descent rate is actually 1282 feet per minute and not the 180 feet per minute you are quoting.
What is your explanation for the 180 feet per minute quote?
-
Real world observation: I once passed a candy bar wrapper serval thousand feet up over Livermore CA. I was under a canopy, which happened to be a 28 ft C9 surplus round. I was descending a lot faster than the wrapper. It was fluttering and rotating. Since I was the first jumper out I had to assume it ascended from the ground in an updraft.
377
I have also seen debris and bugs several thousand feet above the ground. I have 1000+ hours flying time in gliders and have routinely climbed at over 1000 feet per minute in thermals. And since the glider was descending at several hundred feet per minute with respect to the thermal, the thermal itself was ascending at an even greater speed.
-
That chart doesn't seem to make sense. it continues with altitudes in the next figures directly below showing the last altitude of 50,000.
3.0 ft/sec at 50k takes .05?
.09 at 1,000 feet?
The figures remain the same for altitudes of 1,000 thru 9,000 feet?
Are these figures something to factor in with other figures vs what the actual number or conclusion is for these altitudes?
Three feet a second would be 180 feet per minute. not 700 feet as you calculated being similar to a parachute drift. how do they equal?
The chart is for non-rotation which appears to have changed from it "tumbling"
Chart below is just an example...
The chart you have posted shows various data for each altitude segment.
For example, if you drop leaflets at 1000 feet the data pertaining to that segment would be in the "5-0 height increment." Next, for a leaflet to travel through that entire segment--meaning 5k to 0 feet--it would take 0.49 hours. However, your placard drop would be only from 1K. Therefore it would take about 1/5th of the time, in other words, 0.9 hours. Moreover, the wind speed is 5 KTS during that segment, you would have a horizontal drift of 1/5th of 2.5 NM, and the azimuth angle is 170.
But a more direct standard test of which flight path is valid would be to measure the time taken to fly from A to B. Let A be Maylay. Let B be the time of T33/305 intersection near Lake Oswego. Somebody has that data. That intersection was put together by R2 and the T33 pilot. The time between two alternate routes starting at Maylay must be different. Tests like that was one reason for running simulations?
I am not aware of anyone involved in this case ever using the placard find as a test of the "Flight Path" - nor did they use the meals brought on board 305 as a test of the flight path either!
Finding direct data was in the original mandate and FOIA request filing by Robert. That failed. What's next? Tea leaves?
Tests have to be valid.
-
Thanks for adding your sailplane experience R99 and confirming debris sightings aloft.
Some pilots refer to skydivers as skytrash.
377
-
Thanks for adding your sailplane experience R99 and confirming debris sightings aloft.
Some pilots refer to skydivers as skytrash.
377
Skytrash? I hadn't heard that before.
-
That chart doesn't seem to make sense. it continues with altitudes in the next figures directly below showing the last altitude of 50,000.
3.0 ft/sec at 50k takes .05?
.09 at 1,000 feet?
The figures remain the same for altitudes of 1,000 thru 9,000 feet?
Are these figures something to factor in with other figures vs what the actual number or conclusion is for these altitudes?
Three feet a second would be 180 feet per minute. not 700 feet as you calculated being similar to a parachute drift. how do they equal?
The chart is for non-rotation which appears to have changed from it "tumbling"
Chart below is just an example...
The chart you have posted shows various data for each altitude segment.
For example, if you drop leaflets at 1000 feet the data pertaining to that segment would be in the "5-0 height increment." Next, for a leaflet to travel through that entire segment--meaning 5k to 0 feet--it would take 0.49 hours. However, your placard drop would be only from 1K. Therefore it would take about 1/5th of the time, in other words, 0.9 hours. Moreover, the wind speed is 5 KTS during that segment, you would have a horizontal drift of 1/5th of 2.5 NM, and the azimuth angle is 170.
But a more direct standard test of which flight path is valid would be to measure the time taken to fly from A to B. Let A be Maylay. Let B be the time of T33/305 intersection near Lake Oswego. Somebody has that data. That intersection was put together by R2 and the T33 pilot. The time between two alternate routes starting at Maylay must be different. Tests like that was one reason for running simulations?
I am not aware of anyone involved in this case ever using the placard find as a test of the "Flight Path" - nor did they use the meals brought on board 305 as a test of the flight path either!
Finding direct data was in the original mandate and FOIA request filing by Robert. That failed. What's next? Tea leaves?
Tests have to be valid.
Tests do have to be valid and yours isn't. If the airliner stayed on the centerline of V-23, as you claim, from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection rather than flying a direct path between them, it would only travel two nautical miles further. Since the airliner's ground speed was more than three nautical miles per minute, that would be less than 40 seconds of flying time. And the data quality is not sufficient to draw a conclusion based on this.
How are you coming along on your search for my posts on DropZone? I trust you will find my posts, somewhere around 2009, that point out the problems with the FBI flight path. These problems with the FBI flight path didn't just pop up last week.
-
That chart doesn't seem to make sense. it continues with altitudes in the next figures directly below showing the last altitude of 50,000.
3.0 ft/sec at 50k takes .05?
.09 at 1,000 feet?
The figures remain the same for altitudes of 1,000 thru 9,000 feet?
Are these figures something to factor in with other figures vs what the actual number or conclusion is for these altitudes?
Three feet a second would be 180 feet per minute. not 700 feet as you calculated being similar to a parachute drift. how do they equal?
The chart is for non-rotation which appears to have changed from it "tumbling"
Chart below is just an example...
The chart you have posted shows various data for each altitude segment.
For example, if you drop leaflets at 1000 feet the data pertaining to that segment would be in the "5-0 height increment." Next, for a leaflet to travel through that entire segment--meaning 5k to 0 feet--it would take 0.49 hours. However, your placard drop would be only from 1K. Therefore it would take about 1/5th of the time, in other words, 0.9 hours. Moreover, the wind speed is 5 KTS during that segment, you would have a horizontal drift of 1/5th of 2.5 NM, and the azimuth angle is 170.
But a more direct standard test of which flight path is valid would be to measure the time taken to fly from A to B. Let A be Maylay. Let B be the time of T33/305 intersection near Lake Oswego. Somebody has that data. That intersection was put together by R2 and the T33 pilot. The time between two alternate routes starting at Maylay must be different. Tests like that was one reason for running simulations?
I am not aware of anyone involved in this case ever using the placard find as a test of the "Flight Path" - nor did they use the meals brought on board 305 as a test of the flight path either!
Finding direct data was in the original mandate and FOIA request filing by Robert. That failed. What's next? Tea leaves?
Tests have to be valid.
Tests do have to be valid and yours isn't. If the airliner stayed on the centerline of V-23, as you claim, from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection rather than flying a direct path between them, it would only travel two nautical miles further. Since the airliner's ground speed was more than three nautical miles per minute, that would be less than 40 seconds of flying time. And the data quality is not sufficient to draw a conclusion based on this.
How are you coming along on your search for my posts on DropZone? I trust you will find my posts, somewhere around 2009, that point out the problems with the FBI flight path. These problems with the FBI flight path didn't just pop up last week.
Funny! So you agree the distance is further, v23 vs straight path. But you turn around and say "the test isnt valid". You clarify: 'the data quality is not sufficient to draw a conclusion based on this.' Now you turn that into an asset.
Robert we already knew all of this - we have discussed this for years. Nothing has changed in this story, except for your tactics. Fortunately for you both fp's go through Maylay ! Anyone with a brain knows where this is going. Nowhere. And if the placard did not even come off during the hijacking flight ... then you have one more problem.
As for searches, do them yourself if you feel you have something to prove. :rofl:
-
Anyone with a brain knows where this is going. Nowhere. And if the placard did not even come off during the hijacking flight ... then you have one more problem.
As for searches, do them yourself if you feel you have something to prove. :rofl:
I do not understand the need for you to constantly be snarky. I have never understood why anyone feels the need to be snarky here. Why attack on a personal level?
All R99 and I have done is put forward a theory. Additionally, we've backed it up. Deal with it.
As to your snarky comment: "And if the placard did not even come off during the hijacking flight ... then you have one more problem."
Why would I, or we, have a problem? Isn't this like saying, "If you don't have evidence, you don't have evidence"...? Put another way, if by some miracle the placard happened to come from some other 727 and not N467US, then yes that would no longer be considered evidence pointing to a western path. That would obviously change some things. That said, it still wouldn't explain the money find or the lack of anything found in the FBI search area or along the FBI Flight Path.
You act is if we're afraid of evidence.
Unfortunately for you, someone who apparently cannot accept that something doesn't add up regarding the FBI Flight Path, the placard is a compelling piece of evidence.
Why are you afraid of evidence?
-
That chart doesn't seem to make sense. it continues with altitudes in the next figures directly below showing the last altitude of 50,000.
3.0 ft/sec at 50k takes .05?
.09 at 1,000 feet?
The figures remain the same for altitudes of 1,000 thru 9,000 feet?
Are these figures something to factor in with other figures vs what the actual number or conclusion is for these altitudes?
Three feet a second would be 180 feet per minute. not 700 feet as you calculated being similar to a parachute drift. how do they equal?
The chart is for non-rotation which appears to have changed from it "tumbling"
Chart below is just an example...
The chart you have posted shows various data for each altitude segment.
For example, if you drop leaflets at 1000 feet the data pertaining to that segment would be in the "5-0 height increment." Next, for a leaflet to travel through that entire segment--meaning 5k to 0 feet--it would take 0.49 hours. However, your placard drop would be only from 1K. Therefore it would take about 1/5th of the time, in other words, 0.9 hours. Moreover, the wind speed is 5 KTS during that segment, you would have a horizontal drift of 1/5th of 2.5 NM, and the azimuth angle is 170.
But a more direct standard test of which flight path is valid would be to measure the time taken to fly from A to B. Let A be Maylay. Let B be the time of T33/305 intersection near Lake Oswego. Somebody has that data. That intersection was put together by R2 and the T33 pilot. The time between two alternate routes starting at Maylay must be different. Tests like that was one reason for running simulations?
I am not aware of anyone involved in this case ever using the placard find as a test of the "Flight Path" - nor did they use the meals brought on board 305 as a test of the flight path either!
Finding direct data was in the original mandate and FOIA request filing by Robert. That failed. What's next? Tea leaves?
Tests have to be valid.
Tests do have to be valid and yours isn't. If the airliner stayed on the centerline of V-23, as you claim, from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection rather than flying a direct path between them, it would only travel two nautical miles further. Since the airliner's ground speed was more than three nautical miles per minute, that would be less than 40 seconds of flying time. And the data quality is not sufficient to draw a conclusion based on this.
How are you coming along on your search for my posts on DropZone? I trust you will find my posts, somewhere around 2009, that point out the problems with the FBI flight path. These problems with the FBI flight path didn't just pop up last week.
Funny! So you agree the distance is further, v23 vs straight path. But you turn around and say "the test isnt valid". You clarify: 'the data quality is not sufficient to draw a conclusion based on this.' Now you turn that into an asset.
Robert we already knew all of this - we have discussed this for years. Nothing has changed in this story, except for your tactics. Fortunately for you both fp's go through Maylay ! Anyone with a brain knows where this is going. Nowhere. And if the placard did not even come off during the hijacking flight ... then you have one more problem.
As for searches, do them yourself if you feel you have something to prove. :rofl:
Georger, you are the one who has been making false statements about me (and EU). And you claimed to have e-mails proving your statements even though no such e-mails exist.
So I can only assume that you can draw positive or negative conclusions from data which is actually inconclusive.
-
Georger, if you have the email or documents you need to provide them. if not. we need to move on....
-
Flyjack has a good point with emergency door going with the placard. how did it separate?
How did everyone miss the opening where the door was. why did it take 2 days to notice. the stairs should have been a focal point.
-
That chart doesn't seem to make sense. it continues with altitudes in the next figures directly below showing the last altitude of 50,000.
3.0 ft/sec at 50k takes .05?
.09 at 1,000 feet?
The figures remain the same for altitudes of 1,000 thru 9,000 feet?
Are these figures something to factor in with other figures vs what the actual number or conclusion is for these altitudes?
Three feet a second would be 180 feet per minute. not 700 feet as you calculated being similar to a parachute drift. how do they equal?
The chart is for non-rotation which appears to have changed from it "tumbling"
Chart below is just an example...
The chart you have posted shows various data for each altitude segment.
For example, if you drop leaflets at 1000 feet the data pertaining to that segment would be in the "5-0 height increment." Next, for a leaflet to travel through that entire segment--meaning 5k to 0 feet--it would take 0.49 hours. However, your placard drop would be only from 1K. Therefore it would take about 1/5th of the time, in other words, 0.9 hours. Moreover, the wind speed is 5 KTS during that segment, you would have a horizontal drift of 1/5th of 2.5 NM, and the azimuth angle is 170.
But a more direct standard test of which flight path is valid would be to measure the time taken to fly from A to B. Let A be Maylay. Let B be the time of T33/305 intersection near Lake Oswego. Somebody has that data. That intersection was put together by R2 and the T33 pilot. The time between two alternate routes starting at Maylay must be different. Tests like that was one reason for running simulations?
I am not aware of anyone involved in this case ever using the placard find as a test of the "Flight Path" - nor did they use the meals brought on board 305 as a test of the flight path either!
Finding direct data was in the original mandate and FOIA request filing by Robert. That failed. What's next? Tea leaves?
Tests have to be valid.
Tests do have to be valid and yours isn't. If the airliner stayed on the centerline of V-23, as you claim, from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection rather than flying a direct path between them, it would only travel two nautical miles further. Since the airliner's ground speed was more than three nautical miles per minute, that would be less than 40 seconds of flying time. And the data quality is not sufficient to draw a conclusion based on this.
How are you coming along on your search for my posts on DropZone? I trust you will find my posts, somewhere around 2009, that point out the problems with the FBI flight path. These problems with the FBI flight path didn't just pop up last week.
Funny! So you agree the distance is further, v23 vs straight path. But you turn around and say "the test isnt valid". You clarify: 'the data quality is not sufficient to draw a conclusion based on this.' Now you turn that into an asset.
Robert we already knew all of this - we have discussed this for years. Nothing has changed in this story, except for your tactics. Fortunately for you both fp's go through Maylay ! Anyone with a brain knows where this is going. Nowhere. And if the placard did not even come off during the hijacking flight ... then you have one more problem.
As for searches, do them yourself if you feel you have something to prove. :rofl:
Georger, you are the one who has been making false statements about me (and EU). And you claimed to have e-mails proving your statements even though no such e-mails exist.
So I can only assume that you can draw positive or negative conclusions from data which is actually inconclusive.
What exactly are you talking about? Emails?
-
Georger, if you have the email or documents you need to provide them. if not. we need to move on....
so move on! I have no idea what specifically he is talking about ... emails about what ..... R2 maybe? As I have stated before all of those very old emails are all gone. That was years ago!!!
As for R99's west path, either he is right or R2 is right. They cant both be right!
I am neutral in this WHOLE GOD DAMNED FLIGHT PATH THING! Ive always made that clear. I have also said numerous times that there are other doors to the money mystery, that don't depend on the flight path. Nobody but FJ wants to talk about that!
Find somebody else to persecute!
-
Some of my pics are on my bad computer..is any of the photo's from the testing of the stairs show the left side of the stairs? it's almost like someone told every photographer to stay away from that area..very hard pics to find..
-
Anyone with a brain knows where this is going. Nowhere. And if the placard did not even come off during the hijacking flight ... then you have one more problem.
As for searches, do them yourself if you feel you have something to prove. :rofl:
I do not understand the need for you to constantly be snarky. I have never understood why anyone feels the need to be snarky here. Why attack on a personal level?
All R99 and I have done is put forward a theory. Additionally, we've backed it up. Deal with it.
As to your snarky comment: "And if the placard did not even come off during the hijacking flight ... then you have one more problem."
Why would I, or we, have a problem? Isn't this like saying, "If you don't have evidence, you don't have evidence"...? Put another way, if by some miracle the placard happened to come from some other 727 and not N467US, then yes that would no longer be considered evidence pointing to a western path. That would obviously change some things. That said, it still wouldn't explain the money find or the lack of anything found in the FBI search area or along the FBI Flight Path.
You act is if we're afraid of evidence.
Unfortunately for you, someone who apparently cannot accept that something doesn't add up regarding the FBI Flight Path, the placard is a compelling piece of evidence.
Why are you afraid of evidence?
what EVIDENCE ?
Let me ask you the same thing a poster over at DZ is asking you today! Are you going to be posting daily videos to the world about your views in the Cooper case ... for the next 52 weeks daily, in addition to all of your other posts!? I think the poster is saying its getting tiresome! It's a little overbearing dont you think?
What do you hope to prove by this massive TAKEOVER OF NORJAK? What are your goals in this FLOOD?
re- Dropzone: JJG78 says: "Why are you posting this every day? Will there be 52 weeks of these posts every weekday? "
PS: And I am reminded people have expressed the same dislike over at The Mountain News ?
-
Let me ask you the same thing a poster over at DZ is asking you today! Are you going to be posting daily videos to the world about your views in the Cooper case ... for the next 52 weeks daily, in addition to all of your other posts!? I think the poster is saying its getting tiresome! It's a little overbearing dont you think?
What do you hope to prove by this massive TAKEOVER OF NORJAK? What are your goals in this FLOOD?
re- Dropzone: JJG78 says: "Why are you posting this every day? Will there be 52 weeks of these posts every weekday? "
PS: And I am reminded people have expressed the same dislike over at The Mountain News ?
How unbelievably petty. Especially if JJG78 is you.
Let me provide a road map for the person who dislikes the Daily DB Cooper Bite:
1) Avoid the Eric Ulis thread on the Forum.
2) That ought to pretty much take care of it.
Cheers!
-
Let me ask you the same thing a poster over at DZ is asking you today! Are you going to be posting daily videos to the world about your views in the Cooper case ... for the next 52 weeks daily, in addition to all of your other posts!? I think the poster is saying its getting tiresome! It's a little overbearing dont you think?
What do you hope to prove by this massive TAKEOVER OF NORJAK? What are your goals in this FLOOD?
re- Dropzone: JJG78 says: "Why are you posting this every day? Will there be 52 weeks of these posts every weekday? "
PS: And I am reminded people have expressed the same dislike over at The Mountain News ?
How unbelievably petty. Especially if JJG78 is you.
Let me provide a road map for the person who dislikes the Daily DB Cooper Bite:
1) Avoid the Eric Ulis thread on the Forum.
2) That ought to pretty much take care of it.
Cheers!
How petty indeed!
JJG78 is not me. JJG78 is a poster at Dropzone - go check it out! Probably a skydiver. Duhhhhhhh. I am not registered at DZ. Ask the mods at DZ who JJG78 is and they may tell you! But my impression is this is only the beginning of complaints about your Cooper jihad. At least Colbert had a committee and substantive programs when he launched his massive program. He brought tangible resources and results, eg. the Cooper FOIA files which continue to this day.
But others are complaining too.
I dont know what to tell you Elvis. Maybe they just dont like your impersonations?
-
Let me ask you the same thing a poster over at DZ is asking you today! Are you going to be posting daily videos to the world about your views in the Cooper case ... for the next 52 weeks daily, in addition to all of your other posts!? I think the poster is saying its getting tiresome! It's a little overbearing dont you think?
What do you hope to prove by this massive TAKEOVER OF NORJAK? What are your goals in this FLOOD?
re- Dropzone: JJG78 says: "Why are you posting this every day? Will there be 52 weeks of these posts every weekday? "
PS: And I am reminded people have expressed the same dislike over at The Mountain News ?
How unbelievably petty. Especially if JJG78 is you.
Let me provide a road map for the person who dislikes the Daily DB Cooper Bite:
1) Avoid the Eric Ulis thread on the Forum.
2) That ought to pretty much take care of it.
Cheers!
How petty indeed!
JJG78 is not me. JJG78 is a poster at Dropzone - go check it out! Probably a skydiver. Duhhhhhhh. I am not registered at DZ. Ask the mods at DZ who JJG78 is and they may tell you! But my impression is this is only the beginning of complaints about your Cooper jihad. At least Colbert had a committee and substantive programs.
But others are complaining too.
I dont know what to tell you Elvis. Maybe they just dont like your impersonations?
If you don't like the impersonation...don't go to the show!
Cheers!
-
Let me ask you the same thing a poster over at DZ is asking you today! Are you going to be posting daily videos to the world about your views in the Cooper case ... for the next 52 weeks daily, in addition to all of your other posts!? I think the poster is saying its getting tiresome! It's a little overbearing dont you think?
What do you hope to prove by this massive TAKEOVER OF NORJAK? What are your goals in this FLOOD?
re- Dropzone: JJG78 says: "Why are you posting this every day? Will there be 52 weeks of these posts every weekday? "
PS: And I am reminded people have expressed the same dislike over at The Mountain News ?
How unbelievably petty. Especially if JJG78 is you.
Let me provide a road map for the person who dislikes the Daily DB Cooper Bite:
1) Avoid the Eric Ulis thread on the Forum.
2) That ought to pretty much take care of it.
Cheers!
How petty indeed!
JJG78 is not me. JJG78 is a poster at Dropzone - go check it out! Probably a skydiver. Duhhhhhhh. I am not registered at DZ. Ask the mods at DZ who JJG78 is and they may tell you! But my impression is this is only the beginning of complaints about your Cooper jihad. At least Colbert had a committee and substantive programs.
But others are complaining too.
I dont know what to tell you Elvis. Maybe they just dont like your impersonations?
If you don't like the impersonation...don't go to the show!
Cheers!
I dont and I wont. I knew people who knew the real Elvis.
-
G wrote: “I knew people who knew the real Elvis.”
Knew? Don’t they know he’s still alive? 😉
I like EU’s daily show. All Cooper all the time.
I like Mountain News too.
I even like reading about Blevins Cooper campout plans.
I don’t gripe about things I can easily ignore. I’m incredibly easy to please.
377
-
It appears the placard was more like a decal. the photo shows a placard very similar to the one on 305..
-
It appears the placard was more like a decal. the photo shows a placard very similar to the one on 305..
You mean like model airplane decals? Dissolved in water and applied to some surface? Those photos dont look like any decal - they look like a plastic sheet, something you would screw on or rivet on to a hard cover plate ?
If this is a decal then what is the broken thicker surface it's on? Metal, plastic ... paper ??
Send a piece to Tom and let him look at it under the SEM. Edgewise!
Did you ever get any info from the Cowlitz county office?
-
Plastic with adhesive backing...
-
Plastic with adhesive backing...
That is correct. I just talked to an Agent who has held it in his hands. He says it is plastic - torn plastic. Flexible. As to decal he laughed and said "hell I dont know!" :rofl: "But the thing is plastic! CASE SOLVED. 8)
Took me longer to make the call than to get his answer. Funny.
-
thin, like a decal. the picture I posted looks to be about the same size. I guess I should say similar to a decal but more stable since it's plastic.
Hominid, email sent to me in 2014...
The placard was on the outside of a panel door that was adjacent to the normal airstair
control handle. It was "stuck" there with adhesive. It was probably made of metal foil,
but might have been plastic. Inside that door was the control that the placard related
to, the control for the "emergency" (pneumatic) airstair extension system. The control
was a red handle that had to be pulled hard in order to break a lockwire. NWA did not
want people pulling the handle by mistake thinking it to be the normal way of dropping the
stair. This is why it was inside a "cabinet" and had the lockwire. They didn't want it
to be used for a routine dropping of the airstair because using this system would damage
the stair such that it would have to be repaired before it could be closed and locked for
flight.
-
here is a couple photo's I don't think have been seen much, if any. one is the rear stairs during the test but a pic I haven't seen. the second link is the cockpit crew during the testing..and eattle January 6, 1972...too big to post.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sq0wnswKmaXzxnnB6Qvw410tKNlKKqEW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1piPOAgPUsju1geBrEBF9n4Sozo95uEyW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TW_4WWy9g7AokHXNun8XMSAgqdJ7t7pR/view?usp=sharing
-
Plastic with adhesive backing...
That is correct. I just talked to an Agent who has held it in his hands. He says it is plastic - torn plastic. Flexible. As to decal he laughed and said "hell I dont know!" :rofl: "But the thing is plastic! CASE SOLVED. 8)
Took me longer to make the call than to get his answer. Funny.
Georger,
What did the agent who has held the placard in his hands say when you asked him how it managed to get upwind of the FBI flight path?
-
Plastic with adhesive backing...
That is correct. I just talked to an Agent who has held it in his hands. He says it is plastic - torn plastic. Flexible. As to decal he laughed and said "hell I dont know!" :rofl: "But the thing is plastic! CASE SOLVED. 8)
Took me longer to make the call than to get his answer. Funny.
Georger,
What did the agent who has held the placard in his hands say when you asked him how it managed to get upwind of the FBI flight path?
He said, "how ya doin .................. tell XYZ to give me a call, what do ya need ............. " The call didnt last long.
-
here is a couple photo's I don't think have been seen much, if any. one is the rear stairs during the test but a pic I haven't seen. the second link is the cockpit crew during the testing..and eattle January 6, 1972...too big to post.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sq0wnswKmaXzxnnB6Qvw410tKNlKKqEW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1piPOAgPUsju1geBrEBF9n4Sozo95uEyW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TW_4WWy9g7AokHXNun8XMSAgqdJ7t7pR/view?usp=sharing
Here, a bit lighter. Cant push it any further in jpeg format without distortions. Any names of these people?
-
here is a couple photo's I don't think have been seen much, if any. one is the rear stairs during the test but a pic I haven't seen. the second link is the cockpit crew during the testing..and eattle January 6, 1972...too big to post.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sq0wnswKmaXzxnnB6Qvw410tKNlKKqEW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1piPOAgPUsju1geBrEBF9n4Sozo95uEyW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TW_4WWy9g7AokHXNun8XMSAgqdJ7t7pR/view?usp=sharing
Here, a bit lighter. Cant push it any further in jpeg format without distortions. Any names of these people?
The fellow in the foreground looking at the flight engineer's panel is probably Harald Anderson who was the flight engineer on the hijacked aircraft. The gray haired fellow in the right side in the co-pilot's seat may be Soderland. Rataczak was suppose to be the pilot on these tests so he would be in the left side in the pilot's seat but there is no way to identify him in that picture.
Are there any more pictures of the cockpit crew?
-
thin, like a decal. the picture I posted looks to be about the same size. I guess I should say similar to a decal but more stable since it's plastic.
Hominid, email sent to me in 2014...
The placard was on the outside of a panel door that was adjacent to the normal airstair
control handle. It was "stuck" there with adhesive. It was probably made of metal foil,
but might have been plastic. Inside that door was the control that the placard related
to, the control for the "emergency" (pneumatic) airstair extension system. The control
was a red handle that had to be pulled hard in order to break a lockwire. NWA did not
want people pulling the handle by mistake thinking it to be the normal way of dropping the
stair. This is why it was inside a "cabinet" and had the lockwire. They didn't want it
to be used for a routine dropping of the airstair because using this system would damage
the stair such that it would have to be repaired before it could be closed and locked for
flight.
BTW the placard was transferred from Cowlitz County to the Seattle FBI office.
-
here is a couple photo's I don't think have been seen much, if any. one is the rear stairs during the test but a pic I haven't seen. the second link is the cockpit crew during the testing..and eattle January 6, 1972...too big to post.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sq0wnswKmaXzxnnB6Qvw410tKNlKKqEW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1piPOAgPUsju1geBrEBF9n4Sozo95uEyW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TW_4WWy9g7AokHXNun8XMSAgqdJ7t7pR/view?usp=sharing
Here, a bit lighter. Cant push it any further in jpeg format without distortions. Any names of these people?
The fellow in the foreground looking at the flight engineer's panel is probably Harald Anderson who was the flight engineer on the hijacked aircraft. The gray haired fellow in the right side in the co-pilot's seat may be Soderland. Rataczak was suppose to be the pilot on these tests so he would be in the left side in the pilot's seat but there is no way to identify him in that picture.
Are there any more pictures of the cockpit crew?
The left seat guy is older than Rataczak. Is this photo from the TAG team test flight? Here is the tag team. Rataczak wasnt on that test flight.
-
here is a couple photo's I don't think have been seen much, if any. one is the rear stairs during the test but a pic I haven't seen. the second link is the cockpit crew during the testing..and eattle January 6, 1972...too big to post.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sq0wnswKmaXzxnnB6Qvw410tKNlKKqEW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1piPOAgPUsju1geBrEBF9n4Sozo95uEyW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TW_4WWy9g7AokHXNun8XMSAgqdJ7t7pR/view?usp=sharing
Here, a bit lighter. Cant push it any further in jpeg format without distortions. Any names of these people?
The fellow in the foreground looking at the flight engineer's panel is probably Harald Anderson who was the flight engineer on the hijacked aircraft. The gray haired fellow in the right side in the co-pilot's seat may be Soderland. Rataczak was suppose to be the pilot on these tests so he would be in the left side in the pilot's seat but there is no way to identify him in that picture.
Are there any more pictures of the cockpit crew?
The left seat guy is older than Rataczak. Is this photo from the TAG team test flight? Here is the tag team. Rataczak wasnt on that test flight.
Based on the color of the shirts, the fellow in the left seat is probably Al Lee, the NWA Chief Pilot in the Seattle area. There is no way to tell who the fellow in the jump seat might be. But he is possibly an FBI agent due to his white shirt.
-
Al Lee was Chief Pilot AND Sea-Tac Ground Chief for NWO? Whoa.
BTW, Shut, I loved the pix of Seattle-Tacoma airport in 1971. What a sleepy little airport. Sure ain't that way, nowadays...
-
WSHS sent me 49 pictures. I was looking for the possibility of getting a picture of the stairs that could show the two sets of compartments to lower the stairs. two photo's show the normal release door open and possibly covering the emergency release cover panel where the placard would be. since the door was blocking the view it didn't show the placard missing or the door. not many 727's had this option. most had the free fall release.
The information Flyjack found shows many airlines failed to train employee's properly with the two systems. Tina showed Cooper how to lower them but he still had trouble or was confused since they only dropped a few feet. he either found the second panel or it didn't exist on the aircraft and he finally went down the stairs. the panel must come off to access the emergency release. if the placard went out the back with the panel attached. what happened to the panel. if Cooper used the option, why did it take two days to notice a hole in the wall? 305 had the stairs lined with panels vs canvas. I don't believe any testing was done two days later that conflicts with the newspaper article stating they noticed it missing during the testing in January. the stairs were not locked as far as I know. a pressure bump would not of occurred if they were locked.
Cowlitz county contacted me yesterday with zero results. she said they don't have many records of anything that far back.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17A-ShSZyNumcrokR2bABLsKwy-paZGfj/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z9VirMWkD2S0lmIvQ0F1Mbe50L2X59yw/view?usp=sharing
-
WSHS sent me 49 pictures. I was looking for the possibility of getting a picture of the stairs that could show the two sets of compartments to lower the stairs. two photo's show the normal release door open and possibly covering the emergency release cover panel where the placard would be. since the door was blocking the view it didn't show the placard missing or the door. not many 727's had this option. most had the free fall release.
The information Flyjack found shows many airlines failed to train employee's properly with the two systems. Tina showed Cooper how to lower them but he still had trouble or was confused since they only dropped a few feet. he either found the second panel or it didn't exist on the aircraft and he finally went down the stairs. the panel must come off to access the emergency release. if the placard went out the back with the panel attached. what happened to the panel. if Cooper used the option, why did it take two days to notice a hole in the wall? 305 had the stairs lined with panels vs canvas. I don't believe any testing was done two days later that conflicts with the newspaper article stating they noticed it missing during the testing in January. the stairs were not locked as far as I know. a pressure bump would not of occurred if they were locked.
Cowlitz county contacted me yesterday with zero results. she said they don't have many records of anything that far back.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17A-ShSZyNumcrokR2bABLsKwy-paZGfj/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z9VirMWkD2S0lmIvQ0F1Mbe50L2X59yw/view?usp=sharing
Great quality pics Shutter. Thanks for posting. I'm amazed sometimes at the quality of pictures from that time. For whatever reason the pictures my dad had put on slides are much better quality than pictures that were printed back then. These two remind me of that type of quality. Do you plan to put any of the other 49 pics up? I wouldn't fault you if you decided to save them for another time.
-
I will post a few more but the pics are like the 302's. Doubles are included in the 49.
-
Al Lee was Chief Pilot AND Sea-Tac Ground Chief for NWO? Whoa.
BTW, Shut, I loved the pix of Seattle-Tacoma airport in 1971. What a sleepy little airport. Sure ain't that way, nowadays...
Interesting statement! What a sleepy little airport. Sure ain't that way, nowadays... But some claim loudly PDX and Portland was a BUSTLING METROPOLIS WITH MILLIONS OF PEOPLE TO PROTECT - no pilot would be allowed to fly a bomb over METRO PORTLAND and METRO PDX! One more reason why the west path is true. Isnt this an example of what Sluggo meant by CULTURAL GOGGLES or CULTURAL FALSEHOODS that are built into people's theories?
But we wont talk about that! Hush-hush! The show must go on! The media and the show, is the message! ;)
-
A couple more photo's...
Cockpit view
Aircraft identification
Chase plane
Back stairs.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FfQGYg7Yo6P9CgnCOTfdRF97m2PMhFvs/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aTez3v1wnmFXfFNjfIKuIhEBfavdEzIG/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1G4fMkbiQICz0YeffJcJWalbPDlukJn4M/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gZ0hiiX4e9X1xSXz2EhYYhZH6BFVDQmY/view?usp=sharing
-
If people are confused about the controls on the inside of the stairs. I made a diagram showing what it looks like. I hope the size fits along with the words in the photo. I'm working off a 100 inch diagonal screen.
-
If people are confused about the controls on the inside of the stairs. I made a diagram showing what it looks like. I hope the size fits along with the words in the photo. I'm working off a 100 inch diagonal screen.
I am still unsure about exactly where this panel is? Here is a pic FJ posted.
Thanks for your pics! I will lighten a few that need it and post them back.
Are the stairs immediately to the left (around the corner) from the control panel placard? Is the control panel behind this placard, on a door to the control panel ????
-
walking to the back of the plane. once you hit the stairs. the controls would be to your left. they are on the other side of the pressurized door.
-
Here you can see the door open to lower the stairs....the open door is opposite the gauges..
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sq0wnswKmaXzxnnB6Qvw410tKNlKKqEW/view?usp=sharing
-
walking to the back of the plane. once you hit the stairs. the controls would be to your left. they are on the other side of the pressurized door.
OK... good grief. Thanks.
Some of these pics cant be lightened (gamma stretch in Photoshop) ... they are so dense no tinkering helps. Here's no example. Others however are beautiful when enlarged and lightened! Will post a few of those... keep em coming!
-
Here you can see the door open to lower the stairs....the open door is opposite the gauges..
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sq0wnswKmaXzxnnB6Qvw410tKNlKKqEW/view?usp=sharing
Yes I see it! The thick door the guy has his hands on - thats a pressure door! Now I get it.
-
I think they took some of these pictures while they were on display behind glass..
-
Fly's photo...the red area is the normal stair release...the blue is the emergency release. placard is missing on the panel
-
Here you can see the door open to lower the stairs....the open door is opposite the gauges..
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sq0wnswKmaXzxnnB6Qvw410tKNlKKqEW/view?usp=sharing
Yes I see it! The thick door the guy has his hands on - thats a pressure door! Now I get it.
The green fiber/hair on the photo is on the door to the stair release. where it loops to the left..
-
I think they took some of these pictures while they were on display behind glass..
Some of these other photos benefit from enlarging and lightening ... let me post these two that go together.
-
This should resolve the problem. I outlined the door...it's open and swings to the right and covers the emergency panel. still can't see if the panel is missing or the placard...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1a_G1rxTkNuBsicfnebEd2Jf3mboclF3U/view?usp=sharing
-
This should resolve the problem. I outlined the door...it's open and swings to the right and covers the emergency panel. still can't see if the panel is missing or the placard...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1a_G1rxTkNuBsicfnebEd2Jf3mboclF3U/view?usp=sharing
OK. This one relarged and lightened well ...
-
Interesting document....
-
I feel a little guilty posting this over from DZ, but here goes - by Flyjack.
FLYJACK
Found this, very interesting though some errors (assumptions)..
"On the night of 24 November 1971 a man who became known as D. B. Cooper boarded a Northwest Airlines 727 in Portland OR and then demanded $200,000 in cash and five parachutes, ransom money, and crews to open the back door and he parachuted out of the Seattle-bound plane with the ransom money. He was never found, nor was any validated evidence of him. Beginning in ca. 2000 a youth reportedly found scraps of the marked ransom money along the Columbia River near Vancouver WA. Other reports spotted fragments of his parachute; this has been repudiated.
The 190th FIS scrambled two armed F-102A interceptors to shadow the hijacked plane, but the hijacker's cleverness and the nighttime conditions prevented very close observation of the airliner. 190th Pilot Major Gene Winchester recalls the incident and his story in this chapter reveals how carefully planned and executed was 'Cooper's Caper'. In October, the 190th alert crews were called on to assist in what has become known as the D B Cooper Affair. Lee Bernasconi was the 190th's Alert Detachment Commander at the time, and when I asked him about it and who was on alert when it happened, he replied, "Ahh, Winchester ... and I can't remember who else was on that night, Thanksgiving night, or maybe the Friday after Thanksgiving. [Laughing]
I was at my home on Cole and Victory, and the phone rings, and two airplanes takeoff. I said, "That's my alert birds!" My home was at Cole and Victory. I said, "Hey, that's my alert birds! What's going on?" They [the night crew in the CAC] said they didn't know—so that's about all I knew. And our interceptors got over there and got generally behind him, but they didn't get there until after he crossed the Columbia River, and I think Cooper was already gone by then. And they followed him for a ways, and finally went in ... refueled, and came home. They didn't have radio contact with the airliner, and... probably stayed two miles back most of the time
Gene Winchester remembers that Thanksgiving very well when he and Jack Newland were on alert, and at about 4:50 p.m. "... we got a telephone call saying there was a hijacking taking place, and they were airborne at the time and ... they told us to stand by. And then I guess they landed at Seattle first, and picked up the money and four parachutes and ... then they went over to Portland and landed again and let some of the passengers off.
They called us and said this guy has commandeered the plane, and he's got the chutes and the money, and he's at Portland and ... ''what we want you to do is be at Portland in the traffic pattern—don't get too close that you'll bother him or startle him—but we'll put you on him in trail' and they figured he's going to bail out somewhere and so you just follow him, and don't get too close to scare him. The thing was, they told us 'when he bails out the commercial pilot would turn all his lights back on bright flash', and we would fly a triangle pattern to mark this spot on the radar. That was our briefing.
"So Jack Newland and I took off and ... watched him take off from Portland and we snuck in to ... about a mile in trail—and it was a little difficult, he was only going 150. And he was staying about 10,000 feet." Recalling his previous cargo plane flying days, Winchester figured "... he'd maintain that altitude and airspeed as a safety factor because if he bailed out at a higher velocity... I had a little trouble keeping flying, so I'd get up on the perch and when I was about to stall, I'd go over and sit on the other side. And the lights never came on—the 'bright- flash' signal—when he jumped out. And I was told that he had displayed a weapon and told the crew to shut the cabin door. So they never knew exactly when he bailed out, that's why they didn't turn the lights on."
Winchester continues, "So, evidently he went out there, and we had no way of knowing, and we followed that airliner to Reno—Jack and I, it was Thanksgiving evening, I remember that. We were worried about getting home for Thanksgiving dinner! But our briefing was 'he was going to land at Reno and refuel, and we don't want you to land on the same base with him', so we went over to Hamilton, I believe it was, and they would call us when he took off. I watched him land and that back door of that airplane was dragging on the runway and shooting sparks like—you know when you put a knife on the grinder?!It looked like the sparks was going 50 feet in the air!
It's dark, and we probably.... got up there about somewhere around 6 o'clock—it was VFR, it was great—a clear night and we could see other airplanes ... and there were a couple F-106s out of McChord, they came down and were available for a while, then they went back. And we asked Maj Gene Winchester 'What are our instructions?' They said 'Well, we don't know if he's still on the airplane, or if he went out the back door when it stopped, he might be here, we 're going to make a cordon, a perimeter off, and do a ground search... And you go over there and get out of the way and fill up 'cause we think he might be going to Mexico; you might be following him to Mexico And I thought 'That sounds interesting!'
So we sit over there for, I don't know, several hours. And then they called us and said 'you could go home'. We got back here about 7:00 a.m., Jack and I."1 Winchester had no direct radio contact with the airline crew, only with FAA Controllers. In the darkness and following in-trail at a safe distance, they never saw Cooper leave the airliner."
Edited 1 hour ago by FLYJACK
Edited into paragraphs by Ggr.
-
SAGE IBM and the F106 program.
SAGE - https://us.hidester.com/proxy.php?u=eJwBNQDK%2F3M6NDU6ImhKru9aDcJCCKm3qVMYIzvwLHMHPsZ8Vd37ap5gG9Ta3vi3pqpmES8%2FjdLX4iI7XksYsg%3D%3D&b=7
-
It is noteworthy that in August of 1972 the FBI reviewed the NORJAK file which led to some things including what they termed "a more accurate method of plotting of radar data of the NORJAK flight using a computer." Additionally, they said a "new search area" was plotted and searched with negative results.
SAGE? Why the uncertainty?
-
It is noteworthy that in August of 1972 the FBI reviewed the NORJAK file which led to some things including what they termed "a more accurate method of plotting of radar data of the NORJAK flight using a computer." Additionally, they said a "new search area" was plotted and searched with negative results.
SAGE? Why the uncertainty?
ELVIS? Produce the documents? Where's the beef? Stop the innuendo?
Show us instances of where SAGE failed to identify and follow a target, and sent fighter jets to intercept the target, and failed in that basic mission ? The system worked in the case of the Cooper plane (305). I fail to see the "uncertainty" you keep gossiping about?
In fact as a tactical matter, 305 wasn't engaged in any evasive tactics! Show where and how SAGE failed. I dont think you even know what 'fail' means in this context!
-
It's not that they believe the path is miles off. They are trying to find a way to pinpoint further using the existing path.
-
Had a very bad evening last night. A water line broke. Then my truck battery terminals failed....woke up this morning and the modem needs to be replaced. I'm on my phone at the moment..I will be contacting several people who worked with the sage at mcchord to get a hands on view of the operation itself. I have to sort things out here first before I proceed..
-
It's not that they believe the path is miles off. They are trying to find a way to pinpoint further using the existing path.
Exactly.
Except if you get sucked in by ELVIS you will wind up believing the Cooper hijacking involved twenty camels being sold to Iraq at below market prices, all to forstal global warming in Seattle, in case residents of Seattle should ever want to vacation is Israel! The plot to end all plots.
-
It's not that they believe the path is miles off. They are trying to find a way to pinpoint further using the existing path.
Exactly.
Except if you get sucked in by ELVIS you will wind up believing the Cooper hijacking involved twenty camels being sold to Iraq at below market prices, all to forstal global warming in Seattle, in case residents of Seattle should ever want to vacation is Israel! The plot to end all plots.
Georger, You are the one putting out the BS (or is it CS?). You haven't come up with a single rational explanation to justify your claims about the validity of the FBI flight path.
Deny and deflect and then claim you are not doing either one. I'll bet you are on a short list for a presidential cabinet appointment.
-
Had a very bad evening last night. A water line broke. Then my truck battery terminals failed....woke up this morning and the modem needs to be replaced. I'm on my phone at the moment..I will be contacting several people who worked with the sage at mcchord to get a hands on view of the operation itself. I have to sort things out here first before I proceed..
Welcome to the club. Don't get the idea that the Fates are picking on just you with problems like that. There is light at the end of the tunnel. The question is it sunshine or an oncoming freight train.
-
It's not that they believe the path is miles off. They are trying to find a way to pinpoint further using the existing path.
Exactly.
Except if you get sucked in by ELVIS you will wind up believing the Cooper hijacking involved twenty camels being sold to Iraq at below market prices, all to forstal global warming in Seattle, in case residents of Seattle should ever want to vacation is Israel! The plot to end all plots.
Georger, You are the one putting out the BS (or is it CS?). You haven't come up with a single rational explanation to justify your claims about the validity of the FBI flight path.
Deny and deflect and then claim you are not doing either one. I'll bet you are on a short list for a presidential cabinet appointment.
Specifically what!? Be specific for a change?
Since you wont be specific let me be specific! Quote:
Eric,, EU wrote
“It is noteworthy that in August of 1972 the FBI reviewed the NORJAK file which led to some things including what they termed “a more accurate method of plotting of radar data of the NORJAK flight using a computer.” Additionally, they said a “new search area” was plotted and searched with negative results.
SAGE? Why the uncertainty?”
REPLY BY FLYJACK:
Your answer is in the files… they used a more accurate method for plotting the SAGE data, from a 1 mile error to 1/2 mile.
FBI FILE PART 30 P 10802
Re: Seattle airtel to the Bureau, 2/7/73.
SEARCH AREA AND COURSE
In attempt to determine the accuracy of the first search area, the following was learned:
The first search area was calculated using a system of plotting known as “GEOREF” (i.e. Geographical Reference) which has a plotting error of plus or minus one mile. A new system using latitude and longitude has a plotting error of plus or minus 1/2 mile. Using the new system, ___________ Northwest Orient Airlines ________ plotted a new course for the Norjak airplane and a new search area based on the new course. The new search area is partially outside the first area.
It is felt that if Unsub’s parachute opened, he is no longer in the southwest Washington area, but if his parachute did not open, he would be in a corridor along the flight path. The time of jump is known, and an area approximately one mile by seven represents the area Unsub. would have landed in if his parachute did not open.
Seattle Division is currently making arrangements to search that portion of the above described area not previously searched.
Conclusion: a plotting error of plus or minus one half (1/2) mile ... does not change a flight path! Sorry dude. :rofl:
Its not that I want the FBI flight path to be "thee flight path" - it simply appears to be what it is! And until you and Jughead ELVIS can come up with something actually better, go fish and keep engaging in ridiculous attacks which border on senility!
-
I have a response from a radar operator out of McChord but can't copy paste since my internet is down. He explains things as I have posted with radar sites connected. You had long range sites and height finder sites etc. He also mentions the F106 could fly as low as about 300 knots at altitude...the data shows slower so I will ask further about that..once my internet is repaired I will post his replies..
-
It's not that they believe the path is miles off. They are trying to find a way to pinpoint further using the existing path.
Exactly.
Except if you get sucked in by ELVIS you will wind up believing the Cooper hijacking involved twenty camels being sold to Iraq at below market prices, all to forstal global warming in Seattle, in case residents of Seattle should ever want to vacation is Israel! The plot to end all plots.
Georger, You are the one putting out the BS (or is it CS?). You haven't come up with a single rational explanation to justify your claims about the validity of the FBI flight path.
Deny and deflect and then claim you are not doing either one. I'll bet you are on a short list for a presidential cabinet appointment.
Specifically what!? Be specific for a change?
Since you wont be specific let me be specific! Quote:
Eric,, EU wrote
“It is noteworthy that in August of 1972 the FBI reviewed the NORJAK file which led to some things including what they termed “a more accurate method of plotting of radar data of the NORJAK flight using a computer.” Additionally, they said a “new search area” was plotted and searched with negative results.
SAGE? Why the uncertainty?”
REPLY BY FLYJACK:
Your answer is in the files… they used a more accurate method for plotting the SAGE data, from a 1 mile error to 1/2 mile.
FBI FILE PART 30 P 10802
Re: Seattle airtel to the Bureau, 2/7/73.
SEARCH AREA AND COURSE
In attempt to determine the accuracy of the first search area, the following was learned:
The first search area was calculated using a system of plotting known as “GEOREF” (i.e. Geographical Reference) which has a plotting error of plus or minus one mile. A new system using latitude and longitude has a plotting error of plus or minus 1/2 mile. Using the new system, ___________ Northwest Orient Airlines ________ plotted a new course for the Norjak airplane and a new search area based on the new course. The new search area is partially outside the first area.
It is felt that if Unsub’s parachute opened, he is no longer in the southwest Washington area, but if his parachute did not open, he would be in a corridor along the flight path. The time of jump is known, and an area approximately one mile by seven represents the area Unsub. would have landed in if his parachute did not open.
Seattle Division is currently making arrangements to search that portion of the above described area not previously searched.
Okay, let's be specific. The above indicates that the if Cooper was a no-pull, he would have landed in a corridor along the flight path that was "approximately one mile by seven (statute miles?)". In and off itself, this statement is wildly inaccurate.
It is a given that as a no-pull, Cooper would have landed along the flight path. Hopefully, by this point in time the members of this site are in agreement that neither Cooper nor the placard would have landed upwind of the flight path. If you can't understand this point then don't bother reading further.
The standard accepted values for a typical sky diver in a stable spread position is that he will be descending at about 120 MPH at sea level if he is a no-pull. Also, if the same sky diver is descending head first he will be doing about 180 MPH at sea level if he is a no-pull. While I haven't bothered to check it out, my guess is that a tumbling sky diver will be doing somewhere between these two values under the same conditions. At higher altitudes, the descent rates will be greater.
To keep things simple, lets assume that the airliner was two statute miles (10,560 feet) above sea level when Cooper jumped. From charts that I remember seeing somewhere, at the 225 MPH speed that the airliner was probably traveling when Cooper jumped, his forward motion would have been reduced to zero in about 1500 feet and he would also have been about 1500 feet below the airliner's flight path at that point. His descent path would then have been straight down with respect to the local air mass (the winds aloft were moving the air mass horizontally).
With a vertical descent rate of 120 MPH, Cooper would have been on the ground and dead in about one minute. With a vertical descent rate of 180 MPH, Cooper would have been on the ground and dead in about 40 seconds.
Assuming that the airliner had a 30 MPH headwind that was 45 degrees off the flight path, that would be a 21 MPH wind component blowing the sky diver back down the flight path and a 21 MPH wind component perpendicular to the flight path.
If Cooper was descending at 120 MPH for one minute, he would have been blown about 1850 feet back down the flight path and the same distance perpendicular and downwind to the flight path. If Cooper was descending at 180 MPH for 40 seconds, he would have been blown about 1235 feet back down the flight path and the same distance perpendicular and downwind to the flight path.
So the ground "impact zone" for Cooper as a no-pull is basically as follows:
1. Along the flight path, from about 350 feet before his jump point to about 265 feet after his jump point. This is a total distance of about 615 feet.
2. Perpendicular to the flight path, from about 1235 feet to 1850 feet from the flight path which is also about 615 feet.
3. In reality, the impact zone is a parallelogram with the end points as indicated above.
The whole point of the above is that the ground impact area for Cooper as a no-pull would have been quite small. The one mile by seven mile estimate is grossly overstated.
As always, if better information about the flight path is released then the Cooper no-pull ground impact estimate can be refined.
-
I'm still waiting on the explanation as to why the Air Force, apparently utilizing SAGE (according to whom, I've yet to learn), needed flight data recorder information from 305 and radio transcript information from 305, Flight Ops and Seattle Center, to plot the flight path. Moreover, why SAGE would require any adjustment. After all, it could direct firepower directly to an enemy target in real time. Being 1/2 mile or 1 mile off isn't going to cut it. Oh, and why there apparently aren't time stamps on this SAGE radar data?
I know it's painful to admit, but perhaps R99 and Elvis are on to something here. I certainly welcome those who disagree to point to one shred of evidence validating the FBI's version of the flight path. And, by the way, just because some guy said so is no longer good enough after 47 years of zilch.
-
It's all wrong...the path is way off...it's not worth the trouble anymore...
-
Now I've got a very difficult question that I want to direct to that icon of internet civility, GEORGER.
Here it goes:
What does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?
Perhaps...not finding anything along that flight path after 47 years? How about...the evidence that is found after 47 years is way off the flight path? Hmmmm...
What say you GEORGER? What exactly does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?
-
I'm still waiting on the explanation as to why the Air Force, apparently utilizing SAGE (according to whom, I've yet to learn), needed flight data recorder information from 305 and radio transcript information from 305, Flight Ops and Seattle Center, to plot the flight path. Moreover, why SAGE would require any adjustment. After all, it could direct firepower directly to an enemy target in real time. Being 1/2 mile or 1 mile off isn't going to cut it. Oh, and why there apparently aren't time stamps on this SAGE radar data?
"Why was the FDR used?"---The FBI's goal wasn't to create a flight path, the goal was to create a search grid where they could look for Cooper. I'm sure if the goal was creating a flight path that could stand up to radical skepticism forty years after the fact we'd have more of the original documentation. In reality, creating a search zone was a practical matter involving finding the general area the plane was flying, the apparent time of the jump, and the weather conditions. Why the FDR? As we've read from FBI docs, the FDR was examined pinpoint *The Timing* of the jump. Same with the radio transcripts, these sources provided relevant data in creating a search zone.
"Being 1/2 mile or 1 mile off isn't going to cut it"---Sure it would. There is a lot of literature on defense against strategic bombing in the jet age. Getting fighters within a mile of a strategic bomber should result in an engagement that the bomber can't win.
"why there apparently aren't time stamps on this SAGE radar data?"---We don't have the original source of the data, we have the resultant map that was used to create the search grids that the FBI invested thousands of man hours searching. On that map? Time stamps.
This was directed at Georger but I'd like a crack at it:
"What does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?"---Any flight path is incorrect. The flight path can't be reproduced perfectly, nor can it be represented on a two dimensional map perfectly. In fact, the difficulties in representing the curvature of the Earth on a flat piece of paper is a well known problem in cartography. ANY MAP of the flight path is going to be wrong, however the FBI believed the one they had was useful... Because they used it a lot. ---If you're suggesting the map we have isn't just wrong, but "very wrong" then I would need an explanation about where this map came from and why the FBI even had it...And why they used it to search for Cooper.
"...the evidence that is found after 47 years is way off the flight path?"---The Tina Bar money location is downstream from where the plane crossed the Columbia. So... not the wrong flight path. The placard? Recovered years after the fact and the location was not marked at the moment it was found. We can't be sure of its exact location when it was found, let alone where it originally landed. Who knows how, when and why it ended up where it ended up (much like the rest of the trash that floats around the troposphere). It's anomalous, but you don't conjecture a radical departure from primary sources based on a single outlier.
-
Now I've got a very difficult question that I want to direct to that icon of internet civility, GEORGER.
Here it goes:
What does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?
Perhaps...not finding anything along that flight path after 47 years? How about...the evidence that is found after 47 years is way off the flight path? Hmmmm...
What say you GEORGER? What exactly does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?
Answer: Any flight path that isnt based on some well documented data. In this case any flight path that is outside V23 and has Cooper landing in Montana or Lima Peru!
BTW, when will it dawn on you you don't need a west path to get the money bundles to Tina Bar! That was already known clear back in 1980 when the Palmer Rpt listed all of the likely options, of which there were four!
-
I'm still waiting on the explanation as to why the Air Force, apparently utilizing SAGE (according to whom, I've yet to learn), needed flight data recorder information from 305 and radio transcript information from 305, Flight Ops and Seattle Center, to plot the flight path. Moreover, why SAGE would require any adjustment. After all, it could direct firepower directly to an enemy target in real time. Being 1/2 mile or 1 mile off isn't going to cut it. Oh, and why there apparently aren't time stamps on this SAGE radar data?
"Why was the FDR used?"---The FBI's goal wasn't to create a flight path, the goal was to create a search grid where they could look for Cooper. I'm sure if the goal was creating a flight path that could stand up to radical skepticism forty years after the fact we'd have more of the original documentation. In reality, creating a search zone was a practical matter involving finding the general area the plane was flying, the apparent time of the jump, and the weather conditions. Why the FDR? As we've read from FBI docs, the FDR was examined pinpoint *The Timing* of the jump. Same with the radio transcripts, these sources provided relevant data in creating a search zone.
"Being 1/2 mile or 1 mile off isn't going to cut it"---Sure it would. There is a lot of literature on defense against strategic bombing in the jet age. Getting fighters within a mile of a strategic bomber should result in an engagement that the bomber can't win.
"why there apparently aren't time stamps on this SAGE radar data?"---We don't have the original source of the data, we have the resultant map that was used to create the search grids that the FBI invested thousands of man hours searching. On that map? Time stamps.
This was directed at Georger but I'd like a crack at it:
"What does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?"---Any flight path is incorrect. The flight path can't be reproduced perfectly, nor can it be represented on a two dimensional map perfectly. In fact, the difficulties in representing the curvature of the Earth on a flat piece of paper is a well known problem in cartography. ANY MAP of the flight path is going to be wrong, however the FBI believed the one they had was useful... Because they used it a lot. ---If you're suggesting the map we have isn't just wrong, but "very wrong" then I would need an explanation about where this map came from and why the FBI even had it...And why they used it to search for Cooper.
"...the evidence that is found after 47 years is way off the flight path?"---The Tina Bar money location is downstream from where the plane crossed the Columbia. So... not the wrong flight path. The placard? Recovered years after the fact and the location was not marked at the moment it was found. We can't be sure of its exact location when it was found, let alone where it originally landed. Who knows how, when and why it ended up where it ended up (much like the rest of the trash that floats around the troposphere). It's anomalous, but you don't conjecture a radical departure from primary sources based on a single outlier.
well said.
-
I'm still waiting on the explanation as to why the Air Force, apparently utilizing SAGE (according to whom, I've yet to learn), needed flight data recorder information from 305 and radio transcript information from 305, Flight Ops and Seattle Center, to plot the flight path. Moreover, why SAGE would require any adjustment. After all, it could direct firepower directly to an enemy target in real time. Being 1/2 mile or 1 mile off isn't going to cut it. Oh, and why there apparently aren't time stamps on this SAGE radar data?
"Why was the FDR used?"---The FBI's goal wasn't to create a flight path, the goal was to create a search grid where they could look for Cooper. I'm sure if the goal was creating a flight path that could stand up to radical skepticism forty years after the fact we'd have more of the original documentation. In reality, creating a search zone was a practical matter involving finding the general area the plane was flying, the apparent time of the jump, and the weather conditions. Why the FDR? As we've read from FBI docs, the FDR was examined pinpoint *The Timing* of the jump. Same with the radio transcripts, these sources provided relevant data in creating a search zone.
"Being 1/2 mile or 1 mile off isn't going to cut it"---Sure it would. There is a lot of literature on defense against strategic bombing in the jet age. Getting fighters within a mile of a strategic bomber should result in an engagement that the bomber can't win.
"why there apparently aren't time stamps on this SAGE radar data?"---We don't have the original source of the data, we have the resultant map that was used to create the search grids that the FBI invested thousands of man hours searching. On that map? Time stamps.
This was directed at Georger but I'd like a crack at it:
"What does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?"---Any flight path is incorrect. The flight path can't be reproduced perfectly, nor can it be represented on a two dimensional map perfectly. In fact, the difficulties in representing the curvature of the Earth on a flat piece of paper is a well known problem in cartography. ANY MAP of the flight path is going to be wrong, however the FBI believed the one they had was useful... Because they used it a lot. ---If you're suggesting the map we have isn't just wrong, but "very wrong" then I would need an explanation about where this map came from and why the FBI even had it...And why they used it to search for Cooper.
"...the evidence that is found after 47 years is way off the flight path?"---The Tina Bar money location is downstream from where the plane crossed the Columbia. So... not the wrong flight path. The placard? Recovered years after the fact and the location was not marked at the moment it was found. We can't be sure of its exact location when it was found, let alone where it originally landed. Who knows how, when and why it ended up where it ended up (much like the rest of the trash that floats around the troposphere). It's anomalous, but you don't conjecture a radical departure from primary sources based on a single outlier.
Andrade,
Here is your first mistake. What is the basis for your statement that the airliner crossed the Columbia River upstream of Tina Bar? This seems like a logical conclusion but there is no data to support it. While it is a given that the money at Tina Bar didn't come from down stream, it is pure conjecture by whoever dreamed up the so-called FBI flight path and I trust that you are of some of the problems with that flight path.
Here is some good news and bad news. First the good news. It is true that no two dimensional map can accurately represent anything except a very small area on a spherical body. The bad news is that I used an online program for celestial navigation in determining the flight path that I have written about in my posts over the last 10 years on this subject. And I used the GPS coordinates for the navigation aids and intersections. So there is no basis for criticizing the flight path based on a two dimensional paper map.
It is also a given that the earth is not really spherical in the first place. But celestial navigation using the appropriate GPS coordinates is as accurate as anything can be in this day and age.
You say the FBI wasn't trying to determine the flight path? That they were just trying to determine a location to search for Cooper? A good place to start would be determining the flight path. Otherwise, they may as well have started their search during happy hour at the nearest bar and grill to the FBI's Portland office.
-
I'm still waiting on the explanation as to why the Air Force, apparently utilizing SAGE (according to whom, I've yet to learn), needed flight data recorder information from 305 and radio transcript information from 305, Flight Ops and Seattle Center, to plot the flight path. Moreover, why SAGE would require any adjustment. After all, it could direct firepower directly to an enemy target in real time. Being 1/2 mile or 1 mile off isn't going to cut it. Oh, and why there apparently aren't time stamps on this SAGE radar data?
"Why was the FDR used?"---The FBI's goal wasn't to create a flight path, the goal was to create a search grid where they could look for Cooper. I'm sure if the goal was creating a flight path that could stand up to radical skepticism forty years after the fact we'd have more of the original documentation. In reality, creating a search zone was a practical matter involving finding the general area the plane was flying, the apparent time of the jump, and the weather conditions. Why the FDR? As we've read from FBI docs, the FDR was examined pinpoint *The Timing* of the jump. Same with the radio transcripts, these sources provided relevant data in creating a search zone.
"Being 1/2 mile or 1 mile off isn't going to cut it"---Sure it would. There is a lot of literature on defense against strategic bombing in the jet age. Getting fighters within a mile of a strategic bomber should result in an engagement that the bomber can't win.
"why there apparently aren't time stamps on this SAGE radar data?"---We don't have the original source of the data, we have the resultant map that was used to create the search grids that the FBI invested thousands of man hours searching. On that map? Time stamps.
This was directed at Georger but I'd like a crack at it:
"What does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?"---Any flight path is incorrect. The flight path can't be reproduced perfectly, nor can it be represented on a two dimensional map perfectly. In fact, the difficulties in representing the curvature of the Earth on a flat piece of paper is a well known problem in cartography. ANY MAP of the flight path is going to be wrong, however the FBI believed the one they had was useful... Because they used it a lot. ---If you're suggesting the map we have isn't just wrong, but "very wrong" then I would need an explanation about where this map came from and why the FBI even had it...And why they used it to search for Cooper.
"...the evidence that is found after 47 years is way off the flight path?"---The Tina Bar money location is downstream from where the plane crossed the Columbia. So... not the wrong flight path. The placard? Recovered years after the fact and the location was not marked at the moment it was found. We can't be sure of its exact location when it was found, let alone where it originally landed. Who knows how, when and why it ended up where it ended up (much like the rest of the trash that floats around the troposphere). It's anomalous, but you don't conjecture a radical departure from primary sources based on a single outlier.
Andrade,
Here is your first mistake. What is the basis for your statement that the airliner crossed the Columbia River upstream of Tina Bar? This seems like a logical conclusion but there is no data to support it. While it is a given that the money at Tina Bar didn't come from down stream, it is pure conjecture by whoever dreamed up the so-called FBI flight path and I trust that you are of some of the problems with that flight path.
Here is some good news and bad news. First the good news. It is true that no two dimensional map can accurately represent anything except a very small area on a spherical body. The bad news is that I used an online program for celestial navigation in determining the flight path that I have written about in my posts over the last 10 years on this subject. And I used the GPS coordinates for the navigation aids and intersections. So there is no basis for criticizing the flight path based on a two dimensional paper map.
It is also a given that the earth is not really spherical in the first place. But celestial navigation using the appropriate GPS coordinates is as accurate as anything can be in this day and age.
You say the FBI wasn't trying to determine the flight path? That they were just trying to determine a location to search for Cooper? A good place to start would be determining the flight path. Otherwise, they may as well have started their search during happy hour at the nearest bar and grill to the FBI's Portland office.
All metaphors aside - as a historical note, literally nobody jumped up and suggested the flight path be moved after the money find in 1980; only Himmelsbach tried that in recommending the plane had flown down the Washougal and the Washougal was responsible for money being on Tina Bar!
So 99 you are now in the same boat with Himmelsbach, only in the reverse direction. History tends to repeat itself.
-
This really shouldn't be that difficult. The reason it is difficult is because something is off.
Did the FDR record the pressure bump? Is there a time stamp associated with that bump? Why then do we get jump times ranging from 8:10 to 8:15 or beyond on both ends?
I have heard more creative explanations to discredit the placard then I care to remember. The placard is a problem for the FBI flight path.
I have heard more exotic explanations for the money ending up on Tena Bar then I care to remember. The money on Tena Bar is a problem for the FBI flight path.
The world not being two-dimensional argument is new to me. I don't really understand how this explains the fact that nothing has been found in 47 years along the flight path or search area. Nothing being found after 47 years is a problem for the FBI flight path.
Doesn't any of this raise any red flags?
-
Now I've got a very difficult question that I want to direct to that icon of internet civility, GEORGER.
Here it goes:
What does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?
Perhaps...not finding anything along that flight path after 47 years? How about...the evidence that is found after 47 years is way off the flight path? Hmmmm...
What say you GEORGER? What exactly does an incorrect FBI flight path look like?
Answer: Any flight path that isnt based on some well documented data. In this case any flight path that is outside V23 and has Cooper landing in Montana or Lima Peru!
BTW, when will it dawn on you you don't need a west path to get the money bundles to Tina Bar! That was already known clear back in 1980 when the Palmer Rpt listed all of the likely options, of which there were four!
What and where are the "well documented data" for the FBI flight path? You also don't need an east flight path for the money to get to Tina Bar.
-
All metaphors aside - as a historical note, literally nobody jumped up and suggested the flight path be moved after the money find in 1980; only Himmelsbach tried that in recommending the plane had flown down the Washougal and the Washougal was responsible for money being on Tina Bar!
So 99 you are now in the same boat with Himmelsbach, only in the reverse direction. History tends to repeat itself.
I suppose it's better to ignore any and all new evidence and continue to drink the Kool-Aid.
-
This whole flight path discussion reminds me of Kevin Costner (Jim Garrison) in JFK. By creating doubt that Oswald could have gotten off 3 shots in less than 6 seconds, Jim Garrison determined that there had to be a second gunman, and therefore a conspiracy, and then he said the conspiracy had to be big (Mafia, Cuba, CIA, etc.). That's what this is, creating doubt to advance a theory.
Oswald likely took all the shots. Flight 305 likely flew on or near the FBI flight path. But if Flight 305 was off the flight path some, it does not make for some huge downstream effect. The FBI had a pretty good handle on the case, and we still don't know everything they did or all the evidence they have. So I tend to believe they are generally correct. If the flight path is a little off, then what does it mean? It does not mean that the FBI was wrong about everything.
This is arguing for the sake of arguing, to find some tiny flaw and therefore invalidate an entire process. This is just like the money find topic a few months ago. What's next, the tie? Flight 305 took off from Portland, it landed in Seattle, it flew to Reno. Somewhere around 8:12 PM, just north of Portland, D.B. Cooper jumped out. If the North Vietnamese could shoot down our fighters in 1971, then I think American technology could figure out where a passenger airplane was between Seattle and Portland.
What do you hope to gain by disproving the current flight path theory? To prove that there were inconsistencies in the investigation? Of course there were. People can't even agree on what color his suit jacket was. When does this stop? Maybe he took $500,000. Maybe he was a she, like in the Barb Dayton theory. Maybe the flight crew was in on it. Maybe the plane flew over Cle Elum. Nothing is ever 100% for certain.
Any chance we can start a new topic so there is interest in coming back here to read up on the case? I'd rather hear from you guys about the case than have to read 302's.
-
It sounds as if we're in the same spot we have been all along. That is to say, R99 and I think the FBI flight path is fatally flawed. Everyone else, the FBI flight path is essentially accurate.
I feel as if we have stated our case quite well. I'm sure others feel they have stated their case well too. Therefore, I agree, there is probably little to be gained by going much further with it all.
Someone is right. Someone is wrong.
-
It sounds as if we're in the same spot we have been all along. That is to say, R99 and I think the FBI flight path is fatally flawed. Everyone else, the FBI flight path is essentially accurate.
I feel as if we have stated our case quite well. I'm sure others feel they have stated their case well too. Therefore, I agree, there is probably little to be gained by going much further with it all.
Someone is right. Someone is wrong.
There is somethin wrong with you, boy! Yous have anger management issues -
-
It sounds as if we're in the same spot we have been all along. That is to say, R99 and I think the FBI flight path is fatally flawed. Everyone else, the FBI flight path is essentially accurate.
I feel as if we have stated our case quite well. I'm sure others feel they have stated their case well too. Therefore, I agree, there is probably little to be gained by going much further with it all.
Someone is right. Someone is wrong.
There is somethin wrong with you, boy! Yous have anger management issues -
Anger management issues? Where does this claim come from? Fcastle866 would probably put that claim in the same category as the Garrison claims about the JFK matter.
Georger, you are free to dream on.
-
This whole flight path discussion reminds me of Kevin Costner (Jim Garrison) in JFK. By creating doubt that Oswald could have gotten off 3 shots in less than 6 seconds, Jim Garrison determined that there had to be a second gunman, and therefore a conspiracy, and then he said the conspiracy had to be big (Mafia, Cuba, CIA, etc.). That's what this is, creating doubt to advance a theory.
Oswald likely took all the shots. Flight 305 likely flew on or near the FBI flight path. But if Flight 305 was off the flight path some, it does not make for some huge downstream effect. The FBI had a pretty good handle on the case, and we still don't know everything they did or all the evidence they have. So I tend to believe they are generally correct. If the flight path is a little off, then what does it mean? It does not mean that the FBI was wrong about everything.
This is arguing for the sake of arguing, to find some tiny flaw and therefore invalidate an entire process. This is just like the money find topic a few months ago. What's next, the tie? Flight 305 took off from Portland, it landed in Seattle, it flew to Reno. Somewhere around 8:12 PM, just north of Portland, D.B. Cooper jumped out. If the North Vietnamese could shoot down our fighters in 1971, then I think American technology could figure out where a passenger airplane was between Seattle and Portland.
What do you hope to gain by disproving the current flight path theory? To prove that there were inconsistencies in the investigation? Of course there were. People can't even agree on what color his suit jacket was. When does this stop? Maybe he took $500,000. Maybe he was a she, like in the Barb Dayton theory. Maybe the flight crew was in on it. Maybe the plane flew over Cle Elum. Nothing is ever 100% for certain.
Any chance we can start a new topic so there is interest in coming back here to read up on the case? I'd rather hear from you guys about the case than have to read 302's.
There are many THREADS at this forum. Conversaton in one thread (flight path issues) does not have to dominate the whole forum - other threads can be tapped by anyone at any time. At the present time Ulis and R99 are dominating the flight path thread - nothing anyone can do about that. It is what it is, but other threads are available to anyone registered here. Thats my 2 cents worth.
I personally try to avoid the Ulis thread, like the plague, so I dont comment much there. :)
-
Robert--My point about the map is to simply say that any 2D rendering of a 3D event won't perfectly reflect the event (theoretical models of a hologram universe aside) and I was trying to show how ridiculous radical skepticism (in this case, and elsewhere) can be. I am well aware of your criticisms of the FBI map and have taken them seriously (seriously enough to include them in my book as a plausible explanation for Tina Bar). I also supported, a couple of years ago now, searching Caterpillar Island and other areas associated with your theory with a cadaver dog. I even suggested such a segment for a TV show to a producer.
I'll even admit that I struggle with the placard find, but that my personal opinion on the matter is that the wind was coming more directly from the south than what appears in our limited measurements. I could be wrong.
Regardless...
I don't need the flight path to be in V-23. I don't have a theory or a suspect that requires an alternate flight path. I don't need to put a dead Cooper near a culvert upstream of Tina Bar. I don't need a living Cooper to land in Ridgefield NWR. In my mind, the explanatory power of R99's flight path helps us *only if* the money wasn't found in the dredge later. Unfortunately, I think the money was found in the dredge layer and that eradicates the explanatory power of the theory, and thus the need for the theory.
I wish we had the radar tapes, or a print out of the data, or a photo of the radar screen. We got a hand-drawn map that was handled by a bunch of people, one of who played connect-the-dots and obscured the original plots. If that's all that's left of the radar data, so be it.
If you look at satellite photos of the areas where we think the jump took place, there are fewer and fewer places to look regardless of where you move the flight path. So knowing the *real* flight path is less and less useful to finding evidence of Cooper on the ground. Either Cooper took everything with him, or it all washed out with his body into the Pacific.
-
Robert--My point about the map is to simply say that any 2D rendering of a 3D event won't perfectly reflect the event (theoretical models of a hologram universe aside) and I was trying to show how ridiculous radical skepticism (in this case, and elsewhere) can be. I am well aware of your criticisms of the FBI map and have taken them seriously (seriously enough to include them in my book as a plausible explanation for Tina Bar). I also supported, a couple of years ago now, searching Caterpillar Island and other areas associated with your theory with a cadaver dog. I even suggested such a segment for a TV show to a producer.
I'll even admit that I struggle with the placard find, but that my personal opinion on the matter is that the wind was coming more directly from the south than what appears in our limited measurements. I could be wrong.
Regardless...
I don't need the flight path to be in V-23. I don't have a theory or a suspect that requires an alternate flight path. I don't need to put a dead Cooper near a culvert upstream of Tina Bar. I don't need a living Cooper to land in Ridgefield NWR. In my mind, the explanatory power of R99's flight path helps us *only if* the money wasn't found in the dredge later. Unfortunately, I think the money was found in the dredge layer and that eradicates the explanatory power of the theory, and thus the need for the theory.
I wish we had the radar tapes, or a print out of the data, or a photo of the radar screen. We got a hand-drawn map that was handled by a bunch of people, one of who played connect-the-dots and obscured the original plots. If that's all that's left of the radar data, so be it.
If you look at satellite photos of the areas where we think the jump took place, there are fewer and fewer places to look regardless of where you move the flight path. So knowing the *real* flight path is less and less useful to finding evidence of Cooper on the ground. Either Cooper took everything with him, or it all washed out with his body into the Pacific.
Andrade,
It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer.
Only two pieces of evidence have been found on the ground (the money and the placard) and both invalidate the FBI flight path.
I think it was the late Carlos Castaneda (his name comes to mind but it probably wasn't him) that wrote a book about the Seven Golden Cities of Cibola (or some such thing) and people who were searching for them. At the conclusion of the book (page 121 comes to mind for some reason) the author concluded that the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams.
The above also seems to apply to the Cooper matter. But if you really want to find Cooper you are going to have to determine the actual flight path. Otherwise, just find a beautiful location to search and dream on.
-
I don't need a living Cooper to land in Ridgefield NWR.
I've read this type of comment a few times referencing Sheridan Peterson. Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't.
My Ridgefield NWR theory doesn't apply to any specific suspect other than one who survived.
The dredge theory is a non-starter. Want a test: Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen.
This is what would have been required given the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot. Not to mention, rubber bands cannot survive in an outdoor environment more than 6 months according to Tom Kaye's testing. The dredge was in August 1974, nearly 3 years after 11/24/71. The science does not support the dredge theory. The money was buried by human intervention.
-
Robert
"It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer."
It is my understanding the sand layer is still in dispute. Or maybe I'm misreading the 5,000 posts on the topic.
"the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams."
That made me smile, thank you :)
Eric
"Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't."
And this is why I am so bemused at your adamant support of a flight path that does nothing for your hypothesis.
"Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen."
265,000 cubic yards of dredge spoils suggests to me it doesn't need to self bury.
" the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot."
I thought it was 200ft? Regardless, the dredge piles extended far beyond the two bumps we see in those photos. Here's the math: 265,000 cubic yards divided evenly between two 50' radius piles... Perfect cylinders would be 50 feet high! According to my handy Pocket Reference, a 265' Diameter pile o'stuff that is 100 feet (!) tall contains 68,300 cubic yards of material. Two of these giant piles only gives up half the actual amount of spoils that were deposited on Tina Bar in '74. A perfect rectangle, 100 feet wide and twenty feet deep, would have to span 1800 feet EVEN IF IT LOST HALF the total yardage of the spoils. I don't know what kind of distances we're actually talking about and I don't know enough about dredging to say how to calculate how much area was covered by this operation. But these operations are *huge* and there's plenty of material to get 400' away from that northern bump.
According to the Pocket Reference, the angle of repose for wet sand is 40 degrees. So, you're welcome to do your own math.
Anyway, thanks guys, I really do appreciate being here and talking the case with y'all.
-
Robert
"It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer."
It is my understanding the sand layer is still in dispute. Or maybe I'm misreading the 5,000 posts on the topic.
"the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams."
That made me smile, thank you :)
Eric
"Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't."
And this is why I am so bemused at your adamant support of a flight path that does nothing for your hypothesis.
"Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen."
265,000 cubic yards of dredge spoils suggests to me it doesn't need to self bury.
" the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot."
I thought it was 200ft? Regardless, the dredge piles extended far beyond the two bumps we see in those photos. Here's the math: 265,000 cubic yards divided evenly between two 50' radius piles... Perfect cylinders would be 50 feet high! According to my handy Pocket Reference, a 265' Diameter pile o'stuff that is 100 feet (!) tall contains 68,300 cubic yards of material. Two of these giant piles only gives up half the actual amount of spoils that were deposited on Tina Bar in '74. A perfect rectangle, 100 feet wide and twenty feet deep, would have to span 1800 feet EVEN IF IT LOST HALF the total yardage of the spoils. I don't know what kind of distances we're actually talking about and I don't know enough about dredging to say how to calculate how much area was covered by this operation. But these operations are *huge* and there's plenty of material to get 400' away from that northern bump.
According to the Pocket Reference, the angle of repose for wet sand is 40 degrees. So, you're welcome to do your own math.
Anyway, thanks guys, I really do appreciate being here and talking the case with y'all.
Andrade,
Where did you get this 265,000 cubic yards number? For comparison, the volume of Hoover Dam is 3,250,000 cubic yards.
The nominal water level of the Columbia River at Tina Bar is about 5 feet above sea level (ASL). The highest land point in the immediate money find location at Tina Bar is only about 25 or 30 feet ASL. In 2013, Dr. Meyer Louie and I were at Tina Bar and a local fisherman told us he had been there just about ever day for the past 50 years (he also had the key to the Tina Bar gate) and that he had never seen any flow from the river into the cow pond or vice-versa. This means that the river water level was never more than about 25 feet ASL.
I would suggest that you divide you 265,000 cubic yards by about 1000 to get a realistic number.
-
Robert
"It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer."
It is my understanding the sand layer is still in dispute. Or maybe I'm misreading the 5,000 posts on the topic.
"the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams."
That made me smile, thank you :)
Eric
"Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't."
And this is why I am so bemused at your adamant support of a flight path that does nothing for your hypothesis.
"Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen."
265,000 cubic yards of dredge spoils suggests to me it doesn't need to self bury.
" the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot."
I thought it was 200ft? Regardless, the dredge piles extended far beyond the two bumps we see in those photos. Here's the math: 265,000 cubic yards divided evenly between two 50' radius piles... Perfect cylinders would be 50 feet high! According to my handy Pocket Reference, a 265' Diameter pile o'stuff that is 100 feet (!) tall contains 68,300 cubic yards of material. Two of these giant piles only gives up half the actual amount of spoils that were deposited on Tina Bar in '74. A perfect rectangle, 100 feet wide and twenty feet deep, would have to span 1800 feet EVEN IF IT LOST HALF the total yardage of the spoils. I don't know what kind of distances we're actually talking about and I don't know enough about dredging to say how to calculate how much area was covered by this operation. But these operations are *huge* and there's plenty of material to get 400' away from that northern bump.
According to the Pocket Reference, the angle of repose for wet sand is 40 degrees. So, you're welcome to do your own math.
Anyway, thanks guys, I really do appreciate being here and talking the case with y'all.
Let's clear a few things up.
1. R99 says 'the money' (find) conflicts with the FBI flight path. How? That claim is nonsense. The FBI fp crosses the Columbia. The fact is the flight path has no proven relationship to the money find!
2. Palmer said the money was not in the dredging layer. TK disputes that. His explanation is on his site.
3. Static measurements of the distance between the money find and the dredging spoils is probably pointless and wrong. For one thing it doesnt tell the whole story! It fails to consider the mobile nature of those spoils over time, and erosion and movement of eroded materials - in the general direction of flow which is directly toward the money find location. These static distances people keep coming up with are absurd in terms of the reality of flow of materials on sandbars along the Columbia, always in the direction of flow from south to north on that river.
4, All of these claims people peddle avoid the money itself, the condition of the money, the chemistry of the money analysis, and the story the money itself tells. This is literally tantamount to people looking at a dead body scene in some street, without even examining the body! Its crazy and ridiculous on its face.
-
Robert
"It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer."
It is my understanding the sand layer is still in dispute. Or maybe I'm misreading the 5,000 posts on the topic.
"the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams."
That made me smile, thank you :)
Eric
"Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't."
And this is why I am so bemused at your adamant support of a flight path that does nothing for your hypothesis.
"Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen."
265,000 cubic yards of dredge spoils suggests to me it doesn't need to self bury.
" the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot."
I thought it was 200ft? Regardless, the dredge piles extended far beyond the two bumps we see in those photos. Here's the math: 265,000 cubic yards divided evenly between two 50' radius piles... Perfect cylinders would be 50 feet high! According to my handy Pocket Reference, a 265' Diameter pile o'stuff that is 100 feet (!) tall contains 68,300 cubic yards of material. Two of these giant piles only gives up half the actual amount of spoils that were deposited on Tina Bar in '74. A perfect rectangle, 100 feet wide and twenty feet deep, would have to span 1800 feet EVEN IF IT LOST HALF the total yardage of the spoils. I don't know what kind of distances we're actually talking about and I don't know enough about dredging to say how to calculate how much area was covered by this operation. But these operations are *huge* and there's plenty of material to get 400' away from that northern bump.
According to the Pocket Reference, the angle of repose for wet sand is 40 degrees. So, you're welcome to do your own math.
Anyway, thanks guys, I really do appreciate being here and talking the case with y'all.
Andrade,
Where did you get this 265,000 cubic yards number? For comparison, the volume of Hoover Dam is 3,250,000 cubic yards.
The nominal water level of the Columbia River at Tina Bar is about 5 feet above sea level (ASL). The highest land point in the immediate money find location at Tina Bar is only about 25 or 30 feet ASL. In 2013, Dr. Meyer Louie and I were at Tina Bar and a local fisherman told us he had been there just about ever day for the past 50 years (he also had the key to the Tina Bar gate) and that he had never seen any flow from the river into the cow pond or vice-versa. This means that the river water level was never more than about 25 feet ASL.
I would suggest that you divide you 265,000 cubic yards by about 1000 to get a realistic number.
Quote from the Bechly report: "This material was deposited on the beach area of the FAZIO Brothers’ Farm between August 19 through the 25th, 1974, ‘and consisted of 91,100 cubic yards of fill."
-
Got it from Flyjack, who posted it (somewhere?)
-
" "This material was deposited on the beach area of the FAZIO Brothers’ Farm between August 19 through the 25th, 1974, ‘and consisted of 91,100 cubic yards of fill.""
Even that is a rectangle twenty feet high, a hundred feet wide and 1200' long.
These are huge operations.
-
Got it from Flyjack, who posted it (somewhere?)
I quoted directly from the Bechly report! I have no idea what Fly's document is or how it applies. The Bechly report was a direct reply to the FBI concerning dredging materials piped onto the Fazio property. BTW it turned out the money find location was very close to the neighboring property line just north of the Fazio property by no more than a foot or two away at most!
-
" "This material was deposited on the beach area of the FAZIO Brothers’ Farm between August 19 through the 25th, 1974, ‘and consisted of 91,100 cubic yards of fill.""
Even that is a rectangle twenty feet high, a hundred feet wide and 1200' long.
These are huge operations.
That's right! That is why its flow characteristics are important. It took two weeks before it settled out enough to even put a tractor on it to spread. Maybe 50% of it flowed back into the river, including north as far as the Ingram find site before flowing back into the river! Even a year later it was not consolidated enough to prevent flow movement, generally in the direction of flow forces. That is one reason why people's static measurements of the separation between the Ingram site and the spoil site are all but meaningless ...
Before that dredge material consolidates it is subject to movement and erosion generally in the northward direction of flow forces during daily periods of tides, high water periods, etc . It doesn't just sit like a pile of cement hardening! Its more like pudding ... always prone to movement.
-
Marty,
I am not interested in looking for things that simply support Sheridan Peterson as DBC. Indeed, I'm trying to establish the truth.
I have been VERY uncomfortable with the notion that nothing has been found in the FBI search area or anywhere along the flight path that I would expect to find--body, money, parachute, attache case. Moreover, the money find on Tena Bar and the placard find also made me question what the truth was. So I studied both.
I walked away with a mathematical analysis that indicates the placard separated from the jet 8 statute miles SW of the placard find. That analysis is what it is. I believe it is very accurate and have found absolutely no reason to consider it wrong. Talk from others about the placard separating from another 727 flying with its airstairs open is pure nonsense and taking deniability to an epic new level. Talk about winds coming from the SE that night is also not realistic given the data we have, and apparently the data the FBI used to craft the landing zone relative to their believed flight path.
The money on Tena Bar also is what it is. Paper currency can't bury itself, let alone for 6 years. We have high altitude pictures that show precisely where the dredge spoils were spread. This is impossible to refute. Tom Kaye's money find spot was about 150 feet from the edge of the spoils and about 260 feet from the actual money find spot. The distance from the actual money find spot to the edge of the dredge spoils is 400 feet. This is a fact based upon photographic evidence.
Additionally, there is a lot more to consider when looking at Tena Bar. Specifically, that fact that it is for all intents and purpose on an island. This greatly limits the possibilities of human arrival paths. Also, the spot where the jet would be located at 8:12 PM--certainly not upstream from Tena Bar. Plus, the fact that most of the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge is off-limits makes sense in terms of explaining why nothing has ever been found. Not to mention, the fact that Tina Mucklow said she saw Cooper putting a portion of the ransom in a reserve and what that would mean once DBC landed. Let's also not forget that at some point DBC realized he accidentally left his tie on the jet, I assume this was a matter of some concern to him. This realization affected how he proceeded. There is also the very strong indications that DBC intended to jump very near Seattle, meaning he landed in an area he didn't intend to land.
All of this has been considered at great length by me and has caused me to arrive at the belief that the western flight path is the most accurate version, and that human intervention was involved with burying the cash on Tena Bar, and that DBC survived. This really has nothing to do with Sheridan Peterson except to say that I consider Sheridan the most likely candidate for DBC based upon a separate stand-alone analysis of him.
My motivation is simple. I want the truth and to be able to prove it.
-
Marty,
I am not interested in looking for things that simply support Sheridan Peterson as DBC. Indeed, I'm trying to establish the truth.
I have been VERY uncomfortable with the notion that nothing has been found in the FBI search area or anywhere along the flight path that I would expect to find--body, money, parachute, attache case. Moreover, the money find on Tena Bar and the placard find also made me question what the truth was. So I studied both.
I walked away with a mathematical analysis that indicates the placard separated from the jet 8 statute miles SW of the placard find. That analysis is what it is. I believe it is very accurate and have found absolutely no reason to consider it wrong. Talk from others about the placard separating from another 727 flying with its airstairs open is pure nonsense and taking deniability to an epic new level. Talk about winds coming from the SE that night is also not realistic given the data we have, and apparently the data the FBI used to craft the landing zone relative to their believed flight path.
The money on Tena Bar also is what it is. Paper currency can't bury itself, let alone for 6 years. We have high altitude pictures that show precisely where the dredge spoils were spread. This is impossible to refute. Tom Kaye's money find spot was about 150 feet from the edge of the spoils and about 260 feet from the actual money find spot. The distance from the actual money find spot to the edge of the dredge spoils is 400 feet. This is a fact based upon photographic evidence.
Additionally, there is a lot more to consider when looking at Tena Bar. Specifically, that fact that it is for all intents and purpose on an island. This greatly limits the possibilities of human arrival paths. Also, the spot where the jet would be located at 8:12 PM--certainly not upstream from Tena Bar. Plus, the fact that most of the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge is off-limits makes sense in terms of explaining why nothing has ever been found. Not to mention, the fact that Tina Mucklow said she saw Cooper putting a portion of the ransom in a reserve and what that would mean once DBC landed. Let's also not forget that at some point DBC realized he accidentally left his tie on the jet, I assume this was a matter of some concern to him. This realization affected how he proceeded. There is also the very strong indications that DBC intended to jump very near Seattle, meaning he landed in an area he didn't intend to land.
All of this has been considered at great length by me and has caused me to arrive at the belief that the western flight path is the most accurate version, and that human intervention was involved with burying the cash on Tena Bar, and that DBC survived. This really has nothing to do with Sheridan Peterson except to say that I consider Sheridan the most likely candidate for DBC based upon a separate stand-alone analysis of him.
My motivation is simple. I want the truth and to be able to prove it.
Tena Bar. Specifically, ... is for all intents and purpose on an island. All of this has been considered at great length by me and has caused me to arrive at the belief that ...
Really! How is it an island? How does that work?
And DB Cooper is like Gulliver who takes a trip to the island of Glubbdubdrib which is southwest of Balnibarbi. ?
Is there more Cooper money on Laputi ?
-
I'll tell you what GEORGER, pull up Tena Bar on Google Earth. You will notice one piece of land that is 437 feet in length that is directly west of Vancouver Lake and a few miles south of Tena Bar. If it weren't for that 437 feet of land, Tena Bar would be on an island. The rest of the Tena Bar land mass is surrounded on all sides by 25 miles of the Columbia River, Lake River and Vancouver Lake.
Therefore, either DBC commuted up to Tena Bar via the 437 foot land bridge, swam across a river or lake, or landed on the "island" Tena Bar is located upon. Oh, I should mention, that there is one small bridge that crosses Lake River from Ridgefield leading into, you got it, the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
Cheers!
-
I'll tell you what GEORGER, pull up Tena Bar on Google Earth. You will notice one piece of land that is 437 in length that is directly west of Vancouver Lake and a few miles south of Tena Bar. If it weren't for that 437 feet of land, Tena Bar would be on an island. The rest of the Tena Bar land mass is surrounded on all sides by 25 miles of the Columbia River, Lake River and Vancouver Lake.
Therefore, either DBC commuted up to Tena Bar via the 437 foot land bridge, swam across a river or lake, or landed on the "island" Tena Bar is located upon. Oh, I should mention, that there is one small bridge that crosses Lake River from Ridgefield leading into, you got it, the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
Cheers!
I have USGS aerial photos of TBar going back to 1948.
When you find Cooper's loafer footprints and a Cooper twenty in baked mud, be sure to let us know.
-
Robert
"It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer."
It is my understanding the sand layer is still in dispute. Or maybe I'm misreading the 5,000 posts on the topic.
"the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams."
That made me smile, thank you :)
Eric
"Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't."
And this is why I am so bemused at your adamant support of a flight path that does nothing for your hypothesis.
"Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen."
265,000 cubic yards of dredge spoils suggests to me it doesn't need to self bury.
" the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot."
I thought it was 200ft? Regardless, the dredge piles extended far beyond the two bumps we see in those photos. Here's the math: 265,000 cubic yards divided evenly between two 50' radius piles... Perfect cylinders would be 50 feet high! According to my handy Pocket Reference, a 265' Diameter pile o'stuff that is 100 feet (!) tall contains 68,300 cubic yards of material. Two of these giant piles only gives up half the actual amount of spoils that were deposited on Tina Bar in '74. A perfect rectangle, 100 feet wide and twenty feet deep, would have to span 1800 feet EVEN IF IT LOST HALF the total yardage of the spoils. I don't know what kind of distances we're actually talking about and I don't know enough about dredging to say how to calculate how much area was covered by this operation. But these operations are *huge* and there's plenty of material to get 400' away from that northern bump.
According to the Pocket Reference, the angle of repose for wet sand is 40 degrees. So, you're welcome to do your own math.
Anyway, thanks guys, I really do appreciate being here and talking the case with y'all.
Andrade,
Where did you get this 265,000 cubic yards number? For comparison, the volume of Hoover Dam is 3,250,000 cubic yards.
The nominal water level of the Columbia River at Tina Bar is about 5 feet above sea level (ASL). The highest land point in the immediate money find location at Tina Bar is only about 25 or 30 feet ASL. In 2013, Dr. Meyer Louie and I were at Tina Bar and a local fisherman told us he had been there just about ever day for the past 50 years (he also had the key to the Tina Bar gate) and that he had never seen any flow from the river into the cow pond or vice-versa. This means that the river water level was never more than about 25 feet ASL.
I would suggest that you divide you 265,000 cubic yards by about 1000 to get a realistic number.
Quote from the Bechly report: "This material was deposited on the beach area of the FAZIO Brothers’ Farm between August 19 through the 25th, 1974, ‘and consisted of 91,100 cubic yards of fill."
Tina Bar may have been a bit more than 100 feet wide in 1974, but it was not 20 feet deep or 1800 feet long. You simply could not put 265,000 cubic feet of material on Tina Bar. It is just not big enough.
-
Just a few notes about SAGE. I worked at Hughes Aircraft which designed and mfd the MA 1 fire control system and came to learn a fair amount about how SAGE worked. The Hughes MA 1 (when it worked) allowed F 106s to establish 2-way data links with SAGE control centers and be automatically flown to target intercept points through autopilot remote control. When it worked, it was deadly accurate, but it was too often down with various malfunctions. The MA 1 was a sophisticated system employing a very early airborne digital computer and rotating drum multitrack digital memory. The mean time between failure of the MA 1 was classified then, but I can tell you it was miserably short. There were many subsequent mods made but it never became a robust reliable system. The MA 1 digital computer used discrete transistors, not ICs and there were thousands. SAGE was a monstrously complex system (used over 60,000 vacuum tubes) that allowed input from a network of radars to be combined into a single display. The use of networked geographically dispersed radars eliminated blind spots and extended reach greatly. The SAGE design philosophy didn't care so much about geographical target position accuracy. The purpose wasn't navigation or accurate mapping, it was target detection and intercept. It was far more important to bring the interceptor to the current position of the target for a kill shot than it was to know the exact geographical location of the target. That's not to say it was inaccurate, but intercept was the goal. The target data displayed in the data block on the CRT did not contain target geographical info such as lat lon. There were problems in getting the locations and slight variations in target ranging of the various networked radars properly handled in the system. Any inaccuracies or ambiguities would lead to a single taget appearingf as multiple closely spaced returns on the SAGE display. In the end, SAGE wasnt a very good defensive system, but it did lay the groundwork for better future systems.
377
-
Robert
"It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer."
It is my understanding the sand layer is still in dispute. Or maybe I'm misreading the 5,000 posts on the topic.
"the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams."
That made me smile, thank you :)
Eric
"Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't."
And this is why I am so bemused at your adamant support of a flight path that does nothing for your hypothesis.
"Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen."
265,000 cubic yards of dredge spoils suggests to me it doesn't need to self bury.
" the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot."
I thought it was 200ft? Regardless, the dredge piles extended far beyond the two bumps we see in those photos. Here's the math: 265,000 cubic yards divided evenly between two 50' radius piles... Perfect cylinders would be 50 feet high! According to my handy Pocket Reference, a 265' Diameter pile o'stuff that is 100 feet (!) tall contains 68,300 cubic yards of material. Two of these giant piles only gives up half the actual amount of spoils that were deposited on Tina Bar in '74. A perfect rectangle, 100 feet wide and twenty feet deep, would have to span 1800 feet EVEN IF IT LOST HALF the total yardage of the spoils. I don't know what kind of distances we're actually talking about and I don't know enough about dredging to say how to calculate how much area was covered by this operation. But these operations are *huge* and there's plenty of material to get 400' away from that northern bump.
According to the Pocket Reference, the angle of repose for wet sand is 40 degrees. So, you're welcome to do your own math.
Anyway, thanks guys, I really do appreciate being here and talking the case with y'all.
Andrade,
Where did you get this 265,000 cubic yards number? For comparison, the volume of Hoover Dam is 3,250,000 cubic yards.
The nominal water level of the Columbia River at Tina Bar is about 5 feet above sea level (ASL). The highest land point in the immediate money find location at Tina Bar is only about 25 or 30 feet ASL. In 2013, Dr. Meyer Louie and I were at Tina Bar and a local fisherman told us he had been there just about ever day for the past 50 years (he also had the key to the Tina Bar gate) and that he had never seen any flow from the river into the cow pond or vice-versa. This means that the river water level was never more than about 25 feet ASL.
I would suggest that you divide you 265,000 cubic yards by about 1000 to get a realistic number.
Quote from the Bechly report: "This material was deposited on the beach area of the FAZIO Brothers’ Farm between August 19 through the 25th, 1974, ‘and consisted of 91,100 cubic yards of fill."
Tina Bar may have been a bit more than 100 feet wide in 1974, but it was not 20 feet deep or 1800 feet long. You simply could not put 265,000 cubic feet of material on Tina Bar. It is just not big enough.
I merely provided the data from the report. Take it or leave it!
This has all been discussed to death before.
-
Robert
"It is my understanding that the money at Tina Bar was NOT found in the dredge layer."
It is my understanding the sand layer is still in dispute. Or maybe I'm misreading the 5,000 posts on the topic.
"the golden cities were a myth but that the people who were searching for them had found a beautiful valley to search for their dreams."
That made me smile, thank you :)
Eric
"Why do I need DBC to have landed anywhere near Tena Bar to be right about Sheridan Peterson? The answer is, I don't."
And this is why I am so bemused at your adamant support of a flight path that does nothing for your hypothesis.
"Put three packets of cash on the beach and see how long it takes to self-bury. It will never happen."
265,000 cubic yards of dredge spoils suggests to me it doesn't need to self bury.
" the dredge spreading stopped 400 feet short of the money find spot."
I thought it was 200ft? Regardless, the dredge piles extended far beyond the two bumps we see in those photos. Here's the math: 265,000 cubic yards divided evenly between two 50' radius piles... Perfect cylinders would be 50 feet high! According to my handy Pocket Reference, a 265' Diameter pile o'stuff that is 100 feet (!) tall contains 68,300 cubic yards of material. Two of these giant piles only gives up half the actual amount of spoils that were deposited on Tina Bar in '74. A perfect rectangle, 100 feet wide and twenty feet deep, would have to span 1800 feet EVEN IF IT LOST HALF the total yardage of the spoils. I don't know what kind of distances we're actually talking about and I don't know enough about dredging to say how to calculate how much area was covered by this operation. But these operations are *huge* and there's plenty of material to get 400' away from that northern bump.
According to the Pocket Reference, the angle of repose for wet sand is 40 degrees. So, you're welcome to do your own math.
Anyway, thanks guys, I really do appreciate being here and talking the case with y'all.
Andrade,
Where did you get this 265,000 cubic yards number? For comparison, the volume of Hoover Dam is 3,250,000 cubic yards.
The nominal water level of the Columbia River at Tina Bar is about 5 feet above sea level (ASL). The highest land point in the immediate money find location at Tina Bar is only about 25 or 30 feet ASL. In 2013, Dr. Meyer Louie and I were at Tina Bar and a local fisherman told us he had been there just about ever day for the past 50 years (he also had the key to the Tina Bar gate) and that he had never seen any flow from the river into the cow pond or vice-versa. This means that the river water level was never more than about 25 feet ASL.
I would suggest that you divide you 265,000 cubic yards by about 1000 to get a realistic number.
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
-
Yikes. Remind me to never buy a home in a flood plain.
I've spoken with inland pilots who take big freighters up the Columbia and Sacramento Rivers. They tell me that the rivers are always changing and NOAA depth and channel charts can become inaccurate overnight in a flood.
377
-
Yikes. Remind me to never buy a home in a flood plain.
I've spoken with inland pilots who take big freighters up the Columbia and Sacramento Rivers. They tell me that the rivers are always changing and NOAA depth and channel charts can become inaccurate overnight in a flood.
377
Nobody, not even Tom Kaye, disputes the UNDISTURBED continuity of the strata Palmer found at T_Bar. In other words there is no evidence of the strata having been disturbed or mixed as would happen in a burial. The debate is over the IDENTITY of those strata.
Palmer claimed the found strata were (a) an active surface layer 0-8" deep approx, (b) a cross bedded layer to about 14-24" inches deep, and (c) a thick layer of dredging spoils laid down in 1974. Tom disputes Palmer's identification of those layers, especially the layer Palmer assigned to the dredging spoils.
You can actually see these layers in FBI photos taken at the excavation. I have posted several of these photos many times!
I have always said that the crossbedded layer is especially important because it represents multiple high water and erosion events which occurred over time. The question is 'how much time'? And it is this layer in which fragments of money were found - a fact denied by Ulis!
That is the context in which the found money resides and only through a correct interpretation of these strata can the history of those strata and the Ingram find be understood. It's as simple as that.
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
-
I merely provided the data from the report. Take it or leave it!
This has all been discussed to death before.
I'll leave it! But I agree that this has been discussed to death.
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
The contention by Himmelsbach was that Cooper "might have" landed somewhere in the Washougal Basin. This was based on a comment by a Hydrologist named Bradley who said in 1977 the Washougal was ten feet out of its banks. But two separate lab analyses of Cooper bills and sands found between the bills showed no evidence the money had ever been in the Washougal geological region. There is no evidence the flight path was ever in the Washougal basin!
Sand types and chemistry found in labs on two separate occasions, connect the money to "Columbia river water" - only, and to no other source or geological region like the Washougal, or anywhere else on the Fazio property than where the Ingrams found the money.
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
Kermit,
I think that "zero" on the I-5 gage would be above sea level. And I don't think there would be an actual measured gage reading below sea level. Portland International Airport, which is just across the Columbia River from this gage, is listed as being 30 feet above sea level. The typical low water river level surface is probability going to be about five feet above sea level or less. So my guess is that the "zero" on the gage is going to be about five feet above sea level.
Do you happen to know if the gage readings were published in the Portland newspapers during the early 1970s? I contacted the National Weather Service in Portland about 10 years ago and they directed me to a site that had the gage information going back to about 1973. This covered the money find time period but not the jump time frame. I would like to get the water level information for the day of the hijacking and a few days on each side of that date.
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
The contention by Himmelsbach was that Cooper "might have" landed somewhere in the Washougal Basin. This was based on a comment by a Hydrologist named Bradley who said in 1977 the Washougal was ten feet out of its banks. But two separate lab analyses of Cooper bills and sands found between the bills showed no evidence the money had ever been in the Washougal geological region. There is no evidence the flight path was ever in the Washougal basin!
Sand types and chemistry found in labs on two separate occasions, connect the money to "Columbia river water" - only, and to no other source or geological region like the Washougal, or anywhere else on the Fazio property than where the Ingrams found the money.
Your posts suggests that Cooper landed in the Columbia River and not north of it. Since the airliner had a ground speed of about three nautical miles per minute, or 300 feet per second, and the river is 1500 feet wide at most in the Portland International Airport area (and east of there) the airliner would have crossed the river in about five seconds. Cooper must have timed his jump well!
And you have just pulled the rug out from under the FBI flight path. Congratulations!
-
Your posts suggests that Cooper landed in the Columbia River and not north of it. Since the airliner had a ground speed of about three nautical miles per minute, or 300 feet per second, and the river is 1500 feet wide at most in the Portland International Airport area (and east of there) the airliner would have crossed the river in about five seconds. Cooper must have timed his jump well!
And you have just pulled the rug out from under the FBI flight path. Congratulations!
What?
The likelihood of hitting a specific point on a dart board is near zero, but the odds of hitting the dartboard are near 1:1. Yeah, it was an unlikely event to land in the Columbia, but it was also an unlikely event to land at any specific point. But he had to land somewhere...
-
Your posts suggests that Cooper landed in the Columbia River and not north of it. Since the airliner had a ground speed of about three nautical miles per minute, or 300 feet per second, and the river is 1500 feet wide at most in the Portland International Airport area (and east of there) the airliner would have crossed the river in about five seconds. Cooper must have timed his jump well!
And you have just pulled the rug out from under the FBI flight path. Congratulations!
What?
The likelihood of hitting a specific point on a dart board is near zero, but the odds of hitting the dartboard are near 1:1. Yeah, it was an unlikely event to land in the Columbia, but it was also an unlikely event to land at any specific point. But he had to land somewhere...
"But he had to land somewhere...." We are making progress here.
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
Kermit,
I think that "zero" on the I-5 gage would be above sea level. And I don't think there would be an actual measured gage reading below sea level. Portland International Airport, which is just across the Columbia River from this gage, is listed as being 30 feet above sea level. The typical low water river level surface is probability going to be about five feet above sea level or less. So my guess is that the "zero" on the gage is going to be about five feet above sea level.
Do you happen to know if the gage readings were published in the Portland newspapers during the early 1970s? I contacted the National Weather Service in Portland about 10 years ago and they directed me to a site that had the gage information going back to about 1973. This covered the money find time period but not the jump time frame. I would like to get the water level information for the day of the hijacking and a few days on each side of that date.
Robert,
Yes I am in agreement with you that the gage is probably 5 ft. Above SL. I had it pegged at perhaps as high as 7 ft. Above Sea Level.
I live about 70 miles North of Portland now but go to Portland about twice a month. I might put it on my agenda to drop by the Portland Weather bureau on one of my next trips. Accessing a copy of the Oregonian newspaper on Nov 24 and 25 would be a very interesting although I’m not sure if that would still be possible. The present day Oregonian is a shadow of what it used to be. I might try to drop by in person and see what I can find out about archived editions.
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
Kermit,
I think that "zero" on the I-5 gage would be above sea level. And I don't think there would be an actual measured gage reading below sea level. Portland International Airport, which is just across the Columbia River from this gage, is listed as being 30 feet above sea level. The typical low water river level surface is probability going to be about five feet above sea level or less. So my guess is that the "zero" on the gage is going to be about five feet above sea level.
Do you happen to know if the gage readings were published in the Portland newspapers during the early 1970s? I contacted the National Weather Service in Portland about 10 years ago and they directed me to a site that had the gage information going back to about 1973. This covered the money find time period but not the jump time frame. I would like to get the water level information for the day of the hijacking and a few days on each side of that date.
Robert,
Yes I am in agreement with you that the gage is probably 5 ft. Above SL. I had it pegged at perhaps as high as 7 ft. Above Sea Level.
I live about 70 miles North of Portland now but go to Portland about twice a month. I might put it on my agenda to drop by the Portland Weather bureau on one of my next trips. Accessing a copy of the Oregonian newspaper on Nov 24 and 25 would be a very interesting although I’m not sure if that would still be possible. The present day Oregonian is a shadow of what it used to be. I might try to drop by in person and see what I can find out about archived editions.
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=HA-ORGB&p_theme=histpaper&p_action=keyword
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
The contention by Himmelsbach was that Cooper "might have" landed somewhere in the Washougal Basin. This was based on a comment by a Hydrologist named Bradley who said in 1977 the Washougal was ten feet out of its banks. But two separate lab analyses of Cooper bills and sands found between the bills showed no evidence the money had ever been in the Washougal geological region. There is no evidence the flight path was ever in the Washougal basin!
Sand types and chemistry found in labs on two separate occasions, connect the money to "Columbia river water" - only, and to no other source or geological region like the Washougal, or anywhere else on the Fazio property than where the Ingrams found the money.
Your posts suggests that Cooper landed in the Columbia River and not north of it. Since the airliner had a ground speed of about three nautical miles per minute, or 300 feet per second, and the river is 1500 feet wide at most in the Portland International Airport area (and east of there) the airliner would have crossed the river in about five seconds. Cooper must have timed his jump well!
And you have just pulled the rug out from under the FBI flight path. Congratulations!
That's pretty funny Roberto! Cooper cant land in the Columbia ... but he can land on a dime at Tina Bar! All roads lead to Tina Bar.
Got any more tricky dicky under your hat?
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
Kermit,
I think that "zero" on the I-5 gage would be above sea level. And I don't think there would be an actual measured gage reading below sea level. Portland International Airport, which is just across the Columbia River from this gage, is listed as being 30 feet above sea level. The typical low water river level surface is probability going to be about five feet above sea level or less. So my guess is that the "zero" on the gage is going to be about five feet above sea level.
Do you happen to know if the gage readings were published in the Portland newspapers during the early 1970s? I contacted the National Weather Service in Portland about 10 years ago and they directed me to a site that had the gage information going back to about 1973. This covered the money find time period but not the jump time frame. I would like to get the water level information for the day of the hijacking and a few days on each side of that date.
Robert,
Yes I am in agreement with you that the gage is probably 5 ft. Above SL. I had it pegged at perhaps as high as 7 ft. Above Sea Level.
I live about 70 miles North of Portland now but go to Portland about twice a month. I might put it on my agenda to drop by the Portland Weather bureau on one of my next trips. Accessing a copy of the Oregonian newspaper on Nov 24 and 25 would be a very interesting although I’m not sure if that would still be possible. The present day Oregonian is a shadow of what it used to be. I might try to drop by in person and see what I can find out about archived editions.
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=HA-ORGB&p_theme=histpaper&p_action=keyword
I looked this up yesterday and it isn’t as easy as it sounds to try and get to ! Getting a article or newspaper for Nov 24 or 25 is easier said than done !
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain.
Why are we still chasing this dead issue? This was settled years ago but some people are just stubborn!
The guage people told us the data for 1971 to 1973 and before hit their cutoff - the data had been transferred to an archive maintained by the U of Wyoming and we could get the data there. Or, we could simply get data for those years (and before) from a nearby gauge station. I encountered a problem getting anything from the Wyoming archive (they weren't set up to give data to the public?), so I opted for data for those years from a nearby gauge station. And Robert rejected that.
It is what it is. :chr2:
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain.
Why are we still chasing this dead issue? This was settled years ago but some people are just stubborn!
The guage people told us the data for 1971 to 1973 and before hit their cutoff - the data had been transferred to an archive maintained by the U of Wyoming and we could get the data there. Or, we could simply get data for those years (and before) from a nearby gauge station. I encountered a problem getting anything from the Wyoming archive (they weren't set up to give data to the public?), so I opted for data for those years from a nearby gauge station. And Robert rejected that.
It is what it is. :chr2:
Georger,
Your reply above ain't what it is. I have never seen any gage data from you or elsewhere from 1971-1973 that provided any useful information. From about 1973 to the present, the online gage information is highly useful. But nothing like that prior to 1973.
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain.
Why are we still chasing this dead issue? This was settled years ago but some people are just stubborn!
The guage people told us the data for 1971 to 1973 and before hit their cutoff - the data had been transferred to an archive maintained by the U of Wyoming and we could get the data there. Or, we could simply get data for those years (and before) from a nearby gauge station. I encountered a problem getting anything from the Wyoming archive (they weren't set up to give data to the public?), so I opted for data for those years from a nearby gauge station. And Robert rejected that.
It is what it is. :chr2:
Georger,
Your reply above ain't what it is. I have never seen any gage data from you or elsewhere from 1971-1973 that provided any useful information. From about 1973 to the present, the online gage information is highly useful. But nothing like that prior to 1973.
OK! whatever. I will post it for Kermit in case he hasn't seen it. You turn your head away just to avoid contamination by facts! ;)
-
It’s great to quote a fisherman’s memory going back 50 years but that doesn’t make it factual ! I was delivering mail back in 1964 and the Great Christmas flood crested at 27.7 feet. I had a mail route in Milwaukee and the Willamette flooded about 1/3 of my route under water. Also in 1996, we had another flood that crested at 27.6 feet and caused huge damage in the hundreds of Millions as I recall. The 1964 Christmas floods led to quite a few deaths also. I witnessed mobile homes docked at the Sellwood Bridge area break loose and float down the Willamette. I was there in 1948 and witnessed the famous Vanport flood which crested at over 30 ft.as I recall. The river and Tina Bar Robert viewed in 2013 was a shadow of what it was in 1971.
Kermit,
I suspect you are relating "gage" readings and not distances above sea level. And what gage are you referring to? The Vancouver/Portland gage is located just off shore on the Vancouver side of the Columbia River and just a few hundred feet east of the I-5 bridge.
It is agreed that the Tina Bar area has a huge erosion problem. But the aerial pictures from the early 1970s can be used to estimate that erosion.
Do you know of a source for the gage readings at Vancouver/Portland in the 1971 to 1973 time frame? Also, can you clarify how the earlier readings were adjusted to put them in the WGS84 system?
Robert,
Yes I am giving a reading from the Portland/Vancouver gage which is right by the I 5 Bridge as you mentioned.
Since I’m seeing up to 24 readings in the negative, I’m assuming the river actual Sea Level high point must be in excess of the gage readings ? Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain. Since the present daily readings are charted by the National Weather bureau Portland’s Office, that might be a good area to start at. I guess one of the main points I wanted to make is all these rivers in the general area have had numerous
Floods over the years I’ve lived here. Some people have posted about how small the Washougal River flow is but I’ve seem it flood and cause close to $100,000 damage to my Mother In Laws home which was right on the river !
Going back to the 1971 to 1973 time frame might not be easy to attain.
Why are we still chasing this dead issue? This was settled years ago but some people are just stubborn!
The guage people told us the data for 1971 to 1973 and before hit their cutoff - the data had been transferred to an archive maintained by the U of Wyoming and we could get the data there. Or, we could simply get data for those years (and before) from a nearby gauge station. I encountered a problem getting anything from the Wyoming archive (they weren't set up to give data to the public?), so I opted for data for those years from a nearby gauge station. And Robert rejected that.
It is what it is. :chr2:
Georger,
Your reply above ain't what it is. I have never seen any gage data from you or elsewhere from 1971-1973 that provided any useful information. From about 1973 to the present, the online gage information is highly useful. But nothing like that prior to 1973.
OK! whatever. I will post it for Kermit in case he hasn't seen it. You turn your head away just to avoid contamination by facts! ;)
To be honest, I’m not sure what the importance of the gauge reading on nov 24, 1971 really is ? Since the normal gauge reading at the Vancouver site is 7 to 8 feet during this time of the year, I’ll take a guess. Since all the weather reports indicate precipitation was almost exactly at the historical average for that time, I’d think the reading is right close to 8 feet. Obviously it’s just my guess so please feel free to offer your opinions!
-
Some time earlier (on this thread I believe) EU and others were discussing the Sage radar system and the F 106's response. Eric,you asked for someone to explain why the F 106 couldn't fly at 200 mph. I am curious as to the origin of the question. Was this something that you read or something someone said? I should say that I believe this (the F 106's inability to maintain a 200 mph speed ) to be true.
-
Some time earlier (on this thread I believe) EU and others were discussing the Sage radar system and the F 106's response. Eric,you asked for someone to explain why the F 106 couldn't fly at 200 mph. I am curious as to the origin of the question. Was this something that you read or something someone said? I should say that I believe this (the F 106's inability to maintain a 200 mph speed ) to be true.
The F-106's probably had a full load of internal fuel when they took off and maybe some ammunition as well. Their touchdown landing speed under those conditions would probably have been about 180 knots which is about 10 knots higher than the 170 knots indicated airspeed that the airliner was trying to maintain.
Google "F-106 Flight Manual" and you can probably find additional information, but it appears to be true that the F-106's could not fly at the slow speed of the airliner under the existing conditions.
-
Thank you for the response R 99. Glad to see you back on the forum. I am curious R 99, would the flight manual have been restricted for most people to see? Probably a need to know only basis? If I recall correctly, I believe Hager told me there was a problem concerning the F 106 being air aspirated. I think he said they would be a threat to stall at those speeds due to not enough intake. Something along those lines. In fact Hager said there were revisions ordered to the design of the F 106 in early 1972. I believe they increased the air intake. Hager went as far as to say that the revision in early 1972 was a direct result of this problem they had with the F 106s (inability to maintain that speed) the night of the hijacking. He also said he doubted anyone would admit to this. Hager thought the Sage radar worked fine except for the inability of the F 106s to be able to maintain speed of 305 once engaged (if engaged is the right word). Added to the threat of stalling at that speed would have been the weather conditions. Hager didn't think the F 106s would have had any de-icing capability. at least in their wings. He said there was probably not any de-icing equipment installed because the type of aircraft they were (high speed interceptors). They would normally be flying fast enough to not have to worry about their wings icing up.
-
Thank you for the response R 99. Glad to see you back on the forum. I am curious R 99, would the flight manual have been restricted for most people to see? Probably a need to know only basis? If I recall correctly, I believe Hager told me there was a problem concerning the F 106 being air aspirated. I think he said they would be a threat to stall at those speeds due to not enough intake. Something along those lines. In fact Hager said there were revisions ordered to the design of the F 106 in early 1972. I believe they increased the air intake. Hager went as far as to say that the revision in early 1972 was a direct result of this problem they had with the F 106s (inability to maintain that speed) the night of the hijacking. He also said he doubted anyone would admit to this. Hager thought the Sage radar worked fine except for the inability of the F 106s to be able to maintain speed of 305 once engaged (if engaged is the right word). Added to the threat of stalling at that speed would have been the weather conditions. Hager didn't think the F 106s would have had any de-icing capability. at least in their wings. He said there was probably not any de-icing equipment installed because the type of aircraft they were (high speed interceptors). They would normally be flying fast enough to not have to worry about their wings icing up.
I don't claim to be knowledgeable about engine air intakes, but my guess is that if there was an intake problem related to the aircraft structure that it would be not getting enough air into the engine at low speeds. Some high speed fighter aircraft in the 1960s and 1970s had variable air intake inlets for the engines. I think you can find more information online about this problem.
Another problem with the early F-106s was with the ejection seats. Reportedly the first 11 pilots who had to make emergency ejections from that aircraft were killed. The ejection seats were replaced with improved ones, but I'll bet there was some nervous pilots until that happened.
The F-106 was designed for high rates of climb and high speeds. It's top speed was 1500+ MPH and it reportedly could zoon to 70,000 feet (that's U-2 territory).
-
As per R 99's last post... That is amazing that it took 11 pilots dying before they got the ejection seat problem figured out. Can you imagine what was going through the head of that 12th pilot right before ejecting? As far as the problems that the F 106s encountered the night of the hijacking, do you think D.B. knew of them beforehand?
-
...and all built by the lowest-bidder...
-
I guess you get what you pay for and nothing more than that. I am curious, am I the only forum member who thinks D.B. knew the F106s wouldn't be able to maintain the flight speed of 305? I wonder why he ordered for all the lights to be turned off? I think he knows the F106s will be the initial pursuit aircraft. I actually think he anticipated the military's, law enforcement's, and the airline's response. Seems like he was always one step ahead of their responses. Maybe thats the system that beats the system.
-
With all due respect to R99, my understanding is that the F-106 is a remarkably capable jet that handles very well at slow speeds. I do not believe that the F-106s that were attempting to trail 305 that night had a problem with the 200 MPH speed. I think there is more to the story.
That said, the fact that Cooper wanted the lights out in the jet probably did have to do with the possibility of the jet being chased. After all, when the airstairs extended downward during Cooper's jump, this would have been quite visible by a trailing jet if the lights were on in 305's cabin.
-
With all due respect to R99, my understanding is that the F-106 is a remarkably capable jet that handles very well at slow speeds. I do not believe that the F-106s that were attempting to trail 305 that night had a problem with the 200 MPH speed. I think there is more to the story.
That said, the fact that Cooper wanted the lights out in the jet probably did have to do with the possibility of the jet being chased. After all, when the airstairs extended downward during Cooper's jump, this would have been quite visible by a trailing jet if the lights were on in 305's cabin.
You may have hit on an important distinction. lights out in the jet on the ground vs in the air. On the ground makes sense - in the air who is going to be looking? It could go to Cooper's background, his experience, possibly his training, ... perhaps tactical training or just somebody rather bright. Not your typical food service employee?
Why did a search turn up no military records? Maybe they focused too much on sky divers and not enough on retired tactical fighter pilots? Or tactical planner types, or disaffected systems analysts and mathematicians? Somebody sensitive to all the pieces in a puzzle, or a chess match.
Ive always wondered why H had a almost visceral reaction to this Unsub. H was trained as a fighter pilot although he never saw any combat. H turns around and calls C a nasty ... food service worker type! He might as well have said 'a dumb son of a bitch ...even though Cooper is outwitting everyone!' Did H sense one of his own kind was at work and was competing with him personally'?
We have to be very careful that we don't create paradigms that may not be true!
What I am suggesting here is the FBI may have looked in all the wrong places with the wrong profile for Cooper, just as in the Unabomber case. Kaczynski got found but he essentially revealed himself just as McCoy did ... it just took longer to nail down Kaczynski. They both had the same big ego and big mouth! If Cooper survived to have a long career, what did he do with it?
I dont think this was Cooper's first rodeo - or his last! I dont think a mere $200k assuaged Cooper's "grudge".
-
With all due respect to R99, my understanding is that the F-106 is a remarkably capable jet that handles very well at slow speeds. I do not believe that the F-106s that were attempting to trail 305 that night had a problem with the 200 MPH speed. I think there is more to the story.
That said, the fact that Cooper wanted the lights out in the jet probably did have to do with the possibility of the jet being chased. After all, when the airstairs extended downward during Cooper's jump, this would have been quite visible by a trailing jet if the lights were on in 305's cabin.
According to the F-106 Flight Manual, airframe buffeting starts at about 175 Knots (which is about 200 MPH). The manual also states that the touchdown speed on landing (wheels on the runway) is about 147 Knots (which is 169 MPH) with only 1000 pounds of fuel. With a full fuel load, the touchdown speed is 165 Knots (which is 190 MPH). The approach speeds are quite a bit higher in each case.
Consequently, there is no reason to question the statement that the F-106s could not maintain the speed of the airliner which was 170 Knots (which is 195 MPH). The airliner was told by the NWA performance engineers in Minneapolis to fly at 170 Knots Indicated Airspeed because that would maximize the range for the configuration that was specified by Cooper.
It should be remembered that the F-106s did not have trailing edge flaps to reduce their stall speed. And their landing speeds are quite high even by present day standards.
-
With all due respect to R99, my understanding is that the F-106 is a remarkably capable jet that handles very well at slow speeds. I do not believe that the F-106s that were attempting to trail 305 that night had a problem with the 200 MPH speed. I think there is more to the story.
That said, the fact that Cooper wanted the lights out in the jet probably did have to do with the possibility of the jet being chased. After all, when the airstairs extended downward during Cooper's jump, this would have been quite visible by a trailing jet if the lights were on in 305's cabin.
You may have hit on an important distinction. lights out in the jet on the ground vs in the air. On the ground makes sense - in the air who is going to be looking? It could go to Cooper's background, his experience, possibly his training, ... perhaps tactical training or just somebody rather bright. Not your typical food service employee?
Why did a search turn up no military records? Maybe they focused too much on sky divers and not enough on retired tactical fighter pilots? Or tactical planner types, or disaffected systems analysts and mathematicians? Somebody sensitive to all the pieces in a puzzle, or a chess match.
Ive always wondered why H had a almost visceral reaction to this Unsub. H was trained as a fighter pilot although he never saw any combat. H turns around and calls C a nasty ... food service worker type! He might as well have said 'a dumb son of a bitch ...even though Cooper is outwitting everyone!' Did H sense one of his own kind was at work and was competing with him personally'?
We have to be very careful that we don't create paradigms that may not be true!
What I am suggesting here is the FBI may have looked in all the wrong places with the wrong profile for Cooper, just as in the Unabomber case. Kaczynski got found but he essentially revealed himself just as McCoy did ... it just took longer to nail down Kaczynski. They both had the same big ego and big mouth! If Cooper survived to have a long career, what did he do with it?
I dont think this was Cooper's first rodeo - or his last! I dont think a mere $200k assuaged Cooper's "grudge".
I'll have to look at my notes, but I thought his demands in the air from Portland were to land in Seattle, get the chutes, and take off by 5, he may have stated lights off for takeoff. Georger raises a good point about whether it was lights off in the air or on the ground. On the ground I'd be worried about snipers or someone getting a picture of me, in the air I'd be thinking about being tracked visually by an aircraft or by someone on the ground. But lights out in the cabin does not mean there would not be a blinking beacon light on the plane (red or green) that people can see from the ground. How would he control the pilot's choosing to keep one of those on?
What are other reasons for having the lights off? He still needs to be able to see in the plane. Trying to keep his night vision maybe?
Why takeoff by 5PM? A rendezvous with an accomplice? Wanted to make the evening papers? The sun must have been down at 5PM in November in Seattle right?
-
Keeping the lights out in the air makes the jet much more difficult to see from a trailing jet. Also, it doesn't give away his jump time by virtue of the back stairs lowering and the light from the cabin shining out the back.
Cooper wanted everything in place in Seattle by 5PM. In other words, he wanted to land in Seattle by shortly after 5PM.
Sunset in Seattle on November 24, 1971 was 4:25PM.
-
With all due respect to R99, my understanding is that the F-106 is a remarkably capable jet that handles very well at slow speeds. I do not believe that the F-106s that were attempting to trail 305 that night had a problem with the 200 MPH speed. I think there is more to the story.
That said, the fact that Cooper wanted the lights out in the jet probably did have to do with the possibility of the jet being chased. After all, when the airstairs extended downward during Cooper's jump, this would have been quite visible by a trailing jet if the lights were on in 305's cabin.
You may have hit on an important distinction. lights out in the jet on the ground vs in the air. On the ground makes sense - in the air who is going to be looking? It could go to Cooper's background, his experience, possibly his training, ... perhaps tactical training or just somebody rather bright. Not your typical food service employee?
Why did a search turn up no military records? Maybe they focused too much on sky divers and not enough on retired tactical fighter pilots? Or tactical planner types, or disaffected systems analysts and mathematicians? Somebody sensitive to all the pieces in a puzzle, or a chess match.
Ive always wondered why H had a almost visceral reaction to this Unsub. H was trained as a fighter pilot although he never saw any combat. H turns around and calls C a nasty ... food service worker type! He might as well have said 'a dumb son of a bitch ...even though Cooper is outwitting everyone!' Did H sense one of his own kind was at work and was competing with him personally'?
We have to be very careful that we don't create paradigms that may not be true!
What I am suggesting here is the FBI may have looked in all the wrong places with the wrong profile for Cooper, just as in the Unabomber case. Kaczynski got found but he essentially revealed himself just as McCoy did ... it just took longer to nail down Kaczynski. They both had the same big ego and big mouth! If Cooper survived to have a long career, what did he do with it?
I dont think this was Cooper's first rodeo - or his last! I dont think a mere $200k assuaged Cooper's "grudge".
I'll have to look at my notes, but I thought his demands in the air from Portland were to land in Seattle, get the chutes, and take off by 5, he may have stated lights off for takeoff. Georger raises a good point about whether it was lights off in the air or on the ground. On the ground I'd be worried about snipers or someone getting a picture of me, in the air I'd be thinking about being tracked visually by an aircraft or by someone on the ground. But lights out in the cabin does not mean there would not be a blinking beacon light on the plane (red or green) that people can see from the ground. How would he control the pilot's choosing to keep one of those on?
What are other reasons for having the lights off? He still needs to be able to see in the plane. Trying to keep his night vision maybe?
Why takeoff by 5PM? A rendezvous with an accomplice? Wanted to make the evening papers? The sun must have been down at 5PM in November in Seattle right?
I think I can answer that - it was lights off both on the ground and when in the air! I have the passages somewhere if someone insists I provide them as evidence.
Insisting on lights off while in the air, is imho a pure tactical move by someone with experience, or a guy that is very intelligent! I asked a friend of mine who is a retired fighter pilot to read the PI Transcript some years back and he quickly nailed this point as a potentially crucial piece of evidence about the hijacker, if its true.
-
Keeping the lights out in the air makes the jet much more difficult to see from a trailing jet. Also, it doesn't give away his jump time by virtue of the back stairs lowering and the light from the cabin shining out the back.
Cooper wanted everything in place in Seattle by 5PM. In other words, he wanted to land in Seattle by shortly after 5PM.
Sunset in Seattle on November 24, 1971 was 4:25PM.
.
I agree completely. This whole crime is very tactical.
Two people had an almost visceral fear or dislike of Cooper right from the start: Rataczak and Himms. Both have strong tactical backgrounds not just in their training but personality-wise. Type A personalities. They may have sensed 'this guy is competing on our level, and is therefore serious and dangerous!' Didnt Rataczak make the comment to the effect: 'This guy must have the manual back there!'. Rataczak thought the best thing to do was to 'take this guy out over the ocean'! Some of these sentiments may have been conveyed to Nyrop when he ordered "full cooperation". The FAA psychiatrist took it even further is his assessment of Cooper!! >:D He basically advised that the hijacker might be blood thirsty and ready to go to extremes ... (thankfully he was wrong?)
I still believe there is a very high probability Cooper was armed. I dont think he was flying by the seat of his pants but had backup. Its the tactical thing to do. Cooper behaved as if he had a very high level of confidence. He allowed the refueling to drag out after initially setting a limit on time on the ground, he allowed Hancock to simply walk back on the plane to get her purse!, and he allowed several other openings which people could have taken advantage of. A tactical military unit would have taken advantage of any opening the hijacker gave. But nobody did! Everyone followed Nyrop's orders...
-
Keeping the lights out in the air makes the jet much more difficult to see from a trailing jet. Also, it doesn't give away his jump time by virtue of the back stairs lowering and the light from the cabin shining out the back.
Cooper wanted everything in place in Seattle by 5PM. In other words, he wanted to land in Seattle by shortly after 5PM.
Sunset in Seattle on November 24, 1971 was 4:25PM.
.
I agree completely. This whole crime is very tactical.
Two people had an almost visceral fear or dislike of Cooper right from the start: Rataczak and Himms. Both have strong tactical backgrounds not just in their training but personality-wise. Type A personalities. They may have sensed 'this guy is competing on our level, and is therefore serious and dangerous!' Didnt Rataczak make the comment to the effect: 'This guy must have the manual back there!'. Rataczak thought the best thing to do was to 'take this guy out over the ocean'! Some of these sentiments may have been conveyed to Nyrop when he ordered "full cooperation". The FAA psychiatrist took it even further is his assessment of Cooper!! >:D He basically advised that the hijacker might be blood thirsty and ready to go to extremes ... (thankfully he was wrong?)
I still believe there is a very high probability Cooper was armed. I dont think he was flying by the seat of his pants but had backup. Its the tactical thing to do. Cooper behaved as if he had a very high level of confidence. He allowed the refueling to drag out after initially setting a limit on time on the ground, he allowed Hancock to simply walk back on the plane to get her purse!, and he allowed several other openings which people could have taken advantage of. A tactical military unit would have taken advantage of any opening the hijacker gave. But nobody did! Everyone followed Nyrop's orders...
This is one of the best posts I have ever seen on this forum ! Yes I am quite sure Cooper was armed. I’ve hunted and fished with these type of people most of my life. They come prepared and plan ahead. I’ve said before that most likely Cooper had both an altimiter and compass with him. We know for a fact that he had a knife and why wouldn’t he have a gun also. I have always felt certain he carried a number of other essentials in the bag he brought along. This is a guy who knew exactly what he wanted and was very annoyed when his orders,weren’t obeyed. The arrival of the money in a bank bag was NOT what he asked for and of course created some problems.
The games they were playing with the refueling was of course irratating him also. I feel Cooper researched out pretty much every aspect of this caper and was not a happy camper when his orders were ignored. Somewhere along the line I feel Cooper was in the military as his discipline seems obvious. Unlike Georger however, I think Cooper acted alone. This type of guy doesn’t like to deal with unknowns ! JMHO
-
Keeping the lights out in the air makes the jet much more difficult to see from a trailing jet. Also, it doesn't give away his jump time by virtue of the back stairs lowering and the light from the cabin shining out the back.
Cooper wanted everything in place in Seattle by 5PM. In other words, he wanted to land in Seattle by shortly after 5PM.
Sunset in Seattle on November 24, 1971 was 4:25PM.
.
I agree completely. This whole crime is very tactical.
Two people had an almost visceral fear or dislike of Cooper right from the start: Rataczak and Himms. Both have strong tactical backgrounds not just in their training but personality-wise. Type A personalities. They may have sensed 'this guy is competing on our level, and is therefore serious and dangerous!' Didnt Rataczak make the comment to the effect: 'This guy must have the manual back there!'. Rataczak thought the best thing to do was to 'take this guy out over the ocean'! Some of these sentiments may have been conveyed to Nyrop when he ordered "full cooperation". The FAA psychiatrist took it even further is his assessment of Cooper!! >:D He basically advised that the hijacker might be blood thirsty and ready to go to extremes ... (thankfully he was wrong?)
I still believe there is a very high probability Cooper was armed. I dont think he was flying by the seat of his pants but had backup. Its the tactical thing to do. Cooper behaved as if he had a very high level of confidence. He allowed the refueling to drag out after initially setting a limit on time on the ground, he allowed Hancock to simply walk back on the plane to get her purse!, and he allowed several other openings which people could have taken advantage of. A tactical military unit would have taken advantage of any opening the hijacker gave. But nobody did! Everyone followed Nyrop's orders...
This is one of the best posts I have ever seen on this forum ! Yes I am quite sure Cooper was armed. I’ve hunted and fished with these type of people most of my life. They come prepared and plan ahead. I’ve said before that most likely Cooper had both an altimiter and compass with him. We know for a fact that he had a knife and why wouldn’t he have a gun also. I have always felt certain he carried a number of other essentials in the bag he brought along. This is a guy who knew exactly what he wanted and was very annoyed when his orders,weren’t obeyed. The arrival of the money in a bank bag was NOT what he asked for and of course created some problems.
The games they were playing with the refueling was of course irratating him also. I feel Cooper researched out pretty much every aspect of this caper and was not a happy camper when his orders were ignored. Somewhere along the line I feel Cooper was in the military as his discipline seems obvious. Unlike Georger however, I think Cooper acted alone. This type of guy doesn’t like to deal with unknowns ! JMHO
I have never said he wasnt acting alone. I dont know of anything in the record that indicates he had an accomplice or was acting with others ... I tend to agree with you Kermit. This type of guy doesn’t like to deal with unknowns .. the issue would be 'control'.
-
Keeping the lights out in the air makes the jet much more difficult to see from a trailing jet. Also, it doesn't give away his jump time by virtue of the back stairs lowering and the light from the cabin shining out the back.
Cooper wanted everything in place in Seattle by 5PM. In other words, he wanted to land in Seattle by shortly after 5PM.
Sunset in Seattle on November 24, 1971 was 4:25PM.
.
I agree completely. This whole crime is very tactical.
Two people had an almost visceral fear or dislike of Cooper right from the start: Rataczak and Himms. Both have strong tactical backgrounds not just in their training but personality-wise. Type A personalities. They may have sensed 'this guy is competing on our level, and is therefore serious and dangerous!' Didnt Rataczak make the comment to the effect: 'This guy must have the manual back there!'. Rataczak thought the best thing to do was to 'take this guy out over the ocean'! Some of these sentiments may have been conveyed to Nyrop when he ordered "full cooperation". The FAA psychiatrist took it even further is his assessment of Cooper!! >:D He basically advised that the hijacker might be blood thirsty and ready to go to extremes ... (thankfully he was wrong?)
I still believe there is a very high probability Cooper was armed. I dont think he was flying by the seat of his pants but had backup. Its the tactical thing to do. Cooper behaved as if he had a very high level of confidence. He allowed the refueling to drag out after initially setting a limit on time on the ground, he allowed Hancock to simply walk back on the plane to get her purse!, and he allowed several other openings which people could have taken advantage of. A tactical military unit would have taken advantage of any opening the hijacker gave. But nobody did! Everyone followed Nyrop's orders...
This is one of the best posts I have ever seen on this forum ! Yes I am quite sure Cooper was armed. I’ve hunted and fished with these type of people most of my life. They come prepared and plan ahead. I’ve said before that most likely Cooper had both an altimiter and compass with him. We know for a fact that he had a knife and why wouldn’t he have a gun also. I have always felt certain he carried a number of other essentials in the bag he brought along. This is a guy who knew exactly what he wanted and was very annoyed when his orders,weren’t obeyed. The arrival of the money in a bank bag was NOT what he asked for and of course created some problems.
The games they were playing with the refueling was of course irratating him also. I feel Cooper researched out pretty much every aspect of this caper and was not a happy camper when his orders were ignored. Somewhere along the line I feel Cooper was in the military as his discipline seems obvious. Unlike Georger however, I think Cooper acted alone. This type of guy doesn’t like to deal with unknowns ! JMHO
I have never said he wasnt acting alone. I dont know of anything in the record that indicates he had an accomplice or was acting with others ... I tend to agree with you Kermit. This type of guy doesn’t like to deal with unknowns .. the issue would be 'control'.
My bad as I misread your “ backup “ meaning so we are on the same page.
-
Keeping the lights out in the air makes the jet much more difficult to see from a trailing jet. Also, it doesn't give away his jump time by virtue of the back stairs lowering and the light from the cabin shining out the back.
Cooper wanted everything in place in Seattle by 5PM. In other words, he wanted to land in Seattle by shortly after 5PM.
Sunset in Seattle on November 24, 1971 was 4:25PM.
.
I agree completely. This whole crime is very tactical.
Two people had an almost visceral fear or dislike of Cooper right from the start: Rataczak and Himms. Both have strong tactical backgrounds not just in their training but personality-wise. Type A personalities. They may have sensed 'this guy is competing on our level, and is therefore serious and dangerous!' Didnt Rataczak make the comment to the effect: 'This guy must have the manual back there!'. Rataczak thought the best thing to do was to 'take this guy out over the ocean'! Some of these sentiments may have been conveyed to Nyrop when he ordered "full cooperation". The FAA psychiatrist took it even further is his assessment of Cooper!! >:D He basically advised that the hijacker might be blood thirsty and ready to go to extremes ... (thankfully he was wrong?)
I still believe there is a very high probability Cooper was armed. I dont think he was flying by the seat of his pants but had backup. Its the tactical thing to do. Cooper behaved as if he had a very high level of confidence. He allowed the refueling to drag out after initially setting a limit on time on the ground, he allowed Hancock to simply walk back on the plane to get her purse!, and he allowed several other openings which people could have taken advantage of. A tactical military unit would have taken advantage of any opening the hijacker gave. But nobody did! Everyone followed Nyrop's orders...
This is one of the best posts I have ever seen on this forum ! Yes I am quite sure Cooper was armed. I’ve hunted and fished with these type of people most of my life. They come prepared and plan ahead. I’ve said before that most likely Cooper had both an altimiter and compass with him. We know for a fact that he had a knife and why wouldn’t he have a gun also. I have always felt certain he carried a number of other essentials in the bag he brought along. This is a guy who knew exactly what he wanted and was very annoyed when his orders,weren’t obeyed. The arrival of the money in a bank bag was NOT what he asked for and of course created some problems.
The games they were playing with the refueling was of course irratating him also. I feel Cooper researched out pretty much every aspect of this caper and was not a happy camper when his orders were ignored. Somewhere along the line I feel Cooper was in the military as his discipline seems obvious. Unlike Georger however, I think Cooper acted alone. This type of guy doesn’t like to deal with unknowns ! JMHO
I have never said he wasnt acting alone. I dont know of anything in the record that indicates he had an accomplice or was acting with others ... I tend to agree with you Kermit. This type of guy doesn’t like to deal with unknowns .. the issue would be 'control'.
My bad as I misread your “ backup “ meaning so we are on the same page.
no problem ... 8)
-
Hag believed he had help. Trying to put aside my own bias, I think the sophistication of the planning tends to support the idea of more than one person. (you know, two heads are better than one). Touching back on several points (very good ones I believe), I also believe he probably had some type of sidearm on him. Hag was guessing a snub nosed .38 or a .22 caliber derringer. A very good point about the lights and his night vision. Could another reason for the lights out be that it makes it easier to see the lights on the ground? (maybe looking for Merwin Dam lights or such?) I also believe this wasn't his first rodeo. It's too hard to believe a one time criminal would have been able to pull this off. Too much planning, too sophisticated in my opinion. Also one more thing, he had to have known it would it was going to be dark when he jumped based on his five a-clock demand don't you think? Doesn't jumping in the dark indicate a fairly skilled sky diver?
-
One other thought, maybe he planned to jump just after dark knowing he would have until morning before they could start looking for him. His lack of fear of jumping at night into possible trees or water is telling in my opinion. Maybe he had a death wish or he was that confident in his abilities?
-
One other thought, maybe he planned to jump just after dark knowing he would have until morning before they could start looking for him. His lack of fear of jumping at night into possible trees or water is telling in my opinion. Maybe he had a death wish or he was that confident in his abilities?
He had to be planning a night jump since sunset was well before the 5:00PM time he specified for having the money at SEATAC. And since there were heavy clouds in the Seattle area that evening, it would be very dark just a few minutes after sunset.
On the subject of "fear", Cooper told Tina that he had some pills for the crew if they started getting tired. So maybe Cooper's lack of fear also came from a pill. And the mention of pills in this context suggests to me that Cooper had previous experience using them either in the military or such activities as long distance truck driving.
-
Cooper told Tina that he had some pills for the crew if they started getting tired.
Is there some way to verify whether this actually happened? Is this in a 302 somewhere?
This strikes me as exceptionally odd and naive if it's true. Obviously the crew is not going to ingest a pill from a skyjacker while commanding an airliner. If Cooper actually considered this a possibility it is remarkably bizarre. It appears to run contrary to what we know about Cooper. I'm inclined to think this is not accurate.
-
Cooper told Tina that he had some pills for the crew if they started getting tired.
Is there some way to verify whether this actually happened? Is this in a 302 somewhere?
This strikes me as exceptionally odd and naive if it's true. Obviously the crew is not going to ingest a pill from a skyjacker while commanding an airliner. If Cooper actually considered this a possibility it is remarkably bizarre. It appears to run contrary to what we know about Cooper. I'm inclined to think this is not accurate.
See Richard T. Tosaw's book, "D.B. Cooper - Dead or Alive", ISBN 0-9609016-1-2, 1984, page 31. The very last sentence at the bottom of that page reads as follows:
"Tina told Cooper that she was concerned about the crew getting tired on the long trip, but Cooper told her, 'Don't worry, I've got some pills that will keep them awake.' "
This statement was made during the time the airliner was on the ground in Seattle. And I don't remember seeing it anywhere else.
Tosaw was a California lawyer who had been an FBI agent for five years before setting up his legal practice. He spent a significant amount of money searching in the Columbia River just off shore from Tina Bar. He interviewed many of the principals in the matter including the Ingram family and apparently talked to Tina at length.
I recommend that everyone get a copy of this book, if possible, since it contains things that apparently were not included in the FBI investigation paper work.
-
I've heard the pills mentioned in passing but was uncertain where this came from.
If Tosaw is the only source I'm not sure what to make of it. Tosaw was likely wrong when he mentioned that Tina saw DBC pull out the parachute packing card (377 considers this a huge tell if it is true).
However, Tosaw was the first to mention the NB6 publicly from what I can tell--this back in 1984.
All of this said, the pill comment, if true, is very remarkable if it is true.
-
I've heard the pills mentioned in passing but was uncertain where this came from.
If Tosaw is the only source I'm not sure what to make of it. Tosaw was likely wrong when he mentioned that Tina saw DBC pull out the parachute packing card (377 considers this a huge tell if it is true).
However, Tosaw was the first to mention the NB6 publicly from what I can tell--this back in 1984.
All of this said, the pill comment, if true, is very remarkable if it is true.
Why all the superlatives! Its just a factoid that is true or not true - nothing more. Tosaw was reknowned for being a showman and gaming the system - he did that in every project he worked on or invented. He blew things out of proportion before doing research and placed his own interests above the needs of others ... his departure from the FBI may not have been friendly.
Either the things he said were true, or not. That is the only issue at stake! :rofl:
-
I've heard the pills mentioned in passing but was uncertain where this came from.
If Tosaw is the only source I'm not sure what to make of it. Tosaw was likely wrong when he mentioned that Tina saw DBC pull out the parachute packing card (377 considers this a huge tell if it is true).
However, Tosaw was the first to mention the NB6 publicly from what I can tell--this back in 1984.
All of this said, the pill comment, if true, is very remarkable if it is true.
Why all the superlatives! Its just a factoid that is true or not true - nothing more. Tosaw was reknowned for being a showman and gaming the system - he did that in every project he worked on or invented. He blew things out of proportion before doing research and placed his own interests above the needs of others ... his departure from the FBI may not have been friendly.
Either the things he said were true, or not. That is the only issue at stake! :rofl:
For what its worth, here are a couple of other things of note that Tosaw quotes Tina as saying.
Tina reportedly said that Cooper took out a pocket knife to cut the shroud lines of the chest pack that was left on the airliner. It is a given that Cooper had to be carrying a pocket knife since there was nothing else on that airplane that he could use to cut those lines. You can forget about using the meal service cutlery, if there was even any on the plane at that point, since it had a hard time cutting melted butter in any event. And there were nothing else on board that Cooper could have used.
Tina is also reported as having said that Cooper opened the sage green military back parachute and examined the nylon panels and shroud line. It is highly unlikely that this happened since he would have had to pull the ripcord and then repack the parachute after his examination. Even if Cooper was a parachute rigger, he would have had a very hard time repacking that chute in the back of the cabin.
-
Skyjack mentions pills, too.
-
Tina reportedly said that Cooper took out a pocket knife to cut the shroud lines of the chest pack that was left on the airliner. It is a given that Cooper had to be carrying a pocket knife since there was nothing else on that airplane that he could use to cut those lines. You can forget about using the meal service cutlery, if there was even any on the plane at that point, since it had a hard time cutting melted butter in any event. And there were nothing else on board that Cooper could have used.
I've always wondered, in order to cut the shroud lines, he would have had to handle them, Perhaps wrapping them around his hand and pulling them tight before cutting, have these shroud lines ever been tested for epithelial cells? I'm sure they have been handled by many people through the years, there would be multiple cells from multiple people. but perhaps Cooper's are still hanging around somewhere.
-
Tina reportedly said that Cooper took out a pocket knife to cut the shroud lines of the chest pack that was left on the airliner. It is a given that Cooper had to be carrying a pocket knife since there was nothing else on that airplane that he could use to cut those lines. You can forget about using the meal service cutlery, if there was even any on the plane at that point, since it had a hard time cutting melted butter in any event. And there were nothing else on board that Cooper could have used.
I've always wondered, in order to cut the shroud lines, he would have had to handle them, Perhaps wrapping them around his hand and pulling them tight before cutting, have these shroud lines ever been tested for epithelial cells? I'm sure they have been handled by many people through the years, there would be multiple cells from multiple people. but perhaps Cooper's are still hanging around somewhere.
To cut the shroud lines requires a really sharp knife. They are specially constructed multi-layer lines and not just "ropes". The best way to cut one is to form a "U" with the line and then insert the knife in that "U" and pull.
So it is possible that Cooper left some epithelial cells on the stubs at the end of the lines that remain attached to the canopy and the harness. Personally, I think this would be worth checking into. I doubt if it would be very expensive (relatively speaking) and the DNA people can now work wonders with amounts of DNA that are not visible to the naked eye.
-
HIS POST:
So it is possible that Cooper left some epithelial cells on the stubs at the end of the lines
Typically, touch STR typing is known to require approximately 70–150 cells to produce a viable DNA profile. But since you cant chew gum and type at the same time you will ignore this and 'play the epithelial mantra again Sam'.
Its like people who cook everything they eat in one 10" pan!
Blevins is watching - must go! :rofl:
PS: R99 you screwed up the formatting again! oh well ...
-
HIS POST:
So it is possible that Cooper left some epithelial cells on the stubs at the end of the lines
Typically, touch STR typing is known to require approximately 70–150 cells to produce a viable DNA profile. But since you cant chew gum and type at the same time you will ignore this and 'play the epithelial mantra again Sam'.
Its like people who cook everything they eat in one 10" pan!
Blevins is watching - must go! :rofl:
PS: R99 you screwed up the formatting again! oh well ...
First, I don't have anything to do with the formatting. So I would suggest that you just look in a mirror to start your search for the culprit.
Secondly, I suggest that we leave the DNA analysis to people who actually know what they are talking about. And that does not include you or me. If there is sufficient DNA on a car door handle, for instance, to provide meaningful data, and there is, then there should be sufficient DNA on the shroud lines and other parts of the remaining chest pack to make the effort worthwhile.
Thirdly, why are you suddenly disparaging DNA analysis? Are you afraid that DNA might prove that Cooper didn't live in Montana as you seem to believe?
-
HIS POST:
So it is possible that Cooper left some epithelial cells on the stubs at the end of the lines
Typically, touch STR typing is known to require approximately 70–150 cells to produce a viable DNA profile. But since you cant chew gum and type at the same time you will ignore this and 'play the epithelial mantra again Sam'.
Its like people who cook everything they eat in one 10" pan!
Blevins is watching - must go! :rofl:
PS: R99 you screwed up the formatting again! oh well ...
First, I don't have anything to do with the formatting. So I would suggest that you just look in a mirror to start your search for the culprit.
Secondly, I suggest that we leave the DNA analysis to people who actually know what they are talking about. And that does not include you or me. If there is sufficient DNA on a car door handle, for instance, to provide meaningful data, and there is, then there should be sufficient DNA on the shroud lines and other parts of the remaining chest pack to make the effort worthwhile.
Thirdly, why are you suddenly disparaging DNA analysis? Are you afraid that DNA might prove that Cooper didn't live in Montana as you seem to believe?
OK Gomer. Thanks for yous OPInE. Ulis needs a hair cut!
-
HIS POST:
So it is possible that Cooper left some epithelial cells on the stubs at the end of the lines
Typically, touch STR typing is known to require approximately 70–150 cells to produce a viable DNA profile. But since you cant chew gum and type at the same time you will ignore this and 'play the epithelial mantra again Sam'.
Its like people who cook everything they eat in one 10" pan!
Blevins is watching - must go! :rofl:
PS: R99 you screwed up the formatting again! oh well ...
First, I don't have anything to do with the formatting. So I would suggest that you just look in a mirror to start your search for the culprit.
Secondly, I suggest that we leave the DNA analysis to people who actually know what they are talking about. And that does not include you or me. If there is sufficient DNA on a car door handle, for instance, to provide meaningful data, and there is, then there should be sufficient DNA on the shroud lines and other parts of the remaining chest pack to make the effort worthwhile.
Thirdly, why are you suddenly disparaging DNA analysis? Are you afraid that DNA might prove that Cooper didn't live in Montana as you seem to believe?
OK Gomer. Thanks for yous OPInE. Ulis needs a hair cut!
Georger, You need to get an emergency appointment with your shrink!
-
HIS POST:
So it is possible that Cooper left some epithelial cells on the stubs at the end of the lines
Typically, touch STR typing is known to require approximately 70–150 cells to produce a viable DNA profile. But since you cant chew gum and type at the same time you will ignore this and 'play the epithelial mantra again Sam'.
Its like people who cook everything they eat in one 10" pan!
Blevins is watching - must go! :rofl:
PS: R99 you screwed up the formatting again! oh well ...
First, I don't have anything to do with the formatting. So I would suggest that you just look in a mirror to start your search for the culprit.
Secondly, I suggest that we leave the DNA analysis to people who actually know what they are talking about. And that does not include you or me. If there is sufficient DNA on a car door handle, for instance, to provide meaningful data, and there is, then there should be sufficient DNA on the shroud lines and other parts of the remaining chest pack to make the effort worthwhile.
Thirdly, why are you suddenly disparaging DNA analysis? Are you afraid that DNA might prove that Cooper didn't live in Montana as you seem to believe?
OK Gomer. Thanks for yous OPInE. Ulis needs a hair cut!
Georger, You need to get an emergency appointment with your shrink!
Yep - somebody does! Your degeneration over the last year has people commenting.
Good luck Robert99. It was nice while it lasted. :congrats:
-
HIS POST:
So it is possible that Cooper left some epithelial cells on the stubs at the end of the lines
Typically, touch STR typing is known to require approximately 70–150 cells to produce a viable DNA profile. But since you cant chew gum and type at the same time you will ignore this and 'play the epithelial mantra again Sam'.
Its like people who cook everything they eat in one 10" pan!
Blevins is watching - must go! :rofl:
PS: R99 you screwed up the formatting again! oh well ...
First, I don't have anything to do with the formatting. So I would suggest that you just look in a mirror to start your search for the culprit.
Secondly, I suggest that we leave the DNA analysis to people who actually know what they are talking about. And that does not include you or me. If there is sufficient DNA on a car door handle, for instance, to provide meaningful data, and there is, then there should be sufficient DNA on the shroud lines and other parts of the remaining chest pack to make the effort worthwhile.
Thirdly, why are you suddenly disparaging DNA analysis? Are you afraid that DNA might prove that Cooper didn't live in Montana as you seem to believe?
OK Gomer. Thanks for yous OPInE. Ulis needs a hair cut!
Georger, You need to get an emergency appointment with your shrink!
Yep - somebody does! Your degeneration over the last year has people commenting.
Good luck Robert99. It was nice while it lasted. :congrats:
Thanks for the information. Otherwise, I wouldn't have know that I had degenerated.
-
HIS POST:
So it is possible that Cooper left some epithelial cells on the stubs at the end of the lines
Typically, touch STR typing is known to require approximately 70–150 cells to produce a viable DNA profile. But since you cant chew gum and type at the same time you will ignore this and 'play the epithelial mantra again Sam'.
Its like people who cook everything they eat in one 10" pan!
Blevins is watching - must go! :rofl:
PS: R99 you screwed up the formatting again! oh well ...
First, I don't have anything to do with the formatting. So I would suggest that you just look in a mirror to start your search for the culprit.
Secondly, I suggest that we leave the DNA analysis to people who actually know what they are talking about. And that does not include you or me. If there is sufficient DNA on a car door handle, for instance, to provide meaningful data, and there is, then there should be sufficient DNA on the shroud lines and other parts of the remaining chest pack to make the effort worthwhile.
Thirdly, why are you suddenly disparaging DNA analysis? Are you afraid that DNA might prove that Cooper didn't live in Montana as you seem to believe?
OK Gomer. Thanks for yous OPInE. Ulis needs a hair cut!
Georger, You need to get an emergency appointment with your shrink!
Yep - somebody does! Your degeneration over the last year has people commenting.
Good luck Robert99. It was nice while it lasted. :congrats:
Thanks for the information. Otherwise, I wouldn't have know that I had degenerated.
It was you who keep bringing it up! "Senility"
You have brought it up incessantly ... but I am here to examine the Cooper case.
Good look with the senility thing. :good post:
-
For those interested in Cooper bailing around the Orchards area. the reason could be the report from the F-106 dart. the pilot claims an airport with skydiving was near by. that airport would be Scholl's. a sectional map shows a parachute as the pilot mentions in the 302's. according to the flight path it fly's directly over Scholl's at the 8:15 time frame.
-
For those interested in Cooper bailing around the Orchards area. the reason could be the report from the F-106 dart. the pilot claims an airport with skydiving was near by. that airport would be Scholl's. a sectional map shows a parachute as the pilot mentions in the 302's. according to the flight path it fly's directly over Scholl's at the 8:15 time frame.
so what is the date of this screen grab from a 302? Can you post the whole 302?
-
I'll have to try and locate the PDF. I believe Flyjack originally posted that portion on Bruce's site. it was taken from the FBI vault. I might have the PDF....
-
For those interested in Cooper bailing around the Orchards area. the reason could be the report from the F-106 dart. the pilot claims an airport with skydiving was near by. that airport would be Scholl's. a sectional map shows a parachute as the pilot mentions in the 302's. according to the flight path it fly's directly over Scholl's at the 8:15 time frame.
I just find this document remarkable for several reasons. Sluggo earmarked Orchards but he never explained why, except for Sluggo's revision of the time stamps...
It would be nice to know what the basis for the F-106 pilot's remark was: overheard communications, engaged in communications with someone related to the jump, ....... any and all reasons why this pilot would have any knowledge of the jump matter. Was he still trailing 305 when Cooper jumped?
I have never forgotten one of Sluggos' posts at DZ when the issue of Orchards came up. Out of the blue Wayne asked Crket something like ' have you guys been digging there - where?' Ckret replied something like: 'lets talk about this off line'. And there the matter died! Nobody followed their exchange up. I finally emailed Wayne and asked: "What is going on? FBI digging at Orchards? Can you tell us more". Wayne answered and said ... 'in the fullness of time, as this develops ...'.
If you recall this morphed into Sluggo making a few posts suggesting people should dig up graves in cemeteries around Orchards! That Cooper might be there in an unmarked grave! People asked if Wayne was serious. In due course Wayne dropped the whole matter after a lot of kidding ....... but I have never forgotten this. I always wondered what the basis for Sluggo's sudden interest in Orchards was ...... I never got a satisfactory reply and the matter died at DZ.
-
It's all very confusing. Carr implies they mixed up the oscillation with the pressure bump. documents clearly indicate both occurred not far apart. then you have the pilots claim of the jump time being between 5-10 minutes after the last contact at 8:05. that puts the time frame right where the F-106 states. that would be the Orchards area close to Scholl's airport..
-
It's all very confusing. Carr implies they mixed up the oscillation with the pressure bump. documents clearly indicate both occurred not far apart. then you have the pilots claim of the jump time being between 5-10 minutes after the last contact at 8:05. that puts the time frame right where the F-106 states. that would be the Orchards area close to Scoll's airport..
I think that was Sluggo's analysis too.
-
The chase plane would of been somewhere around Battleground if they were 5 miles back. this would also explain the people on the ground complaining of a loud low flying plane.
-
It's all very confusing. Carr implies they mixed up the oscillation with the pressure bump. documents clearly indicate both occurred not far apart. then you have the pilots claim of the jump time being between 5-10 minutes after the last contact at 8:05. that puts the time frame right where the F-106 states. that would be the Orchards area close to Scoll's airport..
In your recollection, who else has targeted Scholl's (sp?) Airport and Orchards? Colbert? Any suspect promoters?
I asked JT about it once and he replied "NOH! NOH! It was the Troutdale airport" :rofl:
Any 302's with 106 pilot testimony is important.
-
Nobody that I'm aware of. I first looked at Evergreen airport. then when I looked at Scholl's the sectional map was there showing the parachute. I wanted to find the airport the F-106 was referring too. didn't take long. I don't know if anyone followed that lead from the pilot?
-
It makes sense but then you have to figure out where he landed. Flyjack keeps posting wind data but it's ground winds. those go to 1000 feet if not mistaken. it does put Cooper closer to the Columbia. actually, he does have winds aloft. I have to look for it..
I looked back to the 70's and the area was not entirely woods or vacant. roads and housing were all over the area. spread out but not empty..
-
Nobody that I'm aware of. I first looked at Evergreen airport. then when I looked at Scholl's the sectional map was there showing the parachute. I wanted to find the airport the F-106 was referring too. didn't take long. I don't know if anyone followed that lead from the pilot?
I just wish Wayne was here to speak to this!
Any bail near Scholls/Orchards place the jump in the 2011-13 time space, as I read this.
-
It makes sense but then you have to figure out where he landed. Flyjack keeps posting wind data but it's ground winds. those go to 1000 feet if not mistaken. it does put Cooper closer to the Columbia.
I looked back to the 70's and the area was not entirely woods or vacant. roads and housing were all over the area. spread out but not empty..
Andrade is going to have something to say about this, I am sure! I just posted his flight path drop map in the my last reply ...
I have to run ... later. Thanks! Been a nice evening.
-
Nobody that I'm aware of. I first looked at Evergreen airport. then when I looked at Scholl's the sectional map was there showing the parachute. I wanted to find the airport the F-106 was referring too. didn't take long. I don't know if anyone followed that lead from the pilot?
I just wish Wayne was here to speak to this!
Any bail near Scholls/Orchards place the jump in the 2011-13 time space, as I read this.
The path connects to what the pilot stated. it veered east and then turns right. that's the 8:15 location.
-
The time on the file is November 26, 1971. in reference to the F-106 pilot.....
-
The time on the file is November 26, 1971. in reference to the F-106 pilot.....
Thank you! Great !! will note in the file.
-
Thanks for all this information, guys. I haven't made my trip down to Orchards to scout out the LZ, but this information gives me a better starting point. Maybe I'll head down there this week.
-
Anyone know where Scholl's Air Field is/was? I can't find it anywhere on a map.
-
Anyone know where Scholl's Air Field is/was? I can't find it anywhere on a map.
Scholl's Airport is located southeast of the intersection of Northeast 117th Avenue & Northeast 95th Street. the runway is still there being used by a business. it closed sometime in the early 90's.
The photo below shows the flight path going over Scholl's. near by you can see the parachute on the map.
-
Anyone know where Scholl's Air Field is/was? I can't find it anywhere on a map.
Scholl's Airport is located southeast of the intersection of Northeast 117th Avenue & Northeast 95th Street. the runway is still there being used by a business. it closed sometime in the early 90's.
The photo below shows the flight path going over Scholl's. near by you can see the parachute on the map.
Smith's free-lunch-buzzer has gone off! So let me simply ask: 'Who landed at Scholl's airport the evening of 11-24-71 and where did he go'?
There are 302's about this.
The F-106 pilot's notes probably end all speculation about an east path or a west path, imho. :chr2:
*This may take until Monday until I can find and talk to two people, if they are still alive. I pray they are, and their memory is sound!
-
It makes sense but then you have to figure out where he landed. Flyjack keeps posting wind data but it's ground winds. those go to 1000 feet if not mistaken. it does put Cooper closer to the Columbia.
I looked back to the 70's and the area was not entirely woods or vacant. roads and housing were all over the area. spread out but not empty..
Andrade is going to have something to say about this, I am sure! I just posted his flight path drop map in the my last reply ...
I have to run ... later. Thanks! Been a nice evening.
I never liked the western half of the search grid, I took some of the reports that the plane over La Center when Cooper dropped, then I tried to incorporate a flight path west of Portland from that point.... meh. I'm really beginning to despise speculation, even my own.
From everything my father and I have looked at, and all the calculations and reports, we put Cooper as far south as Orchards. That's with a "missing minute" plus a minute of error, plus a three minute "oscillation event" that was reported in one of the newspaper accounts. Speaking personally, I've become more orthodox the more I look at the case, and find little objection to the 8:10-8:13 LZ-A the FBI came up with in '72.
-
It's still confusing. the same report with the military (F-106) the 302 states the oscillation and pressure bump occurred in the same time frame. if that's true Cooper didn't stay on the stairs very long.
The F-106 states the plane veered. that appears to be the 8:14 location just east of Battlegound. the plane turns (right) at the 8:15 location. that would be considered a course change. this is some difference in miles to Lake Merwin. was Carr right when he stated they mixed up the oscillation and pressure bump...
If Cooper bailed at 8:13 - 8:15 the plane is in the opposite direction the drop map shows.
I think some of the lapse in time in this area is due to the pilot speaking with the company vs radio transmissions.
The three pages can be found in the FBI vault. part 10 of 37, page 427 or looking at the bottom right of the pages will show DB Cooper - 1660
-
The F-106 pilot really nails the location. it will be hard to find a loophole for reasoning out of the report. he knew exactly where he was as well as the plane. I don't see any location matching this west of the flight path. the western flight path is suppose to be a straight line of flight. 60 plus nautical miles straight if not mistaken? no turns, no veering.
Next will be finding out why the 6 dashes are on the radio transcripts. they start almost immediately after the plane takes off. what would they be hiding seconds after takeoff, or does this imply something else. why would they mark where they removed something. if they redacted, it would be blacked out...or blank with box lines similar to the 302's. IMO, this would be a cover up or conspiracy.
-
Anyone know where Scholl's Air Field is/was? I can't find it anywhere on a map.
Scholl's Airport is located southeast of the intersection of Northeast 117th Avenue & Northeast 95th Street. the runway is still there being used by a business. it closed sometime in the early 90's.
The photo below shows the flight path going over Scholl's. near by you can see the parachute on the map.
Smith's free-lunch-buzzer has gone off! So let me simply ask: 'Who landed at Scholl's airport the evening of 11-24-71 and where did he go'?
There are 302's about this.
The F-106 pilot's notes probably end all speculation about an east path or a west path, imho. :chr2:
*This may take until Monday until I can find and talk to two people, if they are still alive. I pray they are, and their memory is sound!
The surprises never end. Just exactly how did the F-106 pilots determine the ground point where they claim Cooper jumped? Georger apparently believes they had x-ray eyes. The facts seem to be that the F-106 pilots were 5 miles behind the airliner and never saw anyone jump either visually or on their radar systems. And they were above an overcast and several additional cloud layers and could not possibly have had a view of the ground. But that doesn't discourage Georger and others who try to arrange the facts to fit their theories.
Incidentally, in an early post on the current DZ Cooper forum, Ckret states that Cooper could not possibly have known his location when he jumped. And that statement is absolutely true.
Recent posts on DZ by well known wackos claim that the wind was from the southeast at Portland when Cooper jumped. One of these characters posts a 302 form that lists the 7:00PM, 8:00PM, and 9:00PM Aviation Sequence Reports for Portland and a few other locations plus a winds aloft estimate for the Portland area for the 8:00PM to 9:00PM time period.
But he apparently doesn't know how to read those sequence reports or the winds aloft estimate. They indicate that the winds aloft were from the southwest (225 degrees true) or further west. They absolutely do not support the claim that the winds were from the southeast.
Those estimated winds aloft are of unknown origin. The National Weather Service is responsible for preparing the winds aloft forecasts that are used in FAA briefings. They do not predict winds aloft for less than 3000 feet above the surface.
In any event, the winds aloft were substantially higher than the estimates shown in the DZ post as well as the predictions in the NWS forecasts. The actual measured winds aloft and directions only recently became available to the Cooper community thanks to the efforts of Tom Kaye. To repeat, the radiosonde data is actual measured data and not predictions.
Anyone who is even casually interested in determining the weather and flight path during the Cooper hijacking should make some effort to understand them. The NWS has excellent publications on aviation weather and the FAA has excellent publications on instrument flying, ATC procedures, navigation, and everything else related to aviation. Most if not all of these publications can be downloaded for free. I'm sure that Georger will appreciate that.
-
Anyone know where Scholl's Air Field is/was? I can't find it anywhere on a map.
Scholl's Airport is located southeast of the intersection of Northeast 117th Avenue & Northeast 95th Street. the runway is still there being used by a business. it closed sometime in the early 90's.
The photo below shows the flight path going over Scholl's. near by you can see the parachute on the map.
Thanks, Shut.
-
The surprises never end. Just exactly how did the F-106 pilots determine the ground point where they claim Cooper jumped? Georger apparently believes they had x-ray eyes. The facts seem to be that the F-106 pilots were 5 miles behind the airliner and never saw anyone jump either visually or on their radar systems. And they were above an overcast and several additional cloud layers and could not possibly have had a view of the ground....
Good points, Robert. I've been wondering the same thing. But it is a starting point for further investigation and conversation with the folks who were down there and might remember something about the FBI's follow-up ground search, if there was any, in the Orchards-Hockinson area.
Besides Scholl's Air Field, the Goheen Airport is still active, apparently, and might be a source of information. Goheen has popped up frequently in local narratives about DBC and low-flying airplanes, strange takeoffs and landings, etc.
I'm developing a map of this area. A central feature is WA State Route 503, and I'm labeling it the "LZ Highway." In fact, there is a loop involved as SR 503 runs north from Orchards to Amboy, and then from there one can drive south on 182nd St back to the Orchards area, passing through Yacolt along the way. Yacolt is where Tom McDowell currently works, and he was the leader of the ground search in Amboy on November 26-29, 1971.
-
Just exactly how did the F-106 pilots determine the ground point where they claim Cooper jumped?
Experience.
Close behind the hijacked aircraft.
Knowing where he was.
Knowing the area.
Listening in on the cross talk.
Radar.
He never claimed it to be "the jump point"
He stated "The point of there change of course would have been in close proximity in time and location to that believed were unsub departed the aircraft"
It's similar to a cop chasing a suspect in a car. you see them name the street a block before they get there. they know. eveybody can't be wrong here.
-
Has it been verified the dashes mean data was removed? they start right out of the gate on takeoff. what could be said that wasn't mentioned minutes prior?
-
Has it been verified the dashes mean data was removed? they start right out of the gate on takeoff. what could be said that wasn't mentioned minutes prior?
I think that using dash to indicate deletions is a standard writing practice. But what needed to be deleted in the first two minutes after takeoff is an open question.
-
I just noticed when looking at the radio transcripts at the top. more transmissions are shown further down that fill the gaps where the dases are placed.
-
Time frame
0433:46
---------
0433:51
5 second difference? you can't get two transmissions worth hiding in this time frame?
-
I just noticed when looking at the radio transcripts at the top. more transmissions are shown further down that fill the gaps where the dases are placed.
Could you explain this a bit better? Are you confusing the time a message was transmitted over the ARINC phone patch with the time same message was received through the ARINC teletype network?
-
The two shots on one page are from the radio transcript PDF. not the other.....further down gives more detail it appears?
-
Time frame
0433:46
---------
0433:51
5 second difference? you can't get two transmissions worth hiding in this time frame?
I don't see what you are talking about. But as previously mentioned, any transmission from the airliner over the ARINC phone patch is going to arrive at least two minutes before the message arrives over the ARINC teletype network.
-
I just noticed when looking at the radio transcripts at the top. more transmissions are shown further down that fill the gaps where the dases are placed.
Could you explain this a bit better? Are you confusing the time a message was transmitted over the ARINC phone patch with the time same message was received through the ARINC teletype network?
actually, you are right. I thought I had one PDF open in two windows....one is the ARINC...
-
here is the time issue....5 seconds between transmissions and dashes in between?
-
A skydiver on the DZ makes a good point in reference to the chase plane. it appears they are talking about the two planes and not 305. this could be from the radar data and the person making the comment. it's showing the planes did zig zag to trail them. makes more sense as to how they found the ground location.
-
here is the time issue....5 seconds between transmissions and dashes in between?
This was in connection with the hand off from one controller to another. The deleted information probably related to the aircraft's position.
-
Most US interceptor aircraft in the 70s had only UHF AM comm radios covering 225-400 MHz. They had no way to directly communicate with civil aircraft that had only VHF AM comm radios covering approx 118-136 MHz.
The McChord F 106s never sighted Coopers 727, despite SAGE and the Hughes MA1 data link system that, when working, provided SAGE directed automatically flown target intercepts.
A McChord "trash hauler" C 130 cargo plane did intercept the skyjacked 727. The elite F 106 fighter/interceptor jocks must have been totally humiliated.
The involvement of Minneapolis is not surprising. Airline pilots want to clear everything with "The Company" when there are risky situations. I've seen VHF ACARS texts where a cockpit crew was angsting with "The Company" on whether to involve law enforcement when a drunk celeb was causing trouble on a flight. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS.
377
-
Most US interceptor aircraft in the 70s had only UHF AM comm radios covering 225-400 MHz. They had no way to directly communicate with civil aircraft that had only VHF AM comm radios covering approx 118-136 MHz.
The McChord F 106s never sighted Coopers 727, despite SAGE and the Hughes MA1 data link system that, when working, provided SAGE directed automatically flown target intercepts.
A McChord "trash hauler" C 130 cargo plane did intercept the skyjacked 727. The elite F 106 fighter/interceptor jocks must have been totally humiliated.
The involvement of Minneapolis is not surprising. Airline pilots want to clear everything with "The Company" when there are risky situations. I've seen VHF ACARS texts where a cockpit crew was angsting with "The Company" on whether to involve law enforcement when a drunk celeb was causing trouble on a flight. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS.
377
What is your narrative based on? Specific documents?
So what do you make of this - F106 pilot describing 305's movements?
-
I could be wrong G but that excerpt doesn't read like it came from either of the F 106 pilots. Sounds more like a radar operator's narrative.
At night, even in clear weather, trailing a 727 from 5 miles back, chase planes wouldn't see much more than its lights.
Again, I may be wrong. Show me evidence that the F 106 pilots actually saw the 727 and I'll change my mind.
377
-
I could be wrong G but that excerpt doesn't read like it came from either of the F 106 pilots. Sounds more like a radar operator's narrative.
At night, even in clear weather, trailing a 727 from 5 miles back, chase planes wouldn't see much more than its lights.
Again, I may be wrong. Show me evidence that the F 106 pilots actually saw the 727 and I'll change my mind.
377
I tend to agree. I think Flyjack found this excerpt and posted it to make some point - then Shutter picked it up and posted it to make his point - but we have not been shown the whole doc or series of docs from which this single passage was pulled. FJ and Shutter have a bad habit of posting pieces of things vs whole documents.
In any event, even if this is a radar ops comment, or even a controllers comment, there must be some basis for it? If the comment is accurate, whatever the source, it tends to redefine when and where Cooper bailed ?
*Bits and pieces of things do not add up to a smoking gun, much less to a corpse! :rofl:
The solution to the Cooper case may rest with the history of Jello - and the adherents of Jello! ;)
-
I posted the entire page concerning the fighter jets. then I posted where it was from and how to find it. out of the three pages the other two are not related to that subject.
Then a couple days later explained it was probably the fighter jets the radar operator was speaking about and not 305.
-
I posted the entire page concerning the fighter jets. then I posted where it was from and how to find it. out of the three pages the other two are not related to that subject.
Then a couple days later explained it was probably the fighter jets the radar operator was speaking about and not 305.
So the passages are from a radar operator ... being quoted in an FBI 302?
It is impossible to keep track of or remember cross postings posted by somebody in some thread on something ... in some forum somewhere!
-
It wasn't cross posting. you asked where it was from after I posted the document and I posted where it could be found. then someone on the DZ stated it sounded more like the fighters making the turn to the east. it also sounds like the radar operator speaking about that specific time and location. I made the comment a couple days later stating it probably wasn't 305 they were talking about.
It's in the files on the FBI vault page. I have downloaded the file.
-
Reading the document again suggest it was someone from KPDX. stated at the start of the page. possibly who ever is in charge of the tower.
He goes on to explain that the fighters were 5 miles behind and somewhere around where they believed Cooper jumped. they veered east and made a sudden turn. to explain the location further he speaks of a small airfield that has skydiving in the area and is marked on the sectional map. the only location marked on the map and is a small airfield was Scholl's. if the operator is correct then Cooper bailed further south than they first believed and this kind of confirms Carr's statements saying the samething.
-
Reading the document again suggest it was someone from KPDX. stated at the start of the page. possibly who ever is in charge of the tower.
He goes on to explain that the fighters were 5 miles behind and somewhere around where they believed Cooper jumped. they veered east and made a sudden turn. to explain the location further he speaks of a small airfield that has skydiving in the area and is marked on the sectional map. the only location marked on the map and is a small airfield was Scholl's. if the operator is correct then Cooper bailed further south than they first believed and this kind of confirms Carr's statements saying the samething.
Thanks for the explanation - found this.
-
Reading the document again suggest it was someone from KPDX. stated at the start of the page. possibly who ever is in charge of the tower.
He goes on to explain that the fighters were 5 miles behind and somewhere around where they believed Cooper jumped. they veered east and made a sudden turn. to explain the location further he speaks of a small airfield that has skydiving in the area and is marked on the sectional map. the only location marked on the map and is a small airfield was Scholl's. if the operator is correct then Cooper bailed further south than they first believed and this kind of confirms Carr's statements saying the samething.
Thanks for the explanation - found this.
As I understand the above, it was the F-106s that the Portland radar operator saw east of V-23 and not the airliner. Also, the reference to "Vector 23", which was probably taken from some Seattle radio transcripts, should be to "Victor 23".
-
There is no reference to any airway taken on the document surrounding the fighters. a ground location is given.
-
There is no reference to any airway taken on the document surrounding the fighters. a ground location is given.
The recent posts regarding a radar operator at Portland claiming to have seen the airliner on the east side of V-23 in the immediate Portland area means that he should also have seen the F-106s.
-
There is no reference to any airway taken on the document surrounding the fighters. a ground location is given.
The recent posts regarding a radar operator at Portland claiming to have seen the airliner on the east side of V-23 in the immediate Portland area means that he should also have seen the F-106s.
Yes, and reported just that on another document. one document is about airways and the other is in reference to the fighter jets.
-
Then you have this that was recently posted on the DZ...Flyjack didn't mention where this came from.
-
Then you have this that was recently posted on the DZ...Flyjack didn't mention where this came from.
Looks like about 2/3s of a page. Someone's book: Tosaw, Himms, Smith ... too lazy to post the source.
-
Then you have this that was recently posted on the DZ...Flyjack didn't mention where this came from.
Looks like about 2/3s of a page. Someone's book: Tosaw, Himms, Smith ... too lazy to post the source.
It is not from Himmelsbach's or Tosaw's book. I don't think that last paragraph will pass the smell test much less any other test.
-
It's from a book called "Amazing Flights And Flyers" he was an air traffic controller that was working that evening but I see some error's in the book from the start.. operator was Clifford Ammerman.
click here (https://books.google.com/books?id=EIgbHUvO76kC&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115&dq=clifford+ammerman+air+traffic+controller&source=bl&ots=tJzPp9NmvW&sig=ACfU3U0FYzrvqQLNIT5-OgGjzNpsAg1xiA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwinxOO_udPjAhUIca0KHc51DUwQ6AEwCnoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=clifford%20ammerman%20air%20traffic%20controller&f=false/url)
-
It's from a book called "Amazing Flights And Flyers" he was an air traffic controller that was working that evening but I see some error's in the book from the start.. operator was Clifford Ammerman.
click here (https://books.google.com/books?id=EIgbHUvO76kC&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115&dq=clifford+ammerman+air+traffic+controller&source=bl&ots=tJzPp9NmvW&sig=ACfU3U0FYzrvqQLNIT5-OgGjzNpsAg1xiA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwinxOO_udPjAhUIca0KHc51DUwQ6AEwCnoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=clifford%20ammerman%20air%20traffic%20controller&f=false/url)
The book is not by Clifford Ammerman. No evidence Clifford Ammerman was even interviewed for the book.
The book is "Amazing Flights And Flyers", a synopsis of aviation incidents and stories for the general public by a Canadian aviation writer: Shirlee Smith Matheson, published in 2010. The Preface says material for the book was gleaned from articles, histories, internet postings, personal interviews, etc ... see below. It looks like something FlyJack found ?
No doubt this author followed Dropzone. Maybe Smith or Blevins knows her?
There is more about the Cooper hijacking before and after the page Shutter posted.
-
The radar operator was Clifford Ammerman....I never said he wrote the book. I also stated the book has error's.
It states he was working that evening "November 27"
Takeoff time "7:44"
Cooper jumped 24 minutes after takeoff.
Cooper had a bag vs a briefcase for the bomb.
Clifford wasn't at the airport or the tower. he was at Seattle center. that's where the operator's were and are today. ARTCC..
-
Snowmman first brings this up back in November of 2018.
Here's some detail about the chase planes, from Clifford Ammerman who was working radar control at Sea-Tac the night of the hijack. He was employed by the FAA.
I don't think Clifford Ammerman has been named before.
Ammerman controlled the F-106's that trailed Flight 305. It seems like the T-33 arrived just north of portland, and the F-106's left the immediate trail then to the T-33.
Notably, the F-106's weren't getting control from the SAGE center.
It's interesting the T-33/F-106 handoff occurred just north of Portland, because it means maybe they were switching the trailing planes around at the time Cooper jumped?
-
Snowmman first brings this up back in November of 2018.
Here's some detail about the chase planes, from Clifford Ammerman who was working radar control at Sea-Tac the night of the hijack. He was employed by the FAA.
I don't think Clifford Ammerman has been named before.
Ammerman controlled the F-106's that trailed Flight 305. It seems like the T-33 arrived just north of portland, and the F-106's left the immediate trail then to the T-33.
Notably, the F-106's weren't getting control from the SAGE center.
It's interesting the T-33/F-106 handoff occurred just north of Portland, because it means maybe they were switching the trailing planes around at the time Cooper jumped?
Im at a loss for what to say! [Snowmman first brings this up back in November of 2018. I don't think Clifford Ammerman has been named before. ]
I broke the news about the flare story and R2 clear back in 2010 at Dropzone. R2 is Cliff Ammerman. For all I know it was my post(s) that alerted this author to interview Cliff Ammerman and include the flare story in her book. I had interviewed R2 and R3 several months earlier and there are a number of people who know this (Smith/R99/Ckret, etc)
The author says she interviewed R2 also, and even has a letter from him. I have emails from R2. The problem is: I have a different version of the flare story than the author is giving, who did what when, etc. The flares were being dropped from a plane in the southern Eugene area approx a week before the Cooper hijacking. R2 explained to me that after 305 had cleared Eugene airspace and things settled down, he (R2) called R3 at Eugene and asked if he thought the 305 hijacker might be the same person dropping flares from the week before. Both controllers were aware that formal documentation and fillings had been made in this matter, with the FAA, law enforcement, the FBI, etc. R2 told me that both he and R3 agreed it would only be a matter of time until this issue came up again given the hijacking in progress, and this would probably be invested further - as far as anyone could investigate it. Then as we know, several passengers on the plane were later shown photos of possible suspects, and were told that a large percentage of the photos they were being shown were of people 'in the Eugene area'.
The author says nothing about the "Janet fire in the sky" story at Vancouver, the day of the hijacking. I asked R2 if he had ever heard of the Janet Story and he said he hadn't, and he asked for details which I provided by email. R2 said he thought the story was 'interesting but nothing further developed from this, that I am aware of.
Pages 117 to 135 are missing in the Google version of this book, without purchase. Who knows what the author says there...
I will address other issues later.
-
My comment is in reference to this thread. I'm simply going by what I find in basic searches. I've seen a lot of posts by you stating only R2 or R anything vs a name. according to the statement in the book Ammerman claims the flare incident occurred on the 23rd.
sorting things out is a process.
-
I contacted the author and just got her response...
"Hello,
Thank you for your email and your interest in my book, Amazing Flights and Flyers. I states clearly in the book (pp. 115-117) that I had personal telephone calls with Mr. Ammerman as well as a follow-up letter he wrote to me to explain some of the more technical aspects of his work in air traffic control the night of the hijacking. He told me I was the first (and possibly only) person who had ever contacted him about this experience (see last line, p. 117). His contact information was given to me by a tour guide (docent) at the Seattle Museum of Flight (whom I met when I myself worked at an aviation museum in Calgary). This fellow was a personal friend of Ammerman, and so I followed up.
The book is still in print and can be ordered through Amazon or the Canadian distributor, Alpine Book Peddlers of Canmore, Alberta.
Best regards,
Shirlee Smith Matheson"
-
My comment is in reference to this thread. I'm simply going by what I find in basic searches. I've seen a lot of posts by you stating only R2 or R anything vs a name. according to the statement in the book Ammerman claims the flare incident occurred on the 23rd.
sorting things out is a process.
There is no way "in hell" R3 would call R2 asking about the flare incident from the week before _ during the same period of time R3 is still dealing with 305! It was R2 'off duty' so to speak. R3 was still engaged! Cliff was very firm that he "waited until things had settled down and 305 had left Eugene air space, before he called R3 up and brought up the flare incident.
Cliff's name was finally given long before 2018! Look it up at Dropzone.
Also, what does your statement mean "Notably, the F-106's weren't getting control from the SAGE center." ?
I dont know what you mean or are implying. Who is the "Sage Center"? The author clearly says: "Ammerman at Seattle Center was now one of those charged with keeping the F-106 fighters five miles in trail, . . .
-
Also, what does your statement mean "Notably, the F-106's weren't getting control from the SAGE center
It sounds like the fighters locked onto the target and not the Sage system itself. the SAGE might of just tracked it from McChord.
-
I contacted the author and just got her response...
"Hello,
Thank you for your email and your interest in my book, Amazing Flights and Flyers. I states clearly in the book (pp. 115-117) that I had personal telephone calls with Mr. Ammerman as well as a follow-up letter he wrote to me to explain some of the more technical aspects of his work in air traffic control the night of the hijacking. He told me I was the first (and possibly only) person who had ever contacted him about this experience (see last line, p. 117). His contact information was given to me by a tour guide (docent) at the Seattle Museum of Flight (whom I met when I myself worked at an aviation museum in Calgary). This fellow was a personal friend of Ammerman, and so I followed up.
The book is still in print and can be ordered through Amazon or the Canadian distributor, Alpine Book Peddlers of Canmore, Alberta.
Best regards,
Shirlee Smith Matheson"
So? WTF is that supposed to mean? :rofl:
I dont know or care who was 1st or 2nd or third or fourth. ...... where does R99 fit in? He talked to Ammerman too by email. Was he 14th?
-
So? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I guess nothing? I read your statement of the book compiling of articles and things taking from the internet. I thought I would try and contact her and ask..
pretty dumb, right?
-
So? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I guess nothing? I read your statement of the book compiling of articles and things taking from the internet. I thought I would try and contact her and ask..
pretty dumb, right?
She didnt say anything of substance.
This author is getting some things correctly, and some things wrong. She gets the date of the hijacking wrong! Period. Or we are all idiots and she is the only truth teller in the whole Cooper hijacking.
This is unfortunate. I had hoped to learn something new about the Cooper hijacking today. I guess not!
If this author cant even get the date of the hijacking correct then that may impeach her whole book! Maybe everything she is saying is wrong?
I can tell you R3 did NOT call R2 while he was in the middle of handling 305 and ask about the flare incident the week before! And R3 was not sitting on a buffalo either!
-
I'm confused, and concerned. Ammerman never spoke to anyone before Matheson? Really? What about Georger?
What's going on?
-
I don't give a shit what you think....
I simply stated things I read that are inaccurate and posted them!
Takeoff time 7:44
Cooper had a bag vs briefcase
November 27.
I posted the page for people to discuss and agree or disagree with what was posted. all of the sudden I'm attacked for making comments about the page. "sage center" you need to ask Snowmman about that. I didn't post that either.
I was curious to how she got the knowledge about Ammerman and asked. I get a load of shit about that. I think I'll just go in the background again.
Shutter
-
I'm confused, and concerned. Ammerman never spoke to anyone before Matheson? Really? What about Georger?
What's going on?
I have no idea. My feeling is this lady picked up on our conversations at DZ and went off and wrote a book, or included the Cooper jacking in a book she was already writing? The timing is weird. Was she ever at DZ? Did she ever post at DZ? Is she an aviation writer? I guess she is according to her vita.
All I do know is she says the hijacking was on "the eve of Amercan Thanksgiving Saturday November 27th" !
The hijacking was on Nov 24th which was a Wednesday!
-
I don't give a shit what you think....
I simply stated things I read that are inaccurate and posted them!
Takeoff time 7:44
Cooper had a bag vs briefcase
November 27.
I posted the page for people to discuss and agree or disagree with what was posted. all of the sudden I'm attacked for making comments about the page. "sage center" you need to ask Snowmman about that. I didn't post that either.
I was curious to how she got the knowledge about Ammerman and asked. I get a load of shit about that. I think I'll just go in the background again.
Shutter
All I am saying is her versions of things I have are wrong. Ive already said she is making mistakes (no expert would make) You point her other mistakes. I agree. She is supposed to be some known aviation author? We basically agree!
I dont know who interviewed Ammerman first second or third etc... I have no idea! It doesnt matter to me. But I do know what CA told me!
And even with her mistakes which no real author would make, she does describe what R2 did in his handling of 305, F106, T33 ...... and THAT is very important and interesting ....... but can you trust it based on her other claims and mistake? I just dont know. That is ALL I am saying.
-
Author Shirlee Smith Matheson, Children's Writer.
www.ssmatheson.ca/
Shirlee Smith Matheson Canadian award-winning author of real life adventure fiction and nonfiction books for juvenile, young adult, adult readers.
http://www.ssmatheson.ca/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirlee_Matheson
https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=2sM8XbvtBsHWtAb4r5_wDg&q=Shirlee+Smith+Matheson&oq=Shirlee+Smith+Matheson&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0.2651.8746..10067...0.0..0.109.1554.21j1......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131j0i10j0i22i30j0i22i10i30.4PRuHNin9Cw&ved=0ahUKEwi7wtubh9bjAhVBK80KHfjXB-4Q4dUDCAc&uact=5
-
I contacted the author and just got her response...
"Hello,
Thank you for your email and your interest in my book, Amazing Flights and Flyers. I states clearly in the book (pp. 115-117) that I had personal telephone calls with Mr. Ammerman as well as a follow-up letter he wrote to me to explain some of the more technical aspects of his work in air traffic control the night of the hijacking. He told me I was the first (and possibly only) person who had ever contacted him about this experience (see last line, p. 117). His contact information was given to me by a tour guide (docent) at the Seattle Museum of Flight (whom I met when I myself worked at an aviation museum in Calgary). This fellow was a personal friend of Ammerman, and so I followed up.
The book is still in print and can be ordered through Amazon or the Canadian distributor, Alpine Book Peddlers of Canmore, Alberta.
Best regards,
Shirlee Smith Matheson"
So? WTF is that supposed to mean? :rofl:
I dont know or care who was 1st or 2nd or third or fourth. ...... where does R99 fit in? He talked to Ammerman too by email. Was he 14th?
Actually, I never contacted Ammerman but Georger did tell me about his contacts with him about 10 years ago.
Who knows for sure where R3 was located? Frankly, I would assume that he was located at the Seattle ATC facility and probably only a few feet from R2. Some of you would probably be surprised as to how much the ATC people used land telephone lines and remote transmitter/receiver sites. At least some of the remote transmitter/receiver sites and their radio frequencies are listed on the FAA's IFR Enroute Charts.
-
The original Seattle Air Route Traffic Control Center was located at the Boeing Field
Administration Building in 1940 and control instructions were relayed to pilots via company phone
lines. In 1950, Seattle ARTCC moved to the Seattle Tacoma Airport (SeaTac) Administration
Building, where the first radio was commissioned in the facility allowing direct controller to pilot
communications. In 1962 the ARTCC moved from SeaTac to its current location in Auburn,
Washington. The new, larger building allowed for further expansion and new equipment.
open 24/7 and has never closed since 1962.
-
I contacted the author and just got her response...
"Hello,
Thank you for your email and your interest in my book, Amazing Flights and Flyers. I states clearly in the book (pp. 115-117) that I had personal telephone calls with Mr. Ammerman as well as a follow-up letter he wrote to me to explain some of the more technical aspects of his work in air traffic control the night of the hijacking. He told me I was the first (and possibly only) person who had ever contacted him about this experience (see last line, p. 117). His contact information was given to me by a tour guide (docent) at the Seattle Museum of Flight (whom I met when I myself worked at an aviation museum in Calgary). This fellow was a personal friend of Ammerman, and so I followed up.
The book is still in print and can be ordered through Amazon or the Canadian distributor, Alpine Book Peddlers of Canmore, Alberta.
Best regards,
Shirlee Smith Matheson"
So? WTF is that supposed to mean? :rofl:
I dont know or care who was 1st or 2nd or third or fourth. ...... where does R99 fit in? He talked to Ammerman too by email. Was he 14th?
Actually, I never contacted Ammerman but Georger did tell me about his contacts with him about 10 years ago.
Who knows for sure where R3 was located? Frankly, I would assume that he was located at the Seattle ATC facility and probably only a few feet from R2. Some of you would probably be surprised as to how much the ATC people used land telephone lines and remote transmitter/receiver sites. At least some of the remote transmitter/receiver sites and their radio frequencies are listed on the FAA's IFR Enroute Charts.
I thought you exchanged emails with R2 ? Didnt I share his email adr with you so you and he could converse? I told Cliff to look for you.
Fly is really pushing this over at DZ - congratulating Shutter on his fine job and basically saying I am an idiot, as usual. He has not called me a liar - yet! But I would not count that out. :rofl: Fly has yet to even identify his source or name the Matheson book, a fellow Canadian. For all anyone knows Flyjack and Matheson may be one-and-the-same person? For all we know Shutter, Flyjack, and Matheson have been comunicating for some time? And as usual, Flyjack has not admitted (yet) that Matheson makes any mistakes. Perhaps another Flyjack bankruptcy is just around the corner - who knows.
All that matters is whether Matheson's Ammerman report is accurate or not. Parts of it agree with my interview notes with Cliff - but parts do not agree. Neiher FLYJACK or Matheson even mention a T33 rendezvous at Lake Oswego, for example. And as usual, that is the last thing FLYJACK (with capitol letters) is even concerned about at present, until he gets his zombie mileage he wants first, from his reports at DZ and the controversy he has stirred up again. FLYJACK might at least try to get Matheson to get the date of the hijacking straight! That would be a good place to start. EH? ;)
Again, what matters here is whether Matheson's report for Ammerman is accurate or not. All other considerations are secondary.
Matheson's fast reply to Shutter today seems to imply that she is concerned about the accuracy of her reporting.
Lastly, there is also a possibility nobody has mentioned: Cliff's recollections may have changed over time? I tend to discount that because for one thing the Matheson book was copyrighted 2010, the same year I interviewed CA. I tend to doubt that Ammerman's recollections changed radically within one year? I am sure he knows the actual date of the hijacking, for example. How Matheson (and FLYJACK) got that wrong, who can say. Moreover, if they continue to stick to the wrong date ... then we do have a problemo! ;)
-
I'm going to explain my action one more time for the record!
Approx. two days ago I seen a post made by Flyjack. I copied the page he posted and then posted it here. I added that error's were noticed while reading the document. comments were made about the document that one could consider negative. I, Shutter, a researcher took it upon myself to contact the author to see where and how she came about the claims on the page I provided from her book. I was specific with asking where and how she got the information regarding Ammerman. I didn't go into the other error's noted in the book nor did I ask if Ammerman had spoken to anyone previous to her contacting him directly. I then posted the email in it's entirety where she explains how she got the information.
I find it insulting to believe I'm working with the author or anyone else or trying to make someone out a liar. I'm usually pretty direct when it comes to something I don't believe. to go further it's rather ridiculous to believe Flyjack is Matheson. I really don't feel I need to explain this at all....
Now, the book clearly has statements from Ammerman. the author claims to have had several phone calls and a letter going into technical details along with statements from a longtime friend of Ammerman's. perhaps it was the first time being contacted from someone writing a book. who knows why he said she was the first. this was around 39 years after the fact. I would guess he's spoken to many over the years. perhaps he meant "publicly"
I'm here to find answers. I asked her and she answered. how the hell would I know she was going to make the comment of him speaking exclusively to her?
-
I am currently awaiting a third reply where I did go into detail asking about the error's on that page.
The date..November 27.
Takeoff time 7:44
Bag vs briefcase.
The last email was made late in the evening so I don't expect a reply until tomorrow.
-
I am currently awaiting a third reply where I did go into detail asking about the error's on that page.
The date..November 27.
Takeoff time 7:44
Bag vs briefcase.
The last email was made late in the evening so I don't expect a reply until tomorrow.
There is no confusion over "bag" vs "briefcase. She uses both terms but in different places, for different reasons. She says Cooper had a bomb in his BRIEFCASE. She says that twice. Then she starts talking about "bags" passengers usually carried on and in that context she refers to Cooper's briefcase ... as a BAG! See the passages below.
Its this confusion in language that makes me wonder if the Canadian Matheson is the Canadian FLYJACK - they are both hung up on ordinary language! I dont know - maybe all Canadians screw up the English language, but I doubt that. I think Matheson is a native American from some tribe. I base that on several things in her vita including her photos. I think FLYJACK is just a Frenchman - have no evidence of anything else so far unless you know something I dont. But I find no problem over bag vs briefcase in her writing, so far. See the passages below.
In a like manner I am going to break this down into manageable pieces I can compare with Ammerman notes. I am not going to jump to conclusions like FLYJACK always does!
I dont think Matheson intended this writing as a scholarly work on the Cooper hijacking - because it isn't! Just because FLYJACK is jumping through hoops over this does not mean we should, or Matheson intended this work to be a scholarly treatise either.
-
I am currently awaiting a third reply where I did go into detail asking about the error's on that page.
The date..November 27.
Takeoff time 7:44
Bag vs briefcase.
The last email was made late in the evening so I don't expect a reply until tomorrow.
There is no confusion over "bag" vs "briefcase. She uses both terms but in different places, for different reasons. She says Cooper had a bomb in his BRIEFCASE. She says that twice. Then she starts talking about "bags" passengers usually carried on and in that context she refers to Cooper's briefcase ... as a BAG! See the passages below.
Its this confusion in language that makes me wonder if the Canadian Matheson is the Canadian FLYJACK - they are both hung up on ordinary language! I dont know - maybe all Canadians screw up the English language, but I doubt that. I think Matheson is a native American from some tribe. I base that on several things in her vita including her photos. I think FLYJACK is just a Frenchman - have no evidence of anything else so far unless you know something I dont. But I find no problem over bag vs briefcase in her writing, so far. See the passages below.
In a like manner I am going to break this down into manageable pieces I can compare with Ammerman notes. I am not going to jump to conclusions like FLYJACK always does!
I dont think Matheson intended this writing as a scholarly work on the Cooper hijacking - because it isn't! Just because FLYJACK is jumping through hoops over this does not mean we should, or Matheson intended this work to be a scholarly treatise either.
I think the "briefcase" is described as being an "attache case". That is, it had a box type rigid construction.
In his interview with the FBI in Reno, Captain Scott stated that he did not see or talk to Cooper. So can we at least put that silly story to rest. Whoever started that story in the first place probably started other false ones as well.
-
I am currently awaiting a third reply where I did go into detail asking about the error's on that page.
The date..November 27.
Takeoff time 7:44
Bag vs briefcase.
The last email was made late in the evening so I don't expect a reply until tomorrow.
There is no confusion over "bag" vs "briefcase. She uses both terms but in different places, for different reasons. She says Cooper had a bomb in his BRIEFCASE. She says that twice. Then she starts talking about "bags" passengers usually carried on and in that context she refers to Cooper's briefcase ... as a BAG! See the passages below.
Its this confusion in language that makes me wonder if the Canadian Matheson is the Canadian FLYJACK - they are both hung up on ordinary language! I dont know - maybe all Canadians screw up the English language, but I doubt that. I think Matheson is a native American from some tribe. I base that on several things in her vita including her photos. I think FLYJACK is just a Frenchman - have no evidence of anything else so far unless you know something I dont. But I find no problem over bag vs briefcase in her writing, so far. See the passages below.
In a like manner I am going to break this down into manageable pieces I can compare with Ammerman notes. I am not going to jump to conclusions like FLYJACK always does!
I dont think Matheson intended this writing as a scholarly work on the Cooper hijacking - because it isn't! Just because FLYJACK is jumping through hoops over this does not mean we should, or Matheson intended this work to be a scholarly treatise either.
I think the "briefcase" is described as being an "attache case". That is, it had a box type rigid construction.
In his interview with the FBI in Reno, Captain Scott stated that he did not see or talk to Cooper. So can we at least put that silly story to rest. Whoever started that story in the first place probably started other false ones as well.
I have both a Samsonite briefcase and an attache case. The briefcase is larger, but I think a lot of people use the terms interchangeably. And you're right, Scott's statement is quite brief and explicitly states he never saw Cooper and could not identify him.
-
I am currently awaiting a third reply where I did go into detail asking about the error's on that page.
The date..November 27.
Takeoff time 7:44
Bag vs briefcase.
The last email was made late in the evening so I don't expect a reply until tomorrow.
There is no confusion over "bag" vs "briefcase. She uses both terms but in different places, for different reasons. She says Cooper had a bomb in his BRIEFCASE. She says that twice. Then she starts talking about "bags" passengers usually carried on and in that context she refers to Cooper's briefcase ... as a BAG! See the passages below.
Its this confusion in language that makes me wonder if the Canadian Matheson is the Canadian FLYJACK - they are both hung up on ordinary language! I dont know - maybe all Canadians screw up the English language, but I doubt that. I think Matheson is a native American from some tribe. I base that on several things in her vita including her photos. I think FLYJACK is just a Frenchman - have no evidence of anything else so far unless you know something I dont. But I find no problem over bag vs briefcase in her writing, so far. See the passages below.
In a like manner I am going to break this down into manageable pieces I can compare with Ammerman notes. I am not going to jump to conclusions like FLYJACK always does!
I dont think Matheson intended this writing as a scholarly work on the Cooper hijacking - because it isn't! Just because FLYJACK is jumping through hoops over this does not mean we should, or Matheson intended this work to be a scholarly treatise either.
I think the "briefcase" is described as being an "attache case". That is, it had a box type rigid construction.
In his interview with the FBI in Reno, Captain Scott stated that he did not see or talk to Cooper. So can we at least put that silly story to rest. Whoever started that story in the first place probably started other false ones as well.
I have both a Samsonite briefcase and an attache case. The briefcase is larger, but I think a lot of people use the terms interchangeably. And you're right, Scott's statement is quite brief and explicitly states he never saw Cooper and could not identify him.
I have two Samsonite attache cases (using my definition of an attache case above). One is relatively slim and the other is quite a bit larger. Both were acquired about 1970 so they are about 50 years old and have quite a few miles on them. And they are still in very good condition.
-
Somehow I was focused on "nestled in his bag" . okay, this part was wrong that I stated. is she stating the dynamite was in a bag inside the briefcase?
Page 112 states this occurred on November 27, and the plane departed at 4:35 pm. transcripts show around 3:00 pm. 4:35 would only allow 25 minutes to meet Cooper's demands.
Page 114 has the plane in the air at 7:44.
Page 115 states cooper jumped at 8:10....20 minutes after takeoff. she goes on to explain two separate bumps and two separate trims. she questions these events to possibly being the airflow causing the bumps.
Page 115 starts discussing Ammerman and November 27 is brought up again. Ammerman starts his recollection with an event he states occurred on November 23, 1971. at the bottom of page 115 she states this occurred in a phone interview followed by a letter dated February 6, 2004. she once again writes that Ammerman was on duty November 27th.
Important factors:
The book appears to have been in the making years before publication. her work surrounding Ammerman dates back to 2004 and the book was released in 2010. anyone speaking with Ammerman later than 2004 is irrelevant as it hasn't occurred yet. she might be right that she was the first to speak with him.
-
According to Ammerman he was never interviewed by the FBI. it's possible the FBI got all the information needed through upper management. the documents we have in the 302's surround Portland radar operators.
-
I have just received word from a source that Matheson did her interviews with Ammerman clear back in 2004. That is before Dropzone even existed, and everyone was at Web Sleuths! My interviews were not until 2010 at the earliest.
Matheson references this fact in her book saying:
"“In my 30 years experience as an air traffic controller nothing ever happened like that before or since - a report of someone dropping flares from an aircraft”, he stated in a telephone interview with the author and in a follow-up letter dated February 6, 2004.
A text copy of the book will be prepared tomorrow but it will only be for my personal use, and I will not share it with anyone. Make your own!
-
Correct....and noted this morning...
Important factors:
The book appears to have been in the making years before publication. her work surrounding Ammerman dates back to 2004 and the book was released in 2010. anyone speaking with Ammerman later than 2004 is irrelevant as it hasn't occurred yet. she might be right that she was the first to speak with him.
-
Correct....and noted this morning...
Important factors:
The book appears to have been in the making years before publication. her work surrounding Ammerman dates back to 2004 and the book was released in 2010. anyone speaking with Ammerman later than 2004 is irrelevant as it hasn't occurred yet. she might be right that she was the first to speak with him.
Is this from the famous FLYJACK? :rofl: Who cares. It does not matter!
Who invented the rock first? Its what the rock is composed of that matters.
-
It doesn't matter because you spoke with Ammerman after she interviewed him. her reference no longer matters since others have spoke with him after her contact.
Why is this such an issue?
-
It doesn't matter because you spoke with Ammerman after she interviewed him. her reference no longer matters since others have spoke with him after her contact.
Am coming late to this, but wouldn't this all be entirely irrelevant? I'm putting all my eggs in with the experienced pilot POV on this, and isn't it pretty much a consensus that on the night in question, from the height in question, flares to spot a jump would have been completely useless anyway? I'm not a jumper, so by all means correct me if I'm wrong.
If it were still 1971, I'd be looking into sporting goods and farming supply stores in the Portland region, as farmers would be the most likely to use dynamite on a civilian basis, and flares would be more commonly employed by outdoor sports types. I'm not convinced Cooper's dynamite was really dynamite going by colour descriptions, but at the same time, that doesn't mean he had any secondary use for the flares beyond making his bomb look real.
-
This appears to have sparked a little more. Georger read the email sent to me and didn't like the fact of her statement of being the first to speak with Ammerman. then the question of when the flare incident actually occurred.
part of this has been resolved and was right in front of us. she spoke with Ammerman before Georger did. the flare incident. not sure how to resolve this. no report has been found on the FAA site.
-
As for me. I simply posted something interesting that turned into a nightmare. I was accused of working with Flyjack and the author in the background? then got my head bit off for trying to get answers from the author.....
If you will excuse me. I have some new rocks to invent. :rofl:
-
As for me. I simply posted something interesting that turned into a nightmare. I was accused of working with Flyjack and the author in the background? then got my head bit off for trying to get answers from the author.....
If you will excuse me. I have some new rocks to invent. :rofl:
Haha, well, I've kinda lost track of all the Flyjack stuff - he lost me at Hahnemann, who is Jay to Cooper's Silent Bob, though I admire his tenacity. The only link I can see from Hahnemann to Cooper is that H was also a skyjacker and Cooper may have looked "Latin". But if you look at the descriptions of how the skyjackings were carried out and the demeanour of the skyjackers, there's just no way I can entertain them being the same person. Hahnemann sounds like a damn meth-head compared to Cooper, lol.
-
Somehow I was focused on "nestled in his bag" . okay, this part was wrong that I stated. is she stating the dynamite was in a bag inside the briefcase?
Page 112 states this occurred on November 27, and the plane departed at 4:35 pm. transcripts show around 3:00 pm. 4:35 would only allow 25 minutes to meet Cooper's demands.
Page 114 has the plane in the air at 7:44.
Page 115 states cooper jumped at 8:10....20 minutes after takeoff. she goes on to explain two separate bumps and two separate trims. she questions these events to possibly being the airflow causing the bumps.
Page 115 starts discussing Ammerman and November 27 is brought up again. Ammerman starts his recollection with an event he states occurred on November 23, 1971. at the bottom of page 115 she states this occurred in a phone interview followed by a letter dated February 6, 2004. she once again writes that Ammerman was on duty November 27th.
Important factors:
The book appears to have been in the making years before publication. her work surrounding Ammerman dates back to 2004 and the book was released in 2010. anyone speaking with Ammerman later than 2004 is irrelevant as it hasn't occurred yet. she might be right that she was the first to speak with him.
Lots of basic errors of fact. She also calls Victor23 "Vector23". That's an interesting mistake for someone with an aviation background. In fact her sole reference in the book to the flight path is her single reference to "Vector 23". Again it is strange she would make a basic mistake like this. (She must not have taken R99's avionics class! ;)) She says her interview of Ammerman followed meeting someone at an air museum where she worked, who thought she might benefit from talking to one of the people actually involved in the Cooper hijacking. She cites having read Gunther's book.
Unless someone else was aware of the Matheson book, FLYJACK is the first to ever post about it. His motives for quoting her book at DZ are clear. He says: "Putting together all the pieces, there is no way there was an alternate western flight path. The western flight path theory is DEAD and should be relegated to the Vortex dust bin." In a related post he tells Ulis in effect: 'its over for you'. "The chase planes were co-ordinated by Seattle Center. They were in contact with the chase pilots. Seattle Center must have known the 305 flight path to do this. The dashes in the transcript may be the deleted ARTCC comms with chase planes.:, FLYJACK says.
I have made it clear since I first asked Ammerman for an interview, that my primary interest was 'anything he could give that would prove the flight of 305 - in the midst of speculations and claims about an East Path, West Path, etc.'. This is how I originally reported it to R99. This is how I framed my interest to Ammerman. Ammerman stated that he had heard about various attempts to redefine the Flight 305 flight path, but as far as he was concerned ' 305 flew almost right down the center of V23 the whole way to Portland'. And without checking my notes I recall I asked and he also said: 'and the plane was on auto pilot the whole time right up to when they approached Portland'. And I followed that up by asking: 'and which side of Portland did they cross on?' and I remember Cliff laughing and he said,
'I don't know. I wasn't looking at my screen when they crossed the Columbia. I was not looking at my screen but involved in communications and I had to stand up to switch radios. By the time I looked back at my screen they had already crossed the Columbia, ON THE WEST SIDE OF PORTLAND!' I believe I reported all of this almost verbatim to R99 the same evening.
If my interview with Cliff is valid there is more flight path detail in my account, than there is in Matheson's account. This simply reflects a difference in our backgrounds, interests, and goals at the time each of us interviewed Cliff.
But, and this is important. Cliff's account to me about him getting up to talk to military aircraft and having to stand up to do this with his radio gear, and not being able to see his radar screen during that process, is IDENTICAL to the same account Matheson describes in her book! Matheson's account and my account are the same on that very point, as it relates to the flight path 305 flew (around Portland). The only difference is Matheson does not say this happened precisely as 305 was crossing the Columbia, on the west side of Portland. The difference in our accounts is a difference in goals. Matheson's book is a general synopsis of the Cooper hijacking, with lots of technical mistakes. My goal with Ammerman was to gain a new authoritative understanding of the flight path specifically, since he was thee person in charge of following and directing the aircraft involved.
Matheson focuses rather heavily on the flare incident at Eugene, but again she is not giving detail Ammerman gave me. For one thing she has the date of that event wrong vs what Cliff gave me. Whatever the date of the flare event at Eugene was, there should be paperwork verifying the event and the date, if what Cliff told me is accurate! Cliff told me the event generated filings with the FAA, FBI, Sherrif Dept, as well as other law enforcement and aviation entities. There might even be an FBI 302 mentioning this event. According to Cliff it was not a casual event but an event of some concern at the time. Then one week later the Cooper hijacking occurs. It was only natural that air controllers might think there was some relationship between the two events. And according to passenger Mitchell, he says he was told photos being shown to him were heavily weighted toward photos of suspects in the Eugene area. I have posted all of this before.
In fact, the flare incident only came up during my 'flight path interviews' with Mr. Ammerman because near the end of the second interview Cliff suddenly asked me: 'Do you want to hear about something interesting?'. He laughed and I laughed and I said "yes, what?". If Cliff hadn't brought it up I wouldn't even know about it to this day. When Cliff finished telling his 'flares dropped at Eugene' story, I asked: "Have you heard about the Janet story at Vancouver?" He didn't know anything about that, so I told him that story. At the end of that long interview we realised we had been talking a long time, so we agreed to talk again and exchange email addresses in the meantime.
-
As I mentioned. all I did was post a page from a book that turned into a nightmare. why the need to drag the author through the mud. does she have an aviation background or is it a requirement? working at a museum wouldn't really qualify, would it?
I posted a comment from Snowmman in 2018. why are you claiming Flyjack was the only one?
Are we discounting the book all together. I don't follow what you are trying to do. it appears she went by what was said to her. I don't know. perhaps you should contact her. I don't think her intentions were the same as yours with finding answers. it's just another book surrounding the hijacking. actually, it's a book with a dozen different stories. not just Cooper. she never responded back to me. I just found it interesting. regardless to who posted it.
-
As I mentioned. all I did was post a page from a book that turned into a nightmare. why the need to drag the author through the mud. does she have an aviation background or is it a requirement? working at a museum wouldn't really qualify, would it?
I posted a comment from Snowmman in 2018. why are you claiming Flyjack was the only one?
Are we discounting the book all together. I don't follow what you are trying to do. it appears she went by what was said to her. I don't know. perhaps you should contact her. I don't think her intentions were the same as yours with finding answers. it's just another book surrounding the hijacking. actually, it's a book with a dozen different stories. not just Cooper. she never responded back to me. I just found it interesting. regardless to who posted it.
Let me go back and search for your comment about Snowmman, whatever he has to do with this.
edit> cant find it.
Lets do this. I will back off. We seem to have cross-conversations going on here. The topic is yours. That way I cant get in trouble. :congrats:
You can remove my last post if it suits you, or if it offends in any manner!
I think I will call Meyer up and see what he is doing today! Hell! I may even pet my cat or take a walk!! If it doesn;t offend anyone!
-
It appears some people lost the ability to search...enjoy, have to go now need to invent the search button for computers :chr2:
Snowmman November 2018
Here's some detail about the chase planes, from Clifford Ammerman who was working radar control at Sea-Tac the night of the hijack. He was employed by the FAA.
I don't think Clifford Ammerman has been named before.
Ammerman controlled the F-106's that trailed Flight 305. It seems like the T-33 arrived just north of portland, and the F-106's left the immediate trail then to the T-33.
Notably, the F-106's weren't getting control from the SAGE center.
It's interesting the T-33/F-106 handoff occurred just north of Portland, because it means maybe they were switching the trailing planes around at the time Cooper jumped?
in this book
https://books.google.com/books?id=EIgbHUvO76kC&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115
Here's how Ackermann describes it.
He talks to the 727 pilot and learns of the hijack. Then contacted McChord, which launched two F-106's
He kept them five miles in trail, 1000 ft higher than 305.
Radar on the F-106's was effective only 20 degrees either side of their nose. They had to S turn to stay behind 305, so if the turns exceeded that, they couldn't keep radar lock on 305.
Just north of Portland, Oregon Air National Guard T-33 joined.
Ammerman then turned the F-106's to the east of the projected track of 305 and then south to parallel the route.
They climbed to 20,000 feet to save fuel. At the same time he positioned the T-33 to 1000 feet above and five miles in trail at a matching speed.
F-106's were still faster than 305, so they did an occasional "orbit"
Military planes used UHF radio, civilian VHF.
Ammerman had to stand up and turn off the VHF while talking to the military on UHF..instructions were going on both frequencies at the same time.
T-33 trailed 305 to Eugene, but then was low on fuel. F-106's returned to McChord because low on fuel also.
Ammerman on radar control, followed 305 from Seattle to south of Medford, OR
Later when 305 entered another air traffic control center, a C-130 picked up the trail at Red Bluff, CA
There was a gap in tracking between Eugene and Red Bluff, in terms of chase planes.
-
It doesn't matter because you spoke with Ammerman after she interviewed him. her reference no longer matters since others have spoke with him after her contact.
Am coming late to this, but wouldn't this all be entirely irrelevant? I'm putting all my eggs in with the experienced pilot POV on this, and isn't it pretty much a consensus that on the night in question, from the height in question, flares to spot a jump would have been completely useless anyway? I'm not a jumper, so by all means correct me if I'm wrong.
If it were still 1971, I'd be looking into sporting goods and farming supply stores in the Portland region, as farmers would be the most likely to use dynamite on a civilian basis, and flares would be more commonly employed by outdoor sports types. I'm not convinced Cooper's dynamite was really dynamite going by colour descriptions, but at the same time, that doesn't mean he had any secondary use for the flares beyond making his bomb look real.
The FBI talked to many jumpers, I'm sure they asked about the use of flares. They put a lot of weight into it and brothers from the uegene oregon area being involved. That is why they showed bill mitchell all those photo of uegene suspects and they initially jumped on the marla cooper lead (LD and Dewey were from eugene.) I have also qouted the flights and flyers book as my suspect James Klansnics brother Dick lived in cottage grove at the time which is the very town the flare drops were reported to have happened in.
-
They put a lot of weight into it
You know this because?
-
If the book or Ammerman's statement is correct?
-
For the next two years, agents constantly came to visit Mitchell at Oregon State University with “hundreds” of suspect photos of exlusively people from the eugene oregon area. Why only Uegene suspects for two years!? You got to ask yourself why did the fbi give such credence to marla coopers claim? No other report got anywhere near the same attention from the fbi. Marla had a close relationship with FBI case agent Curtis Eng and she said the FBI believed brothers from Eugene were responsible for NORJACK.
-
Ammerman also believe it was connected and stated there has never been a report of this kind before or after again.
-
where is that statement from. I recall a similar statement from Mitchell but don't recall the FBI telling him where the suspects were from. what would that matter to him. he had no idea where Cooper was from..
-
Ammerman also believe it was connected and stated there has never been a report of this kind before or after again.
He said nothing came of it. if that's true then what does it mean?
-
I recall Marla saying sisters Oregon which is very close to Eugene. if the FBI did there homework it would show she was not being truthful. the house her grandmother had was an old mining shack. no rooms or bedrooms could fit in the space. it was just an open shed for camping or sleeping. it was converted into a home. something else other than Eugene sparked the interest. I'm wondering if Flo thought he could be Cooper since he's the only one who looks like her updated photo.
-
where is that statement from. I recall a similar statement from Mitchell but don't recall the FBI telling him where the suspects were from. what would that matter to him. he had no idea where Cooper was from..
It's straight from the horses mouth shutt...he said it at the cooper synopsis and he told the same thing to colberts cct team. It didn't matter to him, it was just something he remembered. The FBI told him beforehand, we are going to be showing you pictures of poeople from the eugene oregon area, let us know if you recognize anyboy.
-
I recall Marla saying sisters Oregon which is very close to Eugene. if the FBI did there homework it would show she was not being truthful. the house her grandmother had was an old mining shack. no rooms or bedrooms could fit in the space. it was just an open shed for camping or sleeping. it was converted into a home. something else other than Eugene sparked the interest. I'm wondering if Flo thought he could be Cooper since he's the only one who looks like her updated photo.
LD was a surveyor and Dewy worked at Boeing, that coupled with the connection to eugene checked 2 of there key boxes. That's what got them excited.
-
I researched this case extensively. no records were ever found of either brother working for Boeing. she had two different stories on where LD jumped. I found his birth date was different from his age at death. shows him and his brother born two months apart. I have all the files on Marla. plenty of error's.
-
For the next two years, agents constantly came to visit Mitchell at Oregon State University with “hundreds” of suspect photos of exlusively people from the eugene oregon area.
Where is this from?
-
For the next two years, agents constantly came to visit Mitchell at Oregon State University with “hundreds” of suspect photos of exlusively people from the eugene oregon area.
Where is this from?
It was in my notes from an Interview Bill Mitchell did with a member of colberts CCT.
-
Here is goergers post on the matter from 2014. The FBI were fully aware of the report no need to interview T2.
During the recent WSHM events, Bill Mitchell remarked that of the suspect photos he was shown
post 11-24, a large number were from the Eugene area. This may relate to the 'Eugene Incident'
which happened in Eugene airspace the weekend before 11-24, as related to me by controllers
and others involved in the Cooper case.
During the evening of Nov 20th, 1971, the weekend before the Cooper hijacking at Portland, the
control tower and local law enforcement at Eugene began to get calls about someone dropping
flares from a small airplane, then flying in patterns indicative of tracking the flare's drift and
descent. Attempts to communicate with or track and identify the aircraft failed. Approximately 90
minutes later an unidentified small aircraft appeared on Eugene radar again, and more reports of
the flare dropping activity began to come in, to the Eugene airport and to local law enforcement,
in a different area outside Eugene. Officials directly involved that night say that an FAA report was
filed, and the FBI notified.
This incident gained further attention the night of the Cooper hijacking, and was openly discussed
by ATC and FBI officials after #305 had safely passed through Portland - Eugene airspace and the
investigation began to take form and commence. Mucklow had described the bomb as consisting
of red sticks ... and Himmelsbach believed 'red sticks' indicated road flares, not actual dynamite.
Those recalling the flare dropping at Eugene just a few days earlier, wondered if there could be a connection ?
Then the Janet report at Vancouver surfaced! Janet contacted the FBI in the days following the
Cooper hijacking, with another 'flare/fire' dropping report. Janet claims that FBI agents visited her
home and asked her to 'keep quiet' about her report, except that at least two others surfaced at
Vancouver with similar 'fire' (dropping) reports, almost immediately after the hijacking. (Janet
and/or her husband may be the origin of all of the reports made at Vancouver - this has never
been clarified).
So, when Bill Mitchell says he was shown a large number of photos of 'suspects' from the Eugene
area (and was told these suspects were from the Eugene area), the Eugene flare dropping
incident may be the 'link' the FBI was trying to explore, in the hope of finding Mr. Cooper.
Perhaps Cooper was practicing for the hijacking in the Eugene area prior to the hijacking, or he
knew someone and was in league with someone who had a light plane in the Eugene area, ...
but of the suspects Bill Mitchell was shown it would be interesting to see how their genetic
profiles compare with the 'partial' the FBI apparently has.
Geoff Gray says nothing about the Eugene incident in his book. Apparently he didn't run across
the files? Himmelsbach doesn't mention the incident in his book either.
Maybe the Eugene incident and the Cooper hijacking are not related at all.
-
I recall him saying they kept coming with photo's but don't recall him stating they were from Eugene. this could be considered leading a witness. even though he didn't have a clue where Cooper was from. interesting they had so many from such a small area. population was under 100 grand in 1970. it's close to 200 grand now. they usually just tell you they want you to look at some photo's. might of been different in those days. it would be hard for them to use the "six pack" giving him so many photo's to look at in a short time.
The Janet story is a hard one. nobody from KPDX seen anything. nothing from the chase planes either that we know of...
-
Bill Mitchell's interview for the WSHM, which was conducted by phone on October 3, 2013, did not reference suspects from Eugene. Rather, Bill stated that the FBI would travel to Eugene--where Bill was a U of O student--about one to two times per week with about 10 suspect pics per visit. Bill said this went on for about 1 1/2 years.
-
Thanks, EU. how would they find so many suspects in such a confined area. home of the skydivers, or pilots and bad guys?
-
Bill Mitchell's interview for the WSHM, which was conducted by phone on October 3, 2013, did not reference suspects from Eugene. Rather, Bill stated that the FBI would travel to Eugene--where Bill was a U of O student--about one to two times per week with about 10 suspect pics per visit. Bill said this went on for about 1 1/2 years.
Where is this WSHM interview I've been looking for it for a while?
-
Bill Mitchell's interview for the WSHM, which was conducted by phone on October 3, 2013, did not reference suspects from Eugene. Rather, Bill stated that the FBI would travel to Eugene--where Bill was a U of O student--about one to two times per week with about 10 suspect pics per visit. Bill said this went on for about 1 1/2 years.
Where is this WSHM interview I've been looking for it for a while?
I have it somewhere...trying to locate it..
-
Where is everyone getting that the majority of photos he was shown was eugene residents then? Georger said it, I remember bruce also reporting this when bill was at the cooper symposium in 11 and it's in my notes from an interview he had with colberts CCT.
-
Bill Mitchell's interview for the WSHM, which was conducted by phone on October 3, 2013, did not reference suspects from Eugene. Rather, Bill stated that the FBI would travel to Eugene--where Bill was a U of O student--about one to two times per week with about 10 suspect pics per visit. Bill said this went on for about 1 1/2 years.
Where is this WSHM interview I've been looking for it for a while?
I have it somewhere...trying to locate it..
Thanks shutt!
-
I found it. I will upload it to the vault....here is the section about the photo's...
-
I found it. I will upload it to the vault....here is the section about the photo's...
Much appreciated, there is no audio?
-
I found it. I will upload it to the vault....here is the section about the photo's...
Much appreciated, there is no audio?
An audio version was made but only a part of the interview...
-
A complete transcript is available on my site at:
https://thecoopercase.com/pages/bill-mitchell-transcript-from-wshm
-
It appears some people lost the ability to search...enjoy, have to go now need to invent the search button for computers :chr2:
Snowmman November 2018
Here's some detail about the chase planes, from Clifford Ammerman who was working radar control at Sea-Tac the night of the hijack. He was employed by the FAA.
I don't think Clifford Ammerman has been named before.
Ammerman controlled the F-106's that trailed Flight 305. It seems like the T-33 arrived just north of portland, and the F-106's left the immediate trail then to the T-33.
Notably, the F-106's weren't getting control from the SAGE center.
It's interesting the T-33/F-106 handoff occurred just north of Portland, because it means maybe they were switching the trailing planes around at the time Cooper jumped?
in this book
https://books.google.com/books?id=EIgbHUvO76kC&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115
Here's how Ackermann describes it.
He talks to the 727 pilot and learns of the hijack. Then contacted McChord, which launched two F-106's
He kept them five miles in trail, 1000 ft higher than 305.
Radar on the F-106's was effective only 20 degrees either side of their nose. They had to S turn to stay behind 305, so if the turns exceeded that, they couldn't keep radar lock on 305.
Just north of Portland, Oregon Air National Guard T-33 joined.
Ammerman then turned the F-106's to the east of the projected track of 305 and then south to parallel the route.
They climbed to 20,000 feet to save fuel. At the same time he positioned the T-33 to 1000 feet above and five miles in trail at a matching speed.
F-106's were still faster than 305, so they did an occasional "orbit"
Military planes used UHF radio, civilian VHF.
Ammerman had to stand up and turn off the VHF while talking to the military on UHF..instructions were going on both frequencies at the same time.
T-33 trailed 305 to Eugene, but then was low on fuel. F-106's returned to McChord because low on fuel also.
Ammerman on radar control, followed 305 from Seattle to south of Medford, OR
Later when 305 entered another air traffic control center, a C-130 picked up the trail at Red Bluff, CA
There was a gap in tracking between Eugene and Red Bluff, in terms of chase planes.
Missed this completely for some reason.
-
It doesn't matter because you spoke with Ammerman after she interviewed him. her reference no longer matters since others have spoke with him after her contact.
Am coming late to this, but wouldn't this all be entirely irrelevant? I'm putting all my eggs in with the experienced pilot POV on this, and isn't it pretty much a consensus that on the night in question, from the height in question, flares to spot a jump would have been completely useless anyway? I'm not a jumper, so by all means correct me if I'm wrong.
If it were still 1971, I'd be looking into sporting goods and farming supply stores in the Portland region, as farmers would be the most likely to use dynamite on a civilian basis, and flares would be more commonly employed by outdoor sports types. I'm not convinced Cooper's dynamite was really dynamite going by colour descriptions, but at the same time, that doesn't mean he had any secondary use for the flares beyond making his bomb look real.
The FBI talked to many jumpers, I'm sure they asked about the use of flares. They put a lot of weight into it and brothers from the uegene oregon area being involved. That is why they showed bill mitchell all those photo of uegene suspects and they initially jumped on the marla cooper lead (LD and Dewey were from eugene.) I have also qouted the flights and flyers book as my suspect James Klansnics brother Dick lived in cottage grove at the time which is the very town the flare drops were reported to have happened in.
EU now says Mitchell never said anything about his photo being weighted by suspects at Eugene - so it must be a myth someone started at DZ... ?
-
If the book or Ammerman's statement is correct?
So Ammerman was lying to me when he said reports on the incident had been filed ... with FAA, FBI, etc. ?
-
For the next two years, agents constantly came to visit Mitchell at Oregon State University with “hundreds” of suspect photos of exlusively people from the eugene oregon area. Why only Uegene suspects for two years!? You got to ask yourself why did the fbi give such credence to marla coopers claim? No other report got anywhere near the same attention from the fbi. Marla had a close relationship with FBI case agent Curtis Eng and she said the FBI believed brothers from Eugene were responsible for NORJACK.
What do you base this on? Do you have evidence Mitchell said photo were weighted with suspects in the Eugene area?
-
For the next two years, agents constantly came to visit Mitchell at Oregon State University with “hundreds” of suspect photos of exlusively people from the eugene oregon area. Why only Uegene suspects for two years!? You got to ask yourself why did the fbi give such credence to marla coopers claim? No other report got anywhere near the same attention from the fbi. Marla had a close relationship with FBI case agent Curtis Eng and she said the FBI believed brothers from Eugene were responsible for NORJACK.
What do you base this on? Do you have evidence Mitchell said photo were weighted with suspects in the Eugene area?
His interview with colberts CCT, and what I read from you and I believe Bruce reported this too. What did you base your statement off of?
"During the recent WSHM events, Bill Mitchell remarked that of the suspect photos he was shown
post 11-24, a large number were from the Eugene area. This may relate to the 'Eugene Incident'"
-
For the next two years, agents constantly came to visit Mitchell at Oregon State University with “hundreds” of suspect photos of exlusively people from the eugene oregon area. Why only Uegene suspects for two years!? You got to ask yourself why did the fbi give such credence to marla coopers claim? No other report got anywhere near the same attention from the fbi. Marla had a close relationship with FBI case agent Curtis Eng and she said the FBI believed brothers from Eugene were responsible for NORJACK.
What do you base this on? Do you have evidence Mitchell said photo were weighted with suspects in the Eugene area?
His interview with colberts CCT, and what I read from you and I believe Bruce reported this too. What did you base your statement off of?
"During the recent WSHM events, Bill Mitchell remarked that of the suspect photos he was shown
post 11-24, a large number were from the Eugene area. This may relate to the 'Eugene Incident'"
I have never spoken with Mitchell. When I posted about Mitchell (or anyone else) being shown Eugene photos that would have been based on someone's else's info .... maybe a Smith interview? WSHM info? Something someone else had posted and was common knowledge at the time. The claim he was shown photos weighted toward Eugene suspects is not original with me. I was merely repeating it.
-
Ammerman told me the flare incident generated formal paper work - with FAA, FBI, etc. I cant imagine he was making this up. I am not making it up. Is Ammerman still alive? Someone re-interview him!
It only stand to reason an incident of that kind would generate some kind of paper work.
-
I fail to see a connection by telling a witness where people are from in reference to photo's of possible suspects. would it matter if Cooper lived in Brazil? they want identification. not location....
-
I fail to see a connection by telling a witness where people are from in reference to photo's of possible suspects. would it matter if Cooper lived in Brazil? they want identification. not location....
The issue is did Mitchel say this or not?
Who reported this first back at DZ years ago? Smith? Someone who attended the conference? Someone who talked to Mitchell? It wasnt me. I merely repeated what others posted as fact.
-
I fail to see a connection by telling a witness where people are from in reference to photo's of possible suspects. would it matter if Cooper lived in Brazil? they want identification. not location....
The issue is did Mitchel say this or not?
I could be wrong but I don't recall it. we have what he said at WSHS. I can ask Colbert or watch the show again. where is the information coming from with the 2011 conference. was there even one that year?
-
I fail to see a connection by telling a witness where people are from in reference to photo's of possible suspects. would it matter if Cooper lived in Brazil? they want identification. not location....
I get your point and I agree it doesnt matter where he lived, so maybe the fbi told him matter of factly or he found out some way.
-
Ammerman told me the flare incident generated formal paper work - with FAA, FBI, etc. I cant imagine he was making this up. I am not making it up. Is Ammerman still alive? Someone re-interview him!
It only stand to reason an incident of that kind would generate some kind of paper work.
I tried looking it up years ago, so did Smokin99. if the FBI never interviewed him then how did they know about the incident. perhaps someone could contact airports in the area and look for someone still around from that period. somebody knows something if it occurred..other than Ammerman.
-
I fail to see a connection by telling a witness where people are from in reference to photo's of possible suspects. would it matter if Cooper lived in Brazil? they want identification. not location....
The issue is did Mitchel say this or not?
I could be wrong but I don't recall it. we have what he said at WSHS. I can ask Colbert or watch the show again. where is the information coming from with the 2011 conference. was there even one that year?
If I posted about Mitchell in 2014, I tend to believe it was fresh info I was trying to connect the dots to.
-
I fail to see a connection by telling a witness where people are from in reference to photo's of possible suspects. would it matter if Cooper lived in Brazil? they want identification. not location....
I get your point and I agree it doesnt matter where he lived, so maybe the fbi told him matter of factly or he found out some way.
I haven't seen anything to validate this to date...
-
I found the Bruce Smith 2014 interview with Bill Mitchell. Mitchell says he had a long and 'highly conversant' relationship with FBI agents, lots of give and take for months, so its completely plausible agents may have told Bill something about the nature of photos he was being asked to look at., and there were a ton of photos they brought to him to evaluate over a period of a year!
Not one word about 'Eugene suspects' in this interview that I could find, but the interview is a 'very' good read.
https://themountainnewswa.net/2014/12/07/new-developments-in-the-db-cooper-case-primary-witness-bill-mitchell-speaks-publicaly/
-
Where is everyone getting that the majority of photos he was shown was eugene residents then? Georger said it, I remember bruce also reporting this when bill was at the cooper symposium in 11 and it's in my notes from an interview he had with colberts CCT.
Whoa, Nicky, I have to correct your statements.
1. I have never written or said that Bill Mitchell was shown hundreds of pix of Eugene residents. Bill never told me that. He simply said that he was shown hundreds, if not thousands of pix of suspects in the nearly two years that agents came to his dorm room on a regular basis.
2. Bill Mitchell was not at the 2011 Symposium, and I have never reported that he was. In fact, Bill is quite resistant to talking to most people. He does not speak to me, but he does with Colbert. Perhaps money is involved.
Congratulations on talking with a CCT member. When I tried that, one threatened to arrest me, and another threatened a law suit. I invited them to try, but I never heard back.
-
I researched this case extensively. no records were ever found of either brother working for Boeing. she had two different stories on where LD jumped. I found his birth date was different from his age at death. shows him and his brother born two months apart. I have all the files on Marla. plenty of error's.
A PIO from Boeing did confirm to me that Dewey did work at Boeing in Renton in the 1960s. When I pushed her for more information, like what kind of job and for how long, she clammed up, then hung up the phone.
-
Where is everyone getting that the majority of photos he was shown was eugene residents then? Georger said it, I remember bruce also reporting this when bill was at the cooper symposium in 11 and it's in my notes from an interview he had with colberts CCT.
Whoa, Nicky, I have to correct your statements.
1. I have never written or said that Bill Mitchell was shown hundreds of pix of Eugene residents. Bill never told me that. He simply said that he was shown hundreds, if not thousands of pix of suspects in the nearly two years that agents came to his dorm room on a regular basis.
2. Bill Mitchell was not at the 2011 Symposium, and I have never reported that he was. In fact, Bill is quite resistant to talking to most people. He does not speak to me, but he does with Colbert. Perhaps money is involved.
Congratulations on talking with a CCT member. When I tried that, one threatened to arrest me, and another threatened a law suit. I invited them to try, but I never heard back.
Where would the Eugene pics claim have come from (in 2014?) that it was on DZ and I picked up on it and posted about it there? It is not original with me.
You cant search DZ like we used to.
-
I have pulled out and re-read my 2010 interviews with Ammerman, and Matheson is correct: the flare incident did happen on Nov 23rd 1971, the day before the hijacking - not a week before as I previously reported. My confusion is because here were actually two events in question: one a week before and the flare incident on Nov 23rd. I simply got the event dates mixed up. But, Cliff says: 'the controller advised me that the FAA was aware of the incident and was looking for the plane involved, but nothing definite had surfaced yet.'
On another note, Cliff stresses throughout these interviews how very important it was that 305 be kept within V23 (and as close to the center line as possible), precisely because of the chase plane intercepts and trailing that Cliff says began at the Toledo intersection, which he had to personally manage. He says things got hectic when he had to bring the T33 in, in addition to the F-106s covering with their narrow radar cones, crossing on the west side of PDX ...
Cliff says 'Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centers at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC.'
-
Cliff says 'Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centers at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC.'
According to websites this was during the 50's and a new location was built in 1962 where the Seattle center is today. I don't know enough to confirm these dates though. the information comes from there site..
TRACON controllers might of been there. that's the approach guys. (terminal radar approach control)
The original Seattle Air Route Traffic Control Center was located at the Boeing Field
Administration Building in 1940 and control instructions were relayed to pilots via company phone
lines. In 1950, Seattle ARTCC moved to the Seattle Tacoma Airport (SeaTac) Administration
Building, where the first radio was commissioned in the facility allowing direct controller to pilot
communications. In 1962 the ARTCC moved from SeaTac to its current location in Auburn,
Washington. The new, larger building allowed for further expansion and new equipment.
-
I researched this case extensively. no records were ever found of either brother working for Boeing. she had two different stories on where LD jumped. I found his birth date was different from his age at death. shows him and his brother born two months apart. I have all the files on Marla. plenty of error's.
A PIO from Boeing did confirm to me that Dewey did work at Boeing in Renton in the 1960s. When I pushed her for more information, like what kind of job and for how long, she clammed up, then hung up the phone.
Not much of a confirmation IMO...
-
Sounds like the photo's or suspects from Eugene myth is busted...as mentioned before. the location of the suspect should mean nothing to a witness. it's not a menu. the point is to connect the face to the suspect. this would come in handy for a local crime. then they would show photo's of people from that area. If they focused on a specific area then they might look for suspects. but how would they look for a hijacker in any area without something solid to go on like Boeing.
I don't know how many airports were around the Eugene area. it shouldn't of been to hard to pinpoint the aircraft in the area. how many small aircraft could of been flying at night. 5-10-20?
-
Airports/airfield Eugene area
Jasper Ridge
Crow-Mag
Eugene
Hobby Field
Walker Airstrip
Daniels Field
Cottage Grove State Airport
Oakridge
Heavens Gate
Flying D Ranch
Roseburg
Florence Municipal
The plane would obviously be attached to the event. it appears Cottage Grove has no tower so it might be the reason he called Eugene to report an incident over Cottage Grove. the lack of multiple reports are troubling. both events have only single witnesses even though two people together were in a one spot. did the military drop flares to see the ground. light up the area? was that a pilot chute or a flare chute Tosaw found?
-
I found the Bruce Smith 2014 interview with Bill Mitchell. Mitchell says he had a long and 'highly conversant' relationship with FBI agents, lots of give and take for months, so its completely plausible agents may have told Bill something about the nature of photos he was being asked to look at., and there were a ton of photos they brought to him to evaluate over a period of a year!
Not one word about 'Eugene suspects' in this interview that I could find, but the interview is a 'very' good read.
https://themountainnewswa.net/2014/12/07/new-developments-in-the-db-cooper-case-primary-witness-bill-mitchell-speaks-publicaly/
I stand corrected then for some reason I thought I remember reading a report by you from bill at the symposium maybe because you did a lot of reporting on bill not sure why that came to mind. So much info to keep track of. I guess it was just Georgers comment and the notes I have from an interview with one of Colberts guys.
-
On another note, Cliff stresses throughout these interviews how very important it was that 305 be kept within V23 (and as close to the center line as possible), precisely because of the chase plane intercepts and trailing that Cliff says began at the Toledo intersection, which he had to personally manage. He says things got hectic when he had to bring the T33 in, in addition to the F-106s covering with their narrow radar cones, crossing on the west side of PDX ...
Cliff is saying he and 305 were in a 'close working relationship'. And keeping 305 as close to the center line of V23 as possible was important - in order to facilitate the F106s intercept with 305 starting at Toledo. If 305 had strayed from V23 starting at Toledo, he (Cliff) would have known that and had to inform the F106's accordingly. Cliff says 305 did not start a 'straight line' path on its own starting at Toledo to Canby but was ordered to stay on V23 and never strayed from that instruction.
-
On another note, Cliff stresses throughout these interviews how very important it was that 305 be kept within V23 (and as close to the center line as possible), precisely because of the chase plane intercepts and trailing that Cliff says began at the Toledo intersection, which he had to personally manage. He says things got hectic when he had to bring the T33 in, in addition to the F-106s covering with their narrow radar cones, crossing on the west side of PDX ...
Let me add some information that Georger passed to me about 10 years ago. He said that he had talked to a number of people who ran the airports on the east side of Portland and not a single one of them indicated that the airliner passed on the east side. All of them indicated that it bypassed Portland on the west side.
In addition to the information from Georger, I have never seen any credible information from other sources that disagreed with the airliner bypassing Portland on the west side. And there are a number of actual facts, not opinions, that strongly support the west side bypass.
-
Also, while this subject surrounds aviation the term he used could mean west of KPDX. on the other side of the coin the path is on the west side of Portland or close to "west of Portland". the plane flew over downtown Portland. then the question of flying over populated area's is questionable since they did it over Seattle and Reno.
-
On another note, Cliff stresses throughout these interviews how very important it was that 305 be kept within V23 (and as close to the center line as possible), precisely because of the chase plane intercepts and trailing that Cliff says began at the Toledo intersection, which he had to personally manage. He says things got hectic when he had to bring the T33 in, in addition to the F-106s covering with their narrow radar cones, crossing on the west side of PDX ...
Let me add some information that Georger passed to me about 10 years ago. He said that he had talked to a number of people who ran the airports on the east side of Portland and not a single one of them indicated that the airliner passed on the east side. All of them indicated that it bypassed Portland on the west side.
In addition to the information from Georger, I have never seen any credible information from other sources that disagreed with the airliner bypassing Portland on the west side. And there are a number of actual facts, not opinions, that strongly support the west side bypass.
I told Cliff about JT's claim that 305 had passed over the Troutdale airport. Cliff laughed and said "WHO SAYS THAT!" I explained it again and added Himmelsbach's name. Cliff says "That is nonsense - never happened". In fact Cliff's reaction was so strong I thought I was going to lose him on the telephone, until I interrupted and told him I had talked to the Manager of the Troutdale airport who was present on the evening of the hijacking, who laughed at JT's claim. Cliff's reaction in this exchange clued me into just how seriously he takes these matters! He said: 'its xxxx like that that makes me reluctant to give interviews at all .........'
I thought to myself in that moment: 'the east path is dead'!
-
On another note, Cliff stresses throughout these interviews how very important it was that 305 be kept within V23 (and as close to the center line as possible), precisely because of the chase plane intercepts and trailing that Cliff says began at the Toledo intersection, which he had to personally manage. He says things got hectic when he had to bring the T33 in, in addition to the F-106s covering with their narrow radar cones, crossing on the west side of PDX ...
Cliff is saying he and 305 were in a 'close working relationship'. And keeping 305 as close to the center line of V23 as possible was important - in order to facilitate the F106s intercept with 305 starting at Toledo. If 305 had strayed from V23 starting at Toledo, he (Cliff) would have known that and had to inform the F106's accordingly. Cliff says 305 did not start a 'straight line' path on its own starting at Toledo to Canby but was ordered to stay on V23 and never strayed from that instruction.
See my post above before Georger added the last paragraph to his amended post. I stand by my post.
If the airliner had stayed on the centerline of V-23, it would have passed on the east side of Portland. So Ammerman has made contradictory statements and apparently at the same time.
Himmelsbach's book supports a west side bypass of Portland and he was airborne in a helicopter that evening. Plus the T-33 took off from Portland and headed west before becoming involved with the hijacking. There is plenty of other evidence to support a west side bypass and not a single thing, Ammerman's statement otherwise, to support an east side bypass.
-
As mentioned on the other page I don't see a bypass on anything. why would it only be Portland? I just posted that they flew over "heavy populated" area's in Reno/Sparks. no cross talk regarding any area's out of the question. they were given the sky to fly..
-
As mentioned on the other page I don't see a bypass on anything. why would it only be Portland? I just posted that they flew over "heavy populated" area's in Reno/Sparks. no cross talk regarding any area's out of the question. they were given the sky to fly..
That is my interpretation too.
-
On another note, Cliff stresses throughout these interviews how very important it was that 305 be kept within V23 (and as close to the center line as possible), precisely because of the chase plane intercepts and trailing that Cliff says began at the Toledo intersection, which he had to personally manage. He says things got hectic when he had to bring the T33 in, in addition to the F-106s covering with their narrow radar cones, crossing on the west side of PDX ...
Cliff is saying he and 305 were in a 'close working relationship'. And keeping 305 as close to the center line of V23 as possible was important - in order to facilitate the F106s intercept with 305 starting at Toledo. If 305 had strayed from V23 starting at Toledo, he (Cliff) would have known that and had to inform the F106's accordingly. Cliff says 305 did not start a 'straight line' path on its own starting at Toledo to Canby but was ordered to stay on V23 and never strayed from that instruction.
See my post above before Georger added the last paragraph to his amended post. I stand by my post.
If the airliner had stayed on the centerline of V-23, it would have passed on the east side of Portland. So Ammerman has made contradictory statements and apparently at the same time.
Himmelsbach's book supports a west side bypass of Portland and he was airborne in a helicopter that evening. Plus the T-33 took off from Portland and headed west before becoming involved with the hijacking. There is plenty of other evidence to support a west side bypass and not a single thing, Ammerman's statement otherwise, to support an east side bypass.
You are knit-picking. Ammerman's statement is 'as close to the center line of V23 as possible'. He then says in his interview ' if 305 strayed at all it would have been to the western side of V23 at PDX, but only when it crossed as I wasnt watching my screen (doing radio work) when 305 crossed ...'
You keep looking for contradictions that you can drive a squadron of tanks through! Ammerman's testimony is completely consistent especially in his description of where 305 was from Toledo clear down to Eugene. He was there. You weren't!
In addition, Ammerman explains WHY it was so important to keep 305 within V23, to facilitate the F106 and T33 intercepts and trailing - starting at Toledo! With the F106's being hindered further by a narrow radar nose return! Cliff's instructions to the chase planes was critical all the way from Toledo clear down to south of PDX.
Did you interview Cliff or not? I thot you did? By email ?
-
This is getting consistent with the way people with suspects comment. the DNA comes back negative, well it must not be Cooper's. the witness says no and they look for loopholes to fly through. we have multiple reports from multiple radar operators. it's a shame the cloud coverage was there. Portland would of seen the plane from the tower.
-
This is getting consistent with the way people with suspects comment. the DNA comes back negative, well it must not be Cooper's. the witness says no and they look for loopholes to fly through. we have multiple reports from multiple radar operators. it's a shame the cloud coverage was there. Portland would of seen the plane from the tower.
Ive always wondered if there were people out looking! Maybe that's why Janet and her husband were looking?
Today there would be news people with cameras out waiting-looking.
-
The question is whether Ammerman was ARTCC or TRACON. he said he was at SEATAC. the ARTCC has been away from the airport since 1962.
TRACON handles flights coming in and flights taking off then it's handed off to ARTCC.
ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight.
There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) in the United States.
Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.
Is the information I've provided inaccurate or is Ammerman going off second hand information? he sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
-
The question is whether Ammerman was ARTCC or TRACON. he said he was at SEATAC. the ARTCC has been away from the airport since 1962.
TRACON handles flights coming in and flights taking off then it's handed off to ARTCC.
ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight.
There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) in the United States.
Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.
Is the information I've provided inaccurate or is Ammerman going off second hand information? he sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
It is my understanding that the radar system for the Seattle area was physically located at McChord AFB. It would probably be operated by USAF military and civilian personnel. The FAA air traffic controllers may not have been directly involved in its operation.
There was probably a Memorandum of Understanding between the USAF and the FAA about the use of the radar data. In any event, the Seattle air traffic controllers in Auburn would have displays from this radar at their work stations. The Auburn controllers probably had displays from radar systems in the Spokane area as well as other areas for which they were responsible for air traffic control.
The approach and departure controllers at SEATAC would also have displays from the McChord radar and/or they might also have displays from lower powered radars located at SEATAC itself. These controllers would probably be located in the SEATAC tower building very close to the tower controllers who were looking out the windows. All of these people would work very closely together.
The NWA airliner was cleared for take-off on the ground control frequency and told to contact the Seattle ATC center directly on a specific frequency. They therefore bypassed the tower controller and the departure controller. Apparently there was some confusion between the SEATAC tower controllers and the ATC controllers in Auburn. When the airliner contacted the Auburn controllers, they were apparently taken by surprise and had to ask the airliner for information. This took a couple of minutes to clear up and I think it is discussed in the "FBI Notes" and other places.
In the Portland area, there was probably a low power radar station that provided coverage that was not available from the Seattle ATC radar system. This station would probably be located on the PIA property (maybe on top of the tower cab). Presumably it was just such a station that claimed to have tracked the airliner in the Portland area. This station would be entirely separate from the enroute radar network at Auburn. The mountains between Seattle and Portland would block the two radars.
Previous posts on this site have stated that the F-106s broke off their trailing of the airliner, climbed to 20,000 feet, and headed east while still north of the Columbia River. Ammerman claims to have been the controller who worked the intercept problem between the T-33 (and also presumably the F-106s) and the airliner. He would almost certainly have been at the Seattle ATC in Auburn. Also, he would probably have been assisted by several other people. And I imagine that the most senior managers at the Auburn facility were looking over his should (and that of the other controllers involved) as he worked the interception. This hijacking was not a routine event so it would be an "all hands on deck" situation.
Ammerman has apparently told Georger that he was not looking at his radar display from some point where the airliner was north of the Columbia River until it was south of the Columbia River. But you can rest assured that someone was looking at that display. And it appears that the other people were giving the airliner instructions that Ammerman was not aware of while he was working on the interception matter.
During the hand off to the Oakland Center, at least four Oakland controllers were involved. Only one Seattle Center controller was involved apparently.
-
The question is whether Ammerman was ARTCC or TRACON. he said he was at SEATAC. the ARTCC has been away from the airport since 1962.
TRACON handles flights coming in and flights taking off then it's handed off to ARTCC.
ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight.
There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) in the United States.
Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.
Is the information I've provided inaccurate or is Ammerman going off second hand information? he sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
It is my understanding that the radar system for the Seattle area was physically located at McChord AFB. It would probably be operated by USAF military and civilian personnel. The FAA air traffic controllers may not have been directly involved in its operation.
There was probably a Memorandum of Understanding between the USAF and the FAA about the use of the radar data. In any event, the Seattle air traffic controllers in Auburn would have displays from this radar at their work stations. The Auburn controllers probably had displays from radar systems in the Spokane area as well as other areas for which they were responsible for air traffic control.
The approach and departure controllers at SEATAC would also have displays from the McChord radar and/or they might also have displays from lower powered radars located at SEATAC itself. These controllers would probably be located in the SEATAC tower building very close to the tower controllers who were looking out the windows. All of these people would work very closely together.
The NWA airliner was cleared for take-off on the ground control frequency and told to contact the Seattle ATC center directly on a specific frequency. They therefore bypassed the tower controller and the departure controller. Apparently there was some confusion between the SEATAC tower controllers and the ATC controllers in Auburn. When the airliner contacted the Auburn controllers, they were apparently taken by surprise and had to ask the airliner for information. This took a couple of minutes to clear up and I think it is discussed in the "FBI Notes" and other places.
In the Portland area, there was probably a low power radar station that provided coverage that was not available from the Seattle ATC radar system. This station would probably be located on the PIA property (maybe on top of the tower cab). Presumably it was just such a station that claimed to have tracked the airliner in the Portland area. This station would be entirely separate from the enroute radar network at Auburn. The mountains between Seattle and Portland would block the two radars.
Previous posts on this site have stated that the F-106s broke off their trailing of the airliner, climbed to 20,000 feet, and headed east while still north of the Columbia River. Ammerman claims to have been the controller who worked the intercept problem between the T-33 (and also presumably the F-106s) and the airliner. He would almost certainly have been at the Seattle ATC in Auburn. Also, he would probably have been assisted by several other people. And I imagine that the most senior managers at the Auburn facility were looking over his should (and that of the other controllers involved) as he worked the interception. This hijacking was not a routine event so it would be an "all hands on deck" situation.
Ammerman has apparently told Georger that he was not looking at his radar display from some point where the airliner was north of the Columbia River until it was south of the Columbia River. But you can rest assured that someone was looking at that display. And it appears that the other people were giving the airliner instructions that Ammerman was not aware of while he was working on the interception matter.
During the hand off to the Oakland Center, at least four Oakland controllers were involved. Only one Seattle Center controller was involved apparently.
I have a feeling this is going to get *very* complicated, due to hair splitting, the system Cliff was part of, etc - looking for anything that will nullify Ammerman's testimony ?
From my notes:
"Cliff was a controller located at Seattle Center who handled 305 all the way to PDX and slightly beyond PDX on the evening of 11-24-71. Cliff handed off to Eugene. Departure control gave over 305 to Cliff and Cliff handled 305. Cliff was not SEAR2 in the NWA transcript. Cliff says whoever R2 was, R2 would have handed off to R4, who would have handed off to R5 etc. Cliff was located at Seattle Center. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centers at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC."
And: 'Cliff suggests we contact the FAA Northwest Region who he feels kept and still has ‘all the radar input and any controller transcripts and notes' “if those were kept at all from that night”, he says.
This complexity is the whole reason I wanted R99 to talk to Cliff. Apparently that never happened!
-
Cliff was located at Seattle Center. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centers at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC."
I truly understand all of this, but, it does conflict with the FAA website stating the ARTCC has been at it's present location since 1962. that is the "Seattle Center"...this isn't splitting hairs when we have an obvious conflict. It clearly states it was at SeaTac in the 50's and moved from SeaTac in 1962.
1963 - Spokane ARTCC was transferred to the Seattle ARTCC
It's on the page after the Table Of Contents
https://pointsixtyfive.com/files/welcome_guides/ZSE.pdf
-
The question is whether Ammerman was ARTCC or TRACON. he said he was at SEATAC. the ARTCC has been away from the airport since 1962.
TRACON handles flights coming in and flights taking off then it's handed off to ARTCC.
ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight.
There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) in the United States.
Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.
Is the information I've provided inaccurate or is Ammerman going off second hand information? he sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
It is my understanding that the radar system for the Seattle area was physically located at McChord AFB. It would probably be operated by USAF military and civilian personnel. The FAA air traffic controllers may not have been directly involved in its operation.
There was probably a Memorandum of Understanding between the USAF and the FAA about the use of the radar data. In any event, the Seattle air traffic controllers in Auburn would have displays from this radar at their work stations. The Auburn controllers probably had displays from radar systems in the Spokane area as well as other areas for which they were responsible for air traffic control.
The approach and departure controllers at SEATAC would also have displays from the McChord radar and/or they might also have displays from lower powered radars located at SEATAC itself. These controllers would probably be located in the SEATAC tower building very close to the tower controllers who were looking out the windows. All of these people would work very closely together.
The NWA airliner was cleared for take-off on the ground control frequency and told to contact the Seattle ATC center directly on a specific frequency. They therefore bypassed the tower controller and the departure controller. Apparently there was some confusion between the SEATAC tower controllers and the ATC controllers in Auburn. When the airliner contacted the Auburn controllers, they were apparently taken by surprise and had to ask the airliner for information. This took a couple of minutes to clear up and I think it is discussed in the "FBI Notes" and other places.
In the Portland area, there was probably a low power radar station that provided coverage that was not available from the Seattle ATC radar system. This station would probably be located on the PIA property (maybe on top of the tower cab). Presumably it was just such a station that claimed to have tracked the airliner in the Portland area. This station would be entirely separate from the enroute radar network at Auburn. The mountains between Seattle and Portland would block the two radars.
Previous posts on this site have stated that the F-106s broke off their trailing of the airliner, climbed to 20,000 feet, and headed east while still north of the Columbia River. Ammerman claims to have been the controller who worked the intercept problem between the T-33 (and also presumably the F-106s) and the airliner. He would almost certainly have been at the Seattle ATC in Auburn. Also, he would probably have been assisted by several other people. And I imagine that the most senior managers at the Auburn facility were looking over his should (and that of the other controllers involved) as he worked the interception. This hijacking was not a routine event so it would be an "all hands on deck" situation.
Ammerman has apparently told Georger that he was not looking at his radar display from some point where the airliner was north of the Columbia River until it was south of the Columbia River. But you can rest assured that someone was looking at that display. And it appears that the other people were giving the airliner instructions that Ammerman was not aware of while he was working on the interception matter.
During the hand off to the Oakland Center, at least four Oakland controllers were involved. Only one Seattle Center controller was involved apparently.
I have a feeling this is going to get *very* complicated, due to hair splitting, the system Cliff was part of, etc - looking for anything that will nullify Ammerman's testimony ?
From my notes:
"Cliff was a controller located at Seattle Center who handled 305 all the way to PDX and slightly beyond PDX on the evening of 11-24-71. Cliff handed off to Eugene. Departure control gave over 305 to Cliff and Cliff handled 305. Cliff was not SEAR2 in the NWA transcript. Cliff says whoever R2 was, R2 would have handed off to R4, who would have handed off to R5 etc. Cliff was located at Seattle Center. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centers at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC."
And: 'Cliff suggests we contact the FAA Northwest Region who he feels kept and still has ‘all the radar input and any controller transcripts and notes' “if those were kept at all from that night”, he says.
This complexity is the whole reason I wanted R99 to talk to Cliff. Apparently that never happened!
Georger, please read this post before replying. There is no hair splitting here.
Here are the Seattle controllers listed on the front page of the Seattle ATC radio transcripts (note that an R4 is not listed):
R2
R5
R6
R10
The Seattle ATC radio transcripts are described as being a "true transcription" by Gerald H. Osterkamp, Chief, Seattle ARTCC. He adds that the original transcripts are on file in his office.
Did you read Shutter's post about when the Seattle ATC was opened in Auburn? If not, you might find it interesting compared to what you have written above.
The FAA does keep records of aircraft accidents and incidents such as this hijacking. For the Seattle area, this records are eventually retired to the FAA Regional Office in the Seattle area. If you remember, that FAA Regional Office is the one that I initially contacted several years ago in an effort to obtain the unredacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts.
That FAA Regional Office promptly replied to my inquiry with a full page of contact information for the FBI FOIA office in Winchester, Virginia. And they replied by registered mail.
I contacted that FBI FOIA office and got a run-around, then I appealed to the DOJ and got another run-around. After that I contacted my US Congresswoman, who is now a US Senator filling out the remainder of John McCain's term. Three Congressional interventions later, I received exactly two pages of information but nothing on the radio transcripts. Those two pages are posted here on Shutter's site.
All of the above has been discussed here and at DZ at great length over the last several years.
If you are interested in contacting Ammerman again, let me know and I can suggest some specific questions you might want to discuss with him. This assumes that you have a working relationship with him.
-
FAA Air Route Traffic Control Centers (1960-Present) - A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) system of 25 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC)s operated with radar data provided by FAA radar sites, DoD radar sites, and other federal agency radar sites. These centers provide en route and oceanic services to private, commercial and military aircraft overflying their respective control areas. As aircraft enter or exit from one control area to the next, responsibility for the aircraft is transferred to the gaining ARTCC. Voice communication between aircraft and the ARTCCs is supported by a network of ground-air radio sites.
In addition to the 25 FAA ARTCCs, there are 160 FAA Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) facilities that provide services at terminals (airfields) these facilities have separate supporting radar and radio systems. The nations military airfields generally provide their own terminal services or share with FAA facilities when the airfields are joint use with civil aviation.
The gathering of radar and other sensor data is now largely automated and continuous but the actions necessary to control the airspace are conversational and require some 14,000 FAA air traffic controllers talking directly to pilots in the air and on the ground at terminals. This number does not include military air traffic controllers.
-
The question is whether Ammerman was ARTCC or TRACON. he said he was at SEATAC. the ARTCC has been away from the airport since 1962.
TRACON handles flights coming in and flights taking off then it's handed off to ARTCC.
ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight.
There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) in the United States.
Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.
Is the information I've provided inaccurate or is Ammerman going off second hand information? he sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
It is my understanding that the radar system for the Seattle area was physically located at McChord AFB. It would probably be operated by USAF military and civilian personnel. The FAA air traffic controllers may not have been directly involved in its operation.
There was probably a Memorandum of Understanding between the USAF and the FAA about the use of the radar data. In any event, the Seattle air traffic controllers in Auburn would have displays from this radar at their work stations. The Auburn controllers probably had displays from radar systems in the Spokane area as well as other areas for which they were responsible for air traffic control.
The approach and departure controllers at SEATAC would also have displays from the McChord radar and/or they might also have displays from lower powered radars located at SEATAC itself. These controllers would probably be located in the SEATAC tower building very close to the tower controllers who were looking out the windows. All of these people would work very closely together.
The NWA airliner was cleared for take-off on the ground control frequency and told to contact the Seattle ATC center directly on a specific frequency. They therefore bypassed the tower controller and the departure controller. Apparently there was some confusion between the SEATAC tower controllers and the ATC controllers in Auburn. When the airliner contacted the Auburn controllers, they were apparently taken by surprise and had to ask the airliner for information. This took a couple of minutes to clear up and I think it is discussed in the "FBI Notes" and other places.
In the Portland area, there was probably a low power radar station that provided coverage that was not available from the Seattle ATC radar system. This station would probably be located on the PIA property (maybe on top of the tower cab). Presumably it was just such a station that claimed to have tracked the airliner in the Portland area. This station would be entirely separate from the enroute radar network at Auburn. The mountains between Seattle and Portland would block the two radars.
Previous posts on this site have stated that the F-106s broke off their trailing of the airliner, climbed to 20,000 feet, and headed east while still north of the Columbia River. Ammerman claims to have been the controller who worked the intercept problem between the T-33 (and also presumably the F-106s) and the airliner. He would almost certainly have been at the Seattle ATC in Auburn. Also, he would probably have been assisted by several other people. And I imagine that the most senior managers at the Auburn facility were looking over his should (and that of the other controllers involved) as he worked the interception. This hijacking was not a routine event so it would be an "all hands on deck" situation.
Ammerman has apparently told Georger that he was not looking at his radar display from some point where the airliner was north of the Columbia River until it was south of the Columbia River. But you can rest assured that someone was looking at that display. And it appears that the other people were giving the airliner instructions that Ammerman was not aware of while he was working on the interception matter.
During the hand off to the Oakland Center, at least four Oakland controllers were involved. Only one Seattle Center controller was involved apparently.
I have a feeling this is going to get *very* complicated, due to hair splitting, the system Cliff was part of, etc - looking for anything that will nullify Ammerman's testimony ?
From my notes:
"Cliff was a controller located at Seattle Center who handled 305 all the way to PDX and slightly beyond PDX on the evening of 11-24-71. Cliff handed off to Eugene. Departure control gave over 305 to Cliff and Cliff handled 305. Cliff was not SEAR2 in the NWA transcript. Cliff says whoever R2 was, R2 would have handed off to R4, who would have handed off to R5 etc. Cliff was located at Seattle Center. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centers at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC."
And: 'Cliff suggests we contact the FAA Northwest Region who he feels kept and still has ‘all the radar input and any controller transcripts and notes' “if those were kept at all from that night”, he says.
This complexity is the whole reason I wanted R99 to talk to Cliff. Apparently that never happened!
Georger, please read this post before replying. There is no hair splitting here.
Here are the Seattle controllers listed on the front page of the Seattle ATC radio transcripts (note that an R4 is not listed):
R2
R5
R6
R10
The Seattle ATC radio transcripts are described as being a "true transcription" by Gerald H. Osterkamp, Chief, Seattle ARTCC. He adds that the original transcripts are on file in his office.
Did you read Shutter's post about when the Seattle ATC was opened in Auburn? If not, you might find it interesting compared to what you have written above.
The FAA does keep records of aircraft accidents and incidents such as this hijacking. For the Seattle area, this records are eventually retired to the FAA Regional Office in the Seattle area. If you remember, that FAA Regional Office is the one that I initially contacted several years ago in an effort to obtain the unredacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts.
That FAA Regional Office promptly replied to my inquiry with a full page of contact information for the FBI FOIA office in Winchester, Virginia. And they replied by registered mail.
I contacted that FBI FOIA office and got a run-around, then I appealed to the DOJ and got another run-around. After that I contacted my US Congresswoman, who is now a US Senator filling out the remainder of John McCain's term. Three Congressional interventions later, I received exactly two pages of information but nothing on the radio transcripts. Those two pages are posted here on Shutter's site.
All of the above has been discussed here and at DZ at great length over the last several years.
If you are interested in contacting Ammerman again, let me know and I can suggest some specific questions you might want to discuss with him. This assumes that you have a working relationship with him.
This assumes that you have a working relationship with him. ?
Nothing new in your reply including the smarm.
So let me say it again and maybe this time you can HEAR IT! Why didn't you go ahead and interview Ammerman like I thought you were going to do? I always told you I preferred you interview him - not me! My interviews of CA were preliminary to you interviewing him - as I recall I even asked you 'what questions shall I ask?' I think I asked you again between my interviews, based on the first interview conducted.
For all I know you could be correct. The one thing I do know is: I am though with your childish shit. Good luck. :rofl:
And you can take that to the bank! I am not going to e in the middle of this shit any more. :congrats:
-
FAA Air Route Traffic Control Centers (1960-Present) - A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) system of 25 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC)s operated with radar data provided by FAA radar sites, DoD radar sites, and other federal agency radar sites. These centers provide en route and oceanic services to private, commercial and military aircraft overflying their respective control areas. As aircraft enter or exit from one control area to the next, responsibility for the aircraft is transferred to the gaining ARTCC. Voice communication between aircraft and the ARTCCs is supported by a network of ground-air radio sites.
In addition to the 25 FAA ARTCCs, there are 160 FAA Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) facilities that provide services at terminals (airfields) these facilities have separate supporting radar and radio systems. The nations military airfields generally provide their own terminal services or share with FAA facilities when the airfields are joint use with civil aviation.
The gathering of radar and other sensor data is now largely automated and continuous but the actions necessary to control the airspace are conversational and require some 14,000 FAA air traffic controllers talking directly to pilots in the air and on the ground at terminals. This number does not include military air traffic controllers.
Whatever alternate factoids you have, I can only respond with what CA told me. That's the best I can do.
Find him and call hm and ask him yourself!
Or, find him and dont call him and rely on your own alternate factoids instead and put this to bed. Maybe Flyjack knows? Maybe Blevins knows at Dropzone?
-
I can only respond with what CA told me. That's the best I can do.
Nobody is asking anything of you. you didn't make these statements. someone else did. I'm posting things that conflict and I'm trying to make sense of what he states. some things don't seem to add up. he might have a reason that clears these things up. I don't know.
-
The question is whether Ammerman was ARTCC or TRACON. he said he was at SEATAC. the ARTCC has been away from the airport since 1962.
TRACON handles flights coming in and flights taking off then it's handed off to ARTCC.
ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight.
There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) in the United States.
Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.
Is the information I've provided inaccurate or is Ammerman going off second hand information? he sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
It is my understanding that the radar system for the Seattle area was physically located at McChord AFB. It would probably be operated by USAF military and civilian personnel. The FAA air traffic controllers may not have been directly involved in its operation.
There was probably a Memorandum of Understanding between the USAF and the FAA about the use of the radar data. In any event, the Seattle air traffic controllers in Auburn would have displays from this radar at their work stations. The Auburn controllers probably had displays from radar systems in the Spokane area as well as other areas for which they were responsible for air traffic control.
The approach and departure controllers at SEATAC would also have displays from the McChord radar and/or they might also have displays from lower powered radars located at SEATAC itself. These controllers would probably be located in the SEATAC tower building very close to the tower controllers who were looking out the windows. All of these people would work very closely together.
The NWA airliner was cleared for take-off on the ground control frequency and told to contact the Seattle ATC center directly on a specific frequency. They therefore bypassed the tower controller and the departure controller. Apparently there was some confusion between the SEATAC tower controllers and the ATC controllers in Auburn. When the airliner contacted the Auburn controllers, they were apparently taken by surprise and had to ask the airliner for information. This took a couple of minutes to clear up and I think it is discussed in the "FBI Notes" and other places.
In the Portland area, there was probably a low power radar station that provided coverage that was not available from the Seattle ATC radar system. This station would probably be located on the PIA property (maybe on top of the tower cab). Presumably it was just such a station that claimed to have tracked the airliner in the Portland area. This station would be entirely separate from the enroute radar network at Auburn. The mountains between Seattle and Portland would block the two radars.
Previous posts on this site have stated that the F-106s broke off their trailing of the airliner, climbed to 20,000 feet, and headed east while still north of the Columbia River. Ammerman claims to have been the controller who worked the intercept problem between the T-33 (and also presumably the F-106s) and the airliner. He would almost certainly have been at the Seattle ATC in Auburn. Also, he would probably have been assisted by several other people. And I imagine that the most senior managers at the Auburn facility were looking over his should (and that of the other controllers involved) as he worked the interception. This hijacking was not a routine event so it would be an "all hands on deck" situation.
Ammerman has apparently told Georger that he was not looking at his radar display from some point where the airliner was north of the Columbia River until it was south of the Columbia River. But you can rest assured that someone was looking at that display. And it appears that the other people were giving the airliner instructions that Ammerman was not aware of while he was working on the interception matter.
During the hand off to the Oakland Center, at least four Oakland controllers were involved. Only one Seattle Center controller was involved apparently.
I have a feeling this is going to get *very* complicated, due to hair splitting, the system Cliff was part of, etc - looking for anything that will nullify Ammerman's testimony ?
From my notes:
"Cliff was a controller located at Seattle Center who handled 305 all the way to PDX and slightly beyond PDX on the evening of 11-24-71. Cliff handed off to Eugene. Departure control gave over 305 to Cliff and Cliff handled 305. Cliff was not SEAR2 in the NWA transcript. Cliff says whoever R2 was, R2 would have handed off to R4, who would have handed off to R5 etc. Cliff was located at Seattle Center. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centers at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC."
And: 'Cliff suggests we contact the FAA Northwest Region who he feels kept and still has ‘all the radar input and any controller transcripts and notes' “if those were kept at all from that night”, he says.
This complexity is the whole reason I wanted R99 to talk to Cliff. Apparently that never happened!
Georger, please read this post before replying. There is no hair splitting here.
Here are the Seattle controllers listed on the front page of the Seattle ATC radio transcripts (note that an R4 is not listed):
R2
R5
R6
R10
The Seattle ATC radio transcripts are described as being a "true transcription" by Gerald H. Osterkamp, Chief, Seattle ARTCC. He adds that the original transcripts are on file in his office.
Did you read Shutter's post about when the Seattle ATC was opened in Auburn? If not, you might find it interesting compared to what you have written above.
The FAA does keep records of aircraft accidents and incidents such as this hijacking. For the Seattle area, this records are eventually retired to the FAA Regional Office in the Seattle area. If you remember, that FAA Regional Office is the one that I initially contacted several years ago in an effort to obtain the unredacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts.
That FAA Regional Office promptly replied to my inquiry with a full page of contact information for the FBI FOIA office in Winchester, Virginia. And they replied by registered mail.
I contacted that FBI FOIA office and got a run-around, then I appealed to the DOJ and got another run-around. After that I contacted my US Congresswoman, who is now a US Senator filling out the remainder of John McCain's term. Three Congressional interventions later, I received exactly two pages of information but nothing on the radio transcripts. Those two pages are posted here on Shutter's site.
All of the above has been discussed here and at DZ at great length over the last several years.
If you are interested in contacting Ammerman again, let me know and I can suggest some specific questions you might want to discuss with him. This assumes that you have a working relationship with him.
This assumes that you have a working relationship with him. ?
Nothing new in your reply including the smarm.
So let me say it again and maybe this time you can HEAR IT! Why didn't you go ahead and interview Ammerman like I thought you were going to do? I always told you I preferred you interview him - not me! My interviews of CA were preliminary to you interviewing him - as I recall I even asked you 'what questions shall I ask?' I think I asked you again between my interviews, based on the first interview conducted.
For all I know you could be correct. The one thing I do know is: I am though with your childish shit. Good luck. :rofl:
And you can take that to the bank! I am not going to e in the middle of this shit any more. :congrats:
To the best of my knowledge, I have never received any contact information for Ammerman from you.
-
Weather you like it or not we have a conflict with his statement.
To the best of my knowledge the Seattle center wasn't at SeaTac in 1971. I believe TRACON controllers were before they moved. when I read someone saying the center was there in 1971 it made the old eyebrow raise. If he was there on November 24, 1971 he could of been a tracon controller. to date. that makes the most sense. I could be wrong but I think we are here to find some truth and make sense out of things? to date, it's confusing until further details are found.
-
It appears the tracon controllers were at Sea-Tac till about 2004. reason being the FAA ask's for there removal when a new tower is built. the new tower was started in 2001 and the new tracon building was completed in 2004 which is right beside Sea-Tac.
"The FAA’s policy is to consider relocating a TRACON any time construction of a new airport traffic control tower is considered."
-
FLYJACK has solved the issue of where Ammerman was. FLYJACK says:
FLYJACK
Dropzone 3 hrs ago -
TRACON was in the Tower in 1971....
Ammerman's interview in Matheson's book names Seattle Center.. matches the transcripts.
Georger's SEATAC account is incorrect or inaccurate.
So, if CA was in TRACON, and TRACON was in a Tower, then wherever the Tower was, that is where Ammerman was.?
Matheson says: "Clifford Ammerman was employed by the FAA as an air traffic controller at Seattle Center. Ammerman at Seattle Center ..... was now ‘one of those who ….
Georger has said Ammerman said: Cliff was a controller located at Seattle Center … Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC.
If still confused please contact Cliff Ammerman. Or Shirlee Matheson who you are already in contact with. Or, FLYJACK.
-
All I'm saying is Ammerman could not of been part of ARTCC if he claims he was at Sea-Tac in 1971 or anytime past 1962. the tower is a control center that directs the traffic around the airport. this is why it's above everything. TRACON and ARTCC don't need towers...they were in the Admin. building and moved to Auburn and the tracon building was completed in 2004. that means only the ground control remains at Sea-Tac. actually, TRACON is right beside runway 34L/16/R. it might still be on the property.
Radar screens are hard to see in the daylight hours especially decades back.
Basically, it appears the DZ and now a spin off of this site since they appear to make it the main discussion over there.
-
So, if CA was in TRACON, and TRACON was in a Tower, then wherever the Tower was, that is where Ammerman was.?
Georger, it appears that you are the only one claiming Ammerman was at the airport. is it possible you have this wrong. the book only states he was employed by the FAA and worked at the Seattle Center. that does make sense with what he talks about in the book and to you. the only things that sticks out is the claim of being at the airport. different controllers were there at that time. ARTCC was miles away from the airport in 1971. TRACON controllers hand off 50 nautical miles out from the airport. that's around 12 NM short of Toledo. R2 can't be tracon since communication exceeds the 50 mile ring. the list of controllers don't mention any tracon controllers. they are all ARTCC and I believe control tower boys are in the mix.
Actually, the word "control" could be tracon controllers...
-
Transcripts state "Seattle approach" which is the trancon controllers. they speak on frequency 119.5 which is one of the approach frequencies. ground control is on 121.7 . I don't see a hand off from ground control to departure. Seattle Center takes over (R2) right at takeoff..
-
Right out of the gate it appears 305 is preoccupied and takes 3 minutes to report altitude. they finally radio just getting past 6500 and Cooper trying to get the steps down. probably difficult dealing with Cooper and the company trying to run the show wanting to know every move.
-
So, if CA was in TRACON, and TRACON was in a Tower, then wherever the Tower was, that is where Ammerman was.?
Georger, it appears that you are the only one claiming Ammerman was at the airport. is it possible you have this wrong. the book only states he was employed by the FAA and worked at the Seattle Center. that does make sense with what he talks about in the book and to you. the only things that sticks out is the claim of being at the airport. different controllers were there at that time. ARTCC was miles away from the airport in 1971. TRACON controllers hand off 50 nautical miles out from the airport. that's around 12 NM short of Toledo. R2 can't be tracon since communication exceeds the 50 mile ring. the list of controllers don't mention any tracon controllers. they are all ARTCC and I believe control tower boys are in the mix.
Actually, the word "control" could be tracon controllers...
I keep telling you I am giving what I have! I dont know if it is accurate or not as to where Ammerman was physically located. I have no more. Im not an expert in these matters!
Have you asked Matheson; you are in contact with her ? Plus she is supposed to be an actual aviation historian. Email Matheson again for any clarification she can give. I have no more on this.
-
Right out of the gate it appears 305 is preoccupied and takes 3 minutes to report altitude. they finally radio just getting past 6500 and Cooper trying to get the steps down. probably difficult dealing with Cooper and the company trying to run the show wanting to know every move.
Most of the above posts and this one discuss information that is in my flight path analysis which used to be posted here. Most of it is now in Eric Ulis's book if anyone is interested in more details.
The redactions or deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts have removed radio communications with the airliner for the period 7:59:10 PM PST to 8:13:14 PM PST which covers the predicted jump time.
At 7:59:10 PM, Seattle Center controller R2 tells the airliner to contact Seattle Center on the 133.9 frequency. Actually, I think this is an ARINC frequency rather than an air traffic control frequency.
The next transcript entry is at 8:13:14 PM when the airliner contacts the Seattle Center on 120.9 and controller R5 responds. The 120.9 frequency is remoted to a Scappoose facility which is located 8 statute miles west of Tina Bar.
So there was apparently a change in Seattle Center controllers at almost exactly the same time that the airline crew was dealing with the possibility that Cooper had just jumped. There is nothing in the transcripts to suggest that R2 was involved after this time.
-
Right out of the gate it appears 305 is preoccupied and takes 3 minutes to report altitude. they finally radio just getting past 6500 and Cooper trying to get the steps down. probably difficult dealing with Cooper and the company trying to run the show wanting to know every move.
Most of the above posts and this one discuss information that is in my flight path analysis which used to be posted here. Most of it is now in Eric Ulis's book if anyone is interested in more details.
The redactions or deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts have removed radio communications with the airliner for the period 7:59:10 PM PST to 8:13:14 PM PST which covers the predicted jump time.
At 7:59:10 PM, Seattle Center controller R2 tells the airliner to contact Seattle Center on the 133.9 frequency. Actually, I think this is an ARINC frequency rather than an air traffic control frequency.
The next transcript entry is at 8:13:14 PM when the airliner contacts the Seattle Center on 120.9 and controller R5 responds. The 120.9 frequency is remoted to a Scappoose facility which is located 8 statute miles west of Tina Bar.
So there was apparently a change in Seattle Center controllers at almost exactly the same time that the airline crew was dealing with the possibility that Cooper had just jumped. There is nothing in the transcripts to suggest that R2 was involved after this time.
Back up!
Who was R2, R3, R4 R5 etc? Name them and their locations.
You need to simplify your outpouring to a level the average person can understand - otherwise you are howling at the Moon. If that cannot be done then there is something wrong!
-
An attempt to locate and communicate with Cliff Ammerman is being made.
-
Right out of the gate it appears 305 is preoccupied and takes 3 minutes to report altitude. they finally radio just getting past 6500 and Cooper trying to get the steps down. probably difficult dealing with Cooper and the company trying to run the show wanting to know every move.
Most of the above posts and this one discuss information that is in my flight path analysis which used to be posted here. Most of it is now in Eric Ulis's book if anyone is interested in more details.
The redactions or deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts have removed radio communications with the airliner for the period 7:59:10 PM PST to 8:13:14 PM PST which covers the predicted jump time.
At 7:59:10 PM, Seattle Center controller R2 tells the airliner to contact Seattle Center on the 133.9 frequency. Actually, I think this is an ARINC frequency rather than an air traffic control frequency.
The next transcript entry is at 8:13:14 PM when the airliner contacts the Seattle Center on 120.9 and controller R5 responds. The 120.9 frequency is remoted to a Scappoose facility which is located 8 statute miles west of Tina Bar.
So there was apparently a change in Seattle Center controllers at almost exactly the same time that the airline crew was dealing with the possibility that Cooper had just jumped. There is nothing in the transcripts to suggest that R2 was involved after this time.
Back up!
Who was R2, R3, R4 R5 etc? Name them and their locations.
You need to simplify your outpouring to a level the average person can understand - otherwise you are howling at the Moon. If that cannot be done then there is something wrong!
As stated in earlier posts, the only Seattle controllers listed in the transcripts are R2, R5, R6, and R10. They are never named and their location is never given.
However, in the hand off to Oakland Center the controllers involved gave their initials, as was the custom. Four Oakland Center controllers gave their initials and one Seattle Center controller gave his initials.
The Seattle Center controller was listed as R10 and his initials were "LE".
All of the above has been discussed online over the past several years. If you ignored it then, you can still benefit by getting a copy of Eric Ulis's book.
-
If the ARTCC works similar to TRACON then it has what is called blocks. area's which they control and hand off once they get close to the end of there range/perimeter. it appears R2 goes to around the Toledo area and R5 picks up from there. if R2 is watching the plane cross the Columbia it appears he's only a spectator. actually, they all appear to be spectators since they were given the sky. the only route given was V23.
I also wonder if KOMO news ever interviewed the fighter pilots as claimed in the 302 provided...
-
I keep telling you I am giving what I have! I dont know if it is accurate or not as to where Ammerman was physically located. I have no more. Im not an expert in these matters!
I'm not blaming anyone for anything. I'm hoping you are wrong and misunderstood Ammerman. if he did say that he was at Sea-Tac then it presents a problem. that's all.
Another controller from Seattle ARTCC has been found. someone sent it to me and I'm going to look into this further and hope more understanding can be brought forth. he worked there in 1971.
-
Another controller from Seattle ARTCC has been found. someone sent it to me and I'm going to look into this further and hope more understanding can be brought forth. he worked there in 1971.
Shutter, let us know how this goes and if he is willing to answer specific questions. His answers can be off the record if he wishes.
-
No replies yet. information is new at the moment. hopefully he will reply..
-
He was a greenhorn starting out in 71 to 93 at Seattle. don't know if he was working on the 24th. he should still have viable information to share.
-
I received a reply. I only asked a few questions since I had no idea he would reply....
Hi Dave.
i started work in 1971 but it was lengthy training program and I was working in the area of southern Oregon. I have memories of The hijacking, but not as a controller. Sorry I don't think I'd be much help.
I have replied further with more questions surround the ARTCC functions in Seattle.
-
I received a reply. I only asked a few questions since I had no idea he would reply....
Hi Dave.
i started work in 1971 but it was lengthy training program and I was working in the area of southern Oregon. I have memories of The hijacking, but not as a controller. Sorry I don't think I'd be much help.
I have replied further with more questions surround the ARTCC functions in Seattle.
Any reply from Matheson, the aviation historian? She should know where Ammerman was physically located. Its a basic fact she should have asked in writing her chapter on Ammerman.
-
I just talked with Shirlee Matheson - very nice conversation. Turns out she is a graduate of the UI Writer's Workship (MFA program) here, in 1990! We talked about all kinds of people in the MFA program here, people I know and knew well!
Shirlee says she would have to do a time consuming search for where CA was physically located, the night of the hijacking. She didn't have the information off the top of her head, beyond what she wrote in her book.
Thank you Shirlee!
-
Did you ask her if she still had the letter sent to her?
Another reply from the operator I contacted. his memory doesn't recall much (76 years old). he does claim tracon was at the airport and Seattle center was already open which we already know.
"I am going to be of little help. The TRACON was still at SeaTac. I do not remember the date the ARTCC opened. but it was definitely open in 1971. I recognize the name Cliff Ammerman, I think he worked it the B area which was northern Oregon. I'm don't know who to contact to get anymore info. I'm 76, and it would probably be someone older than me. I 'm sorry to disappoint you"
-
B AREA
The B area controls aircraft in most of Northern Oregon,
from approximately 150 miles off the western coastline east,
roughly to Idaho, between Portland and Eugene, Oregon.
There are four low altitude sectors (Sectors 4, 5, 6 and 34)
controlling the surface up to 24,000 ft and three high altitude
sectors (42, 46 and 16) working traffic at and above 24,000
ft.
Sector 4 works a shelf along the I-5 corridor from Portland,
OR to Olympia WA, below 9000 feet. Sector 6 controls a wide array of traffic departing
from Portland as well as all commercial traffic arriving Portland from the south. Both
sectors provide approach control services to many small airports. Sector 6 is the busiest
low altitude sector in the B area. Sector 5 works Portland departures to the southeast and
supplies approach control services to the Bend-Redmond-Sun River recreational hub.
Sector 34 works traffic arriving and departing Portland to the east.
The B area high altitude sectors are split along north/south lines. Of the
high altitude sectors, Sector 42 is the furthest west and controls traffic
from Seattle and Portland to San Francisco Bay area destinations, as
well as sequencing the Portland arrivals from California into one
stream. Sector 46 is the middle sector. It controls the Portland
departures to the southeast and sequences all Seattle area arrivals
from most California and Nevada airports into one stream. Sector 16
controls the airspace over Eastern Oregon and provides service to
multiple streams of aircraft including Portland departures and arrivals to
the east, Seattle area departures heading to south east and traffic
transiting from the Spokane area to all California destinations. Sector
16 is the busiest high altitude sector in the B area.
There are two approach control facilities within the B-area. Portland Approach controls an
area within 30 miles of the Portland Airport below 13,000 feet; Cascade Approach controls
a similar area at Eugene below 9000 feet. The B area takes responsibility for Cascade
Approach’s airspace at Eugene during the nighttime hours. The Cascade Mountain
Range is dotted with prominent peaks that present a terrain risk to small aircraft.
-
Sounds like R2 would be in area A
The A Area controls air traffic from Portland,
Oregon (PDX) north to Vancouver, British
Columbia (YVR) and from the Cascade
Mountains west to one hundred miles over the
Pacific Ocean. This airspace is divided into six
non-stratified sectors that serve all users
including commercial flights, general aviation
and the diverse aircraft and activities of local
military bases. One additional sector in the A
area underlies both Whidbey RAPCON and
Seattle TRACON airspace to provide arrival,
departure and en route service over the
Everett, WA area, which includes such diverse
activities as newly produced Boeing Company heavy aircraft and attendees to the
Northwest Experimental Aviation Association Fly-In
-
Did you ask her if she still had the letter sent to her?
Another reply from the operator I contacted. his memory doesn't recall much (76 years old). he does claim tracon was at the airport and Seattle center was already open which we already know.
"I am going to be of little help. The TRACON was still at SeaTac. I do not remember the date the ARTCC opened. but it was definitely open in 1971. I recognize the name Cliff Ammerman, I think he worked it the B area which was northern Oregon. I'm don't know who to contact to get anymore info. I'm 76, and it would probably be someone older than me. I 'm sorry to disappoint you"
Yes, she has the letter Cliff sent to her. She has everything from her work with Cliff. It is in an archive at the U of Calgary, if I got that straight.
I just got off the phone with Cliff Ammerman. A long productive conversation. Havent had a chance to write my notes up. Cliff remembered our previous discussion from 2010. He says he was referring to something else which I interpreted him as saying he was located in a building 'below the tower at SeaTac'. He say he was in fact located in the ARTCC building at - Auburn Washington , so Shutter your reference to a facility at Auburn is exactly correct! He worked Sector 4 the evening of the hijacking.
I found Cliff in good health, enjoying life, ......... and I will post more later.
I have to run. Later.
That should solve the location issue.
-
It appears that some news is about to break so I will let you all in on what I have learned in some discussions I’ve had with Cliff Ammerman recently. I have been sitting on this information but decided to go forward with its release now that it appears others have recently reached out to Cliff.
Cliff was controlling the airspace in Sector 4 and Sector 5 on November 24, 1971. He was handed 305 about 10 miles north of Toledo as it entered Sector 4. He explained that this was somewhat complicated by the fact that the controller in Sector 2 attempted to hand 305 off to the controller handling Sector 4 traffic for the higher altitude which would have been normal. However, given that 305 stayed at 10,000 feet it was actually Cliff who would be handling the flight.
Cliff stated that this also explains why the transcripts are missing data. Specifically, he said that when they were transcribed it appears that the person doing the transcription was listening to the tapes from the controller handling the higher altitude of Sector 4 and not the altitude that Cliff was covering and that 305 was actually flying in.
Cliff was located in Auburn. He took over 305 and communicated with the pilots of 305 briefly as the hand off was effected. In addition, Cliff also took over duties for the two F-106 fighters as they entered Sector 4.
Cliff stated that 305 did not have a prescribed flight path. Therefore, his job was to keep an eye on 305 and make certain that no other aircraft got near 305. Also he was tasked with directing the F-106s.
The F-106s never made visual contact with 305. In fact, they trailed at five miles behind from 11,000 feet. Moreover, the F-106s were having a problem flying at such slow speeds. Therefore, they would have to make some S turns occasionally. Cliff explained that the F-106 has onboard radar that enables them to see targets 10 degrees to the left and right for a total scan range of only 20 degrees. This means that as the jets would make their S turns they would lose contact with 305 on radar but regain contact once they came back around.
Not too long after Cliff took over 305 and the F-106s a single T-33 took off from PDX. Cliff directed the T-33 west then north to meet 305. At a point approximately 10 miles north of PDX Cliff had the T-33 swing around in behind 305. The T-33 was placed five miles behind at 11,000 feet. The T-33 never made visual contact with 305.
At this point Cliff directed the F-106s to an altitude of 20,000 feet and 10 miles east of 305. Then all four jets continued south.
Cliff told me that 305 made the turn at Toledo and started heading toward the Battlefield VORTAC. He said 305 was likely west of the V23 centerline at this point. He then stated that at an estimated point east of Kelso that 305 modified its heading by an estimated 15 degrees to the west. He stated this was done so that 305 would pass west of Vancouver and Portland and cutout the “dogleg” in the V23 flight path. He said that 305 headed directly for the Eugene VORTAC from this point east of Kelso.
Cliff also stated that when the T-33 pulled in behind 305 shortly after the new Kelso heading that he gave the T-33 a heading consistent with 305 and that he never modified that heading. In other words, 305 and the T-33 flew in a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC.
Cliff stated that one matter to consider is that an airliner flying at a normal altitude of 33,000 feet would have no trouble seeing VORTACs a great distance away. However, given that 305 was travelling only at 10,000 feet and the weather was murky that this would inhibit the range of VORTAC detection.
He stated that 305 largely stayed within V23 which is 10 miles wide. However, he stated that he believed it flew outside of the western boundary by a small amount (a couple of miles) as the jet was west of PDX. He further stated this was not a concern and that often the navigation of airplanes will differ by a couple of miles from their screens at air traffic control so it isn’t an issue if a jet flies a little out of a set vector. Nonetheless, 305 was not set to stay within V23 anyway so it didn’t matter. Cliff stated that he estimates that 305 travelled near Hillsboro during that part of the flight.
Cliff also mentioned that airliners communicate using VHF and the military uses UHF. However, the switches are toggled so that he can broadcast to both the airliner and the military at the same time. But, they were concerned that Cooper would be able to hear their communication with the military jets. Therefore, he would stand up and un-toggle the switches so he could communicate with the military jets privately. He mentioned that this was labor intensive so at a point somewhere around Kelso or south of Kelso he had 305 switch over to another frequency. Apparently they had a radio tower on Sauvie Island. The other frequency meant that 305 would be communicating with the controller handling the Sector 4 airspace at the lower level—9,000 feet to ground level—even though 305 was flying at 10,000 feet.
Just south of Portland 305 entered Sector 5 which went all the way to Eugene. Cliff was also handling traffic in Sector 5.
Cliff said that as the jets were travelling in a straight line toward the Eugene VORTAC south of Portland that they naturally were merging closer to the V23 center line. He added that as the group was approaching Eugene that the T-33 was getting low on fuel and was turned back to PDX. Also at this time the F-106s stated that they didn’t have that much fuel to continue on much longer so they suggested that they use this opportunity to send the F-106s back to McChord which was done.
Importantly, as I interviewed Cliff I did not tell him of my thoughts regarding the Western Flight Path. I asked him to tell me what happened that night. Moreover, in a later phone call when I explained the FBI flight path he said he was completely unaware of it. In other words, he had no idea that his thoughts about the flight path and the jet flying west of Portland contradicted the FBI’s version of the flight path.
Also, he stated that the FBI never interviewed him. Additionally, he was unaware of the FBI interviewing any of the air traffic controllers in his group.
Finally, Cliff told me that he knows a former Northwest Orient flight attendant named Catherine. This woman was not on 305. However, she knew Captain Scott personally. Catherine stated that Captain Scott told her in later years that he purposely flew the jet west of Portland because he was concerned about the prospect of a bomb being on the jet and the safety of those on the ground.
I don’t think I need to explain what all of this means. That said, it is clear that this first-hand testimony from both Cliff and Catherine vindicates both R99 and me. Yes, it appears that R99 and I were wrong about the jet travelling from Toledo to Canby. Rather, it appears that 305 actually flew from east of Kelso to Eugene--remarkably, just west of both the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge and Tena Bar.
Those, ladies and gentleman, are the facts.
-
Nice EU. this confirms so much I've said over a long period. it was recent that I stated the controllers were actually "spectators" since they didn't really have control of them and were given the sky.
You don't need to see the VORTAC. anyone with instrumentation learns how to follow to and from any given VOR. heading to a VOR would be called a bearing and heading away would be a radial. once you put the frequency in of Battleground you can tell how far away you are from it at takeoff and during the flight. the frequency is 116.60
-
It also appears no TRACON controllers were not needed since they already had a ceiling of 10,000 and could go anywhere they wanted. Seattle ARTCC took the flight at takeoff. TRACON became obsolete. it still appears they were well within the ballpark as to where the plane was. lots of eye's on the flight going all the way to NORAD.
-
It appears that some news is about to break so I will let you all in on what I have learned in some discussions I’ve had with Cliff Ammerman recently. I have been sitting on this information but decided to go forward with its release now that it appears others have recently reached out to Cliff.
Cliff was controlling the airspace in Sector 4 and Sector 5 on November 24, 1971. He was handed 305 about 10 miles north of Toledo as it entered Sector 4. He explained that this was somewhat complicated by the fact that the controller in Sector 2 attempted to hand 305 off to the controller handling Sector 4 traffic for the higher altitude which would have been normal. However, given that 305 stayed at 10,000 feet it was actually Cliff who would be handling the flight.
Cliff stated that this also explains why the transcripts are missing data. Specifically, he said that when they were transcribed it appears that the person doing the transcription was listening to the tapes from the controller handling the higher altitude of Sector 4 and not the altitude that Cliff was covering and that 305 was actually flying in.
Cliff was located in Auburn. He took over 305 and communicated with the pilots of 305 briefly as the hand off was effected. In addition, Cliff also took over duties for the two F-106 fighters as they entered Sector 4.
Cliff stated that 305 did not have a prescribed flight path. Therefore, his job was to keep an eye on 305 and make certain that no other aircraft got near 305. Also he was tasked with directing the F-106s.
The F-106s never made visual contact with 305. In fact, they trailed at five miles behind from 11,000 feet. Moreover, the F-106s were having a problem flying at such slow speeds. Therefore, they would have to make some S turns occasionally. Cliff explained that the F-106 has onboard radar that enables them to see targets 10 degrees to the left and right for a total scan range of only 20 degrees. This means that as the jets would make their S turns they would lose contact with 305 on radar but regain contact once they came back around.
Not too long after Cliff took over 305 and the F-106s a single T-33 took off from PDX. Cliff directed the T-33 west then north to meet 305. At a point approximately 10 miles north of PDX Cliff had the T-33 swing around in behind 305. The T-33 was placed five miles behind at 11,000 feet. The T-33 never made visual contact with 305.
At this point Cliff directed the F-106s to an altitude of 20,000 feet and 10 miles east of 305. Then all four jets continued south.
Cliff told me that 305 made the turn at Toledo and started heading toward the Battlefield VORTAC. He said 305 was likely west of the V23 centerline at this point. He then stated that at an estimated point east of Kelso that 305 modified its heading by an estimated 15 degrees to the west. He stated this was done so that 305 would pass west of Vancouver and Portland and cutout the “dogleg” in the V23 flight path. He said that 305 headed directly for the Eugene VORTAC from this point east of Kelso.
Cliff also stated that when the T-33 pulled in behind 305 shortly after the new Kelso heading that he gave the T-33 a heading consistent with 305 and that he never modified that heading. In other words, 305 and the T-33 flew in a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC.
Cliff stated that one matter to consider is that an airliner flying at a normal altitude of 33,000 feet would have no trouble seeing VORTACs a great distance away. However, given that 305 was travelling only at 10,000 feet and the weather was murky that this would inhibit the range of VORTAC detection.
He stated that 305 largely stayed within V23 which is 10 miles wide. However, he stated that he believed it flew outside of the western boundary by a small amount (a couple of miles) as the jet was west of PDX. He further stated this was not a concern and that often the navigation of airplanes will differ by a couple of miles from their screens at air traffic control so it isn’t an issue if a jet flies a little out of a set vector. Nonetheless, 305 was not set to stay within V23 anyway so it didn’t matter. Cliff stated that he estimates that 305 travelled near Hillsboro during that part of the flight.
Cliff also mentioned that airliners communicate using VHF and the military uses UHF. However, the switches are toggled so that he can broadcast to both the airliner and the military at the same time. But, they were concerned that Cooper would be able to hear their communication with the military jets. Therefore, he would stand up and un-toggle the switches so he could communicate with the military jets privately. He mentioned that this was labor intensive so at a point somewhere around Kelso or south of Kelso he had 305 switch over to another frequency. Apparently they had a radio tower on Sauvie Island. The other frequency meant that 305 would be communicating with the controller handling the Sector 4 airspace at the lower level—9,000 feet to ground level—even though 305 was flying at 10,000 feet.
Just south of Portland 305 entered Sector 5 which went all the way to Eugene. Cliff was also handling traffic in Sector 5.
Cliff said that as the jets were travelling in a straight line toward the Eugene VORTAC south of Portland that they naturally were merging closer to the V23 center line. He added that as the group was approaching Eugene that the T-33 was getting low on fuel and was turned back to PDX. Also at this time the F-106s stated that they didn’t have that much fuel to continue on much longer so they suggested that they use this opportunity to send the F-106s back to McChord which was done.
Importantly, as I interviewed Cliff I did not tell him of my thoughts regarding the Western Flight Path. I asked him to tell me what happened that night. Moreover, in a later phone call when I explained the FBI flight path he said he was completely unaware of it. In other words, he had no idea that his thoughts about the flight path and the jet flying west of Portland contradicted the FBI’s version of the flight path.
Also, he stated that the FBI never interviewed him. Additionally, he was unaware of the FBI interviewing any of the air traffic controllers in his group.
Finally, Cliff told me that he knows a former Northwest Orient flight attendant named Catherine. This woman was not on 305. However, she knew Captain Scott personally. Catherine stated that Captain Scott told her in later years that he purposely flew the jet west of Portland because he was concerned about the prospect of a bomb being on the jet and the safety of those on the ground.
I don’t think I need to explain what all of this means. That said, it is clear that this first-hand testimony from both Cliff and Catherine vindicates both R99 and me. Yes, it appears that R99 and I were wrong about the jet travelling from Toledo to Canby. Rather, it appears that 305 actually flew from east of Kelso to Eugene--remarkably, just west of both the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge and Tena Bar.
Those, ladies and gentleman, are the facts.
Great! Based on a first look at the above, things seem to check out.
If flying directly to the Battleground VORTAC at the Malay Intersection, a 10 to 15 degree turn to the right (west) would put the airliner on a direct line between the Malay Intersection, Newberg VOR/DME, and Eugene VORTAC.
If the airliner flew directly from the Malay Intersection to the Eugene VORTAC, it would pass almost directly over the Scappoose remoted radio site (as described in an earlier post above by me) which is about 8 miles west of Tina Bar.
And it would pass almost directly over the Newberg VOR/DME which is located about 10 miles west of the Canby Intersection. In fact, Scott would probably fly directly to the Newberg VOR/DME and then directly to the Eugene VORTAC. Flying direct to those facilities and using his DME would always tell him his exact location.
At 8:18 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 23 DME miles (which are nautical miles) south of the Battleground VORTAC (which was known as the Portland VORTAC in 1971). This location is a few miles southwest of Hillsboro.
At 10,000 feet, the airliner would have plenty of ground clearance and well within reception range of the appropriate navigation facilities on the Malay-Eugene segment.
So far, so good.
-
Flying directly to Newburg VOR would deviate from V23 putting them on what appears to be V33 which is 9NM from V23.
-
Flying directly to Newburg VOR would deviate from V23 putting them on what appears to be V33 which is 9NM from V23.
I don't see a V-33 at Newberg. There is a V-23W there and there is a V-23E which is east of V-23.
-
Interesting....looking at my sectional map from that era it appears there was 3 V23's...the one going to Newburg is at 194 degree's and considered west while the one going directly through PDX is at 160 degree's is considered east. the airway in the center at 175 degree's in the one where the path is plotted and not known as east or west...I was looking at an online map that has the first portion distorted. this would still be a change in airways...
-
It appears that some news is about to break so I will let you all in on what I have learned in some discussions I’ve had with Cliff Ammerman recently. I have been sitting on this information but decided to go forward with its release now that it appears others have recently reached out to Cliff.
Cliff was controlling the airspace in Sector 4 and Sector 5 on November 24, 1971. He was handed 305 about 10 miles north of Toledo as it entered Sector 4. He explained that this was somewhat complicated by the fact that the controller in Sector 2 attempted to hand 305 off to the controller handling Sector 4 traffic for the higher altitude which would have been normal. However, given that 305 stayed at 10,000 feet it was actually Cliff who would be handling the flight.
Cliff stated that this also explains why the transcripts are missing data. Specifically, he said that when they were transcribed it appears that the person doing the transcription was listening to the tapes from the controller handling the higher altitude of Sector 4 and not the altitude that Cliff was covering and that 305 was actually flying in.
Cliff was located in Auburn. He took over 305 and communicated with the pilots of 305 briefly as the hand off was effected. In addition, Cliff also took over duties for the two F-106 fighters as they entered Sector 4.
Cliff stated that 305 did not have a prescribed flight path. Therefore, his job was to keep an eye on 305 and make certain that no other aircraft got near 305. Also he was tasked with directing the F-106s.
The F-106s never made visual contact with 305. In fact, they trailed at five miles behind from 11,000 feet. Moreover, the F-106s were having a problem flying at such slow speeds. Therefore, they would have to make some S turns occasionally. Cliff explained that the F-106 has onboard radar that enables them to see targets 10 degrees to the left and right for a total scan range of only 20 degrees. This means that as the jets would make their S turns they would lose contact with 305 on radar but regain contact once they came back around.
Not too long after Cliff took over 305 and the F-106s a single T-33 took off from PDX. Cliff directed the T-33 west then north to meet 305. At a point approximately 10 miles north of PDX Cliff had the T-33 swing around in behind 305. The T-33 was placed five miles behind at 11,000 feet. The T-33 never made visual contact with 305.
At this point Cliff directed the F-106s to an altitude of 20,000 feet and 10 miles east of 305. Then all four jets continued south.
Cliff told me that 305 made the turn at Toledo and started heading toward the Battlefield VORTAC. He said 305 was likely west of the V23 centerline at this point. He then stated that at an estimated point east of Kelso that 305 modified its heading by an estimated 15 degrees to the west. He stated this was done so that 305 would pass west of Vancouver and Portland and cutout the “dogleg” in the V23 flight path. He said that 305 headed directly for the Eugene VORTAC from this point east of Kelso.
Cliff also stated that when the T-33 pulled in behind 305 shortly after the new Kelso heading that he gave the T-33 a heading consistent with 305 and that he never modified that heading. In other words, 305 and the T-33 flew in a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC.
Cliff stated that one matter to consider is that an airliner flying at a normal altitude of 33,000 feet would have no trouble seeing VORTACs a great distance away. However, given that 305 was travelling only at 10,000 feet and the weather was murky that this would inhibit the range of VORTAC detection.
He stated that 305 largely stayed within V23 which is 10 miles wide. However, he stated that he believed it flew outside of the western boundary by a small amount (a couple of miles) as the jet was west of PDX. He further stated this was not a concern and that often the navigation of airplanes will differ by a couple of miles from their screens at air traffic control so it isn’t an issue if a jet flies a little out of a set vector. Nonetheless, 305 was not set to stay within V23 anyway so it didn’t matter. Cliff stated that he estimates that 305 travelled near Hillsboro during that part of the flight.
Cliff also mentioned that airliners communicate using VHF and the military uses UHF. However, the switches are toggled so that he can broadcast to both the airliner and the military at the same time. But, they were concerned that Cooper would be able to hear their communication with the military jets. Therefore, he would stand up and un-toggle the switches so he could communicate with the military jets privately. He mentioned that this was labor intensive so at a point somewhere around Kelso or south of Kelso he had 305 switch over to another frequency. Apparently they had a radio tower on Sauvie Island. The other frequency meant that 305 would be communicating with the controller handling the Sector 4 airspace at the lower level—9,000 feet to ground level—even though 305 was flying at 10,000 feet.
Just south of Portland 305 entered Sector 5 which went all the way to Eugene. Cliff was also handling traffic in Sector 5.
Cliff said that as the jets were travelling in a straight line toward the Eugene VORTAC south of Portland that they naturally were merging closer to the V23 center line. He added that as the group was approaching Eugene that the T-33 was getting low on fuel and was turned back to PDX. Also at this time the F-106s stated that they didn’t have that much fuel to continue on much longer so they suggested that they use this opportunity to send the F-106s back to McChord which was done.
Importantly, as I interviewed Cliff I did not tell him of my thoughts regarding the Western Flight Path. I asked him to tell me what happened that night. Moreover, in a later phone call when I explained the FBI flight path he said he was completely unaware of it. In other words, he had no idea that his thoughts about the flight path and the jet flying west of Portland contradicted the FBI’s version of the flight path.
Also, he stated that the FBI never interviewed him. Additionally, he was unaware of the FBI interviewing any of the air traffic controllers in his group.
Finally, Cliff told me that he knows a former Northwest Orient flight attendant named Catherine. This woman was not on 305. However, she knew Captain Scott personally. Catherine stated that Captain Scott told her in later years that he purposely flew the jet west of Portland because he was concerned about the prospect of a bomb being on the jet and the safety of those on the ground.
I don’t think I need to explain what all of this means. That said, it is clear that this first-hand testimony from both Cliff and Catherine vindicates both R99 and me. Yes, it appears that R99 and I were wrong about the jet travelling from Toledo to Canby. Rather, it appears that 305 actually flew from east of Kelso to Eugene--remarkably, just west of both the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge and Tena Bar.
Those, ladies and gentleman, are the facts.
What a coincidence! Having talked to Cliff today I concur with much of what you say. You touched points with Cliff I talked with Cliff about today. Several differences however, which Cliff brought up today and made more comments I may post about later.
1. Cliff has had the FBI flight path map (hi res version) and all Transcripts I have (PI, NWA, etc) since 2010, because I sent them to him.
2, He seemed anxious to talk about the transcripts today, perhaps because he has just talked about them with you? He basically told me the same things you relate him saying - but he said he attributes blanks in the transcripts which convey military and NWA communications to the 'transcriber not knowing what to do with them'! Cliff asked me if I had ever seen NWA's company comm notes? He said 'I would love to see those'. I told him so far as I knew nobody has ever seen those transcriptions. I told him I asked Bruce Kitt several times about those transcriptions and Kitt surprised me saying he had asked for them but could never get them released. Cliff is firm that all of the tapes and transcriptions from the Cooper case still exist and are being held by the FAA.
3. Cliff said today that as a general premise, 'everyone knew that something had happened during the 8:10-8:20 period' because of a sudden increase in communications, especially between 305 and the company. He said 'none of those communications are reflected in any Transcript, and I noticed this immediately after you sent me those transcripts'. Cliff believes the 305/NWA communications are vital to understanding what happened and when, and where. Cliff said, 'the transcripts show the exact opposite, a total gap in communications for that same period. Just the opposite was the case'.
4. Cliff said today that the T33 intercepted and was trailing 305 before 305 even crossed the Columbia. river. The previous intercept at Lake Oswego story is now null and void!
5. Cliff said 305 was never assigned to V23. He said today as time passed it appeared 305 was staying within V23, but as far as he knows 305 was never assigned to V23 or told it had to stay within V23. As 305 progressed south it appeared the pilot had chosen V23, so Cliff says 'there came a point where if 305 had left V23' I would have immediately advised the pilot he was now outside of V23, just as a precaution. He says that never happened during the period he was in charge of 305.
Let me end this hear. My concern now is a 'he said vs she said' situation with EU. Let me digest what EU has said above. I generally try to avoid traffic jams!
-
Cliff said today that as a general premise, 'everyone knew that something had happened during the 8:10-8:20 period' because of a sudden increase in communications, especially between 305 and the company.
Another suspicion I had concerning a lot of cross talk with the company and less with artcc allowing gaps in the radio transcripts..
V23 was discussed i believe with the tower and TRACON doesn't seem to be a part of this flight and would be the one's who would of noted the route taken.
-
Cliff said today that as a general premise, 'everyone knew that something had happened during the 8:10-8:20 period' because of a sudden increase in communications, especially between 305 and the company.
Another suspicion I had concerning a lot of cross talk with the company and less with artcc allowing gaps in the radio transcripts..
V23 was discussed i believe with the tower and TRACON doesn't seem to be a part of this flight and would be the one's who would of noted the route taken.
Wouldnt Cliff have been party to those discussions or have heard them ?
Cliff is adamant that the PI and NWA Transcripts leave out vital communications that occurred with 305, especially during the 8:10-20 period. Cliff did not use the word "redactions" but when he got started on this part of our conversation I thought I was about to hear something straight out of R99's narrative - then Cliff switched to these comm gaps being due to 'transcribers being overwhelmed, or selective', or he said: "literally not knowing what to do with all of those communications" so sticking to a kind of script, for the intended user! Cliff's characterization surprised me. Ive never heard anyone offer that explanation before!
Finding EU's post here today ... it sounds like EU and I got our nickel's worth today from Mr. Ammerman. Cliff is a great gentleman.
-
I don't think any of the controllers would hear anything from the company. we read this on the transcripts "sorry, was talking to the company" I believe it was a phone patch?
-
I believe the transcripts state the tower asking that nobody transmit on the frequency? I'm not sold anything was left out for reasons of covering up or hiding any location.
-
I don't think any of the controllers would hear anything from the company. we read this on the transcripts "sorry, was talking to the company" I believe it was a phone patch?
That's what Cliff says. I asked him about that several times today.
Been a busy day! :rofl: I am going over to the tie issue FJ raised to day ... maybe see you there too..
-
Interesting....looking at my sectional map from that era it appears there was 3 V23's...the one going to Newburg is at 194 degree's and considered west while the one going directly through PDX is at 160 degree's is considered east. the airway in the center at 175 degree's in the one where the path is plotted and not known as east or west...I was looking at an online map that has the first portion distorted. this would still be a change in airways...
As has been discussed previously, a number of airways and navigational facilities in the Portland/Seattle area have been renamed since 1971. Mayfield Intersection is now named Malay Intersection. Portland VORTAC is now named Battleground VORTAC. V-23E between Portland/Seattle and other points is now named V-495. Other names have been changed also.
-
Still no reference to changing airways no matter the changing of the name..
-
Let's not lose sight of the fact that Ammerman stated that 305 was not on a prescribed flight path. He simply stated that to the best of his recollection 305 essentially stayed within V23--largely by default. Of course, the exception being the area west of PDX when he said it was near Hillsboro and probably a couple of miles outside of the western boundary for V23 proper. That said, 305 was heading to the Eugene VORTAC in a straight line so all was well.
-
Still no reference to changing airways no matter the changing of the name..
True.
-
The map pretty much shows a straight line to Eugene. just as it shows it within the limits of V23. is the map perfect, no. is it close. more than likely. IMO, it would be pretty simple to line up the FDR with the map. the turns didn't come out of thin air. the reasoning is uncertain more than unlikely.
-
This flight is entirely different from a basic everyday flight that is directed by controllers and not the pilots.
-
This flight is entirely different from a basic everyday flight that is directed by controllers and not the pilots.
True again.
-
Let's not lose sight of the fact that Ammerman stated that 305 was not on a prescribed flight path. He simply stated that to the best of his recollection 305 essentially stayed within V23--largely by default. Of course, the exception being the area west of PDX when he said it was near Hillsboro and probably a couple of miles outside of the western boundary for V23 proper. That said, 305 was heading to the Eugene VORTAC in a straight line so all was well.
That's interesting because in every interview Ive done with Cliff he insists - and is firm - 305 WAS NOT EVER a couple of miles outside of the western boundary for V23 proper - OR CLIFF WOULD HAVE BEEN ALARMED AND NOTIFIED HIM.
You did a good interview with Cliff but I sense you are now back to your games & claims, trying to prove a West Path because its crucial to your whole theory about the money.
Last night when this was fresh you said:
"I don’t think I need to explain what all of this means. That said, it is clear that this first-hand testimony from both Cliff and Catherine vindicates both R99 and me. Yes, it appears that R99 and I were wrong about the jet travelling from Toledo to Canby. Rather, it appears that 305 actually flew from east of Kelso to Eugene--remarkably, just west of both the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge and Tena Bar.
Today you are back to selling Jackalope meat! I knew you would be. And FLYJACK is in even deeper trying to sell phony doctored photos of the tie over at DZ, to Cooperland! It just never ends.
Could you and R99 give us a day to think etc ....... before stuffing more propaganda down our throats!? Trying to worm your way back in to your original claims? I mean push come to shove there are other ways of handling this he-said she-said Jesus in the Toast stuff.
Have a nice day. You earned it! :rofl: This may sound harsh or even like sour grapes, but I think its wise to hold back, before giving the whole farm away to the Elvis Impersonator ?
-
Cliff said today that as a general premise, 'everyone knew that something had happened during the 8:10-8:20 period' because of a sudden increase in communications, especially between 305 and the company.
Another suspicion I had concerning a lot of cross talk with the company and less with artcc allowing gaps in the radio transcripts..
V23 was discussed i believe with the tower and TRACON doesn't seem to be a part of this flight and would be the one's who would of noted the route taken.
Wouldnt Cliff have been party to those discussions or have heard them ?
Cliff is adamant that the PI and NWA Transcripts leave out vital communications that occurred with 305, especially during the 8:10-20 period. Cliff did not use the word "redactions" but when he got started on this part of our conversation I thought I was about to hear something straight out of R99's narrative - then Cliff switched to these comm gaps being due to 'transcribers being overwhelmed, or selective', or he said: "literally not knowing what to do with all of those communications" so sticking to a kind of script, for the intended user! Cliff's characterization surprised me. Ive never heard anyone offer that explanation before!
Finding EU's post here today ... it sounds like EU and I got our nickel's worth today from Mr. Ammerman. Cliff is a great gentleman.
Let me add some comments related to several posts. Most of this information has been discussed before but some memories need to be refreshed.
While on the ground in Seattle, the airliner talked to the tower on the tower's ground control frequency. It was cleared to take off on this ground control frequency and told to contact Seattle on a certain frequency. When it called Seattle ATC, the answering controller was apparently surprised and had to ask them who they were and where they were. That took a couple of minutes to get things straightened out. This means that the airliner bypassed any TRACON (or tower and departure controller) controllers who were usually responsible for getting departing traffic into the ATC system.
Also while on the ground in Seattle, the airliner crew apparently was in communication on a radio link with the NWA ground personnel there. This means that NWA apparently had its own private ground frequency in Seattle. This was not part of the FAA system and would not be recorded or appear in the FAA radio transcripts.
The FAA tower frequencies and the Seattle ATC frequencies would be recorded on tape automatically. Those tapes should still exist since they were part of an aircraft "incident". Some human would then have to listen to those tapes and prepare a typed transcript of those conversations. As previously discussed on my attempts to get those transcripts released, it is the FBI that prevents the FAA from releasing those tapes. Three interventions by my US Representative and senior FBI managers were not able to get them released. So it may take an intervention with the FBI Director and/or Supreme Court if we are ever able to get those complete and unredacted transcripts.
After take off, the airliner crew communicated with NWA personnel in Minneapolis and Seattle over the ARINC system by a voice patch as well as the usual teletype messages. The voice patch was in real time and a few minutes later a "formatted" version of the same information would come through on the ARINC teletype system. The air traffic controllers would not have access to that information.
A few years ago, Fred Poynter and his group at the WSHM were given access to the teletype version of those communications. Fred's group made a study of them and determined that significant deletions had been made in those teletype messages. That is, entire messages had been deleted.
Thanks to Cliff Ammerman for the information. Does he know if Gerald H. Osterkamp is still alive? If so, can Osterkamp be contacted. He was the Chief of the Seattle ATC facility at the time of the hijacking.
I have still have some questions about the direct to Eugene flight path. Hopefully, more information will be forthcoming.
Kermit! Oh, Kermit!!! You may need to have your medications adjusted. ADDENDUM: And based on his last post above, Georger may need to do the same thing.
-
Cliff said today that as a general premise, 'everyone knew that something had happened during the 8:10-8:20 period' because of a sudden increase in communications, especially between 305 and the company.
Another suspicion I had concerning a lot of cross talk with the company and less with artcc allowing gaps in the radio transcripts..
V23 was discussed i believe with the tower and TRACON doesn't seem to be a part of this flight and would be the one's who would of noted the route taken.
Wouldnt Cliff have been party to those discussions or have heard them ?
Cliff is adamant that the PI and NWA Transcripts leave out vital communications that occurred with 305, especially during the 8:10-20 period. Cliff did not use the word "redactions" but when he got started on this part of our conversation I thought I was about to hear something straight out of R99's narrative - then Cliff switched to these comm gaps being due to 'transcribers being overwhelmed, or selective', or he said: "literally not knowing what to do with all of those communications" so sticking to a kind of script, for the intended user! Cliff's characterization surprised me. Ive never heard anyone offer that explanation before!
Finding EU's post here today ... it sounds like EU and I got our nickel's worth today from Mr. Ammerman. Cliff is a great gentleman.
Let me add some comments related to several posts. Most of this information has been discussed before but some memories need to be refreshed.
While on the ground in Seattle, the airliner talked to the tower on the tower's ground control frequency. It was cleared to take off on this ground control frequency and told to contact Seattle on a certain frequency. When it called Seattle ATC, the answering controller was apparently surprised and had to ask them who they were and where they were. That took a couple of minutes to get things straightened out. This means that the airliner bypassed any TRACON (or tower and departure controller) controllers who were usually responsible for getting departing traffic into the ATC system.
Also while on the ground in Seattle, the airliner crew apparently was in communication on a radio link with the NWA ground personnel there. This means that NWA apparently had its own private ground frequency in Seattle. This was not part of the FAA system and would not be recorded or appear in the FAA radio transcripts.
The FAA tower frequencies and the Seattle ATC frequencies would be recorded on tape automatically. Those tapes should still exist since they were part of an aircraft "incident". Some human would then have to listen to those tapes and prepare a typed transcript of those conversations. As previously discussed on my attempts to get those transcripts released, it is the FBI that prevents the FAA from releasing those tapes. Three interventions by my US Representative and senior FBI managers were not able to get them released. So it may take an intervention with the FBI Director and/or Supreme Court if we are ever able to get those complete and unredacted transcripts.
After take off, the airliner crew communicated with NWA personnel in Minneapolis and Seattle over the ARINC system by a voice patch as well as the usual teletype messages. The voice patch was in real time and a few minutes later a "formatted" version of the same information would come through on the ARINC teletype system. The air traffic controllers would not have access to that information.
A few years ago, Fred Poynter and his group at the WSHM were given access to the teletype version of those communications. Fred's group made a study of them and determined that significant deletions had been made in those teletype messages. That is, entire messages had been deleted.
Thanks to Cliff Ammerman for the information. Does he know if Gerald H. Osterkamp is still alive? If so, can Osterkamp be contacted. He was the Chief of the Seattle ATC facility at the time of the hijacking.
I have still have some questions about the direct to Eugene flight path. Hopefully, more information will be forthcoming.
Kermit! Oh, Kermit!!! You may need to have your medications adjusted. ADDENDUM: And based on his last post above, Georger may need to do the same thing.
Kermit! Oh, Kermit!!! You may need to have your medications adjusted.
Really?
Why blemish a very fine statement above with this? Don't feel guilty for making a fine post! :rofl:
-
Cliff said today that as a general premise, 'everyone knew that something had happened during the 8:10-8:20 period' because of a sudden increase in communications, especially between 305 and the company.
Another suspicion I had concerning a lot of cross talk with the company and less with artcc allowing gaps in the radio transcripts..
V23 was discussed i believe with the tower and TRACON doesn't seem to be a part of this flight and would be the one's who would of noted the route taken.
Wouldnt Cliff have been party to those discussions or have heard them ?
Cliff is adamant that the PI and NWA Transcripts leave out vital communications that occurred with 305, especially during the 8:10-20 period. Cliff did not use the word "redactions" but when he got started on this part of our conversation I thought I was about to hear something straight out of R99's narrative - then Cliff switched to these comm gaps being due to 'transcribers being overwhelmed, or selective', or he said: "literally not knowing what to do with all of those communications" so sticking to a kind of script, for the intended user! Cliff's characterization surprised me. Ive never heard anyone offer that explanation before!
Finding EU's post here today ... it sounds like EU and I got our nickel's worth today from Mr. Ammerman. Cliff is a great gentleman.
Let me add some comments related to several posts. Most of this information has been discussed before but some memories need to be refreshed.
While on the ground in Seattle, the airliner talked to the tower on the tower's ground control frequency. It was cleared to take off on this ground control frequency and told to contact Seattle on a certain frequency. When it called Seattle ATC, the answering controller was apparently surprised and had to ask them who they were and where they were. That took a couple of minutes to get things straightened out. This means that the airliner bypassed any TRACON (or tower and departure controller) controllers who were usually responsible for getting departing traffic into the ATC system.
Also while on the ground in Seattle, the airliner crew apparently was in communication on a radio link with the NWA ground personnel there. This means that NWA apparently had its own private ground frequency in Seattle. This was not part of the FAA system and would not be recorded or appear in the FAA radio transcripts.
The FAA tower frequencies and the Seattle ATC frequencies would be recorded on tape automatically. Those tapes should still exist since they were part of an aircraft "incident". Some human would then have to listen to those tapes and prepare a typed transcript of those conversations. As previously discussed on my attempts to get those transcripts released, it is the FBI that prevents the FAA from releasing those tapes. Three interventions by my US Representative and senior FBI managers were not able to get them released. So it may take an intervention with the FBI Director and/or Supreme Court if we are ever able to get those complete and unredacted transcripts.
After take off, the airliner crew communicated with NWA personnel in Minneapolis and Seattle over the ARINC system by a voice patch as well as the usual teletype messages. The voice patch was in real time and a few minutes later a "formatted" version of the same information would come through on the ARINC teletype system. The air traffic controllers would not have access to that information.
A few years ago, Fred Poynter and his group at the WSHM were given access to the teletype version of those communications. Fred's group made a study of them and determined that significant deletions had been made in those teletype messages. That is, entire messages had been deleted.
Thanks to Cliff Ammerman for the information. Does he know if Gerald H. Osterkamp is still alive? If so, can Osterkamp be contacted. He was the Chief of the Seattle ATC facility at the time of the hijacking.
I have still have some questions about the direct to Eugene flight path. Hopefully, more information will be forthcoming.
Kermit! Oh, Kermit!!! You may need to have your medications adjusted.
Really?
Why blemish a very fine statement above with this? Don't feel guilty for making a fine post! :rofl:
Okay, I deleted it.
-
R99 says:
Let me add some comments related to several posts. Most of this information has been discussed before but some memories need to be refreshed.
While on the ground in Seattle, the airliner talked to the tower on the tower's ground control frequency. It was cleared to take off on this ground control frequency and told to contact Seattle on a certain frequency. When it called Seattle ATC, the answering controller was apparently surprised and had to ask them who they were and where they were. That took a couple of minutes to get things straightened out. This means that the airliner bypassed any TRACON (or tower and departure controller) controllers who were usually responsible for getting departing traffic into the ATC system.
Also while on the ground in Seattle, the airliner crew apparently was in communication on a radio link with the NWA ground personnel there. This means that NWA apparently had its own private ground frequency in Seattle. This was not part of the FAA system and would not be recorded or appear in the FAA radio transcripts.
The FAA tower frequencies and the Seattle ATC frequencies would be recorded on tape automatically. Those tapes should still exist since they were part of an aircraft "incident". Some human would then have to listen to those tapes and prepare a typed transcript of those conversations. As previously discussed on my attempts to get those transcripts released, it is the FBI that prevents the FAA from releasing those tapes. Three interventions by my US Representative and senior FBI managers were not able to get them released. So it may take an intervention with the FBI Director and/or Supreme Court if we are ever able to get those complete and unredacted transcripts.
After take off, the airliner crew communicated with NWA personnel in Minneapolis and Seattle over the ARINC system by a voice patch as well as the usual teletype messages. The voice patch was in real time and a few minutes later a "formatted" version of the same information would come through on the ARINC teletype system. The air traffic controllers would not have access to that information.
A few years ago, Fred Poynter and his group at the WSHM were given access to the teletype version of those communications. Fred's group made a study of them and determined that significant deletions had been made in those teletype messages. That is, entire messages had been deleted.
Thanks to Cliff Ammerman for the information. Does he know if Gerald H. Osterkamp is still alive? If so, can Osterkamp be contacted. He was the Chief of the Seattle ATC facility at the time of the hijacking.
I have still have some questions about the direct to Eugene flight path. Hopefully, more information will be forthcoming.
reply:
Cliff stressed that these communications are vital to understanding where Cooper bailed and when.
-
That's interesting because in every interview Ive done with Cliff he insists - and is firm - 305 WAS NOT EVER a couple of miles outside of the western boundary for V23 proper - OR CLIFF WOULD HAVE BEEN ALARMED AND NOTIFIED HIM.
Based on looking at the map and statements from radar operators as well as pilots the plane was on the east side of V23 from Toledo to nearing the Columbia river. it's the totality one needs to look at that bring things together. if we had conflicting statements with the totality it would then raise questions. I fail to see any to date.
-
GEORGER:
Let me be absolutely clear. What I conveyed Cliff told me is precisely the truth. This includes that he estimates the jet traveled very near Hillsboro.
Don't ever libel me again. Call Cliff yourself to verify. Then report back with an apology.
-
According to the flight path and the eastern edge of Hillsboro would be less than 10 miles. this could very well be considered "very close" I seriously doubt Portland would of missed the plane if you wish to place it further west to line up with the Columbia. it appears were are going right back to where it started...
-
Cliff told me that 305 made the turn at Toledo and started heading toward the Battlefield VORTAC. He said 305 was likely west of the V23 centerline at this point. He then stated that at an estimated point east of Kelso that 305 modified its heading by an estimated 15 degrees to the west. He stated this was done so that 305 would pass west of Vancouver and Portland and cutout the “dogleg” in the V23 flight path. He said that 305 headed directly for the Eugene VORTAC from this point east of Kelso.
30 miles between Kelso and Battleground. why would he reference so far apart. we have established the plane turned at Toledo vs flying past it from malay. now it's heading towards Battleground which once again is consistent with the map. the Kelso area is around the 20:05 location where a westerly jog can be noted. going straight down from east of Kelso would place the plane miles from where other operators close to the plane mark it's location and make there statements of never leaving V23 false.
I can't go back and forth with this again. for that reason. I'm out. we are right back to everything being wrong.
-
All I can tell you is what Cliff said. Consider that the location comments aren't meant to convey precise data. Rather, Cliff gave me his estimates of where the jet was at certain times. What was abundantly clear in any case is the belief on the part of him and Captain Scott's friend Catherine that 305 traveled west of downtown Portland and that this was done intentionally. Moreover, Cliff made it clear he cannot explain the FBI map denoting erratic turns left and right because he stated that the T-33 received only one vector all the way down to Eugene. Simply put, both 305 and the T-33 flew in a straight line to Eugene from a point approximately east of Kelso.
-
All I can tell you is what Cliff said. Consider that the location comments aren't meant to convey precise data. Rather, Cliff gave me his estimates of where the jet was at certain times. What was abundantly clear in any case is the belief on the part of him and Captain Scott's friend Catherine that 305 traveled west of downtown Portland and that this was done intentionally. Moreover, Cliff made it clear he cannot explain the FBI map denoting erratic turns left and right because he stated that the T-33 received only one vector all the way down to Eugene. Simply put, both 305 and the T-33 flew in a straight line to Eugene from a point approximately east of Kelso.
As I pointed out last night on another EU post, what EU has posted is consistent with the facts as they are understood at this time. I'm sure that some refinements to this can be made as more accurate information becomes available but the basic facts given above by EU are going to stand.
-
All I can tell you is what Cliff said. Consider that the location comments aren't meant to convey precise data. Rather, Cliff gave me his estimates of where the jet was at certain times. What was abundantly clear in any case is the belief on the part of him and Captain Scott's friend Catherine that 305 traveled west of downtown Portland and that this was done intentionally. Moreover, Cliff made it clear he cannot explain the FBI map denoting erratic turns left and right because he stated that the T-33 received only one vector all the way down to Eugene. Simply put, both 305 and the T-33 flew in a straight line to Eugene from a point approximately east of Kelso.
because he stated that the T-33 received only one vector all the way down to Eugene
You mean one instruction to 'vector' , 'make a turn' ? Or do you mean Victor not Vector?
What are you saying?
* The T33 took off from PDX and went west then north, then was turned by Cliff to come in behind 305 ... all of this NORTH of the Columbia BEFORE 305 even crossed the Columbia, according to Cliff. So what is this 'vectoring' you are talking about?
-
It appears everyone followed like a row of ducks or a perfect GPS route. If Ammerman knew they were on v23 he would of directed the chase plane to the same. how this deletes turns or deviations inside a corridor is yet to be explained. we are close to breaching another airway west of the Columbia using Kelso to Eugene in a straight line.
If Ammerman was handed the flight around Toledo he wasn't R2. he would be R5 I think is the next controller.
-
All I can tell you is what Cliff said. Consider that the location comments aren't meant to convey precise data. Rather, Cliff gave me his estimates of where the jet was at certain times. What was abundantly clear in any case is the belief on the part of him and Captain Scott's friend Catherine that 305 traveled west of downtown Portland and that this was done intentionally. Moreover, Cliff made it clear he cannot explain the FBI map denoting erratic turns left and right because he stated that the T-33 received only one vector all the way down to Eugene. Simply put, both 305 and the T-33 flew in a straight line to Eugene from a point approximately east of Kelso.
because he stated that the T-33 received only one vector all the way down to Eugene
You mean one instruction to 'vector' , 'make a turn' ? Or do you mean Victor not Vector?
What are you saying?
My verbiage may or may not be incorrect.
Regardless, when the T-33 was pulled in five miles behind 305 he was given a specific heading that was the same as 305. This heading was never changed. The T-33 and 305 flew in a straight line all the way to Eugene. This according to Cliff.
-
All I can tell you is what Cliff said. Consider that the location comments aren't meant to convey precise data. Rather, Cliff gave me his estimates of where the jet was at certain times. What was abundantly clear in any case is the belief on the part of him and Captain Scott's friend Catherine that 305 traveled west of downtown Portland and that this was done intentionally. Moreover, Cliff made it clear he cannot explain the FBI map denoting erratic turns left and right because he stated that the T-33 received only one vector all the way down to Eugene. Simply put, both 305 and the T-33 flew in a straight line to Eugene from a point approximately east of Kelso.
because he stated that the T-33 received only one vector all the way down to Eugene
You mean one instruction to 'vector' , 'make a turn' ? Or do you mean Victor not Vector?
What are you saying?
My verbiage may or may not be incorrect.
Regardless, when the T-33 was pulled in five miles behind 305 he was given a specific heading that was the same as 305. This heading was never changed. The T-33 and 305 flew in a straight line all the way to Eugene. This according to Cliff.
I agree, based on Cliff's description. But, when the T33 and 305 united was 305 on V23? I think yes. The west side of V23, and I think Cliff would accept that. Do you accept that?
-
who will accept the pilot statement of being in the suburbs and not reaching Portland proper. hows is that done west of the Columbia river?
-
who will accept the pilot statement of being in the suburbs and not reaching Portland proper. hows is that done west of the Columbia river?
It is highly unlikely that the flight crew could actually see the physical lights of Portland due to their being above an overcast and several cloud layers. They may have been able to see the "glow" of the Portland lights but that glow can be highly diffused and not useful in pinpointing their location.
-
Just a tad confused here.....
Interesting, they claim to know where they are but are really miles away from the suburbs. but knew how to fly a straight line to Eugene away from Portland?
Then the statement from Scott I believe saying they were east of the Woodland area?
Portland radar operators state 3 miles east southeast of La Center that puts the plane around the 8:12 location and around 6 miles from the 8:10 location. with an AGL of 8,000 or another operator statement of being seven nautical miles from Amboy? not 15 plus NM's? and one more statement from a Portland radar operator giving a ground location over 12 miles away from a western path, who else was a sleep at the wheel other than the pilots?
If we are suggesting a flight from Kelso to Eugene we would expect them to be tuned in to Eugene VOR from Kleso. 112.9 instead they are locked to Battleground and beyond being 23 miles DME past Portland approaching the Canby intersection. why would they even bother with Battleground. could it be that it was around V23 keeping them in line?
What happened to the red dots of lost radar contact in this area where the plane diverted west? 20:05 to 20:11. the pilots knew along with Ammerman but the Air Force didn't even though they had the same radar plus another radar the FAA doesn't have?
The pilots requested maps. but didn't know where they were but knew how to fly a straight line from Kelso to Eugene and couldn't figure out if they were in the suburbs of Portland because light is defused in clouds. they couldn't determine the defused glow was out the left side of the cockpit vs dead ahead? Eugene is mentioned at 8:45 and arriving over Eugene VOR at 8:52?
I think that sums it up?
-
Just a tad confused here.....
Interesting, they claim to know where they are but are really miles away from the suburbs. but knew how to fly a straight line to Eugene away from Portland?
Then the statement from Scott I believe saying they were east of the Woodland area?
Portland radar operators state 3 miles east southeast of La Center that puts the plane around the 8:12 location and around 6 miles from the 8:10 location. with an AGL of 8,000 or another operator statement of being seven nautical miles from Amboy? not 15 plus NM's? and one more statement from a Portland radar operator giving a ground location over 12 miles away from a western path, who else was a sleep at the wheel other than the pilots?
If we are suggesting a flight from Kelso to Eugene we would expect them to be tuned in to Eugene VOR from Kleso. 112.9 instead they are locked to Battleground and beyond being 23 miles DME past Portland approaching the Canby intersection. why would they even bother with Battleground. could it be that it was around V23 keeping them in line?
What happened to the red dots of lost radar contact in this area where the plane diverted west? 20:05 to 20:11. the pilots knew along with Ammerman but the Air Force didn't even though they had the same radar plus another radar the FAA doesn't have?
The pilots requested maps. but didn't know where they were but knew how to fly a straight line from Kelso to Eugene and couldn't figure out if they were in the suburbs of Portland because light is defused in clouds. they couldn't determine the defused glow was out the left side of the cockpit vs dead ahead? Eugene is mentioned at 8:45 and arriving over Eugene VOR at 8:52?
I think that sums it up?
The Light issue:
What we need are some pilots who flew into PDX or Troutdale that night, or over Portland to someplace south. They would know if they saw the lights of Portland coming up! It's as simple as that.
It's too bad nobody bothered to ask Bohan. To be hung up on this all these years is crazy.
-
I agree, based on Cliff's description. But, when the T33 and 305 united was 305 on V23? I think yes. The west side of V23, and I think Cliff would accept that. Do you accept that?
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
-
Just a tad confused here.....
Interesting, they claim to know where they are but are really miles away from the suburbs. but knew how to fly a straight line to Eugene away from Portland?
Then the statement from Scott I believe saying they were east of the Woodland area?
Portland radar operators state 3 miles east southeast of La Center that puts the plane around the 8:12 location and around 6 miles from the 8:10 location. with an AGL of 8,000 or another operator statement of being seven nautical miles from Amboy? not 15 plus NM's? and one more statement from a Portland radar operator giving a ground location over 12 miles away from a western path, who else was a sleep at the wheel other than the pilots?
If we are suggesting a flight from Kelso to Eugene we would expect them to be tuned in to Eugene VOR from Kleso. 112.9 instead they are locked to Battleground and beyond being 23 miles DME past Portland approaching the Canby intersection. why would they even bother with Battleground. could it be that it was around V23 keeping them in line?
What happened to the red dots of lost radar contact in this area where the plane diverted west? 20:05 to 20:11. the pilots knew along with Ammerman but the Air Force didn't even though they had the same radar plus another radar the FAA doesn't have?
The pilots requested maps. but didn't know where they were but knew how to fly a straight line from Kelso to Eugene and couldn't figure out if they were in the suburbs of Portland because light is defused in clouds. they couldn't determine the defused glow was out the left side of the cockpit vs dead ahead? Eugene is mentioned at 8:45 and arriving over Eugene VOR at 8:52?
I think that sums it up?
The Light issue:
What we need are some pilots who flew into PDX or Troutdale that night, or over Portland to someplace south. They would know if they saw the lights of Portland coming up! It's as simple as that.
It's too bad nobody bothered to ask Bohan. To be hung up on this all these years is crazy.
Forget about Bohan! His claims are absolute nonsense!
He said he had a 80 knots headwind from the southeast between Seattle and Portland. The measured winds aloft, that Tom Kaye managed to find, indicate that they were only about 35 knots and were from the southwest.
Bohan also claimed that there was an extremely high crosswind that caused him difficulty on landing in Portland. The measured surface winds at Portland never exceeded 12 MPH from any direction that entire day and evening. Even a two year old child could handle that crosswind. And the 727 had demonstrated that it could handle cross wind components of about 30 MPH.
In summary, Bohan's claims are bullshit!
-
I agree, based on Cliff's description. But, when the T33 and 305 united was 305 on V23? I think yes. The west side of V23, and I think Cliff would accept that. Do you accept that?
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
To fly a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC, all the airline crew would have to do is tune in the Eugene VORTAC, center the needle to indicate that they were flying "TO" the VORTAC, and then fly that heading.
The maps they asked for and needed were IFR related maps and instrument approach procedures that contained the navigational information they needed to fly south. Normally, airline crews would only have onboard maps and instrument approach procedures related to their scheduled route and nearby areas. They would not necessarily have maps and procedures for areas that they would never expect to be. That is, NWA 305 in flying from Minneapolis to Seattle would not have onboard maps for Miami or Los Angeles to cite an extreme example. And in fact, they did not have maps for San Francisco or Reno either.
-
I agree, based on Cliff's description. But, when the T33 and 305 united was 305 on V23? I think yes. The west side of V23, and I think Cliff would accept that. Do you accept that?
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
To fly a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC, all the airline crew would have to do is tune in the Eugene VORTAC, center the needle to indicate that they were flying "TO" the VORTAC, and then fly that heading.
The maps they asked for and needed were IFR related maps and instrument approach procedures that contained the navigational information they needed to fly south. Normally, airline crews would only have onboard maps and instrument approach procedures related to their scheduled route and nearby areas. They would not necessarily have maps and procedures for areas that they would never expect to be. That is, NWA 305 in flying from Minneapolis to Seattle would not have onboard maps for Miami or Los Angeles to cite an extreme example. And in fact, they did not have maps for San Francisco or Reno either.
Did Cooper plant the money with a trowel or his hands? Gloves. No gloves? What time of day? 8)
Since Bohan is all Bullshit, why did the FAA or any company let him fly an airplane? Should he have been grounded .. and sent to Siberia with his children? Or maybe executed?
Since Bohan is all Bullshit, I assume that means he could see the lights of Portland coming up either! How in hell did he manage to land the plane there? An accident?
-
I agree, based on Cliff's description. But, when the T33 and 305 united was 305 on V23? I think yes. The west side of V23, and I think Cliff would accept that. Do you accept that?
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
To fly a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC, all the airline crew would have to do is tune in the Eugene VORTAC, center the needle to indicate that they were flying "TO" the VORTAC, and then fly that heading.
The maps they asked for and needed were IFR related maps and instrument approach procedures that contained the navigational information they needed to fly south. Normally, airline crews would only have onboard maps and instrument approach procedures related to their scheduled route and nearby areas. They would not necessarily have maps and procedures for areas that they would never expect to be. That is, NWA 305 in flying from Minneapolis to Seattle would not have onboard maps for Miami or Los Angeles to cite an extreme example. And in fact, they did not have maps for San Francisco or Reno either.
Did Cooper plant the money with a trowel or his hands? Gloves. No gloves? What time of day? 8)
Since Bohan is all Bullshit, why did the FAA or any company let him fly an airplane? Should he have been grounded .. and sent to Siberia with his children? Or maybe executed?
Since Bohan is all Bullshit, I assume that means he could see the lights of Portland coming up either! How in hell did he manage to land the plane there? An accident?
Maybe the co-pilot landed the airplane in Portland. In making such easily disproved claims, Bohan may having been seeing if he had what it takes to pursue a political career in DC after retiring from airline flying.
-
To fly a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC, all the airline crew would have to do is tune in the Eugene VORTAC, center the needle to indicate that they were flying "TO" the VORTAC, and then fly that heading.
Exactly my point. proof of them having been tuned to Battleground vs Eugene when they decided to divert from Portland and turn 15 degree's at Kelso doesn't make sense. they were still tuned to BTG 23 miles DME past the VOR. should of been tuned to Eugene 112.9 at the decision of routing around Portland clear up at Kelso. this sounds consistent with a pilot wanting to stay on V-23 per the agreement prior to takeoff.
I don't think the path was a secret and were given the sky but did decide on V-23. sure, they could of deviated from any location given the fact they had the sky. the totality of evidence doesn't support that.
The further you push the plane west of V-23 parallel with Kelso the closer it gets to Hillsboro and no longer becomes east of it. the plane pretty much has to deviate 15 degree's from centerline of V23 to get east of Hillsboro. airways are 8 miles wide and not 10. it puts it 13 nautical miles plus away from V-23 in certain locations. it also starts to intrude into another airway west of the Columbia. in order to keep a good straight line would be tuning into Eugene. no mention of Eugene until they were almost on top of it.
The map vs FDR should have them scratching there heads because it wouldn't look anything like the map. I'm pretty sure time was on the FDR and obviously direction/heading. the failure of any turns should cause a red flag with the map. I believe they got all the maps/plates needed for the flight. I recall them asking if they got them...
-
I agree, based on Cliff's description. But, when the T33 and 305 united was 305 on V23? I think yes. The west side of V23, and I think Cliff would accept that. Do you accept that?
Honestly, when it comes to flight path, I'm entirely happy to defer to pilot expertise/Robert99 here. With the caveat that there are transcripts we simply don't have and that the Feds seem unlikely to make available. Would there be anyone still alive who might have copies of them? Guessing no?
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
To fly a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC, all the airline crew would have to do is tune in the Eugene VORTAC, center the needle to indicate that they were flying "TO" the VORTAC, and then fly that heading.
The maps they asked for and needed were IFR related maps and instrument approach procedures that contained the navigational information they needed to fly south. Normally, airline crews would only have onboard maps and instrument approach procedures related to their scheduled route and nearby areas. They would not necessarily have maps and procedures for areas that they would never expect to be. That is, NWA 305 in flying from Minneapolis to Seattle would not have onboard maps for Miami or Los Angeles to cite an extreme example. And in fact, they did not have maps for San Francisco or Reno either.
-
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
Shortly before takeoff ground control did authorize V-23 at 10,000 as the flight plan all the way to Sacramento. he should of radioed any deviation. it's all on reel #5 in the transcripts where they decide V-23 is the route for the entire flight.
-
I just spoke with Cliff and will clarify some points in a bit. I asked about the 23 miles south of BTG DME and V23 path, etc. As stated, I'll write something up and post it within an hour or so.
-
This really wouldn't have anything to do with ARTCC to an extent. it's the transcripts report from the pilots showing they were locked onto BTG even after passing the VOR. I fail to see the reasoning for this if they were flying direct to Eugene from Kelso. this would be a pilots decision vs ARTCC.
-
To fly a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC, all the airline crew would have to do is tune in the Eugene VORTAC, center the needle to indicate that they were flying "TO" the VORTAC, and then fly that heading.
Exactly my point. proof of them having been tuned to Battleground vs Eugene when they decided to divert from Portland and turn 15 degree's at Kelso doesn't make sense. they were still tuned to BTG 23 miles DME past the VOR. should of been tuned to Eugene 112.9 at the decision of routing around Portland clear up at Kelso. this sounds consistent with a pilot wanting to stay on V-23 per the agreement prior to takeoff.
I don't think the path was a secret and were given the sky but did decide on V-23. sure, they could of deviated from any location given the fact they had the sky. the totality of evidence doesn't support that.
The further you push the plane west of V-23 parallel with Kelso the closer it gets to Hillsboro and no longer becomes east of it. the plane pretty much has to deviate 15 degree's from centerline of V23 to get east of Hillsboro. airways are 8 miles wide and not 10. it puts it 13 nautical miles plus away from V-23 in certain locations. it also starts to intrude into another airway west of the Columbia. in order to keep a good straight line would be tuning into Eugene. no mention of Eugene until they were almost on top of it.
The map vs FDR should have them scratching there heads because it wouldn't look anything like the map. I'm pretty sure time was on the FDR and obviously direction/heading. the failure of any turns should cause a red flag with the map. I believe they got all the maps/plates needed for the flight. I recall them asking if they got them...
Shutter, remember that the airliner had TWO VOR receivers and TWO DME receivers. The crew could be tuned into the Eugene VORTAC and flying directly toward it and receiving distance information from it and they could also be tuned into the now named Battleground VORTAC and receiving both radial and distance information from it at the same time.
If I remember correctly, Victor airways were still 10 STATUTE MILES wide in 1971. They are now 8 NAUTICAL MILES wide which translates to 4.6 statute miles on each side or 9.2 statute miles in total width.
In all honesty, I don't think the FDR information would be of much use in determining the flight path in this instance.
-
This really wouldn't have anything to do with ARTCC to an extent. it's the transcripts report from the pilots showing they were locked onto BTG even after passing the VOR. I fail to see the reasoning for this if they were flying direct to Eugene from Kelso. this would be a pilots decision vs ARTCC.
The airliner had two VOR and two DME receivers. So it could have been tuned into both the Eugene and Battleground VORTACS at the same time and receiving radial and distance information from each one.
-
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
Shortly before takeoff ground control did authorize V-23 at 10,000 as the flight plan all the way to Sacramento. he should of radioed any deviation. it's all on reel #5 in the transcripts where they decide V-23 is the route for the entire flight.
The clearance to Sacramento was provided for their use in case all communications were lost for some reason. It was essentially a back-up IFR plan in case they needed it. They could have flown to Sacramento and made an instrument approach without further communications with anyone and the air traffic control people would have been making allowances for them to do exactly that.
-
I agree, based on Cliff's description. But, when the T33 and 305 united was 305 on V23? I think yes. The west side of V23, and I think Cliff would accept that. Do you accept that?
Honestly, when it comes to flight path, I'm entirely happy to defer to pilot expertise/Robert99 here. With the caveat that there are transcripts we simply don't have and that the Feds seem unlikely to make available. Would there be anyone still alive who might have copies of them? Guessing no?
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
To fly a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC, all the airline crew would have to do is tune in the Eugene VORTAC, center the needle to indicate that they were flying "TO" the VORTAC, and then fly that heading.
The maps they asked for and needed were IFR related maps and instrument approach procedures that contained the navigational information they needed to fly south. Normally, airline crews would only have onboard maps and instrument approach procedures related to their scheduled route and nearby areas. They would not necessarily have maps and procedures for areas that they would never expect to be. That is, NWA 305 in flying from Minneapolis to Seattle would not have onboard maps for Miami or Los Angeles to cite an extreme example. And in fact, they did not have maps for San Francisco or Reno either.
Lynn, it is entirely possible that some individuals have copies of the Seattle ATC radio transcripts. But they are probably not going to publicly admit it. Although the FBI may be setting on them, there is nothing secret about them since they only contain information that was broadcast over a government owned radio system that anyone with a VHF receiver in the northwest part of the USA could listen in on. And quite a few people reportedly did listen in on those radio conversations.
-
The recent advice I got was possibly contacting the FAA Northwest Mountain division. I don't know if a specific place would be any better? he stated they don't throw anything away...
-
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
Shortly before takeoff ground control did authorize V-23 at 10,000 as the flight plan all the way to Sacramento. he should of radioed any deviation. it's all on reel #5 in the transcripts where they decide V-23 is the route for the entire flight.
The clearance to Sacramento was provided for their use in case all communications were lost for some reason. It was essentially a back-up IFR plan in case they needed it. They could have flown to Sacramento and made an instrument approach without further communications with anyone and the air traffic control people would have been making allowances for them to do exactly that.
My point would be that the sky being the limit does have it's limit. they appear to all be on the same page that V-23 was the route to be taken. clearance, for what ever reason was given. while on the ground they explained the sky was the limit. then a plan evolved. one would believe deviating out of this range would have the ARTCC diverting to make sure the area was clear further out than originally expected while 305 seeks a new path.
-
The recent advice I got was possibly contacting the FAA Northwest Mountain division. I don't know if a specific place would be any better? he stated they don't throw anything away...
The FAA regional office in Seattle was the first place I contacted. They referred me to the FBI FOIA and the rest is history. That is, it was basically a waste of time.
-
The recent advice I got was possibly contacting the FAA Northwest Mountain division. I don't know if a specific place would be any better? he stated they don't throw anything away...
The FAA regional office in Seattle was the first place I contacted. They referred me to the FBI FOIA and the rest is history. That is, it was basically a waste of time.
All I remembered is you contacting them. figures.....what would Seattle Center have?
-
The recent advice I got was possibly contacting the FAA Northwest Mountain division. I don't know if a specific place would be any better? he stated they don't throw anything away...
The FAA regional office in Seattle was the first place I contacted. They referred me to the FBI FOIA and the rest is history. That is, it was basically a waste of time.
All I remembered is you contacting them. figures.....what would Seattle Center have?
Seattle Center would probably have transferred their file copies of the transcripts to the FAA Regional Office in Seattle within a couple of years of the hijacking. It is unlikely that the Seattle Center has any copies of those transcripts now. And the FAA Regional Office may have transferred everything related to the hijacking to FAA Headquarters in Washington, DC.
-
How would you lock one VOR and radial another. using NAV 2? if the HSI is set up and locked. where do you get the info for VOR 2. the HSI has DME 1....
-
How would you lock one VOR and radial another. using NAV 2? if the HSI is set up and locked. where do you get the info for VOR 2. the HSI has DME 1....
A long time ago, you or someone posted a picture of a 727 instrument panel. It showed a navigation selector switch, and maybe one for the Captain and one for the co-pilot, and that is how you put things on the HSI. I believe that you could put either VOR, either DME, and/or either ADF on the Captain's HSI. And I think you could do the same thing with the co-pilot's instruments although he may not have had as an advanced panel as the Captain. But rest assured that all of these avionics are going to be available for viewing by the flight crew at the same time.
-
I agree, based on Cliff's description. But, when the T33 and 305 united was 305 on V23? I think yes. The west side of V23, and I think Cliff would accept that. Do you accept that?
Yes that is my understanding. That said, this was by default. Put another way, it just happened to be in V23 and wasn't prescribed to V23. Later, according to Cliff, 305 slipped out of the western boundary of V23 (west of PDX) which was of no concern to him because he had absolutely no say where the jet was supposed to fly. Indeed, 305 owned the sky and could fly any way the pilots chose. Moreover, 305 was flying in a straight path to the Eugene VORTAC.
To fly a straight line to the Eugene VORTAC, all the airline crew would have to do is tune in the Eugene VORTAC, center the needle to indicate that they were flying "TO" the VORTAC, and then fly that heading.
The maps they asked for and needed were IFR related maps and instrument approach procedures that contained the navigational information they needed to fly south. Normally, airline crews would only have onboard maps and instrument approach procedures related to their scheduled route and nearby areas. They would not necessarily have maps and procedures for areas that they would never expect to be. That is, NWA 305 in flying from Minneapolis to Seattle would not have onboard maps for Miami or Los Angeles to cite an extreme example. And in fact, they did not have maps for San Francisco or Reno either.
Did Cooper plant the money with a trowel or his hands? Gloves. No gloves? What time of day? 8)
Since Bohan is all Bullshit, why did the FAA or any company let him fly an airplane? Should he have been grounded .. and sent to Siberia with his children? Or maybe executed?
Since Bohan is all Bullshit, I assume that means he could see the lights of Portland coming up either! How in hell did he manage to land the plane there? An accident?
Maybe the co-pilot landed the airplane in Portland. In making such easily disproved claims, Bohan may having been seeing if he had what it takes to pursue a political career in DC after retiring from airline flying.
No worse than some of the claims - you have been hiding.
-
I just spoke with Cliff and will clarify some points in a bit. I asked about the 23 miles south of BTG DME and V23 path, etc. As stated, I'll write something up and post it within an hour or so.
While you are meditating and writing 'something up', did you bother to ask Cliff about the pilots statement: 'we could see the lights of Portland coming up' ?
A statement which clever 99 has ruled impossible, and therefore not admissible - freeing 99 to say anything! :o
-
I just spoke with Cliff and will clarify some points in a bit. I asked about the 23 miles south of BTG DME and V23 path, etc. As stated, I'll write something up and post it within an hour or so.
While you are meditating and writing 'something up', did you bother to ask Cliff about the pilots statement: 'we could see the lights of Portland coming up' ?
A statement which clever 99 has ruled impossible, and therefore not admissible - freeing 99 to say anything! :o
So Georger can see the actual light bulbs through an overcast, three cloud layers, and rain showers. I actually said that the crew would be able to see the "glow" from the Portland lights.
Get a good nights sleep and the world will probably look better to you tomorrow.
-
I just spoke with Cliff and will clarify some points in a bit. I asked about the 23 miles south of BTG DME and V23 path, etc. As stated, I'll write something up and post it within an hour or so.
While you are meditating and writing 'something up', did you bother to ask Cliff about the pilots statement: 'we could see the lights of Portland coming up' ?
A statement which clever 99 has ruled impossible, and therefore not admissible - freeing 99 to say anything! :o
So Georger can see the actual light bulbs through an overcast, three cloud layers, and rain showers. I actually said that the crew would be able to see the "glow" from the Portland lights.
Get a good nights sleep and the world will probably look better to you tomorrow.
3 cloud layers now - its was two. Or several. This has morphed! 'I actually said that the crew would be able to see the "glow" from the Portland lights.'
On 8-4 you said:
"Robert99
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #2447 on: August 04, 2019, 01:14:40 AM »
"It is highly unlikely that the flight crew could actually see the physical lights of Portland due to their being above an overcast and several cloud layers. They may have been able to see the "glow" of the Portland lights but that glow can be highly diffused and not useful in pinpointing their location. "
So you are still confident their position cannot be pinpointed . . . make up your mind!
You get a good night's sleep and tell us tomorrow what the difference between lights and glow is - :rofl:
-
I just spoke with Cliff and will clarify some points in a bit. I asked about the 23 miles south of BTG DME and V23 path, etc. As stated, I'll write something up and post it within an hour or so.
While you are meditating and writing 'something up', did you bother to ask Cliff about the pilots statement: 'we could see the lights of Portland coming up' ?
A statement which clever 99 has ruled impossible, and therefore not admissible - freeing 99 to say anything! :o
Where in the files are you even finding that quote 'we could see the lights of Portland coming up'? This is not mentioned in the statements I am looking at - only that Rataczak stated "they had not yet reached Portland proper but were definitely in the suburbs or immediate vicinity thereof." No lights mentioned.
-
Ammerman's interview with me yesterday:
To begin, Cliff emphasized that his thoughts, recollections and estimates are based upon an event 48 years previous. Therefore, they are not set in stone.
Ammerman clarified that when he formerly stated the jet traveled near Hillsboro that he was referring to an area that he estimates was west of downtown Portland but east of Beaverton. Additionally, he stated that he recalls the jet flying on a heading of 160. Moreover, that this heading was consistent from a point somewhere east of Kelso down to a point south of Portland where the jet would have naturally merged back into centerline V23. At this merging point the jet would have modified its course to 175 as it headed toward Eugene.
He stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. According to Cliff, 305 was never north or east of PDX.
I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
He clarified that he was not told that 305 was assigned V23, however, that it became apparent that V23 was the route that he was flying. He stated that he did not recall 305 leaving V23 because he did not recall being concerned about it leaving V23. Add to this his comments about not being concerned about the jet flying a couple miles out of V23 because their navigation equipment may show a little variance in position. Also, he thinks that 305 would have slipped out of the western boundary of V23 slightly as it passed PDX and Portland. Nonetheless, not far enough out to be of concern.
I asked about the "23 miles south of Battlefield VORTAC" and he said it is entirely likely that 305 was tuned in to Battleground and also Eugene. In other words, that both were set. Remember, the pilot's objective was to cut out the V23 "dogleg" as Cliff puts it. They would have headed 160 from the Kelso area knowing that they would eventually naturally merge back into V23 south of Portland. This was done to avoid the majority of population on the ground around the Portland/Vancouver area.
What this indicates is that 305 and the T-33 flew due south for quite a long distance and that they flew from east of Kelso, over or very near Woodland, over or very near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, over or very near Tena Bar, west of Portland and ultimately merged back in to centerline V23 south of Portland then adjusted to 175 toward Eugene.
Notably, this path appears to line up remarkably well with the three red "+" marks on the yellow FBI flight path map.
-
I just spoke with Cliff and will clarify some points in a bit. I asked about the 23 miles south of BTG DME and V23 path, etc. As stated, I'll write something up and post it within an hour or so.
While you are meditating and writing 'something up', did you bother to ask Cliff about the pilots statement: 'we could see the lights of Portland coming up' ?
A statement which clever 99 has ruled impossible, and therefore not admissible - freeing 99 to say anything! :o
Where in the files are you even finding that quote 'we could see the lights of Portland coming up'? This is not mentioned in the statements I am looking at - only that Rataczak stated "they had not yet reached Portland proper but were definitely in the suburbs or immediate vicinity thereof." No lights mentioned.
oh Christ ............ lets back up to ................ the code of Hammurabi and the development of writing .......... cave art?
'we could see the lights of Portland coming up'? is now eliminated. :nono:
Wake me up when the blind guy with no arms is flying the plane ................. :rofl:
-
Ammerman's interview with me yesterday:
To begin, Cliff emphasized that his thoughts, recollections and estimates are based upon an event 48 years previous. Therefore, they are not set in stone.
Ammerman clarified that when he formerly stated the jet traveled near Hillsboro that he was referring to an area that he estimates was west of downtown Portland but east of Beaverton. Additionally, he stated that he recalls the jet flying on a heading of 160. Moreover, that this heading was consistent from a point somewhere east of Kelso down to a point south of Portland where the jet would have naturally merged back into centerline V23. At this merging point the jet would have modified its course to 175 as it headed toward Eugene.
He stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. According to Cliff, 305 was never north or east of PDX.
I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
He clarified that he was not told that 305 was assigned V23, however, that it became apparent that V23 was the route that he was flying. He stated that he did not recall 305 leaving V23 because he did not recall being concerned about it leaving V23. Add to this his comments about not being concerned about the jet flying a couple miles out of V23 because their navigation equipment may show a little variance in position. Also, he thinks that 305 would have slipped out of the western boundary of V23 slightly as it passed PDX and Portland. Nonetheless, not far enough out to be of concern.
I asked about the "23 miles south of Battlefield VORTAC" and he said it is entirely likely that 305 was tuned in to Battleground and also Eugene. In other words, that both were set. Remember, the pilot's objective was to cut out the V23 "dogleg" as Cliff puts it. They would have headed 160 from the Kelso area knowing that they would eventually naturally merge back into V23 south of Portland. This was done to avoid the majority of population on the ground around the Portland/Vancouver area.
What this indicates is that 305 and the T-33 flew due south for quite a long distance and that they flew from east of Kelso, over or very near Woodland, over or very near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, over or very near Tena Bar, west of Portland and ultimately merged back in to centerline V23 south of Portland then adjusted to 175 toward Eugene.
Notably, this path appears to line up remarkably well with the three red "+" marks on the yellow FBI flight path map.
Your one paragraph above is almost verbatim to what I reported, in my interview with Cliff re- V23.
Looks like you have now pressured your way into confirming your suspect narrative - that Cooper jumped over Tina Bar - and planted the money to a depth of 2-3 feet deep in one million places at Tina Bar - using clam shells and a stick. DB Cooper was Mariner in Waterworld! He never worked at Boeing because Boeing does not hire mermaids!
-
Ammerman's interview with me yesterday:
To begin, Cliff emphasized that his thoughts, recollections and estimates are based upon an event 48 years previous. Therefore, they are not set in stone.
Ammerman clarified that when he formerly stated the jet traveled near Hillsboro that he was referring to an area that he estimates was west of downtown Portland but east of Beaverton. Additionally, he stated that he recalls the jet flying on a heading of 160. Moreover, that this heading was consistent from a point somewhere east of Kelso down to a point south of Portland where the jet would have naturally merged back into centerline V23. At this merging point the jet would have modified its course to 175 as it headed toward Eugene.
He stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. According to Cliff, 305 was never north or east of PDX.
I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
He clarified that he was not told that 305 was assigned V23, however, that it became apparent that V23 was the route that he was flying. He stated that he did not recall 305 leaving V23 because he did not recall being concerned about it leaving V23. Add to this his comments about not being concerned about the jet flying a couple miles out of V23 because their navigation equipment may show a little variance in position. Also, he thinks that 305 would have slipped out of the western boundary of V23 slightly as it passed PDX and Portland. Nonetheless, not far enough out to be of concern.
I asked about the "23 miles south of Battlefield VORTAC" and he said it is entirely likely that 305 was tuned in to Battleground and also Eugene. In other words, that both were set. Remember, the pilot's objective was to cut out the V23 "dogleg" as Cliff puts it. They would have headed 160 from the Kelso area knowing that they would eventually naturally merge back into V23 south of Portland. This was done to avoid the majority of population on the ground around the Portland/Vancouver area.
What this indicates is that 305 and the T-33 flew due south for quite a long distance and that they flew from east of Kelso, over or very near Woodland, over or very near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, over or very near Tena Bar, west of Portland and ultimately merged back in to centerline V23 south of Portland then adjusted to 175 toward Eugene.
Notably, this path appears to line up remarkably well with the three red "+" marks on the yellow FBI flight path map.
Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton. But read further.
We need to briefly discuss the term "heading" and what it means in this instance. VORs are aligned so that the "O" is pointing toward the magnetic north pole and not the geographic north pole. Therefore, the radials are with respect to the magnetic north pole and the magnetic variation must be added or substracted from them in order to determine their relationship with the grid lines or true north.
The magnetic north pole is not a fixed point but wanders around somewhere north of Greenland. Consequently, the magnetic variation is constantly changing for a fixed point such as Portland. In 1971, the magnetic variation at Portland was approximately 20 degrees east and this value must be added to the value of the VOR radials to get their relationship with respect to the grid lines. If the variation was given as a number of degrees west, this value would have to be substracted from the radials to give their relationship with respect to the grid lines.
Cliff said the airliner was flying on a heading of 160 degrees when it bypassed Portland. Adding the 20 degree east variation in this case, means that the airliner was flying on a true heading of 180 degrees or straight south. The direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections is also straight south. The 23 DME radius from the Battleground VORTAC intersects this straight south line on the western edge of V-23.
So from that 23 DME point, the airliner could fly direct to the Eugene VORTAC and always be on V-23 itself.
Although we may have to make some minor changes on the western flight path as more information becomes available, I think Cliff has apparently eliminated all other possible flight paths.
-
Ammerman's interview with me yesterday:
To begin, Cliff emphasized that his thoughts, recollections and estimates are based upon an event 48 years previous. Therefore, they are not set in stone.
Ammerman clarified that when he formerly stated the jet traveled near Hillsboro that he was referring to an area that he estimates was west of downtown Portland but east of Beaverton. Additionally, he stated that he recalls the jet flying on a heading of 160. Moreover, that this heading was consistent from a point somewhere east of Kelso down to a point south of Portland where the jet would have naturally merged back into centerline V23. At this merging point the jet would have modified its course to 175 as it headed toward Eugene.
He stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. According to Cliff, 305 was never north or east of PDX.
I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
He clarified that he was not told that 305 was assigned V23, however, that it became apparent that V23 was the route that he was flying. He stated that he did not recall 305 leaving V23 because he did not recall being concerned about it leaving V23. Add to this his comments about not being concerned about the jet flying a couple miles out of V23 because their navigation equipment may show a little variance in position. Also, he thinks that 305 would have slipped out of the western boundary of V23 slightly as it passed PDX and Portland. Nonetheless, not far enough out to be of concern.
I asked about the "23 miles south of Battlefield VORTAC" and he said it is entirely likely that 305 was tuned in to Battleground and also Eugene. In other words, that both were set. Remember, the pilot's objective was to cut out the V23 "dogleg" as Cliff puts it. They would have headed 160 from the Kelso area knowing that they would eventually naturally merge back into V23 south of Portland. This was done to avoid the majority of population on the ground around the Portland/Vancouver area.
What this indicates is that 305 and the T-33 flew due south for quite a long distance and that they flew from east of Kelso, over or very near Woodland, over or very near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, over or very near Tena Bar, west of Portland and ultimately merged back in to centerline V23 south of Portland then adjusted to 175 toward Eugene.
Notably, this path appears to line up remarkably well with the three red "+" marks on the yellow FBI flight path map.
Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton. But read further.
We need to briefly discuss the term "heading" and what it means in this instance. VORs are aligned so that the "O" is pointing toward the magnetic north pole and not the geographic north pole. Therefore, the radials are with respect to the magnetic north pole and the magnetic variation must be added or substracted from them in order to determine their relationship with the grid lines or true north.
The magnetic north pole is not a fixed point but wanders around somewhere north of Greenland. Consequently, the magnetic variation is constantly changing for a fixed point such as Portland. In 1971, the magnetic variation at Portland was approximately 20 degrees east and this value must be added to the value of the VOR radials to get their relationship with respect to the grid lines. If the variation was given as a number of degrees west, this value would have to be substracted from the radials to give their relationship with respect to the grid lines.
Cliff said the airliner was flying on a heading of 160 degrees when it bypassed Portland. Adding the 20 degree east variation in this case, means that the airliner was flying on a true heading of 180 degrees or straight south. The direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections is also straight south. The 23 DME radius from the Battleground VORTAC intersects this straight south line on the western edge of V-23.
So from that 23 DME point, the airliner could fly direct to the Eugene VORTAC and always be on V-23 itself.
Although we may have to make some minor changes on the western flight path as more information becomes available, I think Cliff has apparently eliminated all other possible flight paths.
Well of course! Cliff is pliable. See if you can get him to endorse Sheridan Peterson and the money plant at Tina's Bar ...... and Mileva Maric inventing Relativity! See if you can get him to endorse Trump in 020! And foghorns replacing trumpets in orchestras! And EU as director of the Air & Space museum.
Two for $5 still at Hardees !
If fact, let me go on record as saying: You and Ulis/Elvis are going to spoil this for everybody. But you and Elvis don't give a shit!
Can you get Cliff to do the Hoky Poky while singing Clementine, or claim he did ? >:D
-
It is what it is.
If Cliff had stated 305 flew over Washougal, then I would have reported he stated it flew over Washougal. But he didn't.
It is what it is.
You can either choose to believe him or not. Interestingly the path he describes is also very similar to Major Dawson's version. Not to mention, if Captain Scott's personal friend is to be believed, the jet was deliberately flown along the west side of Portland as a safety precaution.
It is what it is.
The placard, the money find, Ammerman, Captain Scott, and a complete lack of evidence pointing to Cooper ever being anywhere near the FBI search area or Amboy or Washougal tells a story.
Once again, it is what it is.
-
Ammerman's interview with me yesterday:
To begin, Cliff emphasized that his thoughts, recollections and estimates are based upon an event 48 years previous. Therefore, they are not set in stone.
Ammerman clarified that when he formerly stated the jet traveled near Hillsboro that he was referring to an area that he estimates was west of downtown Portland but east of Beaverton. Additionally, he stated that he recalls the jet flying on a heading of 160. Moreover, that this heading was consistent from a point somewhere east of Kelso down to a point south of Portland where the jet would have naturally merged back into centerline V23. At this merging point the jet would have modified its course to 175 as it headed toward Eugene.
He stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. According to Cliff, 305 was never north or east of PDX.
I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
He clarified that he was not told that 305 was assigned V23, however, that it became apparent that V23 was the route that he was flying. He stated that he did not recall 305 leaving V23 because he did not recall being concerned about it leaving V23. Add to this his comments about not being concerned about the jet flying a couple miles out of V23 because their navigation equipment may show a little variance in position. Also, he thinks that 305 would have slipped out of the western boundary of V23 slightly as it passed PDX and Portland. Nonetheless, not far enough out to be of concern.
I asked about the "23 miles south of Battlefield VORTAC" and he said it is entirely likely that 305 was tuned in to Battleground and also Eugene. In other words, that both were set. Remember, the pilot's objective was to cut out the V23 "dogleg" as Cliff puts it. They would have headed 160 from the Kelso area knowing that they would eventually naturally merge back into V23 south of Portland. This was done to avoid the majority of population on the ground around the Portland/Vancouver area.
What this indicates is that 305 and the T-33 flew due south for quite a long distance and that they flew from east of Kelso, over or very near Woodland, over or very near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, over or very near Tena Bar, west of Portland and ultimately merged back in to centerline V23 south of Portland then adjusted to 175 toward Eugene.
Notably, this path appears to line up remarkably well with the three red "+" marks on the yellow FBI flight path map.
Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton. But read further.
We need to briefly discuss the term "heading" and what it means in this instance. VORs are aligned so that the "O" is pointing toward the magnetic north pole and not the geographic north pole. Therefore, the radials are with respect to the magnetic north pole and the magnetic variation must be added or substracted from them in order to determine their relationship with the grid lines or true north.
The magnetic north pole is not a fixed point but wanders around somewhere north of Greenland. Consequently, the magnetic variation is constantly changing for a fixed point such as Portland. In 1971, the magnetic variation at Portland was approximately 20 degrees east and this value must be added to the value of the VOR radials to get their relationship with respect to the grid lines. If the variation was given as a number of degrees west, this value would have to be substracted from the radials to give their relationship with respect to the grid lines.
Cliff said the airliner was flying on a heading of 160 degrees when it bypassed Portland. Adding the 20 degree east variation in this case, means that the airliner was flying on a true heading of 180 degrees or straight south. The direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections is also straight south. The 23 DME radius from the Battleground VORTAC intersects this straight south line on the western edge of V-23.
So from that 23 DME point, the airliner could fly direct to the Eugene VORTAC and always be on V-23 itself.
Although we may have to make some minor changes on the western flight path as more information becomes available, I think Cliff has apparently eliminated all other possible flight paths.
If fact, let me go on record as saying: You and Ulis/Elvis are going to spoil this for everybody. But you and Elvis don't give a shit!
If you just stuck to facts, nothing would be spoiled for you.
-
Ammerman's interview with me yesterday:
To begin, Cliff emphasized that his thoughts, recollections and estimates are based upon an event 48 years previous. Therefore, they are not set in stone.
Ammerman clarified that when he formerly stated the jet traveled near Hillsboro that he was referring to an area that he estimates was west of downtown Portland but east of Beaverton. Additionally, he stated that he recalls the jet flying on a heading of 160. Moreover, that this heading was consistent from a point somewhere east of Kelso down to a point south of Portland where the jet would have naturally merged back into centerline V23. At this merging point the jet would have modified its course to 175 as it headed toward Eugene.
He stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. According to Cliff, 305 was never north or east of PDX.
I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
He clarified that he was not told that 305 was assigned V23, however, that it became apparent that V23 was the route that he was flying. He stated that he did not recall 305 leaving V23 because he did not recall being concerned about it leaving V23. Add to this his comments about not being concerned about the jet flying a couple miles out of V23 because their navigation equipment may show a little variance in position. Also, he thinks that 305 would have slipped out of the western boundary of V23 slightly as it passed PDX and Portland. Nonetheless, not far enough out to be of concern.
I asked about the "23 miles south of Battlefield VORTAC" and he said it is entirely likely that 305 was tuned in to Battleground and also Eugene. In other words, that both were set. Remember, the pilot's objective was to cut out the V23 "dogleg" as Cliff puts it. They would have headed 160 from the Kelso area knowing that they would eventually naturally merge back into V23 south of Portland. This was done to avoid the majority of population on the ground around the Portland/Vancouver area.
What this indicates is that 305 and the T-33 flew due south for quite a long distance and that they flew from east of Kelso, over or very near Woodland, over or very near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, over or very near Tena Bar, west of Portland and ultimately merged back in to centerline V23 south of Portland then adjusted to 175 toward Eugene.
Notably, this path appears to line up remarkably well with the three red "+" marks on the yellow FBI flight path map.
Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton. But read further.
We need to briefly discuss the term "heading" and what it means in this instance. VORs are aligned so that the "O" is pointing toward the magnetic north pole and not the geographic north pole. Therefore, the radials are with respect to the magnetic north pole and the magnetic variation must be added or substracted from them in order to determine their relationship with the grid lines or true north.
The magnetic north pole is not a fixed point but wanders around somewhere north of Greenland. Consequently, the magnetic variation is constantly changing for a fixed point such as Portland. In 1971, the magnetic variation at Portland was approximately 20 degrees east and this value must be added to the value of the VOR radials to get their relationship with respect to the grid lines. If the variation was given as a number of degrees west, this value would have to be substracted from the radials to give their relationship with respect to the grid lines.
Cliff said the airliner was flying on a heading of 160 degrees when it bypassed Portland. Adding the 20 degree east variation in this case, means that the airliner was flying on a true heading of 180 degrees or straight south. The direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections is also straight south. The 23 DME radius from the Battleground VORTAC intersects this straight south line on the western edge of V-23.
So from that 23 DME point, the airliner could fly direct to the Eugene VORTAC and always be on V-23 itself.
Although we may have to make some minor changes on the western flight path as more information becomes available, I think Cliff has apparently eliminated all other possible flight paths.
Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton. But read further.
This is NOT the Cliff Ammerman I interviewed!
What will Cliff say when he reads all of this EU-R99 bs ? And he will be reading ALL of this crap.
My concern is Ammerman is going to feel miss-quoted and used. Being used for someone's agenda! My impression of Mr. Ammerman is that is the last thing he wants, or would knowingly involve himself in. I guess we will see. EU and R99 have left no other choice now.
-
Ammerman's interview with me yesterday:
To begin, Cliff emphasized that his thoughts, recollections and estimates are based upon an event 48 years previous. Therefore, they are not set in stone.
Ammerman clarified that when he formerly stated the jet traveled near Hillsboro that he was referring to an area that he estimates was west of downtown Portland but east of Beaverton. Additionally, he stated that he recalls the jet flying on a heading of 160. Moreover, that this heading was consistent from a point somewhere east of Kelso down to a point south of Portland where the jet would have naturally merged back into centerline V23. At this merging point the jet would have modified its course to 175 as it headed toward Eugene.
He stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. According to Cliff, 305 was never north or east of PDX.
I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
He clarified that he was not told that 305 was assigned V23, however, that it became apparent that V23 was the route that he was flying. He stated that he did not recall 305 leaving V23 because he did not recall being concerned about it leaving V23. Add to this his comments about not being concerned about the jet flying a couple miles out of V23 because their navigation equipment may show a little variance in position. Also, he thinks that 305 would have slipped out of the western boundary of V23 slightly as it passed PDX and Portland. Nonetheless, not far enough out to be of concern.
I asked about the "23 miles south of Battlefield VORTAC" and he said it is entirely likely that 305 was tuned in to Battleground and also Eugene. In other words, that both were set. Remember, the pilot's objective was to cut out the V23 "dogleg" as Cliff puts it. They would have headed 160 from the Kelso area knowing that they would eventually naturally merge back into V23 south of Portland. This was done to avoid the majority of population on the ground around the Portland/Vancouver area.
What this indicates is that 305 and the T-33 flew due south for quite a long distance and that they flew from east of Kelso, over or very near Woodland, over or very near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, over or very near Tena Bar, west of Portland and ultimately merged back in to centerline V23 south of Portland then adjusted to 175 toward Eugene.
Notably, this path appears to line up remarkably well with the three red "+" marks on the yellow FBI flight path map.
Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton. But read further.
We need to briefly discuss the term "heading" and what it means in this instance. VORs are aligned so that the "O" is pointing toward the magnetic north pole and not the geographic north pole. Therefore, the radials are with respect to the magnetic north pole and the magnetic variation must be added or substracted from them in order to determine their relationship with the grid lines or true north.
The magnetic north pole is not a fixed point but wanders around somewhere north of Greenland. Consequently, the magnetic variation is constantly changing for a fixed point such as Portland. In 1971, the magnetic variation at Portland was approximately 20 degrees east and this value must be added to the value of the VOR radials to get their relationship with respect to the grid lines. If the variation was given as a number of degrees west, this value would have to be substracted from the radials to give their relationship with respect to the grid lines.
Cliff said the airliner was flying on a heading of 160 degrees when it bypassed Portland. Adding the 20 degree east variation in this case, means that the airliner was flying on a true heading of 180 degrees or straight south. The direct line between the Malay and Canby Intersections is also straight south. The 23 DME radius from the Battleground VORTAC intersects this straight south line on the western edge of V-23.
So from that 23 DME point, the airliner could fly direct to the Eugene VORTAC and always be on V-23 itself.
Although we may have to make some minor changes on the western flight path as more information becomes available, I think Cliff has apparently eliminated all other possible flight paths.
Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton. But read further.
This is NOT the Cliff Ammerman I interviewed!
What will Cliff say when he reads all of this EU-R99 bs ? And he will be reading ALL of this crap.
My concern is Ammerman is going to feel miss-quoted and used. Being used for someone's agenda! My impression of Mr. Ammerman is that is the last thing he wants, or would knowingly involve himself in. I guess we will see. EU and R99 have left no other choice now.
Why don't you just state the basis for your allegations? And it would really be nice if you included some facts and not just your impressions or concerns.
And while you are at it, just what is your theory which you claim that EU and I are undercutting?
-
Anecdotally, the original air traffic controller that handled the Northwest Airlines flight north of Portland was interviewed directly over the phone. He volunteered that he was sure that Flight #305 never left the V23 airway the entire time he had them on radar. - Tom Kaye
Towns on flight path confirmed during flight are: Toledo, Pigeon Springs, Ariel, Highland, Battle Ground and Vancouver as being either on or near the radar recorded flight path [5].
The SR71 was directed to overfly and photograph the flight path. The SR71 did not fly a straight line from Toledo to Canby!
According to Mr. Ammerman, he says he never told Eric Ulis anything that would support or authenticate Ulis' statement published here that "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton." Ammerman says that he never told Ulis anything of the kind, but he told Ulis the same thing he has told everyone else, namely: " I am sure 305 never left the V23 airway the entire time I had them on radar."
It is clear that Ulis and R99 are trying to manipulate everything, without any real supporting testimony by anyone.
-
According to Mr. Ammerman, he says he never told Eric Ulis anything that would support or authenticate Ulis' statement published here that "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton." Ammerman says that he never told Ulis anything of the kind, but he told Ulis the same thing he has told everyone else, namely: " I am sure 305 never left the V23 airway the entire time I had them on radar."
It is clear that Ulis and R99 are trying to manipulate everything, without any real supporting testimony by anyone.
GEORGER:
Do you know why Ammerman said he never told me "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton" ? Because I didn't say that. I challenge you to show me where I made that comment.
What I said is in post#2476.
Is this yet another mistake from you, or is this deliberate? Or is it a matter that you cannot read or choose not to read?
Has it ever occurred to you that the reason that people don't want to discuss this case or speak to what they experienced (i.e., Tina, Rataczak, Scott, Mitchell, Fazio's, etc.) is because of people like you? What makes you think Ammerman or anyone wants to be bothered by your antics, drama and agenda to discredit anyone and everything that doesn't dovetail nicely into your narrative? These are normal people that have had enough of dealing with your type for the last 48 years.
Get a life.
-
According to Mr. Ammerman, he says he never told Eric Ulis anything that would support or authenticate Ulis' statement published here that "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton." Ammerman says that he never told Ulis anything of the kind, but he told Ulis the same thing he has told everyone else, namely: " I am sure 305 never left the V23 airway the entire time I had them on radar."
It is clear that Ulis and R99 are trying to manipulate everything, without any real supporting testimony by anyone.
GEORGER:
Do you know why Ammerman said he never told me "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton" ? Because I didn't say that. I challenge you to show me where I made that comment.
What I said is in post#2476.
Is this yet another mistake from you, or is this deliberate? Or is it a matter that you cannot read or choose not to read?
Has it ever occurred to you that the reason that people don't want to discuss this case or speak to what they experienced (i.e., Tina, Rataczak, Scott, Mitchell, Fazio's, etc.) is because of people like you? What makes you think Ammerman or anyone wants to be bothered by your antics, drama and agenda to discredit anyone and everything that doesn't dovetail nicely into your narrative? These are normal people that have had enough of dealing with your type for the last 48 years.
Get a life.
Bull shit. antics, drama and agenda ?
I will go back and find and read "#2476." More of your antics, drama and agenda . . .
I do have an agenda. It's call getting to the truth - you should try it some time. Things are a lot simpler! :rofl:
*Now I guess I go look for 2476 just to placate this know-it-all. :D
-
OK. just read 2476 ...
"I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
Who is leading who? You leading Ammerman or Ammerman leading you? :rofl:
No wonder the Coast Guard wouldnt let you run a boat with passengers to Tina Bar! You dont need no stinkin license! You are your own authority on ever-thang.
Who is leading who? And by the way character - you aint ELVIS! STOP PRETENDING AND MAKING THINGS UP!
Stop using people. The Cooper case is more than a social media event for you to assume management of! :nono:
-
OK. just read 2476 ...
"I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
I see that you cannot come up with me stating "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton."
...and what you did come up with is "I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
That quote is 100% accurate. If it weren't accurate I wouldn't have said it was accurate.
Stop playing games GEORGER, against me you will always lose.
Ciao!
-
OK. just read 2476 ...
"I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
I see that you cannot come up with me stating "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton."
...and what you did come up with is "I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
That quote is 100% accurate. If it weren't accurate I wouldn't have said it was accurate.
Stop playing games GEORGER, against me you will always lose.
Ciao!
Georger, I am the one who made the statement about the east of Beaverton remark. Surely you could see that from the post where I made that statement. So stop playing games and stick to facts.
-
Okay, throwing flags on the field. illegal motion, off sides, unsportsmanlike conduct, face mask, personal foul.
Lets all try to discuss this without the guillotine. it appears we have new information that could or could not be accurate based on a 48 year gap. I'm reading possible or could of. this needs a whole lot more to come to any conclusion IMHO.
The known flight path is close to some of the area's in question. others rule it out based on older evidence. this will and has always taken time to get to the bottom of the truth.
I hope you guys are taking precautions while talking with Ammerman if you are both contacting him. this could turn bad quick.
-
Actually, I will contact Ammerman in a few days and ask him if he'd be interested in making a presentation at this year's CooperCon. I think that would be terrific and give people in attendance the opportunity to ask questions and actually speak with someone who was there. I think we need to take advantage of these first-hand accounts while we can. Needless to say I will let you know if he accepts my offer once I speak with him.
-
OK. just read 2476 ...
"I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
I see that you cannot come up with me stating "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton."
...and what you did come up with is "I stated to him that based upon his information it appears that 305 could have flown right over Woodland and asked him if this sounded accurate. He stated, "yes that's possible."
That quote is 100% accurate. If it weren't accurate I wouldn't have said it was accurate.
Stop playing games GEORGER, against me you will always lose.
Ciao!
Georger, I am the one who made the statement about the east of Beaverton remark. Surely you could see that from the post where I made that statement. So stop playing games and stick to facts.
I keep posting FACTS - you keep posting this nonsense. So why dont you post facts for a change? So just for you I will post it again - dont come unhinged!
Facts!
Anecdotally, the original air traffic controller that handled the Northwest Airlines flight north of Portland was interviewed directly over the phone. He volunteered that he was sure that Flight #305 never left the V23 airway the entire time he had them on radar. - Tom Kaye
Towns on flight path confirmed during flight are: Toledo, Pigeon Springs, Ariel, Highland, Battle Ground and Vancouver as being either on or near the radar recorded flight path [5].
The SR71 was directed to overfly and photograph the flight path. The SR71 did not fly a straight line from Toledo to Canby!
According to Mr. Ammerman, he says he never told Eric Ulis anything that would support or authenticate Ulis' statement published here that "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton." Ammerman says that he never told Ulis anything of the kind, but he told Ulis the same thing he has told everyone else, namely: " I am sure 305 never left the V23 airway the entire time I had them on radar."
Ammerman says: 305 never left V23.
It is clear that Ulis and R99 are trying to manipulate everything, without any real supporting testimony by anyone.
-
Okay, let's have some fun.
I plotted a flight path on Google Maps based upon what my understanding of what Ammerman described to me. There are a few very interesting things I noticed.
1) Factoring in a wide turn around Toledo and 305 then flying parallel to centerline V23 at about one mile west, I noticed that the point 305 would have made its 12 degree turn to the right putting it on a path of 160 is indeed east of Kelso.
2) It just so happens that the point where the jet makes its turn to 160 also happens to be the point where 305 intercepts the drift line of the placard based upon the placard landing spot and the wind direction. In fact, the lines intercept 4.5 miles upwind from where the placard was found. Is it possible that the placard separated from the jet during/because the turn to 160?
3) This flight path puts 305 literally on top of the Tena Bar money find spot--actually 175 feet to the east.
4) This flight path is 8.7 SM miles west of centerline V23 at its greatest point of separation.
5) This flight path ends up at the Canby intersection. From that point the jet would have turned 15 degrees to 175 and flown to Eugene.
Food for thought.
-
Okay, let's have some fun.
I plotted a flight path on Google Maps based upon what my understanding of what Ammerman described to me. There are a few very interesting things I noticed.
1) Factoring in a wide turn around Toledo and 305 then flying parallel to centerline V23 at about one mile west, I noticed that the point 305 would have made its 12 degree turn to the right putting it on a path of 160 is indeed east of Kelso.
2) It just so happens that the point where the jet makes its turn to 160 also happens to be the point where 305 intercepts the drift line of the placard based upon the placard landing spot and the wind direction. In fact, the lines intercept 4.5 miles upwind from where the placard was found. Is it possible that the placard separated from the jet during/because the turn to 160?
3) This flight path puts 305 literally on top of the Tena Bar money find spot--actually 175 feet to the east.
4) This flight path is 8.7 SM miles west of centerline V23 at its greatest point of separation.
5) This flight path ends up at the Canby intersection. From that point the jet would have turned 15 degrees to 175 and flown to Eugene.
Food for thought.
Lets see your map. If you are correct then factually:
1. The air traffic controller interview by Tom Kaye was wrong.
2. The air traffic controller interview by Georger was wrong.
3. The USAF analysis team was wrong.
4. The NWA analysis team ( Solderlind) was wrong.
5. The USAF SR71 team was wrong and sent the SR71 over the wrong terrain!
6. The TAG team analysis team was wrong.
7. Towns identified along the flight path are all wrong.
8. Controller Ammerman is lying when he says he never told Eric Ulis or anyone else anything that would support or authenticate the statement published here by somebody that "Cliff has essentially put the airliner right back on a line between the Malay and Canby Intersections when he said it passed east of Beaverton." Ammerman says that he never told Ulis anything of the kind, but he told Ulis the same thing he has told everyone else, namely: " I am sure 305 never left the V23 airway the entire time I had them on radar."
9. The FBI and other statements describing the F106's trailing 305, are all wrong, if not a lie.
10. Cooper landed (died) somewhere east of the Ingram find - his body was never noticed there.
11. Cooper buried the ransom money on Tina Bar in 1971. There are no fragments at Tina Bar, only money associated with the Ingram find and everything closeby to the Ingram find only, as per Ulis*.
............ and the list goes on and on and on .............
*Ulis has done extensive JFK research also. Are the JFK and Cooper cases related?
-
Now Im really confused! Which is it, landed at Tina bar or Bachelor Island?
Eric Ulis on his way to Bachelor Island, where he believes D.B. Cooper landed nearly 50 years ago. (Douglas Perry/The Oregonian)
If he’s right, he says as he stands on Bachelor Island’s gritty beach, “the parachute is here. He wouldn’t have taken it with him. It’s here. I feel strongly something is here. We just have to find it., says Ulis” (June 2019)
https://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/2019/06/db-cooper-search-leads-to-bachelor-island-ex-fbi-agent-says-suspect-will-get-away-with-it-unless-he-confesses.html
Ulis is taking advantage of the ongoing local interest. On June 29-30, he will conduct a D.B. Cooper Boat Tour, taking the Cooper-curious out to Tena Bar, the Columbia River sandbar where more than $5,000 from the Cooper ransom was found in 1980. He says the sandbar’s location links up perfectly with the skyjacker coming down on Bachelor Island.
I can't keep up!
-
Now Im really confused!
We finally agree on something.
-
The Importance of F-106 Interdiction - was National Security:
Ulis can scoff all he wants. The fact remains (a) the Cooper Hijacking raised national security issues resulting in (b) a response and interdiction of the hijacked plane by USAF F-106's whose primary mission was to protect US Security assets ... and everyone including the pilots flying Flight 305 were aware of the need to stay within acceptable flight restrictions. They were NOT free to roam around the skies or do anything they wanted; and that is an understatement which could have resulted in dire consequences irrespective of the hijacker's threats and purported bomb!
Recent interviews with people involved make that clear. One such interview was recently done by Bruce Smith titled: Interview with a SAGE radar operator as investigations intensify in the DB Cooper Case - May 11, 2019. In this interview a member of the 1971 SAGE team David Morgan, who was stationed at McChord Air Base in Tacoma, WA comments specifically as follows:
"Morgan gave me an interesting military perspective on the Cooper skyjacking. He and many others at McChord were concerned that Cooper might use the airplane as a weapon and fly it into a military installation, or a nuclear reactor, such as the Hanford reactor and its supply of plutonium. Morgan was quite passionate about this possibility, (from a military perspective) and acknowledged it presaged by thirty years the fears now borne by 9-11. In fact, he indicated that the primary purpose of the pursuit planes, the so-called “alert birds,” was to shoot down Cooper and his airplane if he strayed too close to a military installation, or gave indications that he might crash the aircraft into a critical civilian (or military) site."
With that perspective in mind, controller Cliff Ammerman and the others involved, had an important task on their hands. A very real mission with two F-106's primed, loaded, and ready should the need arise. It was important to control and direct everyone to a successful non-military outcome.
Under these conditions knowing where 305 was and what it was doing, was of critical importance.
Likewise knowing that the hijacker was still on board, or not, and what the hijacker was doing, or not doing, was of equal importance.
Ammerman told me that he was never personally involved in any discussions about whether the hijacker was still on board or not, but that others were so involved. Cliff said that had the need developed he would have been given any information necessary to the performance of his duties. At 7:54 pm we have this exchange: 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. - MSP: Roger. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch there (to Company and FBI).
Can we assume the F-106s broke off with 305 after the threat had diminished or was over - according to someone's estimate as the plane left Portland airspace heading south toward Eugene. The F-106's could have been refueled in the air, or joined by other tactical fighters but that did not happen either. The perceived mission complete the F-106's were withdrawn and allowed to leave near Eugene, according to controller Ammerman. Can we assume somebody thought the air threat to national security was over - as appraised by others? From Eugene south no tactically armed mission escorted 305. What was the basis of that decision?
-
The Importance of F-106 Interdiction - was National Security:
Ulis can scoff all he wants. The fact remains (a) the Cooper Hijacking raised national security issues resulting in (b) a response and interdiction of the hijacked plane by USAF F-106's whose primary mission was to protect US Security assets ... and everyone including the pilots flying Flight 305 were aware of the need to stay within acceptable flight restrictions. They were NOT free to roam around the skies or do anything they wanted; and that is an understatement which could have resulted in dire consequences irrespective of the hijacker's threats and purported bomb!
Recent interviews with people involved make that clear. One such interview was recently done by Bruce Smith titled: Interview with a SAGE radar operator as investigations intensify in the DB Cooper Case - May 11, 2019. In this interview a member of the 1971 SAGE team David Morgan, who was stationed at McChord Air Base in Tacoma, WA comments specifically as follows:
"Morgan gave me an interesting military perspective on the Cooper skyjacking. He and many others at McChord were concerned that Cooper might use the airplane as a weapon and fly it into a military installation, or a nuclear reactor, such as the Hanford reactor and its supply of plutonium. Morgan was quite passionate about this possibility, (from a military perspective) and acknowledged it presaged by thirty years the fears now borne by 9-11. In fact, he indicated that the primary purpose of the pursuit planes, the so-called “alert birds,” was to shoot down Cooper and his airplane if he strayed too close to a military installation, or gave indications that he might crash the aircraft into a critical civilian (or military) site."
With that perspective in mind, controller Cliff Ammerman and the others involved, had an important task on their hands. A very real mission with two F-106's primed, loaded, and ready should the need arise. It was important to control and direct everyone to a successful non-military outcome.
Under these conditions knowing where 305 was and what it was doing, was of critical importance.
Likewise knowing that the hijacker was still on board, or not, and what the hijacker was doing, or not doing, was of equal importance.
Ammerman told me that he was never personally involved in any discussions about whether the hijacker was still on board or not, but that others were so involved. Cliff said that had the need developed he would have been given any information necessary to the performance of his duties. At 7:54 pm we have this exchange: 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. - MSP: Roger. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch there (to Company and FBI).
Can we assume the F-106s broke off with 305 after the threat had diminished or was over - according to someone's estimate as the plane left Portland airspace heading south toward Eugene. The F-106's could have been refueled in the air, or joined by other tactical fighters but that did not happen either. The perceived mission complete the F-106's were withdrawn and allowed to leave near Eugene, according to controller Ammerman. Can we assume somebody thought the air threat to national security was over - as appraised by others? From Eugene south no tactically armed mission escorted 305. What was the basis of that decision?
Georger, this is bullshit. I was doing a lot of riding the airlines before the Cooper hijacking, after the Cooper hijacking, and during the very evening of the Cooper hijacking. The only thing unusual about the Cooper hijacking was that it was apparently the first one in the USA for money and that involved a parachute exit.
Usually in 1971 it was just the young Black fellows who were in the line with you who got called out for a check to see if they wanted to go to Cuba or Africa. With the Cooper hijacking, the airlines realized that they needed to start checking some white people as well.
The primary purpose of the F-106s and other such aircraft was to shoot down incoming Russian aircraft. That is why they were based primarily in costal and border areas. And also why they had reserved high altitude climb corridors. These aircraft were operative long before hijacking became a fashion.
Finally, I don't think the FBI was talking directly to the airliner over the ARINC frequency. They might have been relaying information through NWA.
-
The Importance of F-106 Interdiction - was National Security:
Ulis can scoff all he wants. The fact remains (a) the Cooper Hijacking raised national security issues resulting in (b) a response and interdiction of the hijacked plane by USAF F-106's whose primary mission was to protect US Security assets ... and everyone including the pilots flying Flight 305 were aware of the need to stay within acceptable flight restrictions. They were NOT free to roam around the skies or do anything they wanted; and that is an understatement which could have resulted in dire consequences irrespective of the hijacker's threats and purported bomb!
Recent interviews with people involved make that clear. One such interview was recently done by Bruce Smith titled: Interview with a SAGE radar operator as investigations intensify in the DB Cooper Case - May 11, 2019. In this interview a member of the 1971 SAGE team David Morgan, who was stationed at McChord Air Base in Tacoma, WA comments specifically as follows:
"Morgan gave me an interesting military perspective on the Cooper skyjacking. He and many others at McChord were concerned that Cooper might use the airplane as a weapon and fly it into a military installation, or a nuclear reactor, such as the Hanford reactor and its supply of plutonium. Morgan was quite passionate about this possibility, (from a military perspective) and acknowledged it presaged by thirty years the fears now borne by 9-11. In fact, he indicated that the primary purpose of the pursuit planes, the so-called “alert birds,” was to shoot down Cooper and his airplane if he strayed too close to a military installation, or gave indications that he might crash the aircraft into a critical civilian (or military) site."
With that perspective in mind, controller Cliff Ammerman and the others involved, had an important task on their hands. A very real mission with two F-106's primed, loaded, and ready should the need arise. It was important to control and direct everyone to a successful non-military outcome.
Under these conditions knowing where 305 was and what it was doing, was of critical importance.
Likewise knowing that the hijacker was still on board, or not, and what the hijacker was doing, or not doing, was of equal importance.
Ammerman told me that he was never personally involved in any discussions about whether the hijacker was still on board or not, but that others were so involved. Cliff said that had the need developed he would have been given any information necessary to the performance of his duties. At 7:54 pm we have this exchange: 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. - MSP: Roger. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch there (to Company and FBI).
Can we assume the F-106s broke off with 305 after the threat had diminished or was over - according to someone's estimate as the plane left Portland airspace heading south toward Eugene. The F-106's could have been refueled in the air, or joined by other tactical fighters but that did not happen either. The perceived mission complete the F-106's were withdrawn and allowed to leave near Eugene, according to controller Ammerman. Can we assume somebody thought the air threat to national security was over - as appraised by others? From Eugene south no tactically armed mission escorted 305. What was the basis of that decision?
Georger, this is bullshit. I was doing a lot of riding the airlines before the Cooper hijacking, after the Cooper hijacking, and during the very evening of the Cooper hijacking. The only thing unusual about the Cooper hijacking was that it was apparently the first one in the USA for money and that involved a parachute exit.
Usually in 1971 it was just the young Black fellows who were in the line with you who got called out for a check to see if they wanted to go to Cuba or Africa. With the Cooper hijacking, the airlines realized that they needed to start checking some white people as well.
The primary purpose of the F-106s and other such aircraft was to shoot down incoming Russian aircraft. That is why they were based primarily in costal and border areas. And also why they had reserved high altitude climb corridors. These aircraft were operative long before hijacking became a fashion.
Finally, I don't think the FBI was talking directly to the airliner over the ARINC frequency. They might have been relaying information through NWA.
Since my post centeres on the Bruce Smith 'David Morgan' feedback, then you are saying they are full of bullshit.
As usual, you are the smartest guy in the room. Maybe the only guy in the room. :rofl:
You basically are saying there was no military action in the Cooper case that matters. No military input in the Cooper case, that shaped the case. . . . . . the Bruce Smith interview is bullshit ........ and only you can tell the world what to think and how to think about the DB Cooper case.
And of course, that the USAF, FAA restrictions, and F-106s had no affect whatever on the route 305 flew.
Why didn't authorities just call you up and put you in charge of everything? Why are you doing FOIA requests at a high level while also saying you already know everything and none of it matters! Are you are Elvis opting for a management position in the DB Cooper case? Maybe the Smithsonian will hire you and Harvard graduate Ulis ? Im just reaching for anything to say to The Manager of Avionics in the DB Cooper case! Teach us, Oh Master! :rofl:
-
The Importance of F-106 Interdiction - was National Security:
Ulis can scoff all he wants. The fact remains (a) the Cooper Hijacking raised national security issues resulting in (b) a response and interdiction of the hijacked plane by USAF F-106's whose primary mission was to protect US Security assets ... and everyone including the pilots flying Flight 305 were aware of the need to stay within acceptable flight restrictions. They were NOT free to roam around the skies or do anything they wanted; and that is an understatement which could have resulted in dire consequences irrespective of the hijacker's threats and purported bomb!
Recent interviews with people involved make that clear. One such interview was recently done by Bruce Smith titled: Interview with a SAGE radar operator as investigations intensify in the DB Cooper Case - May 11, 2019. In this interview a member of the 1971 SAGE team David Morgan, who was stationed at McChord Air Base in Tacoma, WA comments specifically as follows:
"Morgan gave me an interesting military perspective on the Cooper skyjacking. He and many others at McChord were concerned that Cooper might use the airplane as a weapon and fly it into a military installation, or a nuclear reactor, such as the Hanford reactor and its supply of plutonium. Morgan was quite passionate about this possibility, (from a military perspective) and acknowledged it presaged by thirty years the fears now borne by 9-11. In fact, he indicated that the primary purpose of the pursuit planes, the so-called “alert birds,” was to shoot down Cooper and his airplane if he strayed too close to a military installation, or gave indications that he might crash the aircraft into a critical civilian (or military) site."
With that perspective in mind, controller Cliff Ammerman and the others involved, had an important task on their hands. A very real mission with two F-106's primed, loaded, and ready should the need arise. It was important to control and direct everyone to a successful non-military outcome.
Under these conditions knowing where 305 was and what it was doing, was of critical importance.
Likewise knowing that the hijacker was still on board, or not, and what the hijacker was doing, or not doing, was of equal importance.
Ammerman told me that he was never personally involved in any discussions about whether the hijacker was still on board or not, but that others were so involved. Cliff said that had the need developed he would have been given any information necessary to the performance of his duties. At 7:54 pm we have this exchange: 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. - MSP: Roger. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch there (to Company and FBI).
Can we assume the F-106s broke off with 305 after the threat had diminished or was over - according to someone's estimate as the plane left Portland airspace heading south toward Eugene. The F-106's could have been refueled in the air, or joined by other tactical fighters but that did not happen either. The perceived mission complete the F-106's were withdrawn and allowed to leave near Eugene, according to controller Ammerman. Can we assume somebody thought the air threat to national security was over - as appraised by others? From Eugene south no tactically armed mission escorted 305. What was the basis of that decision?
Georger, this is bullshit. I was doing a lot of riding the airlines before the Cooper hijacking, after the Cooper hijacking, and during the very evening of the Cooper hijacking. The only thing unusual about the Cooper hijacking was that it was apparently the first one in the USA for money and that involved a parachute exit.
Usually in 1971 it was just the young Black fellows who were in the line with you who got called out for a check to see if they wanted to go to Cuba or Africa. With the Cooper hijacking, the airlines realized that they needed to start checking some white people as well.
The primary purpose of the F-106s and other such aircraft was to shoot down incoming Russian aircraft. That is why they were based primarily in costal and border areas. And also why they had reserved high altitude climb corridors. These aircraft were operative long before hijacking became a fashion.
Finally, I don't think the FBI was talking directly to the airliner over the ARINC frequency. They might have been relaying information through NWA.
Since my post centeres on the Bruce Smith 'David Morgan' feedback, then you are saying they are full of bullshit.
As usual, you are the smartest guy in the room. Maybe the only guy in the room. :rofl:
You basically are saying there was no military action in the Cooper case that matters. No military input in the Cooper case, that shaped the case. . . . . . the Bruce Smith interview is bullshit ........ and only you can tell the world what to think and how to think about the DB Cooper case.
And of course, that the USAF, FAA restrictions, and F-106s had no affect whatever on the route 305 flew.
Why didn't authorities just call you up and put you in charge of everything? Why are you doing FOIA requests at a high level while also saying you already know everything and none of it matters! Are you are Elvis opting for a management position in the DB Cooper case? Maybe the Smithsonian will hire you and Harvard graduate Ulis ? Im just reaching for anything to say to The Manager of Avionics in the DB Cooper case! Teach us, Oh Master! :rofl:
Well if the "authorities" had called me up, they would have not been looking for Cooper 20 miles northeast of Portland. And the Cooper hijacking would have probably been solved before the end of 1971 - or the summer of 1972 at the absolute latest. And the FBI would never have been permitted to sit on the Seattle ATC transcripts.
-
The Importance of F-106 Interdiction - was National Security:
Ulis can scoff all he wants. The fact remains (a) the Cooper Hijacking raised national security issues resulting in (b) a response and interdiction of the hijacked plane by USAF F-106's whose primary mission was to protect US Security assets ... and everyone including the pilots flying Flight 305 were aware of the need to stay within acceptable flight restrictions. They were NOT free to roam around the skies or do anything they wanted; and that is an understatement which could have resulted in dire consequences irrespective of the hijacker's threats and purported bomb!
Recent interviews with people involved make that clear. One such interview was recently done by Bruce Smith titled: Interview with a SAGE radar operator as investigations intensify in the DB Cooper Case - May 11, 2019. In this interview a member of the 1971 SAGE team David Morgan, who was stationed at McChord Air Base in Tacoma, WA comments specifically as follows:
"Morgan gave me an interesting military perspective on the Cooper skyjacking. He and many others at McChord were concerned that Cooper might use the airplane as a weapon and fly it into a military installation, or a nuclear reactor, such as the Hanford reactor and its supply of plutonium. Morgan was quite passionate about this possibility, (from a military perspective) and acknowledged it presaged by thirty years the fears now borne by 9-11. In fact, he indicated that the primary purpose of the pursuit planes, the so-called “alert birds,” was to shoot down Cooper and his airplane if he strayed too close to a military installation, or gave indications that he might crash the aircraft into a critical civilian (or military) site."
With that perspective in mind, controller Cliff Ammerman and the others involved, had an important task on their hands. A very real mission with two F-106's primed, loaded, and ready should the need arise. It was important to control and direct everyone to a successful non-military outcome.
Under these conditions knowing where 305 was and what it was doing, was of critical importance.
Likewise knowing that the hijacker was still on board, or not, and what the hijacker was doing, or not doing, was of equal importance.
Ammerman told me that he was never personally involved in any discussions about whether the hijacker was still on board or not, but that others were so involved. Cliff said that had the need developed he would have been given any information necessary to the performance of his duties. At 7:54 pm we have this exchange: 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. - MSP: Roger. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch there (to Company and FBI).
Can we assume the F-106s broke off with 305 after the threat had diminished or was over - according to someone's estimate as the plane left Portland airspace heading south toward Eugene. The F-106's could have been refueled in the air, or joined by other tactical fighters but that did not happen either. The perceived mission complete the F-106's were withdrawn and allowed to leave near Eugene, according to controller Ammerman. Can we assume somebody thought the air threat to national security was over - as appraised by others? From Eugene south no tactically armed mission escorted 305. What was the basis of that decision?
Georger, this is bullshit. I was doing a lot of riding the airlines before the Cooper hijacking, after the Cooper hijacking, and during the very evening of the Cooper hijacking. The only thing unusual about the Cooper hijacking was that it was apparently the first one in the USA for money and that involved a parachute exit.
Usually in 1971 it was just the young Black fellows who were in the line with you who got called out for a check to see if they wanted to go to Cuba or Africa. With the Cooper hijacking, the airlines realized that they needed to start checking some white people as well.
The primary purpose of the F-106s and other such aircraft was to shoot down incoming Russian aircraft. That is why they were based primarily in costal and border areas. And also why they had reserved high altitude climb corridors. These aircraft were operative long before hijacking became a fashion.
Finally, I don't think the FBI was talking directly to the airliner over the ARINC frequency. They might have been relaying information through NWA.
Since my post centeres on the Bruce Smith 'David Morgan' feedback, then you are saying they are full of bullshit.
As usual, you are the smartest guy in the room. Maybe the only guy in the room. :rofl:
You basically are saying there was no military action in the Cooper case that matters. No military input in the Cooper case, that shaped the case. . . . . . the Bruce Smith interview is bullshit ........ and only you can tell the world what to think and how to think about the DB Cooper case.
And of course, that the USAF, FAA restrictions, and F-106s had no affect whatever on the route 305 flew.
Why didn't authorities just call you up and put you in charge of everything? Why are you doing FOIA requests at a high level while also saying you already know everything and none of it matters! Are you are Elvis opting for a management position in the DB Cooper case? Maybe the Smithsonian will hire you and Harvard graduate Ulis ? Im just reaching for anything to say to The Manager of Avionics in the DB Cooper case! Teach us, Oh Master! :rofl:
Well if the "authorities" had called me up, they would have not been looking for Cooper 20 miles northeast of Portland. And the Cooper hijacking would have probably been solved before the end of 1971 - or the summer of 1972 at the absolute latest. And the FBI would never have been permitted to sit on the Seattle ATC transcripts.
There it is! Great post. Truth! 8)
-
The Importance of F-106 Interdiction - was National Security:
Ulis can scoff all he wants. The fact remains (a) the Cooper Hijacking raised national security issues resulting in (b) a response and interdiction of the hijacked plane by USAF F-106's whose primary mission was to protect US Security assets ... and everyone including the pilots flying Flight 305 were aware of the need to stay within acceptable flight restrictions. They were NOT free to roam around the skies or do anything they wanted; and that is an understatement which could have resulted in dire consequences irrespective of the hijacker's threats and purported bomb!
Recent interviews with people involved make that clear. One such interview was recently done by Bruce Smith titled: Interview with a SAGE radar operator as investigations intensify in the DB Cooper Case - May 11, 2019. In this interview a member of the 1971 SAGE team David Morgan, who was stationed at McChord Air Base in Tacoma, WA comments specifically as follows:
"Morgan gave me an interesting military perspective on the Cooper skyjacking. He and many others at McChord were concerned that Cooper might use the airplane as a weapon and fly it into a military installation, or a nuclear reactor, such as the Hanford reactor and its supply of plutonium. Morgan was quite passionate about this possibility, (from a military perspective) and acknowledged it presaged by thirty years the fears now borne by 9-11. In fact, he indicated that the primary purpose of the pursuit planes, the so-called “alert birds,” was to shoot down Cooper and his airplane if he strayed too close to a military installation, or gave indications that he might crash the aircraft into a critical civilian (or military) site."
With that perspective in mind, controller Cliff Ammerman and the others involved, had an important task on their hands. A very real mission with two F-106's primed, loaded, and ready should the need arise. It was important to control and direct everyone to a successful non-military outcome.
Under these conditions knowing where 305 was and what it was doing, was of critical importance.
Likewise knowing that the hijacker was still on board, or not, and what the hijacker was doing, or not doing, was of equal importance.
Ammerman told me that he was never personally involved in any discussions about whether the hijacker was still on board or not, but that others were so involved. Cliff said that had the need developed he would have been given any information necessary to the performance of his duties. At 7:54 pm we have this exchange: 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. - MSP: Roger. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch there (to Company and FBI).
Can we assume the F-106s broke off with 305 after the threat had diminished or was over - according to someone's estimate as the plane left Portland airspace heading south toward Eugene. The F-106's could have been refueled in the air, or joined by other tactical fighters but that did not happen either. The perceived mission complete the F-106's were withdrawn and allowed to leave near Eugene, according to controller Ammerman. Can we assume somebody thought the air threat to national security was over - as appraised by others? From Eugene south no tactically armed mission escorted 305. What was the basis of that decision?
Georger, this is bullshit. I was doing a lot of riding the airlines before the Cooper hijacking, after the Cooper hijacking, and during the very evening of the Cooper hijacking. The only thing unusual about the Cooper hijacking was that it was apparently the first one in the USA for money and that involved a parachute exit.
Usually in 1971 it was just the young Black fellows who were in the line with you who got called out for a check to see if they wanted to go to Cuba or Africa. With the Cooper hijacking, the airlines realized that they needed to start checking some white people as well.
The primary purpose of the F-106s and other such aircraft was to shoot down incoming Russian aircraft. That is why they were based primarily in costal and border areas. And also why they had reserved high altitude climb corridors. These aircraft were operative long before hijacking became a fashion.
Finally, I don't think the FBI was talking directly to the airliner over the ARINC frequency. They might have been relaying information through NWA.
Since my post centeres on the Bruce Smith 'David Morgan' feedback, then you are saying they are full of bullshit.
As usual, you are the smartest guy in the room. Maybe the only guy in the room. :rofl:
You basically are saying there was no military action in the Cooper case that matters. No military input in the Cooper case, that shaped the case. . . . . . the Bruce Smith interview is bullshit ........ and only you can tell the world what to think and how to think about the DB Cooper case.
And of course, that the USAF, FAA restrictions, and F-106s had no affect whatever on the route 305 flew.
Why didn't authorities just call you up and put you in charge of everything? Why are you doing FOIA requests at a high level while also saying you already know everything and none of it matters! Are you are Elvis opting for a management position in the DB Cooper case? Maybe the Smithsonian will hire you and Harvard graduate Ulis ? Im just reaching for anything to say to The Manager of Avionics in the DB Cooper case! Teach us, Oh Master! :rofl:
Well if the "authorities" had called me up, they would have not been looking for Cooper 20 miles northeast of Portland. And the Cooper hijacking would have probably been solved before the end of 1971 - or the summer of 1972 at the absolute latest. And the FBI would never have been permitted to sit on the Seattle ATC transcripts.
Are you really serious ? You’re the same guy that couldn’t figure out how to find REI in downtown Portland even though you were not more than a mile away from it ! You only think you know it all !
-
The Importance of F-106 Interdiction - was National Security:
Ulis can scoff all he wants. The fact remains (a) the Cooper Hijacking raised national security issues resulting in (b) a response and interdiction of the hijacked plane by USAF F-106's whose primary mission was to protect US Security assets ... and everyone including the pilots flying Flight 305 were aware of the need to stay within acceptable flight restrictions. They were NOT free to roam around the skies or do anything they wanted; and that is an understatement which could have resulted in dire consequences irrespective of the hijacker's threats and purported bomb!
Recent interviews with people involved make that clear. One such interview was recently done by Bruce Smith titled: Interview with a SAGE radar operator as investigations intensify in the DB Cooper Case - May 11, 2019. In this interview a member of the 1971 SAGE team David Morgan, who was stationed at McChord Air Base in Tacoma, WA comments specifically as follows:
"Morgan gave me an interesting military perspective on the Cooper skyjacking. He and many others at McChord were concerned that Cooper might use the airplane as a weapon and fly it into a military installation, or a nuclear reactor, such as the Hanford reactor and its supply of plutonium. Morgan was quite passionate about this possibility, (from a military perspective) and acknowledged it presaged by thirty years the fears now borne by 9-11. In fact, he indicated that the primary purpose of the pursuit planes, the so-called “alert birds,” was to shoot down Cooper and his airplane if he strayed too close to a military installation, or gave indications that he might crash the aircraft into a critical civilian (or military) site."
With that perspective in mind, controller Cliff Ammerman and the others involved, had an important task on their hands. A very real mission with two F-106's primed, loaded, and ready should the need arise. It was important to control and direct everyone to a successful non-military outcome.
Under these conditions knowing where 305 was and what it was doing, was of critical importance.
Likewise knowing that the hijacker was still on board, or not, and what the hijacker was doing, or not doing, was of equal importance.
Ammerman told me that he was never personally involved in any discussions about whether the hijacker was still on board or not, but that others were so involved. Cliff said that had the need developed he would have been given any information necessary to the performance of his duties. At 7:54 pm we have this exchange: 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. - MSP: Roger. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch there (to Company and FBI).
Can we assume the F-106s broke off with 305 after the threat had diminished or was over - according to someone's estimate as the plane left Portland airspace heading south toward Eugene. The F-106's could have been refueled in the air, or joined by other tactical fighters but that did not happen either. The perceived mission complete the F-106's were withdrawn and allowed to leave near Eugene, according to controller Ammerman. Can we assume somebody thought the air threat to national security was over - as appraised by others? From Eugene south no tactically armed mission escorted 305. What was the basis of that decision?
Georger, this is bullshit. I was doing a lot of riding the airlines before the Cooper hijacking, after the Cooper hijacking, and during the very evening of the Cooper hijacking. The only thing unusual about the Cooper hijacking was that it was apparently the first one in the USA for money and that involved a parachute exit.
Usually in 1971 it was just the young Black fellows who were in the line with you who got called out for a check to see if they wanted to go to Cuba or Africa. With the Cooper hijacking, the airlines realized that they needed to start checking some white people as well.
The primary purpose of the F-106s and other such aircraft was to shoot down incoming Russian aircraft. That is why they were based primarily in costal and border areas. And also why they had reserved high altitude climb corridors. These aircraft were operative long before hijacking became a fashion.
Finally, I don't think the FBI was talking directly to the airliner over the ARINC frequency. They might have been relaying information through NWA.
Since my post centeres on the Bruce Smith 'David Morgan' feedback, then you are saying they are full of bullshit.
As usual, you are the smartest guy in the room. Maybe the only guy in the room. :rofl:
You basically are saying there was no military action in the Cooper case that matters. No military input in the Cooper case, that shaped the case. . . . . . the Bruce Smith interview is bullshit ........ and only you can tell the world what to think and how to think about the DB Cooper case.
And of course, that the USAF, FAA restrictions, and F-106s had no affect whatever on the route 305 flew.
Why didn't authorities just call you up and put you in charge of everything? Why are you doing FOIA requests at a high level while also saying you already know everything and none of it matters! Are you are Elvis opting for a management position in the DB Cooper case? Maybe the Smithsonian will hire you and Harvard graduate Ulis ? Im just reaching for anything to say to The Manager of Avionics in the DB Cooper case! Teach us, Oh Master! :rofl:
Well if the "authorities" had called me up, they would have not been looking for Cooper 20 miles northeast of Portland. And the Cooper hijacking would have probably been solved before the end of 1971 - or the summer of 1972 at the absolute latest. And the FBI would never have been permitted to sit on the Seattle ATC transcripts.
Are you really serious ? You’re the same guy that couldn’t figure out how to find REI in downtown Portland even though you were not more than a mile away from it ! You only think you know it all !
Yes, I am serious. And I did find REI in downtown Portland.
Portland looks like it was assembled from five different towns and they all kept their same street addresses. When looking for a street address that is suppose to be in the northeast corner of a city, I would not normally expect to find it in the southwest part of the same city. But I did find it and Mensa can relax.
I don't know how the Portland addresses make sense to you, but maybe there is something in your local water that explains it.
-
The Importance of F-106 Interdiction - was National Security:
Ulis can scoff all he wants. The fact remains (a) the Cooper Hijacking raised national security issues resulting in (b) a response and interdiction of the hijacked plane by USAF F-106's whose primary mission was to protect US Security assets ... and everyone including the pilots flying Flight 305 were aware of the need to stay within acceptable flight restrictions. They were NOT free to roam around the skies or do anything they wanted; and that is an understatement which could have resulted in dire consequences irrespective of the hijacker's threats and purported bomb!
Recent interviews with people involved make that clear. One such interview was recently done by Bruce Smith titled: Interview with a SAGE radar operator as investigations intensify in the DB Cooper Case - May 11, 2019. In this interview a member of the 1971 SAGE team David Morgan, who was stationed at McChord Air Base in Tacoma, WA comments specifically as follows:
"Morgan gave me an interesting military perspective on the Cooper skyjacking. He and many others at McChord were concerned that Cooper might use the airplane as a weapon and fly it into a military installation, or a nuclear reactor, such as the Hanford reactor and its supply of plutonium. Morgan was quite passionate about this possibility, (from a military perspective) and acknowledged it presaged by thirty years the fears now borne by 9-11. In fact, he indicated that the primary purpose of the pursuit planes, the so-called “alert birds,” was to shoot down Cooper and his airplane if he strayed too close to a military installation, or gave indications that he might crash the aircraft into a critical civilian (or military) site."
With that perspective in mind, controller Cliff Ammerman and the others involved, had an important task on their hands. A very real mission with two F-106's primed, loaded, and ready should the need arise. It was important to control and direct everyone to a successful non-military outcome.
Under these conditions knowing where 305 was and what it was doing, was of critical importance.
Likewise knowing that the hijacker was still on board, or not, and what the hijacker was doing, or not doing, was of equal importance.
Ammerman told me that he was never personally involved in any discussions about whether the hijacker was still on board or not, but that others were so involved. Cliff said that had the need developed he would have been given any information necessary to the performance of his duties. At 7:54 pm we have this exchange: 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. - MSP: Roger. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch there (to Company and FBI).
Can we assume the F-106s broke off with 305 after the threat had diminished or was over - according to someone's estimate as the plane left Portland airspace heading south toward Eugene. The F-106's could have been refueled in the air, or joined by other tactical fighters but that did not happen either. The perceived mission complete the F-106's were withdrawn and allowed to leave near Eugene, according to controller Ammerman. Can we assume somebody thought the air threat to national security was over - as appraised by others? From Eugene south no tactically armed mission escorted 305. What was the basis of that decision?
Georger, this is bullshit. I was doing a lot of riding the airlines before the Cooper hijacking, after the Cooper hijacking, and during the very evening of the Cooper hijacking. The only thing unusual about the Cooper hijacking was that it was apparently the first one in the USA for money and that involved a parachute exit.
Usually in 1971 it was just the young Black fellows who were in the line with you who got called out for a check to see if they wanted to go to Cuba or Africa. With the Cooper hijacking, the airlines realized that they needed to start checking some white people as well.
The primary purpose of the F-106s and other such aircraft was to shoot down incoming Russian aircraft. That is why they were based primarily in costal and border areas. And also why they had reserved high altitude climb corridors. These aircraft were operative long before hijacking became a fashion.
Finally, I don't think the FBI was talking directly to the airliner over the ARINC frequency. They might have been relaying information through NWA.
Since my post centeres on the Bruce Smith 'David Morgan' feedback, then you are saying they are full of bullshit.
As usual, you are the smartest guy in the room. Maybe the only guy in the room. :rofl:
You basically are saying there was no military action in the Cooper case that matters. No military input in the Cooper case, that shaped the case. . . . . . the Bruce Smith interview is bullshit ........ and only you can tell the world what to think and how to think about the DB Cooper case.
And of course, that the USAF, FAA restrictions, and F-106s had no affect whatever on the route 305 flew.
Why didn't authorities just call you up and put you in charge of everything? Why are you doing FOIA requests at a high level while also saying you already know everything and none of it matters! Are you are Elvis opting for a management position in the DB Cooper case? Maybe the Smithsonian will hire you and Harvard graduate Ulis ? Im just reaching for anything to say to The Manager of Avionics in the DB Cooper case! Teach us, Oh Master! :rofl:
Well if the "authorities" had called me up, they would have not been looking for Cooper 20 miles northeast of Portland. And the Cooper hijacking would have probably been solved before the end of 1971 - or the summer of 1972 at the absolute latest. And the FBI would never have been permitted to sit on the Seattle ATC transcripts.
Are you really serious ? You’re the same guy that couldn’t figure out how to find REI in downtown Portland even though you were not more than a mile away from it ! You only think you know it all !
Yes, I am serious. And I did find REI in downtown Portland.
Portland looks like it was assembled from five different towns and they all kept their same street addresses. When looking for a street address that is suppose to be in the northeast corner of a city, I would not normally expect to find it in the southwest part of the same city. But I did find it and Mensa can relax.
I don't know how the Portland addresses make sense to you, but maybe there is something in your local water that explains it.
First off Try reading directions correctly. REI is clearly listed in Portland at 1405 N.W. Johnson ! There’s a clue there that should quickly tell you that it is Not Located in the N.E Corner Of Portland ! Have you figured out the clue yet ? I will solve it for you ! The W means WEST ! You are now going to tell us that you also know everything about the flight plan BUT you haven’t YET figured out what N.W stands for. What college taught you that E means West !
Carry on with your fantasies! BTW You never did find REI in S. W. Portland! You will find in just exactly as it’s listed. It’s in Northwest Portland as anyone with any kind of direction would immediately recognize ! Johnson is well North of Burnside which divides Portland into North or South. Johnson is also West of the Willamette river. I’m sorry you finally did find REI after getting totally lost in one of the easiest cities to get around in that I’ve ever seen. Now go on telling us how you know exactly where Cooper landed !
-
Does anyone know how much of the FBI search area was actually searched? I assume it wasn't 100%.
-
First off Try reading directions correctly. REI is clearly listed in Portland at 1405 N.W. Johnson ! There’s a clue there that should quickly tell you that it is Not Located in the N.E Corner Of Portland ! Have you figured out the clue yet ? I will solve it for you ! The W means WEST ! You are now going to tell us that you also know everything about the flight plan BUT you haven’t YET figured out what N.W stands for. What college taught you that E means West !
Carry on with your fantasies! BTW You never did find REI in S. W. Portland! You will find in just exactly as it’s listed. It’s in Northwest Portland as anyone with any kind of direction would immediately recognize ! Johnson is well North of Burnside which divides Portland into North or South. Johnson is also West of the Willamette river. I’m sorry you finally did find REI after getting totally lost in one of the easiest cities to get around in that I’ve ever seen. Now go on telling us how you know exactly where Cooper landed !
Actually, I learned what N-S-E-W means as a cub scout a couple of hundred miles northeast of Portland.
Unfortunately, I no longer have the map in question. I left all of my maps of the Portland/Vancouver area with Meyer Louie the last time I was in Portland. REI may be listed as being on NW of something but it is still SW of the urban area.
Since you have apparently resided in Portland for most of your life, the street situation is probably ingrained in your DNA. And you would undoubtedly be confused by normal street arrangements.
I find New York City and Los Angeles streets easier to navigate than Portlands.
Sorry.
-
Does anyone know how much of the FBI search area was actually searched? I assume it wasn't 100%.
The original search area, known as LZ-A, was an area 4 miles by 6 miles, as I understand the prevailing information. That means there was 24 square miles to search. Tom McDowell, the Under-Sheriff of Clark County who ran the ground search told me that his teams covered about one-square mile in western Amboy, WA, along the Cedar Creek Rd area from Friday, November 26 until Monday, November 29th when the FBI terminated those ground searches. They were never resumed until March, 1972, for two weeks, and then another two weeks in April.
Those secondary ground searches covered the greater Amboy area, and the Ariel-Lake Merwin area north of the Lewis River in Cowlitz County. The exact parameters of that search are unknown to me, nor have I seen them in public records. I assume they must be described in Charlie Farrell's 300-page personal account of the NORJAK investigation that has never been published, but Geoffrey Gray has seen it, so GG might know the details of the 1972 search.
I know that one team of searches spent a significant amount of time in the Amboy-Woodland area around Margaret Colf's large ranch on Etna Rd. In fact, one body was found nearby on Grist Mill Rd, off of Spurriel Rd.
-
By the way, in researching my papers for my above reply, I saw a little tidbit from my notes on Capt. Tom Bohan and related "flight path" stuff. There, I had jotted down that in 1980 a journalist by the name of David Krajicek wrote that "Captain William Scott revealed to Ralph Himmelsbach that Flight 305 was flying ten miles further west than the FBI assumed."
Not sure where I originally found that piece of information.
-
We ever going to get to see that Farrell manuscript?
-
By the way, in researching my papers for my above reply, I saw a little tidbit from my notes on Capt. Tom Bohan and related "flight path" stuff. There, I had jotted down that in 1980 a journalist by the name of David Krajicek wrote that "Captain William Scott revealed to Ralph Himmelsbach that Flight 305 was flying ten miles further west than the FBI assumed."
Not sure where I originally found that piece of information.
You sure he wasnt confusing west with east? After-thoughts drive people crazy. I will bet money the Air Force and F-106's knew where in hell he was; or they were!! Somebody should have informed Scott - officially!! - where he was! :-X
Or, maybe Scott actually told Himms he was at a Cubs game in Chicago - the whole time! Didn't all of the pilots have stunt doubles?
Does Geoff Gray have a stunt double? :-X
-
By the way, in researching my papers for my above reply, I saw a little tidbit from my notes on Capt. Tom Bohan and related "flight path" stuff. There, I had jotted down that in 1980 a journalist by the name of David Krajicek wrote that "Captain William Scott revealed to Ralph Himmelsbach that Flight 305 was flying ten miles further west than the FBI assumed."
Not sure where I originally found that piece of information.
You sure he wasnt confusing west with east? After-thoughts drive people crazy. I will bet money the Air Force and F-106's knew where in hell he was; or they were!! Somebody should have informed Scott - officially!! - where he was! :-X
Or, maybe Scott actually told Himms he was at a Cubs game in Chicago - the whole time! Didn't all of the pilots have stunt doubles?
Does Geoff Gray have a stunt double? :-X
Georger, like some other posters on this site, you really get yourself twisted as much as necessary to keep maintaining that the FBI flight path is correct. You should just stick with the facts. And the facts are that there is NOTHING to support the FBI flight path except the FBI flight path.
ATTENTION EVERYONE:
Sluggo's web site is available for purchase for $2095. Anyone interested in pursuing the matter as a group?
-
Although I do it as well the flight path has nothing to do with the FBI. It was made by the Air Force. it's being preserved as evidence by the FBI.
It's amazing how it appears that V23 was some sort of secret path. why would the pilots say they were in area's such as Ariel or Pigeon Springs. wouldn't it be easier to tell them they cut the area out of the flight. the 20 degree shift was interesting. doesn't it basically affect runways more than anything? VOR's move? the flew a straight line and failed to tell anyone? it's documented that they were locked onto BTG but nothing about Eugene. more secrets? if they were flying VOR to VOR how would they not know where they were? it just seems extremely easy for the crew to say they flew from Seattle to Toledo and basically straight down to Eugene via VOR?
VORs (radio beacons that are used for navigation) broadcast their “radial” information in magnetic degrees so that you can fly a magnetic heading to or from a VOR. according to some the plane was locked on two VOR's and yet were 20 degree's off course? no charts or updates of magnetic changes? I see one showing as much as 8 degree's from ground level between Quincy and Longview.
Earth's magnetic field is constantly changing and while large-scale changes, such as a complete reversal of the magnetic field, happen over several thousand years, smaller changes over shorter periods of time affect navigation, including for aviation. This shifting magnetic field affects airports and airline operations, including alphanumeric airport runway names, which indicate headings—crucial information for pilots.
The Fairbanks International Airport renamed runway 1L-19R to 2L-20R in 2009, for example, when magnetic north shifted enough to mandate a change. And the airport operators know—from NOAA’s World Magnetic Model and other sources—that they'll likely need to update the name again in 2033
The flight data recorder wouldn't tell much? I think that statement would fit better in this time period. the only time they need a FDR today is for the data minutes before a crash and not so much for tracking. GPS rules today. I would tend to believe with limited tools in 1971 they used what ever they could.
Then we have statements from radar operators basically right in front of 305. so close it should over rule further radar returns from Seattle. how many times have we been told about the red dots between Malay and the Lewis river being weak returns. the same R5 would of seen? It also appears that the hijacking was an incident with the FAA and a national security risk with the military. who would track it out of the two?
Why would radar operators make these statements right on top of the flight and be false and yet the statements from an operator further away (radar returns) be 100% accurate or enough to prove the path is incorrect? I see more documented evidence that some claim doesn't exist and very limited 48 year old statements suggesting an alternate path? the money and the placard are now facts of a westerly flight path while radar signals stating different are not proof of anything? one is assumption and the radar is what, an amateur point of view?
The placard. early reports are conflicting like everything else to believing it might not of come from 305. several things bother me. the first is the fact of the stairs locked shortly after landing at Reno. it's my understanding pulling the emergency handle damages the stairs. reading the transcripts show there were no sparks so the stairs were not far enough down. second, the inside of the stairs were described in a 302 during discussion surrounding the ability to hide inside the stairwell. they only describe one control handle to raise and lower the stairs. next, we have conflicting reports of the placard missing two days later then over a month later after the testing. no mention of a small hole in the wall that should of been noticed where Cooper removed the panel to pull the emergency handle. the panel already has directions on it and the placard found would of had two holes in it so the panel could be pulled out. plus, the placard is the wrong configuration to fit. the placard itself appears to be missing from evidence. Tom says he never seen it. this could lead one to believe it was no longer considered evidence. Cowlitz county has zero records of the event.
Transcripts: 305 "see any sparks coming off the tail at any time on ah touchdown."
Tower: "Negative, not at all"
Sparks were only seen during taxi speeds which in under 30 knots...
Learning where the placard actually goes is another challenge. companies selling Boeing placards will not assume anything. they go directly by part numbers only. contacting Boeing will also fail since they state on there websites they only answer questions surrounding there subjects on there websites.
Now, I clearly see evidence supporting the known flight path. how could you say differently? the totality is confusing but does give indications to where they were. it could be inaccurate but radar data is hard to challenge being so close to 305. we have more conflictions now with the pilots. Scott claims 10 miles west, and then east of Woodland while Rat has made claims further east of V23. things have also changed over time which is clearly expected with the human mind.
-
Sluggo's web site is available for purchase for $2095. Anyone interested in pursuing the matter as a group?
I find this to be extremely high in value IMHO. something like this should be handed off vs selling anyway.
-
It will be cheaper to rebuild the site at a different domain.
-
Sluggo's web site is available for purchase for $2095. Anyone interested in pursuing the matter as a group?
I find this to be extremely high in value IMHO. something like this should be handed off vs selling anyway.
agree -
-
Although I do it as well the flight path has nothing to do with the FBI. It was made by the Air Force. it's being preserved as evidence by the FBI.
It's amazing how it appears that V23 was some sort of secret path. why would the pilots say they were in area's such as Ariel or Pigeon Springs. wouldn't it be easier to tell them they cut the area out of the flight. the 20 degree shift was interesting. doesn't it basically affect runways more than anything? VOR's move? the flew a straight line and failed to tell anyone? it's documented that they were locked onto BTG but nothing about Eugene. more secrets? if they were flying VOR to VOR how would they not know where they were? it just seems extremely easy for the crew to say they flew from Seattle to Toledo and basically straight down to Eugene via VOR?
VORs (radio beacons that are used for navigation) broadcast their “radial” information in magnetic degrees so that you can fly a magnetic heading to or from a VOR. according to some the plane was locked on two VOR's and yet were 20 degree's off course? no charts or updates of magnetic changes? I see one showing as much as 8 degree's from ground level between Quincy and Longview.
Earth's magnetic field is constantly changing and while large-scale changes, such as a complete reversal of the magnetic field, happen over several thousand years, smaller changes over shorter periods of time affect navigation, including for aviation. This shifting magnetic field affects airports and airline operations, including alphanumeric airport runway names, which indicate headings—crucial information for pilots.
The Fairbanks International Airport renamed runway 1L-19R to 2L-20R in 2009, for example, when magnetic north shifted enough to mandate a change. And the airport operators know—from NOAA’s World Magnetic Model and other sources—that they'll likely need to update the name again in 2033
The flight data recorder wouldn't tell much? I think that statement would fit better in this time period. the only time they need a FDR today is for the data minutes before a crash and not so much for tracking. GPS rules today. I would tend to believe with limited tools in 1971 they used what ever they could.
Then we have statements from radar operators basically right in front of 305. so close it should over rule further radar returns from Seattle. how many times have we been told about the red dots between Malay and the Lewis river being weak returns. the same R5 would of seen? It also appears that the hijacking was an incident with the FAA and a national security risk with the military. who would track it out of the two?
Why would radar operators make these statements right on top of the flight and be false and yet the statements from an operator further away (radar returns) be 100% accurate or enough to prove the path is incorrect? I see more documented evidence that some claim doesn't exist and very limited 48 year old statements suggesting an alternate path? the money and the placard are now facts of a westerly flight path while radar signals stating different are not proof of anything? one is assumption and the radar is what, an amateur point of view?
The placard. early reports are conflicting like everything else to believing it might not of come from 305. several things bother me. the first is the fact of the stairs locked shortly after landing at Reno. it's my understanding pulling the emergency handle damages the stairs. reading the transcripts show there were no sparks so the stairs were not far enough down. second, the inside of the stairs were described in a 302 during discussion surrounding the ability to hide inside the stairwell. they only describe one control handle to raise and lower the stairs. next, we have conflicting reports of the placard missing two days later then over a month later after the testing. no mention of a small hole in the wall that should of been noticed where Cooper removed the panel to pull the emergency handle. the panel already has directions on it and the placard found would of had two holes in it so the panel could be pulled out. plus, the placard is the wrong configuration to fit. the placard itself appears to be missing from evidence. Tom says he never seen it. this could lead one to believe it was no longer considered evidence. Cowlitz county has zero records of the event.
Transcripts: 305 "see any sparks coming off the tail at any time on ah touchdown."
Tower: "Negative, not at all"
Sparks were only seen during taxi speeds which in under 30 knots...
Learning where the placard actually goes is another challenge. companies selling Boeing placards will not assume anything. they go directly by part numbers only. contacting Boeing will also fail since they state on there websites they only answer questions surrounding there subjects on there websites.
Now, I clearly see evidence supporting the known flight path. how could you say differently? the totality is confusing but does give indications to where they were. it could be inaccurate but radar data is hard to challenge being so close to 305. we have more conflictions now with the pilots. Scott claims 10 miles west, and then east of Woodland while Rat has made claims further east of V23. things have also changed over time which is clearly expected with the human mind.
agree- the major debate has always been where Cooper bailed, not the flight path.
-
Although I do it as well the flight path has nothing to do with the FBI. It was made by the Air Force. it's being preserved as evidence by the FBI.
It's amazing how it appears that V23 was some sort of secret path. why would the pilots say they were in area's such as Ariel or Pigeon Springs. wouldn't it be easier to tell them they cut the area out of the flight. the 20 degree shift was interesting. doesn't it basically affect runways more than anything? VOR's move? the flew a straight line and failed to tell anyone? it's documented that they were locked onto BTG but nothing about Eugene. more secrets? if they were flying VOR to VOR how would they not know where they were? it just seems extremely easy for the crew to say they flew from Seattle to Toledo and basically straight down to Eugene via VOR?
VORs (radio beacons that are used for navigation) broadcast their “radial” information in magnetic degrees so that you can fly a magnetic heading to or from a VOR. according to some the plane was locked on two VOR's and yet were 20 degree's off course? no charts or updates of magnetic changes? I see one showing as much as 8 degree's from ground level between Quincy and Longview.
Earth's magnetic field is constantly changing and while large-scale changes, such as a complete reversal of the magnetic field, happen over several thousand years, smaller changes over shorter periods of time affect navigation, including for aviation. This shifting magnetic field affects airports and airline operations, including alphanumeric airport runway names, which indicate headings—crucial information for pilots.
The Fairbanks International Airport renamed runway 1L-19R to 2L-20R in 2009, for example, when magnetic north shifted enough to mandate a change. And the airport operators know—from NOAA’s World Magnetic Model and other sources—that they'll likely need to update the name again in 2033
The flight data recorder wouldn't tell much? I think that statement would fit better in this time period. the only time they need a FDR today is for the data minutes before a crash and not so much for tracking. GPS rules today. I would tend to believe with limited tools in 1971 they used what ever they could.
Then we have statements from radar operators basically right in front of 305. so close it should over rule further radar returns from Seattle. how many times have we been told about the red dots between Malay and the Lewis river being weak returns. the same R5 would of seen? It also appears that the hijacking was an incident with the FAA and a national security risk with the military. who would track it out of the two?
Why would radar operators make these statements right on top of the flight and be false and yet the statements from an operator further away (radar returns) be 100% accurate or enough to prove the path is incorrect? I see more documented evidence that some claim doesn't exist and very limited 48 year old statements suggesting an alternate path? the money and the placard are now facts of a westerly flight path while radar signals stating different are not proof of anything? one is assumption and the radar is what, an amateur point of view?
The placard. early reports are conflicting like everything else to believing it might not of come from 305. several things bother me. the first is the fact of the stairs locked shortly after landing at Reno. it's my understanding pulling the emergency handle damages the stairs. reading the transcripts show there were no sparks so the stairs were not far enough down. second, the inside of the stairs were described in a 302 during discussion surrounding the ability to hide inside the stairwell. they only describe one control handle to raise and lower the stairs. next, we have conflicting reports of the placard missing two days later then over a month later after the testing. no mention of a small hole in the wall that should of been noticed where Cooper removed the panel to pull the emergency handle. the panel already has directions on it and the placard found would of had two holes in it so the panel could be pulled out. plus, the placard is the wrong configuration to fit. the placard itself appears to be missing from evidence. Tom says he never seen it. this could lead one to believe it was no longer considered evidence. Cowlitz county has zero records of the event.
Transcripts: 305 "see any sparks coming off the tail at any time on ah touchdown."
Tower: "Negative, not at all"
Sparks were only seen during taxi speeds which in under 30 knots...
Learning where the placard actually goes is another challenge. companies selling Boeing placards will not assume anything. they go directly by part numbers only. contacting Boeing will also fail since they state on there websites they only answer questions surrounding there subjects on there websites.
Now, I clearly see evidence supporting the known flight path. how could you say differently? the totality is confusing but does give indications to where they were. it could be inaccurate but radar data is hard to challenge being so close to 305. we have more conflictions now with the pilots. Scott claims 10 miles west, and then east of Woodland while Rat has made claims further east of V23. things have also changed over time which is clearly expected with the human mind.
agree- the major debate has always been where Cooper bailed, not the flight path.
Georger, I appreciate your efforts at humor. But are you now claiming that Cooper bailed out somewhere that was not on the flight path?
-
I think Georger is explaining the controversy where he bailed along the flight path. below Lake Merwin, Ochards etc.
I think the point is clear once again looking at the totality of events surrounding the jump time. a progression can be seen based on new evidence coming to light while plotting the LZ. first it appears to be above Ariel and then possibly as far as the Columbia river. this could only conclude they never really had a positive location vs an educated guess based on pilot statements, radar data, FDR, Air Force and operator's at Portland PDX, according to Tom Kaye. even ham operator's had input. we still don't have all the data. I think the challenge was more of where and when he jumped vs finding the general location of the plane.
Radar operator's (ATC) are far from stupid human beings. to believe Seattle seen a plane 10 miles west of where Portland seen the plane leads one to believe all planes were in extreme danger under these conditions and control. we do read about collisions near airports but those typically have multiple planes in one area.
-
I think Georger is explaining the controversy where he bailed along the flight path. below Lake Merwin, Ochards etc.
I think the point is clear once again looking at the totality of events surrounding the jump time. a progression can be seen based on new evidence coming to light while plotting the LZ. first it appears to be above Ariel and then possibly as far as the Columbia river. this could only conclude they never really had a positive location vs an educated guess based on pilot statements, radar data, FDR, Air Force and operator's at Portland PDX, according to Tom Kaye. even ham operator's had input. we still don't have all the data. I think the challenge was more of where and when he jumped vs finding the general location of the plane.
Radar operator's (ATC) are far from stupid human beings. to believe Seattle seen a plane 10 miles west of where Portland seen the plane leads one to believe all planes were in extreme danger under these conditions and control. we do read about collisions near airports but those typically have multiple planes in one area.
The flight crew could determine their location more accurately from the cockpit instruments than any radar operator inputs could. Also the FDR information was not as accurate as the cockpit instruments. You are assuming accuracies that simply did not exist in 1971.
Ham radio operators could not provide any meaningful navigational information on the hijacking. If they could receive on the VHF frequencies, they could then possibly provide radio transcripts.
Unless the Portland radar people had gone through the radar identification procedure, they would not likely have known which radar return was the NWA aircraft. V-23 traffic was controlled from Seattle ATC and Portland was not involved. Even when shifting from one Seattle ATC controller to another, both controllers and the airliner crew had to go through a radar identification procedure.
-
The crew stated several times in documents they were not sure of Cooper's departure. this is in fact a critical error on there behalf. they concluded the location could be marked by looking in the company logs for timing. that makes it hard to look at any indications in the cockpit to log when it occurred. they should of done this but apparently they didn't.
The plane entered into there airspace and I would tend to believe they were aware of 305. I spoke with an operator from Seattle and he states about the same.
"If the flight was in their radar range and they were expecting it, they would see it and know who it was"
Who would ignore a hijacked plane entering there airspace?
Tom is currently out of town and I will get more details on the role the ham operators played.
-
We ever going to get to see that Farrell manuscript?
I don't know, Marty. The Farrell family has resisted all of my efforts to see a copy, they didn't respond to retired FBI agent Bob Sale's efforts on my behalf, and GG hasn't coughed up any parts of the docu - which is in stark contrast to his presentation of 302s.
Farrell family members live in the greater Seattle area, so maybe another intrepid investigator will have more success than I.
-
I believe it's rather simple to handoff from one controller to another. don't they all see the same and just change frequencies. they were in the same room. wasn't "radar contact" already established. would a "point out" be required? some cases a "physical point out" can be made. that's if the controllers are sitting next to each other. also, a landline approach can be used as well. they could of called PDX for radar identification but I doubt it was needed.
The point here is I'm sure Portland along with Oakland were monitoring the flight all the way to the end. just as NWO was.
-
I believe it's rather simple to handoff from one controller to another. don't they all see the same and just change frequencies. they were in the same room. wasn't "radar contact" already established. would a "point out" be required? some cases a "physical point out" can be made. that's if the controllers are sitting next to each other. also, a landline approach can be used as well. they could of called PDX for radar identification but I doubt it was needed.
The point here is I'm sure Portland along with Oakland were monitoring the flight all the way to the end. just as NWO was.
Notice that with each controller change, the airliner would contact the new controller on a frequency specified by the previous controller, identify itself as NWA 305, and that it was as 10,000 feet. The new controller would acknowledge the contact and would tell the airliner to "ident" (that is, push the "ident" button on their transponder). Once the new controller had identified the radar return that was NWA 305, the previous controller's involvement would be ended.
Take a look at the first portion of the Oakland ATC transcripts which represents the handoff from the Seattle ATC to the Oakland ATC. This handoff would be coordinated by long distance telephone. At least four Oakland controller were involved in that handoff and their initials are listed in the transcripts. And as I have said many times before, the Oakland ATC transcripts are textbook air traffic control procedures for 1971.
-
Correct, that still doesn't mean the plane was invisible. that's why physically pointing the target works as well. as the Seattle ARTCC operator pointed out to me that the plane could be identified if it was aware it was entering it's airspace. I fail to see where they allow UFO's to surface on radar screens and ignored them, especially for long periods? it still reports as a target.
"If the flight was in their radar range and they were expecting it, they would see it and know who it was"
I believe a lot of radar and people in the same circle with commercial flight was monitoring 305. lets not forget Norad as well. to believe they were looking at the wrong return is a huge reach.
-
Correct, that still doesn't mean the plane was invisible. that's why physically pointing the target works as well. as the Seattle ARTCC operator pointed out to me that the plane could be identified if it was aware it was entering it's airspace. I fail to see where they allow UFO's to surface on radar screens and ignored them, especially for long periods? it still reports as a target.
"If the flight was in their radar range and they were expecting it, they would see it and know who it was"
I believe a lot of radar and people in the same circle with commercial flight was monitoring 305. lets not forget Norad as well. to believe they were looking at the wrong return is a huge reach.
NWA 305 may have been in radar range of Portland but that does not mean it was within their control area. It was in the Seattle ATC control area and would not be required to contact anyone other than Seattle ATC controllers. And there is absolutely nothing to suggest that Portland tower controllers were expecting the airliner.
-
I'm not sure how much more you can downplay this? it doesn't matter who was controlling the flight. I'm guessing and the 302's backup statements saying they were monitoring the flight. radar range, is not control or they would have to be contacted. 305 without a doubt was in there radar range. I fail to see any reasoning in not believing this as a matter of fact? this was a threat to Portland that you always seem to point out but feel they ignored the plane while on radar? that doesn't make much sense either.....
I've contacted someone else surrounding this issue..
A Former Marine Corps KC-130 Loadmaster and retired Navy carrier based jet pilot, LSO and instructor, (EA-6B Prowler). ATP MEL, and Commercial SEL pilot license. Currently Aerospace Program Manager, part time commercial Cessna 208 Caravan pilot.
I asked him about radar idents/handoff's and the ability of Portland seeing 305 on radar....
It is very easy for the radar operator to know exactly where an aircraft is when it enters their airspace. The plane position tracks live on their scope, and control sectors are depicted on the screen. The only unknown factors in this case are when/where he actually jumped.
Then I told him Portland had nothing to do with controlling the plane but did give information surrounding the plane..
ATC radar sees all aircraft within its coverage area, annotated to indicate who they're talking to, among other things. Handing them off changes that annotation but nothing else.
ATC's job is to keep aircraft safely separated, and they need to see all traffic in their sector, not just the folks they're talking to, to do that effectively. It is somewhat common for one controller to manage aircraft in another's sector, e.g. to avoid two handoffs in a row when clipping the corner of a sector.
At low altitudes, many aircraft won't be talking to anyone at all. ATC still needs to see them so they can vector the folks they are talking to around them.
-
I'm not sure how much more you can downplay this? it doesn't matter who was controlling the flight. I'm guessing and the 302's backup statements saying they were monitoring the flight. radar range, is not control or they would have to be contacted. 305 without a doubt was in there radar range. I fail to see any reasoning in not believing this as a matter of fact? this was a threat to Portland that you always seem to point out but feel they ignored the plane while on radar? that doesn't make much sense either.....
I've contacted someone else surrounding this issue..
A Former Marine Corps KC-130 Loadmaster and retired Navy carrier based jet pilot, LSO and instructor, (EA-6B Prowler). ATP MEL, and Commercial SEL pilot license. Currently Aerospace Program Manager, part time commercial Cessna 208 Caravan pilot.
I asked him about radar idents/handoff's and the ability of Portland seeing 305 on radar....
It is very easy for the radar operator to know exactly where an aircraft is when it enters their airspace. The plane position tracks live on their scope, and control sectors are depicted on the screen. The only unknown factors in this case are when/where he actually jumped.
Then I told him Portland had nothing to do with controlling the plane but did give information surrounding the plane..
ATC radar sees all aircraft within its coverage area, annotated to indicate who they're talking to, among other things. Handing them off changes that annotation but nothing else.
ATC's job is to keep aircraft safely separated, and they need to see all traffic in their sector, not just the folks they're talking to, to do that effectively. It is somewhat common for one controller to manage aircraft in another's sector, e.g. to avoid two handoffs in a row when clipping the corner of a sector.
At low altitudes, many aircraft won't be talking to anyone at all. ATC still needs to see them so they can vector the folks they are talking to around them.
Your friend is right. In 1971, altitude reporting transponders were relatively new and there were a number of bugs. That is why the airliners would report their altitude during each controller change even though the same information would probably be displayed in the radar return data block for that aircraft. Also, initially only airliners and high-end business aircraft had those altitude reporting transponders. Very few general aviation aircraft had them. So the airliners would be vectored around the radar returns of unidentified aircraft since the controllers would not know their altitudes. They would also be vectored around the radar returns of other airliners since there were initially problems with data blocks being switched between aircraft if their returns merged.
And in order to determine where Cooper jumped, you are going to have to determine the flight path first. It is that simple.
-
which transponder mode..A-B-C or S mode had the bugs? I'm reading transponders haven't changed much in 70 years? are you saying bad squawk code? my simulator shows A/B modes. by default it's set to A mode.
Mode A selected on the transponder provides identification of the aircraft to the secondary radar; Mode C will add an automatic height read-out of an aircraft. Mode S is a selective addressing. But previously there was a Mode B which nowadays is not in used anymore.
wouldn't Portland hear the same as Seattle. again, we can also assume Oakland was monitoring as well as they wait for the handoff? this was not a normal flight by any means so I find this troubling that Portland gets diverted visually and through there radar like you describe the flight around Portland. erased from existence. even though Portland explains the radar "was very accurate since it was close to the plane"
-
I'm not sure how much more you can downplay this? it doesn't matter who was controlling the flight. I'm guessing and the 302's backup statements saying they were monitoring the flight. radar range, is not control or they would have to be contacted. 305 without a doubt was in there radar range. I fail to see any reasoning in not believing this as a matter of fact? this was a threat to Portland that you always seem to point out but feel they ignored the plane while on radar? that doesn't make much sense either.....
I've contacted someone else surrounding this issue..
A Former Marine Corps KC-130 Loadmaster and retired Navy carrier based jet pilot, LSO and instructor, (EA-6B Prowler). ATP MEL, and Commercial SEL pilot license. Currently Aerospace Program Manager, part time commercial Cessna 208 Caravan pilot.
I asked him about radar idents/handoff's and the ability of Portland seeing 305 on radar....
It is very easy for the radar operator to know exactly where an aircraft is when it enters their airspace. The plane position tracks live on their scope, and control sectors are depicted on the screen. The only unknown factors in this case are when/where he actually jumped.
Then I told him Portland had nothing to do with controlling the plane but did give information surrounding the plane..
ATC radar sees all aircraft within its coverage area, annotated to indicate who they're talking to, among other things. Handing them off changes that annotation but nothing else.
ATC's job is to keep aircraft safely separated, and they need to see all traffic in their sector, not just the folks they're talking to, to do that effectively. It is somewhat common for one controller to manage aircraft in another's sector, e.g. to avoid two handoffs in a row when clipping the corner of a sector.
At low altitudes, many aircraft won't be talking to anyone at all. ATC still needs to see them so they can vector the folks they are talking to around them.
In the case of 305 there are even three in tow! Hard to miss on any radar.
Good call on getting military input. :congrats:
Items of interest:
threat assessment - assign a mission/ protocols. Chase planes dispatched and given orders. Comms and transcripts throughout the mission then debriefing . . .
Identity assessment of hijacker. Skills. Intent. Was he going to take over the cockpit personally and fly the plane? Had he named a target . . . reason . . .
Reluctance to give 305 too much fuel. Nobody wants a flying bomb! Who made that call. Stall . . .
Notification of threat targets ......... keeping them informed as event unfolds to conclusion.
etc.
-
I'm not sure how much more you can downplay this? it doesn't matter who was controlling the flight. I'm guessing and the 302's backup statements saying they were monitoring the flight. radar range, is not control or they would have to be contacted. 305 without a doubt was in there radar range. I fail to see any reasoning in not believing this as a matter of fact? this was a threat to Portland that you always seem to point out but feel they ignored the plane while on radar? that doesn't make much sense either.....
I've contacted someone else surrounding this issue..
A Former Marine Corps KC-130 Loadmaster and retired Navy carrier based jet pilot, LSO and instructor, (EA-6B Prowler). ATP MEL, and Commercial SEL pilot license. Currently Aerospace Program Manager, part time commercial Cessna 208 Caravan pilot.
I asked him about radar idents/handoff's and the ability of Portland seeing 305 on radar....
It is very easy for the radar operator to know exactly where an aircraft is when it enters their airspace. The plane position tracks live on their scope, and control sectors are depicted on the screen. The only unknown factors in this case are when/where he actually jumped.
Then I told him Portland had nothing to do with controlling the plane but did give information surrounding the plane..
ATC radar sees all aircraft within its coverage area, annotated to indicate who they're talking to, among other things. Handing them off changes that annotation but nothing else.
ATC's job is to keep aircraft safely separated, and they need to see all traffic in their sector, not just the folks they're talking to, to do that effectively. It is somewhat common for one controller to manage aircraft in another's sector, e.g. to avoid two handoffs in a row when clipping the corner of a sector.
At low altitudes, many aircraft won't be talking to anyone at all. ATC still needs to see them so they can vector the folks they are talking to around them.
In the case of 305 there are even three in tow! Hard to miss on any radar.
Good call on getting military input. :congrats:
Items of interest:
threat assessment - assign a mission/ protocols. Chase planes dispatched and given orders. Comms and transcripts throughout the mission then debriefing . . .
Identity assessment of hijacker. Skills. Intent. Was he going to take over the cockpit personally and fly the plane? Had he named a target . . . reason . . .
Reluctance to give 305 too much fuel. Nobody wants a flying bomb! Who made that call. Stall . . .
Notification of threat targets ......... keeping them informed as event unfolds to conclusion.
etc.
Georger, which planet are you on?
Has he named a target? Do you actually think Cooper is going to have a "target" after getting the money that he wanted? Was he just wanting the $200,000 and parachutes so that he could crash them into a building with himself?
Reluctance to give 305 too much fuel? They essentially got a full load of fuel.
-
I'm not sure how much more you can downplay this? it doesn't matter who was controlling the flight. I'm guessing and the 302's backup statements saying they were monitoring the flight. radar range, is not control or they would have to be contacted. 305 without a doubt was in there radar range. I fail to see any reasoning in not believing this as a matter of fact? this was a threat to Portland that you always seem to point out but feel they ignored the plane while on radar? that doesn't make much sense either.....
I've contacted someone else surrounding this issue..
A Former Marine Corps KC-130 Loadmaster and retired Navy carrier based jet pilot, LSO and instructor, (EA-6B Prowler). ATP MEL, and Commercial SEL pilot license. Currently Aerospace Program Manager, part time commercial Cessna 208 Caravan pilot.
I asked him about radar idents/handoff's and the ability of Portland seeing 305 on radar....
It is very easy for the radar operator to know exactly where an aircraft is when it enters their airspace. The plane position tracks live on their scope, and control sectors are depicted on the screen. The only unknown factors in this case are when/where he actually jumped.
Then I told him Portland had nothing to do with controlling the plane but did give information surrounding the plane..
ATC radar sees all aircraft within its coverage area, annotated to indicate who they're talking to, among other things. Handing them off changes that annotation but nothing else.
ATC's job is to keep aircraft safely separated, and they need to see all traffic in their sector, not just the folks they're talking to, to do that effectively. It is somewhat common for one controller to manage aircraft in another's sector, e.g. to avoid two handoffs in a row when clipping the corner of a sector.
At low altitudes, many aircraft won't be talking to anyone at all. ATC still needs to see them so they can vector the folks they are talking to around them.
In the case of 305 there are even three in tow! Hard to miss on any radar.
Good call on getting military input. :congrats:
Items of interest:
threat assessment - assign a mission/ protocols. Chase planes dispatched and given orders. Comms and transcripts throughout the mission then debriefing . . .
Identity assessment of hijacker. Skills. Intent. Was he going to take over the cockpit personally and fly the plane? Had he named a target . . . reason . . .
Reluctance to give 305 too much fuel. Nobody wants a flying bomb! Who made that call. Stall . . .
Notification of threat targets ......... keeping them informed as event unfolds to conclusion.
etc.
Georger, which planet are you on?
Has he named a target? Do you actually think Cooper is going to have a "target" after getting the money that he wanted? Was he just wanting the $200,000 and parachutes so that he could crash them into a building with himself?
Reluctance to give 305 too much fuel? They essentially got a full load of fuel.
That isnt what I said or meant.
From a military point of view, nothing is over until the Fat Lady sings - money or no money - guessing about a person's intentions or not - FAA psychiatrist weigh in or not - etc. The goal is complete containment and neutralisation of all threats.
7:54 pm t1
MSP: As soon as reasonably sure the man has left the quicker you can land.
The fuel delivery was botched or stalled, for some reason, by somebody. Intentional? Only after Cooper and Rataczak got emotional and demanding did fueling resume and finish. Maybe there was a containment plan for Seattle that got rejected or was vetoed (by Nyrop?). There were probably assets in place as the plane landed, ... we know nothing about that if it happened. Nyrop told everyone to cooperate? That did not keep the Air Force from launching its F-106s ... my suspicion is Cooper anticipated all of this and acted accordingly. A contest in the skies over Washington.
-
I believe the Harrison files show the billing from the fuel trucks along with the problems. I think Rat was upset thinking the FBI was stalling..have to read again but that's what I recall....
-
I believe the Harrison files show the billing from the fuel trucks along with the problems. I think Rat was upset thinking the FBI was stalling..have to read again but that's what I recall....
I think that's right!
-
I fired up the simulator...to be 23 miles DME you have to be pretty close to V23. if you fly east of Newberg VOR (inside a mile) you are about 25-26 miles DME. basically, the further west you go the miles click forward away from Battleground. My coords lineup perfectly with the coords on my online maps. I have several ways to cross check my location in real time. I also have a CIVA INS. that gives a digital readout of Longitude and Latitude while flying..
I can use 2 DME's but haven't figured out how to utilize both. one works on the HSI. while I only see the miles click on DME 2. I'm guessing the RME would be what I look at?
-
I fired up the simulator...to be 23 miles DME you have to be pretty close to V23. if you fly east of Newberg VOR (inside a mile) you are about 25-26 miles DME. basically, the further west you go the miles click forward away from Battleground. My coords lineup perfectly with the coords on my online maps. I have several ways to cross check my location in real time. I also have a CIVA INS. that gives a digital readout of Longitude and Latitude while flying..
I can use 2 DME's but haven't figured out how to utilize both. one works on the HSI. while I only see the miles click on DME 2. I'm guessing the RME would be what I look at?
When the flight crew reported "23 DME miles" they were probably reading a number that was somewhere between 23 and 24. So this could add a slight amount to the distance. But since no radial is given for this distance, its terminal point can't be pined down exactly.
Nevertheless, the intersection of a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections, the western edge of V-23, and a 23 DME mile point, strongly supports the western flight path.
-
Could be 22-23 DME miles?
I see it supporting V23. this would be where your path meets up with the known path so I fail to see where this validates that path?
There is not much difference in time or mileage with a western path vs the known path. the plane doesn't fly east or west enough to make a difference. the path will also work switching sides on V23.
-
Paul certainly wasn't a dummy....
Paul A. Soderlind was born August 6, 1923, in Billings, Mont. He took his first flight lesson at age 12, earned his private certificate on his 18th birthday (which was then the CAA minimum age), and earned his Commercial and Instructor ratings three months later. In 1942 he was hired by Northwest Airlines to teach instrument flying to new pilots. In 1944 he took two years of military leave from Northwest to become an instructor and check pilot for the Naval Air Transport Squadron. When the war ended he went back to Northwest, but at age 22 was still several months too young to hold the Air Transport Rating. On his 23rd birthday he checked out and became the nation’s youngest airline captain. Many of the standards and procedures he developed as a line pilot were adopted by the airline, and in 1954 Paul was named Northwest’s Director, Flight Operations-Technical. In that job he flew all the types Northwest operated from the Boeing 247 D up to and including the Boeing 747. He also flew the acceptance test and delivery flights on Northwest types from the Douglas DC-6B up through the 747. In his 30,000+ hours he has flown some 350 types of airplanes, helicopters and gliders, about 25 different types of airliners, about 20 biz jet and turboprops, and some 50 different GA types, including Molt Taylor’s Aerocar.
-
Paul certainly wasn't a dummy....
Paul A. Soderlind was born August 6, 1923, in Billings, Mont. He took his first flight lesson at age 12, earned his private certificate on his 18th birthday (which was then the CAA minimum age), and earned his Commercial and Instructor ratings three months later. In 1942 he was hired by Northwest Airlines to teach instrument flying to new pilots. In 1944 he took two years of military leave from Northwest to become an instructor and check pilot for the Naval Air Transport Squadron. When the war ended he went back to Northwest, but at age 22 was still several months too young to hold the Air Transport Rating. On his 23rd birthday he checked out and became the nation’s youngest airline captain. Many of the standards and procedures he developed as a line pilot were adopted by the airline, and in 1954 Paul was named Northwest’s Director, Flight Operations-Technical. In that job he flew all the types Northwest operated from the Boeing 247 D up to and including the Boeing 747. He also flew the acceptance test and delivery flights on Northwest types from the Douglas DC-6B up through the 747. In his 30,000+ hours he has flown some 350 types of airplanes, helicopters and gliders, about 25 different types of airliners, about 20 biz jet and turboprops, and some 50 different GA types, including Molt Taylor’s Aerocar.
The preponderance of evidence is on the side of the socalled FBI map. The only way Nicholson's west path will ever be adopted is if concrete 'neutral party' data emerges that requires a west path be adopted.
-
Absolutely nothing wrong with the path R99 states. it's logical, but, I don't see the evidence showing this. striking down radar reports based on faulty transponders or not knowing where they were won't cut it.
-
Absolutely nothing wrong with the path R99 states. it's logical, but, I don't see the evidence showing this. striking down radar reports based on faulty transponders or not knowing where they were won't cut it.
Its the time of the jump that has always been in contention. Not the flight path! There are people unwilling to accept this!
The flight path was the product of an Air Force analysis group and some group of people at NWA - evidently. Nobody has ever explained that relationship and when and how that process resulted in a flight path everyone agreed to IF there ever was agreement.
The FBI was a spectator in this whole process. They had no input whatsoever!
-
I don't see where this theory is that extreme to discount. based on known evidence I don't see it as a fact and that's my opinion. R99 is firm in his belief just as many are that are against it. this will undoubtedly take some time to conclude.
-
Nicholson has been making his pitch for a west path - TO ALL THE WRONG PEOPLE!
1. Make your case to the people who matter! To the FBI or FAA.
2. Or go to Court and try to get the FBI/FAA to adopt your flight path, and reject the FBI flight path published by the FBI. Get a Court to give you the data you say you need.
It does not matter what people in Cooper forums say or do - that is howling in the wilderness. People in Cooper forums have no power whatever to change history or doctrine decided by Government Agencies! Or maybe you could form a Cooper Commission and get them to lobby for your flight path and theory. Or put it on a ballot somewhere; get some population to vote and endorse your DB Cooper flight path as the one and only true Cooper flight path.
Post removed...
-
Nicholson has been making his pitch for a west path - TO ALL THE WRONG PEOPLE!
1. Make your case to the people who matter! To the FBI or FAA.
2. Or go to Court and try to get the FBI/FAA to adopt your flight path, and reject the FBI flight path published by the FBI. Get a Court to give you the data you say you need.
It does not matter what people in Cooper forums say or do - that is howling in the wilderness. People in Cooper forums have no power whatever to change history or doctrine decided by Government Agencies! Or maybe you could form a Cooper Commission and get them to lobby for your flight path and theory. Or put it on a ballot somewhere; get some population to vote and endorse your DB Cooper flight path as the one and only true Cooper flight path.
COMPLAINT FILED!
-
You guys want to call each other names. well, have at it...keep actual names out of the battle. especially when both party's know they don't wish to have them published.
I think both of you should take a break from this thread and move on....
-
You guys want to call each other names. well, have at it...keep actual names out of the battle. especially when both party's know they don't wish to have them published.
I think both of you should take a break from this thread and move on....
what have I done - wrong! ? I havent called him any names - that's his doing! He wont even address the fp facts and I keep pointing them out to no response. Im not responsible for his tactics!
It's not my fault he's run out of gas with his west path theory. And its absolutely true neither the FAA or the FBI are going to change their published flight path based on someone's theory peddled in Cooper forums for a decade!
There is just so much anyone can do in any forum, to try and "change" official policy. Ckret came as close as anyone at Dropzone and if people like Weber hadn't driven him away by trying to get him fired, maybe, just maybe the FBI might have reopened the case on the flight path? Its an open question.
Im just trying to point out the obvious... people keep taking all of this so personally.
Anyway thats my point of view.
-
Robert was clearly wrong posting your name but you poke at people bringing things to a head. I'm not blaming anyone. I think you both should refrain from posting here to allow the room to vent.
-
You guys want to call each other names. well, have at it...keep actual names out of the battle. especially when both party's know they don't wish to have them published.
I think both of you should take a break from this thread and move on....
what have I done - wrong! ? I havent called him any names - that's his doing! He wont even address the fp facts and I keep pointing them out to no response. Im not responsible for his tactics!
It's not my fault he's run out of gas with his west path theory. And its absolutely true neither the FAA or the FBI are going to change their published flight path based on someone's theory peddled in Cooper forums for a decade!
There is just so much anyone can do in any forum, to try and "change" official policy. Ckret came as close as anyone at Dropzone and if people like Weber hadn't driven him away by trying to get him fired, maybe, just maybe the FBI might have reopened the case on the flight path? Its an open question.
Im just trying to point out the obvious... people keep taking all of this so personally.
Anyway thats my point of view.
Shutter, I am posting this to include the above post so that he cannot remove all traces of it and claim innocence as he claims about his earlier posts.
He has sent me a private e-mail this evening which consisted of just the following: "YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE". You may already have a copy of that post, but I will forward another to your private e-mail address to insure that you do.
I will also block him on both my private e-mail and on the PMs on this site. Actually, he and I went through something like this a number of years ago. But in this instance two strikes and he is out.
Shutter, to repeat what I have said on a previous instance, I do not have any complaints about you. You have always treated me fair enough.
-
Robert was clearly wrong posting your name but you poke at people bringing things to a head. I'm not blaming anyone. I think you both should refrain from posting here to allow the room to vent.
Note that he posted my name and has done it again tonight in another post.
-
Robert was clearly wrong posting your name but you poke at people bringing things to a head. I'm not blaming anyone. I think you both should refrain from posting here to allow the room to vent.
Note that he posted my name and has done it again tonight in another post.
YOU have always published your name on your Cooper work. You never asked for any privacy. You have always promoted your name! I HAVE NOT!
This is childish nonsense and hypocrisy.
-
Robert was clearly wrong posting your name but you poke at people bringing things to a head. I'm not blaming anyone. I think you both should refrain from posting here to allow the room to vent.
Note that he posted my name and has done it again tonight in another post.
YOU have always published your name on your Cooper work. You never asked for any privacy. You have always promoted your name! I HAVE NOT!
This is childish nonsense and hypocrisy.
When I put my name on my Cooper work, I was simply indicating that I assumed full responsibility for it and was not hiding behind a screen name. The people in my professional circles either stand behind their work or they never publicize it in the first place.
-
I'm guessing the email was sent after he read the post. I can't control what happens outside of this forum. I hope it will not continue either. we have two people passionate in there beliefs. some can simply disagree while other voice out harder. hopefully some common ground can be made and we can continue to discuss the path without taking heads off.
I threw a bucket of ice on the thread. hopefully it cooled it down a bit....
-
I don't have an issue with screen names unless something of value has been put behind it such as a theory like R99. someone in the outfield is only challenging the theory or evidence. If Georger, or even myself was to come up with a theory or something game changing. I would use my name and expect everyone else the same. If I make a video of the flight path explaining every detail you will see Dave Brown (aka Shutter) behind the work.
Privacy can mean different things to different people. it becomes personal to some. I respect those who respect privacy. even if most already know that person's name. should we do away with usernames and require full names?
-
I'm way behind my sack time...I hope I don't wake up to more bullshit.....
Good Evening....
-
Work continues on the flight path including evaluations of the R99 placard analysis work. This mathematical work is simply too long and specialised to post, but Shutter is aware of the work and could include it in the Vault. The first evaluation of 99's placard analysis occurred in 2010 but was updated in May of 2019. The author of that work is a highly qualified person. He has done prior work on weather analysis in the Cooper case using weather data provided by the FBI. It's always nice to have qualified people willing to contribute, in an impartial objective way.
There is more being done based on prior WSHM interviews.
Stay tuned.
-
What is there left to re-analyze regarding the 2019 placard drift analysis? Nothing more than distance.
The bottom line is that the winds were traveling from the SW. Moreover, it is physically impossible for the placard to drift upwind.
So whether the placard drifted 14 miles or 4 miles who cares? The FBI Flight Path is off at that point. I don't see how this can possibly be debated. Of course there will be the fantasy crap about the wind actually blowing from the SE at that point. Frankly such discussions aren't worth my time.
Consider this: The FBI search area has the 220 lb Cooper drifting roughly 4 miles to the NE if he deployed immediately after jumping. What makes the placard any different?
I no longer subscribe to the Toledo-to-Canby Flight Path. However, I do subscribe to a Western Flight Path.
-
Work continues on the flight path including evaluations of the R99 placard analysis work. This mathematical work is simply too long and specialised to post, but Shutter is aware of the work and could include it in the Vault. The first evaluation of 99's placard analysis occurred in 2010 but was updated in May of 2019. The author of that work is a highly qualified person. He has done prior work on weather analysis in the Cooper case using weather data provided by the FBI. It's always nice to have qualified people willing to contribute, in an impartial objective way.
There is more being done based on prior WSHM interviews.
Stay tuned.
In both analyses, I used weather information provided by the National Weather Service and the airliner flight crew. Some of this information was also included in what is referred to as the "FBI Notes". Additional relevant information can be found on the Weather Underground site.
The latest analyses included measured winds aloft information obtained by Tom Kaye through the National Weather Service.
In analyzing the Portland area weather at the time the airliner passed through, in addition to everything else, I used a technique developed by National Weather Service personnel to evaluate the effects of humidity on the airliner performance.
The end result of all of the above is that the atmospheric density in the Portland area, and in fact all over the northwest that evening, was about two percent above standard atmosphere values.
In all of this, I let the facts speak for themselves and do not have an agenda or suspect. There would be no problem here if some other people on this site did the same.
-
What is there left to re-analyze regarding the 2019 placard drift analysis? Nothing more than distance.
That's about right. distance is critical while determining a flight path. the winds are really hard to pinpoint and use as fact from 48 years ago. every controller I spoke with laughed at even trying to get them right. it's a possibility only. they are probably close. the placard doesn't have a drop point to go by unlike the dropzone. the placard was found 7 years after the fact. look how hard it is just trying to place the plane somewhere 48 years later with more proof than just finding a decal on the ground?
The placard has issues just like the rest of the case. ZERO documents have surfaced surrounding the placard. we only have media reports and those conflict. first they claim the placard was missing two days after the plane landed. then they claim it was noticed missing after testing. the only testing on record is away from the path.
A noticeable hole in the wall should of been documented while searching the plane. we don't hear anything except he had trouble with the stairs. one 302 mentions searching behind the panels in the stair area with a possibility Cooper hid behind them and escaped later. they describe the wall and only note the one lever for activating the stairs. those decals should be similar to bumper stickers or the one's you get after being towed or left on the side of the road. extremely hard to get off. to date we just don't know if they really determined it came from 305. no documents anywhere.
The 23 DME miles keeps the plane to a local area. the further west you go, the more problems you will have. a straight line to Eugene is not possible. if the plane was one mile west of V23 does the placard still calculate?
-
The good thing is that we're getting close to release of the placard-related FBI files. We're up to 1977 now and the placard was found in November 1978.
-
files already exist going into the 90's. Tom said he didn't see anything related to the placard. it's possible it never made the trip to Seattle and Cowlitz tossed it away since they have no records that far back.
several from 76 and two from 78 just prior to November and several from the start of 1979. there were 3 sets of 302's. I doubt we will get them all.
-
What is there left to re-analyze regarding the 2019 placard drift analysis? Nothing more than distance.
The bottom line is that the winds were traveling from the SW. Moreover, it is physically impossible for the placard to drift upwind.
So whether the placard drifted 14 miles or 4 miles who cares? The FBI Flight Path is off at that point. I don't see how this can possibly be debated. Of course there will be the fantasy crap about the wind actually blowing from the SE at that point. Frankly such discussions aren't worth my time.
Consider this: The FBI search area has the 220 lb Cooper drifting roughly 4 miles to the NE if he deployed immediately after jumping. What makes the placard any different?
I no longer subscribe to the Toledo-to-Canby Flight Path. However, I do subscribe to a Western Flight Path.
I no longer subscribe to the Toledo-to-Canby Flight Path. However, I do subscribe to a Western Flight Path.
But where does R99 stand? R99 is the real force behind all of this!
I think we all agree where Cooper bailed, is crucial to the Cooper story, and the money challenge. If he bailed near Ariel that poses problems. If he bailed where the H revision said in 1976, 12mi north of Portland, then there are problems. The closer you can bring Cooper to the active Columbia basin, that changes the focus of all money issues. ... I will just stop there.. we all know the various claims on the table being bet, unless it has changed since two days ago?
Keep us posted!
;D
-
Roberts theory makes very good sound aeronautical sense. even with his change from east to west still puts the plane near V23 and the Canby intersection. with the 23 miles DME makes moving the path west very hard from that position. even from Kelso straight down via Eugene. that puts the plane 25-26 miles DME from Portland VOR. either way with east or west the timing is not much different. it's the documentation that presents a problem.
-
files already exist going into the 90's. Tom said he didn't see anything related to the placard. it's possible it never made the trip to Seattle and Cowlitz tossed it away since they have no records that far back.
several from 76 and two from 78 just prior to November and several from the start of 1979. there were 3 sets of 302's. I doubt we will get them all.
Has there ever been anything, any file, any suggestion by whomever ... that someone at the FAA worked on the flight path? Is there any reason to look beyond McChord and NWA people?
-
Roberts theory makes very good sound aeronautical sense. even with his change from east to west still puts the plane near V23 and the Canby intersection. with the 23 miles DME makes moving the path west very hard from that position. even from Kelso straight down via Eugene. that puts the plane 25-26 miles DME from Portland VOR. either way with east or west the timing is not much different. it's the documentation that presents a problem.
I think I see and understand the reasoning.
-
What is not clear is why the pilots didn't simply say they flew from one area to another in a straight run. they had to of seen the path. why wouldn't they say it's wrong? what would even be a reason to make it a secret or to cover it up? looking at one photo of the search area shows they looked all over the area from the Columbia west to the east and down to the Portland area..
-
Has there ever been anything, any file, any suggestion by whomever ... that someone at the FAA worked on the flight path? Is there any reason to look beyond McChord and NWA people?
The path was prepared by McChord and given to the FBI which I assume was then given to Northwest. a file dedicated to the 302's surrounding the flight path needs to be made and dated to see where changes occurred before and after the map.
-
What is there left to re-analyze regarding the 2019 placard drift analysis? Nothing more than distance.
The bottom line is that the winds were traveling from the SW. Moreover, it is physically impossible for the placard to drift upwind.
So whether the placard drifted 14 miles or 4 miles who cares? The FBI Flight Path is off at that point. I don't see how this can possibly be debated. Of course there will be the fantasy crap about the wind actually blowing from the SE at that point. Frankly such discussions aren't worth my time.
Consider this: The FBI search area has the 220 lb Cooper drifting roughly 4 miles to the NE if he deployed immediately after jumping. What makes the placard any different?
I no longer subscribe to the Toledo-to-Canby Flight Path. However, I do subscribe to a Western Flight Path.
I no longer subscribe to the Toledo-to-Canby Flight Path. However, I do subscribe to a Western Flight Path.
But where does R99 stand? R99 is the real force behind all of this!
I think we all agree where Cooper bailed, is crucial to the Cooper story, and the money challenge. If he bailed near Ariel that poses problems. If he bailed where the H revision said in 1976, 12mi north of Portland, then there are problems. The closer you can bring Cooper to the active Columbia basin, that changes the focus of all money issues. ... I will just stop there.. we all know the various claims on the table being bet, unless it has changed since two days ago?
Keep us posted!
;D
I am standing by the Malay to Canby bypass (or a ground track extremely close to that direct line). It's the only one that makes sense from a number of points and puts the airliner almost directly over Tina Bar at the estimated jump time of 8:11 or 8:12 PM.
I am also sticking with Cooper dying in the jump.
Further, I will probably have some additional comments related to the "FBI maps" in a day or so.
There does not seem to be any solid evidence that the FBI or even the FAA had anything to do with so-called "FBI maps". Remember that Larry Carr reportedly posted those maps on DropZone and asked if anyone knew where they came from.
-
Has there ever been anything, any file, any suggestion by whomever ... that someone at the FAA worked on the flight path? Is there any reason to look beyond McChord and NWA people?
The path was prepared by McChord and given to the FBI which I assume was then given to Northwest. a file dedicated to the 302's surrounding the flight path needs to be made and dated to see where changes occurred before and after the map.
I believe there was a 302 released a year or so ago in which it was stated that the FBI gave some maps to NWA. Presumably, this would be maps that the FBI got from the USAF.
-
Remember that Larry Carr reportedly posted those maps on DropZone and asked if anyone knew where they came from
It's obvious Carr is human and probably didn't read all the 302's when the statement was made. it's also something not commented throughout the 302's. I don't know why Larry would ask the public where the map came from. sounds like a question asked to him to answer.
-
Has there ever been anything, any file, any suggestion by whomever ... that someone at the FAA worked on the flight path? Is there any reason to look beyond McChord and NWA people?
The path was prepared by McChord and given to the FBI which I assume was then given to Northwest. a file dedicated to the 302's surrounding the flight path needs to be made and dated to see where changes occurred before and after the map.
I believe there was a 302 released a year or so ago in which it was stated that the FBI gave some maps to NWA. Presumably, this would be maps that the FBI got from the USAF.
The AirForce and NWA collaborated directly in the TAG team test. I have little doubt it was the AF who generated the first fp map ... with that it may have been NWA who developed one of the first search maps (the forward signed by someone at NWA )
the guy on the right is WALLY interviewed by WSHM.
-
Remember that Larry Carr reportedly posted those maps on DropZone and asked if anyone knew where they came from
It's obvious Carr is human and probably didn't read all the 302's when the statement was made. it's also something not commented throughout the 302's. I don't know why Larry would ask the public where the map came from. sounds like a question asked to him to answer.
Nobody ever bothered to ask Ckret why he was making that statement. But he did make a comment later that he had many files he hadn't even had time to examine yet, and he would look for files when he got time, related to questions people were asking at DZ - at night on his own personal time, in bed! Remember Sluggo asked him what he was drinking in bed .... :D
-
Carr produced the map never seen by anyone prior, correct? if so I'm sure someone asked where it came from? It's documented that the Air Force made the maps. Tom Kaye confirmed Paul S. made the LZ map.
-
R99's Toledo-to-Malay path differs from my updated version in one respect only. That is to say that I believe 305 made the turn at Maylay and headed down V23 briefly before heading 160 just east of Kelso. In both cases 305 picks up V23 near Canby (as depicted on the FBI Flight Path). So R99 and I essentially concur on the flight path.
In both cases 305 flies virtually right over Tena Bar. R99's timing is slightly different then mine and he thinks DBC perished whereas I think DBC survived.
Regardless, we both recognize a major problem with the FBI Flight Path.
-
Carr produced the map never seen by anyone prior, correct? if so I'm sure someone asked where it came from? It's documented that the Air Force made the maps. Tom Kaye confirmed Paul S. made the LZ map.
I guess so ....... ?
Prior to the DZ thread there were no maps posted on any other Cooper site ? That I know of .
-
R99's Toledo-to-Malay path differs from my updated version in one respect only. That is to say that I believe 305 made the turn at Maylay and headed down V23 briefly before heading 160 just east of Kelso. In both cases 305 picks up V23 near Canby (as depicted on the FBI Flight Path). So R99 and I essentially concur on the flight path.
In both cases 305 flies virtually right over Tena Bar. R99's timing is slightly different then mine and he thinks DBC perished whereas I think DBC survived.
Regardless, we both recognize a major problem with the FBI Flight Path.
Pardon my ignorance but who are you to be giving the world a DB Cooper flight path!?
Pilot, navigator, engineer, bon vivant ... ?
-
The flight path is all over the place lately...I'm wondering when someone with start believing they dumped him out in the ocean as Rataczak originally wanted to do...maybe we should call it the Wild West Path :rofl:
-
Carr produced the map never seen by anyone prior, correct? if so I'm sure someone asked where it came from? It's documented that the Air Force made the maps. Tom Kaye confirmed Paul S. made the LZ map.
I guess so ....... ?
Prior to the DZ thread there were no maps posted on any other Cooper site ? That I know of .
Not that I'm aware of. it's sounds like someone asked him where the maps came from and he answered with not knowing.
The map was given to the FBI on November 26, 1971...
-
Carr produced the map never seen by anyone prior, correct? if so I'm sure someone asked where it came from? It's documented that the Air Force made the maps. Tom Kaye confirmed Paul S. made the LZ map.
I guess so ....... ?
Prior to the DZ thread there were no maps posted on any other Cooper site ? That I know of .
Not that I'm aware of. it's sounds like someone asked him where the maps came from and he answered with not knowing.
The map was given to the FBI on November 26, 1971...
Cook has claimed he saw or had the fp map, years ago - people that worked for Tosaw in 1980 said he had an FBI flight path map with him on the boat(s). Its likely officials shared the map with others through the years. We see the fp map in photos taken in the 1972 search.
Wally and a few others commented (in a number of interviews) about the 'flight path search map's origin' and I am trying to get time to go through those notes and present them in some kind of logical manner. That TAG team photo is important because it shows some of the people who were central to the development of the flight path search map. One reason for the test flight was to duplicate conditions and refine when and where Cooper bailed ...
-
Jumping tomorrow over the Byron CA DZ. Will be carrying more stuff than Cooper did, multiple radios, etc. I am going to pull just after exit. Don't want to risk getting unstable. A fast spin would probably shake loose my stowed 20 meter long wire antenna and wrap me up in it. www.parachutemobile.com
Wish Georger would fire up on 14.240 MHz USB and make a contact. I have talked to hams as far away as Maryland on that frequency while under canopy. I only use a couple of watts. My HF radio runs on AA batteries.
I think Cooper survived the jump. If he died there would be rent or a mortgage unpaid, mail piling up, friends and relatives wondering where someone had disappeared to. Somebody would put two and two together given the publicity and the sketches.
377
-
Carr produced the map never seen by anyone prior, correct? if so I'm sure someone asked where it came from? It's documented that the Air Force made the maps. Tom Kaye confirmed Paul S. made the LZ map.
I guess so ....... ?
Prior to the DZ thread there were no maps posted on any other Cooper site ? That I know of .
Not that I'm aware of. it's sounds like someone asked him where the maps came from and he answered with not knowing.
The map was given to the FBI on November 26, 1971...
Cook has claimed he saw or had the fp map, years ago - people that worked for Tosaw in 1980 said he had an FBI flight path map with him on the boat(s). Its likely officials shared the map with others through the years. We see the fp map in photos taken in the 1972 search.
Wally and a few others commented (in a number of interviews) about the 'flight path search map's origin' and I am trying to get time to go through those notes and present them in some kind of logical manner. That TAG team photo is important because it shows some of the people who were central to the development of the flight path search map. One reason for the test flight was to duplicate conditions and refine when and where Cooper bailed ...
Tosaw apparently preferred the west bypass of Portland also.
-
Carr produced the map never seen by anyone prior, correct? if so I'm sure someone asked where it came from? It's documented that the Air Force made the maps. Tom Kaye confirmed Paul S. made the LZ map.
I guess so ....... ?
Prior to the DZ thread there were no maps posted on any other Cooper site ? That I know of .
Not that I'm aware of. it's sounds like someone asked him where the maps came from and he answered with not knowing.
The map was given to the FBI on November 26, 1971...
Cook has claimed he saw or had the fp map, years ago - people that worked for Tosaw in 1980 said he had an FBI flight path map with him on the boat(s). Its likely officials shared the map with others through the years. We see the fp map in photos taken in the 1972 search.
Wally and a few others commented (in a number of interviews) about the 'flight path search map's origin' and I am trying to get time to go through those notes and present them in some kind of logical manner. That TAG team photo is important because it shows some of the people who were central to the development of the flight path search map. One reason for the test flight was to duplicate conditions and refine when and where Cooper bailed ...
Tosaw apparently preferred the west bypass of Portland also.
I think that's right. He had Cooper going 'plunk' somewhere near Caterpillar Island. (I need to prepare a map of his areas of his exploration, and run it by Kermit and Tosaw workers... ).
-
Jumping tomorrow over the Byron CA DZ. Will be carrying more stuff than Cooper did, multiple radios, etc. I am going to pull just after exit. Don't want to risk getting unstable. A fast spin would probably shake loose my stowed 20 meter long wire antenna and wrap me up in it. www.parachutemobile.com
Wish Georger would fire up on 14.240 MHz USB and make a contact. I have talked to hams as far away as Maryland on that frequency while under canopy. I only use a couple of watts. My HF radio runs on AA batteries.
I think Cooper survived the jump. If he died there would be rent or a mortgage unpaid, mail piling up, friends and relatives wondering where someone had disappeared to. Somebody would put two and two together given the publicity and the sketches.
377
My ants really suffered this year in our storms - first time in years Ive had this much damage. Maybe they are just getting old and feeble - :rofl: I will have to do something before winter - I do have an eager worker ready to help.. and I planned ahead and have replacement parts. I cant believe how much ants have inflated in price! Have you priced a Butternet HF9V these days! Or the capacitors? OMG. I still belong to that old Butternut Yahoo Group and a few other oldies still going! Those old groups are still alive and active. Yes if we are ever going to work I guess we had better get to it!! ;)
BTW - I still have my old TS830 - I just dont have the heart to part with it, and it still works like a champ. I just love that radio.
anyway 73...
-
The flight path is all over the place lately...I'm wondering when someone with start believing they dumped him out in the ocean as Rataczak originally wanted to do...maybe we should call it the Wild West Path :rofl:
Shutter, I have been attempting to determine when the width of Victor airways was reduced from 10 Statute Miles to 8 Nautical Miles. However, I cannot find anything on the Internet about that.
Do you have any information on this subject or know when it can be found?
-
The flight path is all over the place lately...I'm wondering when someone with start believing they dumped him out in the ocean as Rataczak originally wanted to do...maybe we should call it the Wild West Path :rofl:
Shutter, I have been attempting to determine when the width of Victor airways was reduced from 10 Statute Miles to 8 Nautical Miles. However, I cannot find anything on the Internet about that.
Do you have any information on this subject or know when it can be found?
Ammerman would know! I forget what he said ...
-
Ammerman told me on multiple occasions that V23 was 10 miles wide. Again, it's not like if the jet was 1000 feet to the west of the boundary it would have set off alarms. It wasn't that precise.
-
The flight path is all over the place lately...I'm wondering when someone with start believing they dumped him out in the ocean as Rataczak originally wanted to do...maybe we should call it the Wild West Path :rofl:
Shutter, I have been attempting to determine when the width of Victor airways was reduced from 10 Statute Miles to 8 Nautical Miles. However, I cannot find anything on the Internet about that.
Do you have any information on this subject or know when it can be found?
Never found anything. several pilots haven't heard of it either..
-
I did find a reference of military using 10 mile wide corridor's...
-
Consider that 8NM is equal to 9.2SM.
-
Cliff told me that he is generally speaking in terms of SM. Again, I didn't get the impression that they're overly concerned about a little tolerance built into the discussion.
-
Two miles is a lot...
Most airways are eight nautical miles (14 kilometers) wide, and the airway flight levels keep aircraft separated by at least 500 vertical feet from aircraft on the flight level above and below when operating under VFR.
Military Training Routes are divided into Instrument Routes (IR), and Visual Routes (VR). Each route is identified by either of these two letters, followed by either four digits for routes below 1,500 feet above ground level, or three digits for routes extending for at least one leg above 1,500 ft AGL. (i.e., VR-1056). The difference between the IR and VR routes is that IR routes are flown under Air Traffic Control, while VR routes are not.
Airspace above the United States from the surface to 10,000 feet above sea level is limited to 250 knots (indicated airspeed) per the FAA's Federal Aviation Regulations. This speed limit hinders most modern-day tactical aircraft training operations, since low-level strikes are conducted almost exclusively at speeds exceeding 300 knots. Military Training Routes are usually limited to 420 knots, and in no case are aircraft allowed to exceed Mach 1 within United States sovereign airspace, except in designated Military Operation Areas. While on the route military aircraft squawk a Mode C Transponder code of '4000', which informs controllers that they are 'speeding' on a route. This squawk however is only legal by military aircraft, while inside a properly scheduled route corridor. MTRs do not constitute an official airspace, and are all open to VFR or IFR civilian traffic; however only military aircraft are allowed to squawk 4000 and exceed 250 knots.
Each route is defined by a number of geographical coordinates and their respective navaid fixes. From this line the corridor is extended a specific number of miles, in the vast majority of cases this is five miles, making the corridor 10 miles wide. The Routes are individually operated through one of the local military air bases, which schedule and 'own' the route. The FAA requires these bases to 'NOTAM' out the routes at least two hours prior to use to allow for civilian traffic to de-conflict if needed.....
-
If a plane is shown five and a half miles off center. one could say it's a mile and a half out of the airway or one half mile....makes a difference.
-
Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. 305 cutting off the dogleg and veering outside of V23 by 2 or 3 miles is meaningless if that's what it takes to skirt downtown Portland. Moreover, V23 heads 175 degrees from Battlefield, therefore 305 would naturally merge right back into center line V23 just south of Portland.
-
That's hearsay IMO. I find it hard to believe the pilots obviously seen the path and said nothing or later states a shortcut?
-
This is like forgetting to tell the police it was a female that did the crime and not a male...decades later...oh, it was a woman by the way?
-
This is precisely what Scott told Himmelsbach according to a couple of accounts. Specifically, that he flew west of downtown Portland and that he believes they flew about 10 miles west of the FBI Flight Path. Additionally, Ammerman stated that he believes the jet passed west of downtown Portland between the 405 and Beaverton--this while traveling on heading of 160 (due south). Also, consider that Ammerman was never interviewed by the FBI.
-
This is precisely what Scott told Himmelsbach according to a couple of accounts. Specifically, that he flew west of downtown Portland and that he believes they flew about 10 miles west of the FBI Flight Path. Additionally, Ammerman stated that he believes the jet passed west of downtown Portland between the 405 and Beaverton--this while traveling on heading of 160 (due south).
My whole point in asking the question about the date that the switch was made from a 10 Statute Mile width to an 8 Nautical Mile width is that is the earliest date that the "FBI map" could have been made. And I think that date was sometime in the late 1970s or maybe even 1980s.
And if I am correct, then the "FBI map" that we are now looking at COULD NOT be the original map that was prepared immediately after the hijacking.
-
What is the 405?
You must keep in mind while trying to move the path west that the DME miles increase regardless to what anyone said to anyone after the fact.
Robert, are you saying the sectional map looks out of date for 71?
-
What is the 405?
You must keep in mind while trying to move the path west that the DME miles increase regardless to what anyone said to anyone after the fact.
Robert, are you saying the sectional map looks out of date for 71?
The 405 is one of the freeways in downtown Portland.
-
I see it now. just woke up and not functioning correctly yet. I looked all over for it and it was right there :rofl:
Are you saying 160 degree's would be the path from the Columbia southward? I don't believe the 20 degree magnetic change.
-
I see it now. just woke up and not functioning correctly yet. I looked all over for it and it was right there :rofl:
Are you saying 160 degree's would be the path from the Columbia southward? I don't believe the 20 degree magnetic change.
No, I'm saying he made the turn around Toledo and headed 148 degrees--which is parallel to V23--a couple miles west of the centerline because of the rounded turn at Toledo. Then around Kelso he headed 160 and kept that heading until he reached centerline V23 near Canby. He then headed 175 toward Eugene.
These headings factor in the 20 degree adjustment.
-
Here is a 160 degree path around the Malay intersection on my simulator..
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ultYlvFhmMmygi50H30BHGlLVLTtPssL/view?usp=sharing
-
Here is a sectional around Kelso...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PmdOP1IDeSfCMPbQDRHAjVmBi90DSoj0/view?usp=sharing
The gauges on the right are inaccurate since I place the plane in that position while the simulator is paused.
-
I see it now. just woke up and not functioning correctly yet. I looked all over for it and it was right there :rofl:
Are you saying 160 degree's would be the path from the Columbia southward? I don't believe the 20 degree magnetic change.
No, I'm saying he made the turn around Toledo and headed 148 degrees--which is parallel to V23--a couple miles west of the centerline because of the rounded turn at Toledo. Then around Kelso he headed 160 and kept that heading until he reached centerline V23 near Canby. He then headed 175 toward Eugene.
These headings factor in the 20 degree adjustment.
That's a pretty tight S turn...
-
I'm not sure what you mean by S turn.
-
I'll have to get the degree's but the plane does an S turn even with the original path. it turns left and the a turn right to follow V23..
When I fully wake up :rofl: I will make a short video of the flight in that area. I only have a joystick hooked up at the moment. I moved my simulator computer to my living room where my projector screen is located.
-
A 727 doesn't turn on a dime. I believe while flying the original path I made the first turn at Toledo and not long after leveling I had to turn to line up with V23. now I'm going to have to narrow down the distance turning before V23 and not after...
Things look a little different in flight vs looking at the map....
-
I still don't understand.
I'm saying that 305 makes the turn at Toledo and ends up west of the V23 centerline as it heads 148. I'm quite certain it wasn't a standard rate turn therefore he would end up two or three miles west of centerline V23 once the turn around Toledo was complete. In fact, the FBI Flight Path actually has 305 making the turn and crossing over centerline V23 ending up east of centerline V23.
-
You already stated Ammerman said the plane turned at Toledo, no?
-
You already stated Ammerman said the plane turned at Toledo, no?
I believe Ammerman used both terms, Toledo and Maylay. I believe a map you have shows the jet making the turn around the airport.
-
If you make a turn at Toledo and try to line up with 3 nautical miles from V23 would be a challenge. then the plane would have to merge east to line up one nautical mile west of V23 at Kelso and turn from there. this is why Robert says they flew from V23 to Malay straight down.
-
How far west is the Toledo airport from the Maylay intersection?
I don't think anyone got too specific on the precise turn location. 305 merely made the turn at Toledo/Maylay then traveled however many miles it was to the Kelso area before turning 160.
To be clear, I'm referring to the Toledo airport, not the town.
-
Around 4 nm on center Malay...17 nm to Kelso area. if you are trying to make a path you should know all of this?
-
Yeah, I'm just saying he rounded the turn at Maylay and headed down V23. Perhaps he was 4NM west of the centerline as he flew toward Kelso.
-
Here is your path...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1a5v56N4UN8uXXkqJ0ZvBXeDcbgMl4hid/view?usp=sharing
-
It's difficult to tell. What I have mocked up on Google Maps shows the jet flying over Woodland and Tena Bar, passing between the 405 and Beaverton, and ultimately merging into the centerline near Canby.
-
It's difficult to tell. What I have mocked up on Google Maps shows the jet flying over Woodland and Tena Bar, passing between the 405 and Beaverton, and ultimately merging into the centerline near Canby.
You need to be working off of Skyvector or sectional maps..
-
This is precisely what Scott told Himmelsbach according to a couple of accounts. Specifically, that he flew west of downtown Portland and that he believes they flew about 10 miles west of the FBI Flight Path. Additionally, Ammerman stated that he believes the jet passed west of downtown Portland between the 405 and Beaverton--this while traveling on heading of 160 (due south). Also, consider that Ammerman was never interviewed by the FBI.
where is that documented! ?
-
It's difficult to tell. What I have mocked up on Google Maps shows the jet flying over Woodland and Tena Bar, passing between the 405 and Beaverton, and ultimately merging into the centerline near Canby.
You need to be working off of Skyvector or sectional maps..
Let me comment on about the last 20 posts between EU and Shutter.
First, I am saying that the "FBI map" DOES NOT look like it was drawn on a 1971 FAA Sectional Chart since the airway widths shown appear to be 8 Nautical Miles (due to a number of factors this remains to be confirmed). If the date of the change over from 10 Statute Mile widths to 8 Nautical Mile widths can be determined, that would give the earliest that this map could have been prepared.
The map shows Mount St. Helens at its original height before it blew its stack about three months after the money find at Tina Bar. Update issues of sectional charts are published about ever six months and include updates up to about six weeks before the published date. Thus, it would take at least one and probably two update cycles before the new Mount St. Helens height was shown on the sectional charts. The map would have to be prepared on an issue of the sectional chart prior to the date of the issue of the map with the new height shown. This assumes, of course, that the "FBI map" was prepared on a current issue of the sectional chart and not on an out-of-date issue.
Later today, time permitting, I will post on the meaning of "headings" and such things as used in aircraft navigation and air traffic control. But it is something that everyone should understand when discussing the flight path. And EU is correct when saying that if a controller told a pilot that he was pointed in the compass direction of 160 degrees while in the Portland area in 1971, the aircraft was actually pointed almost straight south, or 180 degrees, when there was a no wind condition. More on this later in greater depth.
Further, assume that the airliner did fly direct between the Malay and Canby Intersections. Its maximum distance from V-23, assuming an 8 Nautical Mile width for V-23, would still be only about 3 Nautical Miles. And that would be in the Tina Bar area. There is no basis for a flight path west of the Malay to Canby path.
-
Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. 305 cutting off the dogleg and veering outside of V23 by 2 or 3 miles is meaningless if that's what it takes to skirt downtown Portland. Moreover, V23 heads 175 degrees from Battlefield, therefore 305 would naturally merge right back into center line V23 just south of Portland.
You are making this up as you go along ... Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 ?
Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 but to Ammerman who was "beholden" to V23! That is the central point of Ammerman's whole testimony and he has been tested on that point by at least five interviewers! Ammerman has told EVERYONE! that the only time 305 could have slipped out of V23 was during the brief period when Cliff was not watching the screen as 305 briefly passed on the west side of V23 passed Portland and his testimony is: "or I would have alert everyone instantly. I was lining the T33 and 305 for a rendezvous, and that was dependent on knowing exactly where 305 was". So sir it is not like you are saying: Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. Those are your words - not Ammerman's. Ammerman has never said what you are saying he said.
You are just looking for an 'out' you can plop some cobbled west path in. Whether it fits with Ammerman's testimony or not. Its as simple as that.
BTW! When you say Cliff says he was never interviewed by the FBI --------- SO WHAT! IT DOESN'T MATTER. why would the "FBI" interview Cliff at all! ? The FBI doesn't make flight path maps! McChord has the tape! Nobody needs Ammerman! Ammerman's superiors were deposed and worked with the Air Force and that is on record.
You are just floating more nonsense when you are posting that empty news. The FBI didn't interview Walt Disney either - :rofl:
-
Here's EU map, for whatever thats worth. I had to trim it to under 200k and try to focus it which I couldnt do -
-
Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. 305 cutting off the dogleg and veering outside of V23 by 2 or 3 miles is meaningless if that's what it takes to skirt downtown Portland. Moreover, V23 heads 175 degrees from Battlefield, therefore 305 would naturally merge right back into center line V23 just south of Portland.
You are making this up as you go along ... Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 ?
Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 but to Ammerman who was "beholden" to V23! That is the central point of Ammerman's whole testimony and he has been tested on that point by at least five interviewers! Ammerman has told EVERYONE! that the only time 305 could have slipped out of V23 was during the brief period when Cliff was not watching the scene as 305 briefly passed on the west side of V23 passed Portland and his testimony is: "or I would have alert everyone instantly. I was lining the T33 and 305 for a rendezvous, and that was dependent on knowing exactly where 305 was". So sir it is not like you are saying: Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. Those are your words - not Ammerman's. Ammerman never said what you are trying to inform us he said! Ammerman has never said what you are saying he said.
You are just looking for an 'out' you can plop some cobbled west path in. Whether it fits with Ammerman's testimony or not. Its as simple as that.
BTW! When you say Cliff says he was never interviewed by the FBI --------- SO WHAT! IT DOESN'T MATTER. why would the FBI interview cliff at all! ? McChord has the tape! Nobody needs Ammerman! Ammerman's superiors were deposed and worked with the Air Force.
You are just floating more nonsense when you are posing that empty news. The FBI didn;t interview Walt Disney either - :rofl:
Cliff (R2) was not the controller after 8:13 PM, it was R5. Cliff may have worked on the intercept problem after that time but the intercepts were made southwest of Portland. Probably ever supervisor in the Seattle ATC facility was looking over the shoulders of R2, R5, and the other controllers involved. This was not a routine operation.
There are four Oakland ATC controllers listed as being involved in the hand-off between Seattle and Oakland. And as I have stated numerous times, the Oakland Center radio transcripts are textbook air traffic control for the 1971 era. If the Seattle Center radio transcripts included the 19 deleted portions, they would probably show textbook air traffic control also.
-
Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. 305 cutting off the dogleg and veering outside of V23 by 2 or 3 miles is meaningless if that's what it takes to skirt downtown Portland. Moreover, V23 heads 175 degrees from Battlefield, therefore 305 would naturally merge right back into center line V23 just south of Portland.
You are making this up as you go along ... Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 ?
Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 but to Ammerman who was "beholden" to V23! That is the central point of Ammerman's whole testimony and he has been tested on that point by at least five interviewers! Ammerman has told EVERYONE! that the only time 305 could have slipped out of V23 was during the brief period when Cliff was not watching the scene as 305 briefly passed on the west side of V23 passed Portland and his testimony is: "or I would have alert everyone instantly. I was lining the T33 and 305 for a rendezvous, and that was dependent on knowing exactly where 305 was". So sir it is not like you are saying: Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. Those are your words - not Ammerman's. Ammerman never said what you are trying to inform us he said! Ammerman has never said what you are saying he said.
You are just looking for an 'out' you can plop some cobbled west path in. Whether it fits with Ammerman's testimony or not. Its as simple as that.
Let me explain a few things to GEORGER who is apparently intellectually challenged and "confused" as he rightfully admitted in previous post:
1) Ammerman stated that 305 passed Portland west of the 405 but east of Beaverton as best he can recall.
2) Ammerman stated that 305 maintained a consistent heading of 160 (Between the Kelso area and south of Portland) as best he can recall.
3) Ammerman stated that 305 could have been OUTSIDE of V23 west of PDX.
4) Ammerman stated that he was there to observe 305 and coordinate the F-106s and T-33.
5) Ammerman stated that he handed communication with 305 off to the controller who handled the airspace from 9K feet and lower as the jet was near Kelso. Therefore, he could not and did not communicate directly with 305.
6) Ammerman stated he was never interviewed by the FBI.
7) Ammerman stated that he was unaware of the FBI Flight Path specifics.
8) Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX.
9) Ammerman stated that he was told by a woman he works with, who apparently knew Capt. Scott in some capacity, that she was told that Scott intentionally flew the jet west of Portland to avoid the primary cluster of population because of the prospect of a bomb being onboard.
10) Ammerman stated that 305 embarked upon a heading of 160 near Kelso to cut out the "dogleg" portion of V23.
Now take that home and smoke it. Plot it out. See what you come up with. Please report back to us all immediately upon discovering the mass EU/R99 conspiracy.
-
It's difficult to tell. What I have mocked up on Google Maps shows the jet flying over Woodland and Tena Bar, passing between the 405 and Beaverton, and ultimately merging into the centerline near Canby.
You need to be working off of Skyvector or sectional maps..
Let me comment on about the last 20 posts between EU and Shutter.
First, I am saying that the "FBI map" DOES NOT look like it was drawn on a 1971 FAA Sectional Chart since the airway widths shown appear to be 8 Nautical Miles (due to a number of factors this remains to be confirmed). If the date of the change over from 10 Statute Mile widths to 8 Nautical Mile widths can be determined, that would give the earliest that this map could have been prepared.
The map shows Mount St. Helens at its original height before it blew its stack about three months after the money find at Tina Bar. Update issues of sectional charts are published about ever six months and include updates up to about six weeks before the published date. Thus, it would take at least one and probably two update cycles before the new Mount St. Helens height was shown on the sectional charts. The map would have to be prepared on an issue of the sectional chart prior to the date of the issue of the map with the new height shown. This assumes, of course, that the "FBI map" was prepared on a current issue of the sectional chart and not on an out-of-date issue.
Later today, time permitting, I will post on the meaning of "headings" and such things as used in aircraft navigation and air traffic control. But it is something that everyone should understand when discussing the flight path. And EU is correct when saying that if a controller told a pilot that he was pointed in the compass direction of 160 degrees while in the Portland area in 1971, the aircraft was actually pointed almost straight south, or 180 degrees, when there was a no wind condition. More on this later in greater depth.
Further, assume that the airliner did fly direct between the Malay and Canby Intersections. Its maximum distance from V-23, assuming an 8 Nautical Mile width for V-23, would still be only about 3 Nautical Miles. And that would be in the Tina Bar area. There is no basis for a flight path west of the Malay to Canby path.
I almost hate to say this, meanwhile the rest of the world is going with V23 and the socalled FBI flight path map. Why? Because there are no compelling reasons anyone has shown (including you) to do otherwise.
It really comes down to that.
-
Here's EU map, for whatever thats worth. I had to trim it to under 200k and try to focus it which I couldnt do -
I did not create this map. I can barely read the map.
-
Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. 305 cutting off the dogleg and veering outside of V23 by 2 or 3 miles is meaningless if that's what it takes to skirt downtown Portland. Moreover, V23 heads 175 degrees from Battlefield, therefore 305 would naturally merge right back into center line V23 just south of Portland.
You are making this up as you go along ... Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 ?
Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 but to Ammerman who was "beholden" to V23! That is the central point of Ammerman's whole testimony and he has been tested on that point by at least five interviewers! Ammerman has told EVERYONE! that the only time 305 could have slipped out of V23 was during the brief period when Cliff was not watching the scene as 305 briefly passed on the west side of V23 passed Portland and his testimony is: "or I would have alert everyone instantly. I was lining the T33 and 305 for a rendezvous, and that was dependent on knowing exactly where 305 was". So sir it is not like you are saying: Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. Those are your words - not Ammerman's. Ammerman never said what you are trying to inform us he said! Ammerman has never said what you are saying he said.
You are just looking for an 'out' you can plop some cobbled west path in. Whether it fits with Ammerman's testimony or not. Its as simple as that.
Let me explain a few things to GEORGER who is apparently intellectually challenged and "confused" as he rightfully admitted in previous post:
1) Ammerman stated that 305 passed Portland west of the 405 but east of Beaverton as best he can recall.
2) Ammerman stated that 305 maintained a consistent heading of 160 (Between the Kelso area and south of Portland) as best he can recall.
3) Ammerman stated that 305 could have been OUTSIDE of V23 west of PDX.
4) Ammerman stated that he was there to observe 305 and coordinate the F-106s and T-33.
5) Ammerman stated that he handed communication with 305 off to the controller who handled the airspace from 9K feet and lower as the jet was near Kelso. Therefore, he could not and did not communicate directly with 305.
6) Ammerman stated he was never interviewed by the FBI.
7) Ammerman stated that he was unaware of the FBI Flight Path specifics.
8) Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX.
9) Ammerman stated that he was told by a woman he works with, who apparently knew Capt. Scott in some capacity, that she was told that Scott intentionally flew the jet west of Portland to avoid the primary cluster of population because of the prospect of a bomb being onboard.
10) Ammerman stated that 305 embarked upon a heading of 160 near Kelso to cut out the "dogleg" portion of V23.
Now take that home and smoke it. Plot it out. See what you come up with. Please report back to us all immediately upon discovering the mass EU/R99 conspiracy.
all according to you.
We dont have Cliff here to depose. Wish we did! :rofl:
Some neutral party go re-interview Cliff again. I am willing to bet Cliff will recant much of what EU is claiming Cliff said. If EU hasn't scared off Ammerman.
I can tell the world one thing for God Damned Certain! Cliff does not like 'suspect peddlers' putting him in the middle of anything! And that is exactly what Mr, Ulis is doing. My concern - and its real - is that Ulis may scare Cliff away and shut him down. I pray that hasn't happened. THAT IS A VERY SERIOUS CONCERN.
For example (lets be specific from EU above: " 3) Ammerman stated that 305 could have been OUTSIDE of V23 west of PDX."
Cliff never told me anything of the kind. I asked him for a clarification of this multiple times during 3 interviews over the phone in addition to email back and forth. (a) Cliff said he had no evidence whatever that 305 ever was outside V23. (b) Cliff said IF 305 was outside V23 during its passage west of PDX it would have been so briefly that he never saw it and he was away from his screen for mere seconds at most. (c) Cliff said specifically that he was talking to the T33 for a rendezvous with 305, NORTH OF THE COLUMBIA, and in order to do that he noted 305's position before he stood up to fiddle with his radio, he gave the T33 instructions based on his last sighting of 305 on his screen, and when he looked back nothing had changed to alter the instructions he had given the T33! Cliff told me that as far as he was concerned 305 NEVER left the center line of V23 or if it did it was STILL inside the four mile western side of V23 ........ that is what Cliff told me. Cliff said specifically as far as he was concern 305 NEVER LEFT the V23 corridor.
Specifically, Cliff said that had he thought for any reason 305 was outside the west boundary of V23 he would have 'given an alert' INSTANTLY to 305' (to get back inside V23!) because his lining up of the T33 pilot with 305 relied on 305 being within the V23 corridor Cliff said HE WAS USING! Everything was dependent on keeping 305 within V23.
So put that in your daily byte!
-
Here's EU map, for whatever thats worth. I had to trim it to under 200k and try to focus it which I couldnt do -
I did not create this map. I can barely read the map.
I never said you did - go back and read what I said! THIS IS ONE MORE REASON NOT TO TAKE ANYTHING EU SAYS AS AN ACCURATE RECORD OF ANYTHING.
SOMEBODY RE-INTERVIEW AMMERMAN! :chr2:
-
Here's EU map, for whatever thats worth. I had to trim it to under 200k and try to focus it which I couldnt do -
I did not create this map. I can barely read the map.
I never said you did - go back and read what I said! THIS IS ONE MORE REASON NOT TO TAKE ANYTHING EU SAYS AS AN ACCURATE RECORD OF ANYTHING.
SOMEBODY RE-INTERVIEW AMMERMAN! :chr2:
I did not say that you said I did. How about you go back to read what I wrote. What I said was "I did not create this map."
You see GEORGER, you will always lose when debating me.
-
I made the map. it's hard to put it all in view. it shows the plane barely turning from Toledo to line up with 3 nm from Malay. then it slowly merges east to be one mile east of V23 at Kelso then turns towards Canby in a straight line.
-
I think Andrade would be the perfect person to converse with Ammerman?
-
Here's EU map, for whatever thats worth. I had to trim it to under 200k and try to focus it which I couldnt do -
I did not create this map. I can barely read the map.
I never said you did - go back and read what I said! THIS IS ONE MORE REASON NOT TO TAKE ANYTHING EU SAYS AS AN ACCURATE RECORD OF ANYTHING.
SOMEBODY RE-INTERVIEW AMMERMAN! :chr2:
I did not say that you said I did. How about you go back to read what I wrote. What I said was "I did not create this map."
You see GEORGER, you will always lose when debating me.
I am not DEBATING you. Is that all you are concerned about?
Did you tell Ammerman your sole concern was winning debates !?
Stop your ridiculous antics.
-
Are we to assume Ammerman was R5 and not R2?
-
Are we to assume Ammerman was R5 and not R2?
That may be true now... but turns out he wasnt R2...
-
Are we to assume Ammerman was R5 and not R2?
That may be true now... but turns out he wasnt R2...
R2 handed off at around Toledo and R5 took over till past Portland. it's possible R2 was Ammerman since he watched over the fighters. not sure why he would go outside his sector though..
-
I am not DEBATING you. Is that all you are concerned about?
Did you tell Ammerman your sole concern was winning debates !?
Stop your ridiculous antics.
GEORGER, you can dish it out, but someone finally decides they've had enough of the cheap shots from you and decides to get in the weeds with you then all of the sudden you start to whine and act like you're a victim.
A word of advice: Try being pleasant.
-
Okay, we have heard from both sides....move on.
-
I think it is important to realise where 'all of this west path maybe' stuff is happening.
West side of PDX. T22 coming in from the north or nor-west? The union of 305 with T33 is going to be "north of the Columbia" so 305 hasn't even crossed the Columbia yet. Cooper may have just bailed a few minutes earlier. Cliff said there was a 'lot' of radio chatter going on. Cliff emphasized to me his primary concern was keeping 305 within V23 and his instructions to the T33 were based on 305 being within V23, and staying within V23. In time, we are talking about a passage of mere seconds here. It was vital for 305 to be in a place Cliff had predicted it would be!
But, EU's goal is to put 305 over Tina Bar, however he can get that done. So the issue is where has 305 come from to be in its present position just north of the Columbia, about to cross the Columbia, with the T33 now in tow.
Cliff's whole statement is: 305 WAS NEVER OUTSIDE OF V23. So wherever 305 was prior to the T33 union and crossing the Columbia, it must be within V23. That is Cliff's whole message.
-
Okay, we have heard from both sides....move on.
This isnt personal with me - but it is with EU. EU keeps trying to manage and direct all players like he was managing some play on a stage! The Cooper case isn't some play script .... anyone can manage like a play! All of EU's social commentary and psycho babel is just that; has nothing to do with the facts of this case, or even with me! It could be anybody who disagrees with EU's claims. EU just cant have his way .......... that is what he is upset about.
EU is trying to force a round peg intro a square hole, any way he can. His only shred of hope is this "might of been" he claims Cliff set on the table like some gigantic opening ...... FOR ANYTHING! That is not what Cliff Ammerman said oir is saying or implying - THAT ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE! In fact Cliff is saying just the opposite!
How many times does Ammerman have to say 305 never left V23 .... before people start believing it! ?
-
According to Ammerman the plane did in fact turn at KTDO, correct? this doesn't match a Malay path, correct? then we are locked with a 23 DME from Portland VORTEC, correct?
If we go by any deviation from Kelso to Canby it puts the plane east of Ridgefield and jumping into populated area's, correct?
Then we have radar reports from Portland that don't seem to be valid but the radar reports from the Toledo area down to the Lewis river appear to be crystal clear now? that's what Ammerman would of seen, correct?
Personally, I need to see good reason for radar reports to be false. along with rechecking the FDR and downplaying that as well. I fail to see where this would be an issue since it's obvious the pilots had input into this as well. we have to discount every piece of proof to fly west IMHO.
-
According to Ammerman the plane did in fact turn at KTDO, correct? this doesn't match a Malay path, correct? then we are locked with a 23 DME from Portland VORTEC, correct?
If we go by any deviation from Kelso to Canby it puts the plane east of Ridgefield and jumping into populated area's, correct?
Then we have radar reports from Portland that don't seem to be valid but the radar reports from the Toledo area down to the Lewis river appear to be crystal clear now? that's what Ammerman would of seen, correct?
Personally, I need to see good reason for radar reports to be false. along with rechecking the FDR and downplaying that as well. I fail to see where this would be an issue since it's obvious the pilots had input into this as well. we have to discount every piece of proof to fly west IMHO.
Add to that Cliff's statement he has repeated 10,000 times: 'Had I thought or seen 305 outside of V23, during the T33-305 lineup, I would have issued an immediate alert to 305, to get back inside V23. The whole work plan given to T33 was based on the premise of 305 being "inside of V23"! '
"I would have issued an alert IMMEDIATELY had I seen 305 outside of V23".
This isn't some debate to be won! This is historical fact and science.
-
This is getting way too complicated.
Cliff simply said the jet made the turn at Maylay. This is what the FBI map shows.
However, he estimates that as the jet was east of Kelso it veered its heading slightly to put it on a due south heading in order to cut out the V23 dogleg. Then he says 305 naturally merged right back into the V23 centerline south of Portland.
-
It's hard to say whether or not they had to fly V23. that was the suggested path and approved.
I'm trying to understand how the eruption of Saint Helens has to do with the map made in 1971?
-
However, he estimates that as the jet was east of Kelso it veered its heading slightly to put it on a due south heading in order to cut out the V23 dogleg. Then he says 305 naturally merged right back into the V23 centerline south of Portland.
was he told they deviated from V23 starting at Kelso and cutting out 10 minutes of radar tracking?
-
If the conversation of any deviation was on the transcripts or radar it would be painfully obvious and a deliberate conspiracy in action? this was a map seen by there own agents searching. did they giggle while watching them search the wrong location?
This doesn't add up IMHO...
-
It just seems odd that Ammerman see's a different path on radar but many claim over the years that the radar reports in that area were weak and if they told Ammermamn they were deviating straight down bypassing Portland it should of been apparent to all involved. then they see the map made by the Air Force and send in the forces to the wrong location? did George Harrison rig his notes that match?
This is how I see this in my world?
-
It just seems odd that Ammerman see's a different path on radar but many claim over the years that the radar reports in that area were weak and if they told Ammermamn they were deviating straight down bypassing Portland it should of been apparent to all involved. then they see the map made by the Air Force and send in the forces to the wrong location?
This is how I see this in my world?
Its quite simple - in all worlds!
EU wants his way. Sandbox time. He wants to win his debate. If that means throwing the whole flight path out - that will happen. If it means the Cooper hijacking was a myth - that will happen. If it means DB Cooper was Donald Duck - that will happen. Script writers always get their way.
In time EU will spawn a new interest project, claim he solved the DB Cooper case, after solving the JFK and Elvis cases, .... and move on.
-
I understand you point of view..lets continue to debate the issue and allow it to lead to actual facts. nobody is right at this moment and time that I can see. lots of variables to prove or disprove in coming to any conclusions..
-
I understand you point of view..lets continue to debate the issue and allow it to lead to actual facts. nobody is right at this moment and time that I can see. lots of variables to prove or disprove in coming to any conclusions..
I need to spend time sort and organising files - I cant find anything when I need it today. It has become very complicated. ;)
-
I'm going through all the files looking for all the data surrounding the flight path...I'm seeing double sometimes scrolling through the files. a lot are easy to pass over with all the blanks in them but they play with your eye's.. :rofl:
-
Shutter, I believe you mentioned that the FBI Flight Path (Air Force) was handed to the FBI on November 26th. How did they know where to search on November 25th without a flight path?
-
Shutter, I believe you mentioned that the FBI Flight Path (Air Force) was handed to the FBI on November 26th. How did they know where to search on November 25th without a flight path?
Possibly the pilots, Air Force,radio transcripts/audio. the FDR, Portland radar reports, the fact of NWO monitoring the flight. they might of received the path prior to the FBI...I suspect they would be working on the LZ that evening. the last LZ map was made on 1-13-72 after the testing of the oscillation and pressure bump.
when someone is missing do we need a map to start or an area?
I found two separate dates surrounding the map. one on 11-26-71 and another 12-23-71 there is several LZ maps and progress as time passes with new information. even if the FDR didn't have a clock a clear straight path should of been noticed under the microscope while viewing the foil.
You guys seem to act as if it was impossible to figure out the basic area's without a map?
-
It appears they found solid ground for an area to search....just as anyone else would do with missing persons or anything else.
-
I'm simply asking a question.
I'm looking at the fact that the jet landed in Reno at 11PM. No one knew definitively that DBC had bailed until the flight crew looked in back.
Given this, how is it possible that the FBI--or anyone for that matter--started searching the next day? Also, did the search area shift over time as the first flight path came out--apparently on the 26th--and was subsequently updated?
Perhaps Bruce can pipe in on this.
-
the search started once they realized he was not on the plane. the clock starts ticking for backtracking from this point. Rataczak was talking to the company during the event. what was said is not clear but he indicated the time would be logged. from that point it comes down to finding where the plane was. we don't know who all was interviewed. Ammerman wasn't but was the flight manager or Seattle tower, Portland etc. aviation was Northwests game not the FBI. it's not 100% clear how involved Paul S. was either. did he monitor the flight?
It's certainly a critical error and lack of communication surrounding the oscillation. at least from our standpoint. could of been worse by not reporting the oscillation and later saying "I think I know where he might of jumped" the original area was above Ariel so they were off until more information came in. the question still remains whether it was an oscillation or pressure bump or both right after another. it appears the final LZ was calculated after the testing.
I just don't find anything odd that they found a possible LZ the next day or late that evening. some pretty smart guys brought three men home from space back in the same period by team work and calculations. I don't believe they got everything right by any means. a lot has to be discounted before anything can replace it.
-
I'm simply asking a question.
I'm looking at the fact that the jet landed in Reno at 11PM. No one knew definitively that DBC had bailed until the flight crew looked in back.
Given this, how is it possible that the FBI--or anyone for that matter--started searching the next day? Also, did the search area shift over time as the first flight path came out--apparently on the 26th--and was subsequently updated?
Perhaps Bruce can pipe in on this.
If I remember correctly, the first LZ estimate was prepared the night of the hijacking and maybe even before the airliner got to Reno. I am referring to the one that names some people (however, their names are redacted).
In my personal and professional opinion, the 1971 FDR information would be essentially useless in determining a landing zone. In that age, such information was basically used to determine the sequence of events within a minute or so of a major event (such as an accident). The FDR would certainly not be able to provide conclusive proof of a jumper leaving the aircraft if even the flight crew couldn't tell for sure.
Further, the airliner, flight crew, and FDR didn't get back to Seattle until late on the afternoon of the 25th (Thanksgiving afternoon). Within just a handful of minutes, the flight crew was placed on an NWA airliner (which had been held for them) and were enroute to Minneapolis and got there late in the evening. Even if they had the FDR with them, someone in Minneapolis would have to work all night to predict the LZ from the FDR and other sources. So it is a very tight time line for a FDR supported LZ to be available on the morning of the 26th.
-
Shutter, I believe you mentioned that the FBI Flight Path (Air Force) was handed to the FBI on November 26th. How did they know where to search on November 25th without a flight path?
Possibly the pilots, Air Force,radio transcripts/audio. the FDR, Portland radar reports, the fact of NWO monitoring the flight. they might of received the path prior to the FBI...I suspect they would be working on the LZ that evening. the last LZ map was made on 1-13-72 after the testing of the oscillation and pressure bump.
when someone is missing do we need a map to start or an area?
I found two separate dates surrounding the map. one on 11-26-71 and another 12-23-71 there is several LZ maps and progress as time passes with new information. even if the FDR didn't have a clock a clear straight path should of been noticed under the microscope while viewing the foil.
You guys seem to act as if it was impossible to figure out the basic area's without a map?
The way the game works is you take the basic information and plot it on a map. The people on the ground then know where to look. Just simple statements such as "He may have landed 10 miles east of Podunk Mountain, or then maybe he didn't." won't get the job done. The searchers could have had a more productive evening by just getting a good nights sleep.
-
Someone just sent me this...it showed in my email blurry...
-
So, are you criticizing them for not having the map ready or jumping the gun?
-
The way the game works.
To post
The flight path info we have leaves a lot to be desired in terms of precision and accuracy, not to mention the time dimension.
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 detachment is still there. They might still have the source data or a listing of coordinates for intermediate times, or they may have transferred it to their headquarters (at Hill AFB if I remember right). The FAA should have a copy. If a copy was ever given to the FBI then they have a copy.
Even if all we could find is a listing of coordinates for intermediate times, we could gain some accuracy on the flight path. We could more precisely identify places where latitude and longitude crossed the halfway points between whole minutes of latitude and longitude. If we could get the data that was recorded we could even calculate to precision better than 1 minute lat/lon.
I wonder if W and S know anything about the RADES, but it's very unlikely they would because they were in airlift, not homeland air defense.
R99 misses something extremely important regarding the FBI flightpath plot because he is oblivious to how it came about. The data was hand plotted, probably by the same people who computed the coordinates. That group did this kind of thing probably once a week, sometimes for incidents but mostly for system QA and change evaluations. Their usual method was to calculate coordinates using taped data from a system that tracked probably hundreds of flights per day just in the Washington-Oregon area alone. They tracked every commercial flight. Every flight with a transponder. Basically everything except small private planes at low altitudes. Plus, every radar involved in this tracking was also constantly tracking its own calibration target.
The flightpath was produced by experts. Within the limits of its precision, it is right. Unfortunately, the precision is only one minute of latitude and longitude. And, the times associated with the plotted points may be off by a minute. AND, it appears we don't know accurately WHEN Coop jumped, except that the NWA and USAF people who did the '72 searchzone map thought (with benefit of the "pressure bump" signature on the flight data recorder) that he jumped at about 19 seconds before 8:11.
PS: Your interviews with Cliff are good. I think he did a commendable job given everything going on at the time. I believe his notation about 305 staying within V23 is entirely accurate. I am sure the people with an agenda will try to get some concession from him.
The T33 intercept north of the river is crucial in two aspects. Cliff confirms 305 did not leave V23 in the period he was talking to our T33. It also confirms the angle of descent of 305 from BTG. Those two facts alone confirm Cliff was keeping 305 within V23. There is no chance 305 passed over the Fazio property where the money was found. I’m sorry but I cant help with that. The timeline and when the oscillations and bump were actually called in and to whom, is key.
____________________ USAF retired.
-
Here is a better copy...
-
Here is a better copy...
Where is Crawford, WA or Highway I-S?
-
Not sure about the I-S. makes no sense. it's about 5 miles east of I-5.
-
We have a criminal running around with a possible explosive. waiting on a map doesn't appear to be the logical thing to do. the clock is ticking for escape. he has hours on them and appears to of as I have always said, caught them with there pants down. it appears they were working on it as I mentioned previously in locating a possible LZ.
I guess the question would be is how the next day search area is close to the Air Force map position? they don't show a jump time. only a path. one that's near the area in question?
-
Here is a better copy...
A few observations regarding the document.
1) This is from Thanksgiving Day, therefore the flight path had not yet been plotted. I assume it was an initial dropzone roughly crafted.
2) It appears that it is describing a section of centerline V23. This would make sense inasmuch as they would assume the jet was flying V23.
3) No wind drift was factored into a search area. Indeed, if DBC no pulled there would not be much of a drift. Moreover, they probably didn't have much in terms of wind data at that time.
-
? really. no wind data from aviation stand points. accurate weather is KEY to aviation. again, NWO is in this game and knows what is needed. weather reports are transmitted so up to date weather can be received at any given time..
-
Whatever. The document obviously doesn't mention looking to the NE or any another direction relative to the descent line.
The larger point is that this probably answers how the initial search area was devised--again with no Air Force flight path in hand.
-
Again, you guys are shooting them in the heart for not having a map ready in less than 12 hours? it's not 2019 where things can be brought forward in seconds to minutes? if this was a kid missing from a dive would you feel good telling the parents you have information on a possible area but have to wait on a map?
I don't get this at all...they were in the same area as the map and you scold them for trying prior to the map? how much more can we downplay events?
-
By the way, how does the lumbering 305 make the turn around PDX?
-
I don't for see any good research in this with you guys. it's one thing after another...
Everyone is wrong and you guys are right....with that I'm out...
-
Again, you guys are shooting them in the heart for not having a map ready in less than 12 hours? it's not 2019 where things can be brought forward in seconds to minutes? if this was a kid missing from a dive would you feel good telling the parents you have information on a possible area but have to wait on a map?
I don't get this at all...they were in the same area as the map and you scold them for trying prior to the map? how much more can we downplay events?
Let me clear because I'm tired of being told what I'm doing.
YOU. ARE. WRONG.
I am not complaining about anything. I was simply asking a question. That's it.
This is getting very frustrating. Am I not allowed to ask a question without being accused of having an agenda by someone?
-
Don't put words in my mouth either...
The larger point is that this probably answers how the initial search area was devised--again with no Air Force flight path in hand.
I've tried for several posts to tell this story. you guys keep shooting down things because of no map...you both said no map...no search worth value.
I pointed out reasons I believe they went forward with a search. they seem to be logical reasons. map or no map. I NEVER once claimed anyone had an agenda to anything nor did I imply anything of the sort! I responded to each question with my answers. that's like implying I have an agenda for the known flight path. that's wrong too! I'm looking for answers just as anyone else is. I rely on what is on the table and what needs to be removed from the table in order to change anything in that event. certain things are hard to remove IMO. until then I can only rely on the evidence in place. attacking data or comments do not suggest an agenda in my book.
It pisses me off hearing people accuse me of them having an agenda. Robert Blevins is famous for that. the only thing you will see me do with accusations is about lying. that statement really ticked me off...
Good nite
-
I don't for see any good research in this with you guys. it's one thing after another...
Everyone is wrong and you guys are right....with that I'm out...
Shutter, I hate to say this but I don't see any research at all on your part. Based on my personal exchanges with you, I know that you have made major efforts to educate yourself on aeronautical things and other fields that are relevant to understanding the Cooper hijacking.
But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value. EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking. We have then proposed alternatives to their work.
You apparently have evaluated the work that EU and I have done and found it lacking. You found the work that is available from others to be sufficient although that work has major problems that I am assure you are aware of. That's the way the ball bounces and that is okay with me.
My work posted here was done with deliberation and considering all the angles. I have been involved in aviation as a pilot or aeronautical engineer since the age of 15. One of the aircraft involved in my flight training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing 707 prototype (the "dash 80") at the National Air and Space Museum on the east side of Dulles Airport just outside Washington, DC. I also did a small number of parachute jumps 55+ years ago just to spice things up.
To summarize, the work I have posted here is based on personal experience and knowledge. And I'm sticking with it.
-
Evidence is what I look at vs research. I don't see valid reasons to dismiss parts of the known evidence. perhaps some can be. we have multiple levels and people surrounding the events from radar operators to the Air Force. the pilots. extremely well versed people at NWO.
If you have read my past comments you would see I don't believe much of anything without solid proof. I'm not claiming the FBI has provided solid proof but a lot of this is hard to dismiss with so many involved to all be wrong.
I see photo's of Caterpillar Island in the 70's and they are different from today along with the traffic on the island. I read reports from other radar operators that seem to be dismissed based on bad transponders or ignoring or not aware of the plane being in there airspace? the hijacking took place at Portland. why wouldn't they be in the loop even if they were alone?
You guys think I'm an idiot. that's fine too. I will no longer challenge you or anyone further in the DB Cooper case. I will continue to run this forum but without interaction. one thing I will not tolerate is being accused of telling someone they have an agenda.
Dave Brown
-
Evidence is what I look at vs research. I don't see valid reasons to dismiss parts of the known evidence. perhaps some can be. we have multiple levels and people surrounding the events from radar operators to the Air Force. the pilots. extremely well versed people at NWO.
If you have read my past comments you would see I don't believe much of anything without solid proof. I'm not claiming the FBI has provided solid proof but a lot of this is hard to dismiss with so many involved to all be wrong.
I see photo's of Caterpillar Island in the 70's and they are different from today along with the traffic on the island. I read reports from other radar operators that seem to be dismissed based on bad transponders or ignoring or not aware of the plane being in there airspace? the hijacking took place at Portland. why wouldn't they be in the loop even if they were alone?
You guys think I'm an idiot. that's fine too. I will no longer challenge you or anyone further in the DB Cooper case. I will continue to run this forum but without interaction. one thing I will not tolerate is being accused of telling someone they have an agenda.
Dave Brown
I have never said you had an agenda and I know damn well you ARE NOT an idiot. I have always understood that this is your forum and you are free to run it any way you want. And I have NO DISRESPECT whatsoever for you.
Robert Nicholson
-
I can read between the lines...the agenda statement was made by Eric. I'm not accusing you of that..I consider this matter closed.
-
Here is a better copy...
A few observations regarding the document.
1) This is from Thanksgiving Day, therefore the flight path had not yet been plotted. I assume it was an initial dropzone roughly crafted.
2) It appears that it is describing a section of centerline V23. This would make sense inasmuch as they would assume the jet was flying V23.
3) No wind drift was factored into a search area. Indeed, if DBC no pulled there would not be much of a drift. Moreover, they probably didn't have much in terms of wind data at that time.
You make LARGE SWEEPING assumptions knowing nothing!
If there wasnt a map perse, which there may have been!, ........... something or someone directed the FBI and LE to respond to specific areas to look. What was that based on? ESP?
-
Whatever. The document obviously doesn't mention looking to the NE or any another direction relative to the descent line.
The larger point is that this probably answers how the initial search area was devised--again with no Air Force flight path in hand.
You are asking how long it took for the Air Force to generate any map, or an opinion based on data?
I think you are creating another straw man which has no basis in fact.
-
Whatever. The document obviously doesn't mention looking to the NE or any another direction relative to the descent line.
The larger point is that this probably answers how the initial search area was devised--again with no Air Force flight path in hand.
Did you ask Ammerman how long it took McChord to generate any kind of map?
I didn't ask the Lt Col but I will if I can get him. The salient facts are:
The flight path coordinates were calculated from data tape recorded at the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Venter (DC). The calculation and the plotting were almost certainly done by the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES). It was their job to do such analyses, and the DC were just users of the system. The data was hand plotted, probably by the same people who computed the coordinates. NWA and USAF people collaborated in producing the '72 searchzone map (with benefit of the "pressure bump" signature on the flight data recorder) that he jumped at about 19 seconds before 8:11.
-
Don't put words in my mouth either...
The larger point is that this probably answers how the initial search area was devised--again with no Air Force flight path in hand.
I've tried for several posts to tell this story. you guys keep shooting down things because of no map...you both said no map...no search worth value.
I pointed out reasons I believe they went forward with a search. they seem to be logical reasons. map or no map. I NEVER once claimed anyone had an agenda to anything nor did I imply anything of the sort! I responded to each question with my answers. that's like implying I have an agenda for the known flight path. that's wrong too! I'm looking for answers just as anyone else is. I rely on what is on the table and what needs to be removed from the table in order to change anything in that event. certain things are hard to remove IMO. until then I can only rely on the evidence in place. attacking data or comments do not suggest an agenda in my book.
It pisses me off hearing people accuse me of them having an agenda. Robert Blevins is famous for that. the only thing you will see me do with accusations is about lying. that statement really ticked me off...
Good nite
We dont know that there wasnt a map by the time 305 landed at Reno ......... or even by 9:00 following any suspicion Cooper had bailed over Washington circa 8:11. I mean the FBI, H, and LE were already scrambled to the Woodland area? Based on what had to be somebody's idea of a flight path and time-sensitive position on that preliminary flight path map!
-
I don't for see any good research in this with you guys. it's one thing after another...
Everyone is wrong and you guys are right....with that I'm out...
Shutter, I hate to say this but I don't see any research at all on your part. Based on my personal exchanges with you, I know that you have made major efforts to educate yourself on aeronautical things and other fields that are relevant to understanding the Cooper hijacking.
But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value. EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking. We have then proposed alternatives to their work.
You apparently have evaluated the work that EU and I have done and found it lacking. You found the work that is available from others to be sufficient although that work has major problems that I am assure you are aware of. That's the way the ball bounces and that is okay with me.
My work posted here was done with deliberation and considering all the angles. I have been involved in aviation as a pilot or aeronautical engineer since the age of 15. One of the aircraft involved in my flight training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing 707 prototype (the "dash 80") at the National Air and Space Museum on the east side of Dulles Airport just outside Washington, DC. I also did a small number of parachute jumps 55+ years ago just to spice things up.
To summarize, the work I have posted here is based on personal experience and knowledge. And I'm sticking with it.
But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value. EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking.
No you havent. There is no question about that! Especially EU who doesnt even know WHO to talk to.
-
I can read between the lines...the agenda statement was made by Eric. I'm not accusing you of that..I consider this matter closed.
This is not over by a country mile!
I have Air Force interviews Ive never published.
If Ulis is 'just asking questions' he sure has a lot of answers! So many answers he can reject things he has yet to even formulate a question about ... because he is lacking and rejecting facts he doesn't even know about, in order to perpetuate his narrative. He has had a narrative since day one.
How soon did the Air Force have a map? How soon did they have a statement about what the flight path was and where to look ? With communications and time data from NWA. Very quickly. Then a longer process started. A test, FDR analysis, etc etc etc. But between the AF and NWA they had an area identified and people were looking within hours.
The AF had a pretty good record of tracking planes and sending up interceptors to find and engage them, within minutes! How quickly could they do a print out? How fast is the printer!? How quickly could people talk between McChord and NWA? How fast is the telephone and the human voice box?
Look at the document Shutter posted - at the top of the page it's dated 11/25 which means they probably had a map on the 24th since the document states a map...
What Shutter is saying makes complete sense and so far is backed up by the facts obtained from Lt. Colonel USAF ret. who worked with the system at McChord.
This is a tempest over personal narrative vs research! :chr2:
-
I don't for see any good research in this with you guys. it's one thing after another...
Everyone is wrong and you guys are right....with that I'm out...
Shutter, I hate to say this but I don't see any research at all on your part. Based on my personal exchanges with you, I know that you have made major efforts to educate yourself on aeronautical things and other fields that are relevant to understanding the Cooper hijacking.
But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value. EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking. We have then proposed alternatives to their work.
You apparently have evaluated the work that EU and I have done and found it lacking. You found the work that is available from others to be sufficient although that work has major problems that I am assure you are aware of. That's the way the ball bounces and that is okay with me.
My work posted here was done with deliberation and considering all the angles. I have been involved in aviation as a pilot or aeronautical engineer since the age of 15. One of the aircraft involved in my flight training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing 707 prototype (the "dash 80") at the National Air and Space Museum on the east side of Dulles Airport just outside Washington, DC. I also did a small number of parachute jumps 55+ years ago just to spice things up.
To summarize, the work I have posted here is based on personal experience and knowledge. And I'm sticking with it.
But research is something else other than accepting the work of others at face value. EU and I have evaluated the work of others and found it lacking.
No you havent. There is no question about that! Especially EU who doesnt even know WHO to talk to.
Georger, do you remember about 9 or 10 years ago you and I spent about an entire year looking at everything we could find on Tina Bar and its immediate environment? We looked at all that data forward, backwards, right side up, upside down, sideways, inside out, and cross-eyed.
You mentioned at that time that you were doing some things that you were not telling me about. I neglected to mention that I was also doing things that I wasn't tell you about (and am not going to do so now either). So I am sticking with my statements above. Sorry about that.
When can we expect to see your placard analysis posted on this site? I genuinely look forward to going through it.
Further, I trust you understand why ALL physics textbooks make major assumptions, such as neglecting gravity or the atmosphere, when presenting problems that involve both vertical and horizontal motion. That being the case where students don't have access to supercomputers, such as the Cray, and a team of programmers, operators, and serious big-time financial backers.
-
I was going to let this matter go, but frankly I’m so sick of this crap I decided to have it out now and see how you navigate my ironclad argument.
1) Let’s start with my question:
Post #2649: “Shutter, I believe you mentioned that the FBI Flight Path (Air Force) was handed to the FBI on November 26th. How did they know where to search on November 25th without a flight path?”
2) Now let’s review your comment:
Post #2650: “when someone is missing do we need a map to start or an area?”, “You guys seem to act as if it was impossible to figure out the basic area's without a map?”
3) Now let’s review my my next post:
Post #2652: “I'm simply asking a question. I'm looking at the fact that the jet landed in Reno at 11PM. No one knew definitively that DBC had bailed until the flight crew looked in back. Given this, how is it possible that the FBI--or anyone for that matter--started searching the next day? Also, did the search area shift over time as the first flight path came out--apparently on the 26th--and was subsequently updated? Perhaps Bruce can pipe in on this.”
4) Now let’s review your posts:
Post #2666: “Again, you guys are shooting them in the heart for not having a map ready in less than 12 hours?”, “I don't get this at all...they were in the same area as the map and you scold them for trying prior to the map? how much more can we downplay events?”
Post #2668: “I don't for see any good research in this with you guys. it's one thing after another...Everyone is wrong and you guys are right....with that I'm out...”
5) Now let’s review my post:
Post #2669: “Let me clear because I'm tired of being told what I'm doing. YOU. ARE. WRONG. I am not complaining about anything. I was simply asking a question. That's it. This is getting very frustrating. Am I not allowed to ask a question without being accused of having an agenda by someone?
6) Now let’s review your post:
Post #2670: “I've tried for several posts to tell this story. you guys keep shooting down things because of no map...you both said no map...no search worth value.”
SHUTTER, do you see a pattern here? I simply asked a question, then get attacked.
Where did I criticize the FBI for searching without a map?
Where did I criticize the FBI, Air Force or law enforcement at all?
I won’t wait for your answers because I’d be waiting forever. After all, I didn’t criticize anybody for anything. Again, I simply asked a question.
Of course, this doesn’t even begin to address the mindless BS from GEORGER who apparently has nothing better to do then troll.
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I rest my case.
-
“Shutter, I believe you mentioned that the FBI Flight Path (Air Force) was handed to the FBI on November 26th. How did they know where to search on November 25th without a flight path?”
Both you and R99 made similar statements. I kept replying other things could tip them off as to where the LZ possibly was vs the entire flight. it's recorded on the transcripts and noted to the company. shouldn't of taken them long to contact someone for a possible location to start. I fail to see any "attack" vs arguing the point. attacking the question, yes, I was. it's debating or challenging what I've read.
Flyjack recently posted a document I've seen and posted as well where the crew finds a possible location over Lake Merwin. why would that claim be made by the pilots who flew the path and not further west?
then I receive two separate files though email showing a date of 11-25-71 out of the two I get questioned as to where Crawford was and I-S which could be written in error. I didn't write the document. the second document makes a reference to viewing a map. was the document typed in the morning, afternoon or even. was the information from the late evening of the hijacking? the agent speaks of a phone call to NWO and after reviewing the flight log and angulating a position they appear to have an idea where to start. the area first searched is above the Lewis river and moves south as time progresses. my point the entire time was they needed to find Cooper quickly. the clock was ticking for his escape.
I had two people disagreeing with me or should I also say attacking me? I gave my thoughts and get accused of telling you that you have an agenda. then I'm told I have basically done no research on the case. did I make any statements like that? I disagreed with your statements and this is what I got in return. if you wish to continue this please go to an off topic thread. I don't feel I did anything wrong. if I'm wrong then my self removal should be enough to satisfy all involved.
-
“Shutter, I believe you mentioned that the FBI Flight Path (Air Force) was handed to the FBI on November 26th. How did they know where to search on November 25th without a flight path?”
Both you and R99 made similar statements. I kept replying other things could tip them off as to where the LZ possibly was vs the entire flight. it's recorded on the transcripts and noted to the company. shouldn't of taken them long to contact someone for a possible location to start. I fail to see any "attack" vs arguing the point. attacking the question, yes, I was. it's debating or challenging what I've read.
Flyjack recently posted a document I've seen and posted as well where the crew finds a possible location over Lake Merwin. why would that claim be made by the pilots who flew the path and not further west?
then I receive two separate files though email showing a date of 11-25-71 out of the two I get questioned as to where Crawford was and I-S which could be written in error. I didn't write the document. the second document makes a reference to viewing a map. was the document typed in the morning, afternoon or even. was the information from the late evening of the hijacking? the agent speaks of a phone call to NWO and after reviewing the flight log and angulating a position they appear to have an idea where to start. the area first searched is above the Lewis river and moves south as time progresses. my point the entire time was they needed to find Cooper quickly. the clock was ticking for his escape.
I had two people disagreeing with me or should I also say attacking me? I gave my thoughts and get accused of telling you that you have an agenda. then I'm told I have basically done no research on the case. did I make any statements like that? I disagreed with your statements and this is what I got in return. if you wish to continue this please go to an off topic thread. I don't feel I did anything wrong. if I'm wrong then my self removal should be enough to satisfy all involved.
It's clear to me that you are reading things into my questions. I was literally attempting to get answers to a couple of questions related to the search. It's as simple as that.
There is a very specific reason I was asking these questions. All I will say is that a little while ago I identified what I suspect is the truth behind all of the confusion with the flight path. I'm afraid proving my suspicions will be very difficult. Nonetheless, I've been working toward that end. That said, it explains a lot--even the missing plot at 20:04.
My point: I am trying to figure out what happened and why. Occasionally me asking a question about a specific topic is nothing more than me asking a question about a specific topic.
-
What info is there regarding Portland radio operators or PDX tower personnel about their recollections of the flight path?
I know what Ammerman's recollections are. I know what Bill Scott's recollections were. I am a little unclear as to where the FBI stands, after all, DBC could not have both landed in the search area and died. I know what the placard indicates per R99's drift analysis. And, I know what the money find spot tells me.
Anything reputable concerning testimony from PDX tower personnel or others would be much appreciated.
-
By the way, my theory has DBC surviving. I do not need 305 to fly over Tena Bar or any such nonsense. Indeed, DBC could have landed in the FBI search area and for whatever reason traveled to Tena Bar and buried the cash.
If I'm questioning the flight path, it's because it doesn't add up in my mind.
-
. . .
Tom Kaye:
Anecdotally, the original air traffic controller that handled the Northwest Airlines flight north of Portland was interviewed directly over the phone. He volunteered that he was sure that Flight #305 never left the V23 airway the entire time he had them on radar.
So who is correct? Tom Kaye (and others) or Eric Ulis. They can't both be right!
-
Thanks, Georger. This is substantive documentation. The plot thickens, eh, Watson????
-
. . .
Tom Kaye:
Anecdotally, the original air traffic controller that handled the Northwest Airlines flight north of Portland was interviewed directly over the phone. He volunteered that he was sure that Flight #305 never left the V23 airway the entire time he had them on radar.
So who is correct? Tom Kaye (and others) or Eric Ulis. They can't both be right!
I'm going to enjoy very much listening to GEORGER after I'm proven right...and I will be.
Cheers!
-
Let's have some fun here.
1) GEORGER states that Ammerman told him that 305 never left V23.
2) I state that Ammerman qualified his comments to me about that, stating that 305 could have slipped out of the western boundary west of PDX.
3) Tom Kaye states that the controller he spoke with told him that 305 never left V23.
OK, so I reached out to Tom and asked him if it was Ammerman with whom he had the V23 conversation. He told me he didn't know because Geoffrey Gray had handed him the phone and that GG would know.
So, I reached out to GG and he confirmed that yes Ammerman was the controller that Tom spoke with.
So, we have somewhat conflicting info here if we take a hardline view of some of Ammerman's comments on V23. With that in mind, I looked and determined that the furthest east point for centerline V23 is the VOR just NW of Battle Ground. If you measure from that furthest east centerline point to the west 5 statute miles (Ammerman said V23 is 10 miles wide) you arrive at a point over Ridgefield, WA that is west of I-5. Also, following that western boundary up you actually pass over the eastern portion of Woodland, WA on top of I-5.
Therefore, if we accept the hard V23 western boundary, the jet could have actually traveled over the eastern portion of Woodland and over Ridgefield to the west of I-5.
Now, if you accept a western boundary that allows for the jet to slip beyond the five mile western boundary you end up literally on top of Tena Bar.
Consider this, William Scott said he flew to the west of Portland. Ammerman also said that the airliner passed west of Portland but not as far west as Beaverton. In fact, if you hold firm to the hard V23 western boundary it is not possible to pass west of Portland and stay in V23 (if heading 160 per Ammerman). Which version is correct?
In conclusion, yes GEORGER, you are correct, all of these things cannot be true.
May I suggest that what we have are recollections that cannot be measured to within 500 feet, or 1000 feet, or 5000 feet. It is better to view this with a broader lens and attempt to gain a general understanding and perception of what happened. Otherwise you run the risk of getting caught up on a detail that may well be false. After all, I know with certainty that everything Ammerman and Scott have stated cannot be accurate. It's simply impossible.
-
Let's have some fun here.
1) GEORGER states that Ammerman told him that 305 never left V23.
2) I state that Ammerman qualified his comments to me about that, stating that 305 could have slipped out of the western boundary west of PDX.
3) Tom Kaye states that the controller he spoke with told him that 305 never left V23.
OK, so I reached out to Tom and asked him if it was Ammerman with whom he had the V23 conversation. He told me he didn't know because Geoffrey Gray had handed him the phone and that GG would know.
So, I reached out to GG and he confirmed that yes Ammerman was the controller that Tom spoke with.
So, we have somewhat conflicting info here if we take a hardline view of some of Ammerman's comments on V23. With that in mind, I looked and determined that the furthest east point for centerline V23 is the VOR just NW of Battle Ground. If you measure from that furthest east centerline point to the west 5 statute miles (Ammerman said V23 is 10 miles wide) you arrive at a point over Ridgefield, WA that is west of I-5. Also, following that western boundary up you actually pass over the eastern portion of Woodland, WA on top of I-5.
Therefore, if we accept the hard V23 western boundary, the jet could have actually traveled over the eastern portion of Woodland and over Ridgefield to the west of I-5.
Now, if you accept a western boundary that allows for the jet to slip beyond the five mile western boundary you end up literally on top of Tena Bar.
Consider this, William Scott said he flew to the west of Portland. Ammerman also said that the airliner passed west of Portland but not as far west as Beaverton. In fact, if you hold firm to the hard V23 western boundary it is not possible to pass west of Portland and stay in V23 (if heading 160 per Ammerman). Which version is correct?
In conclusion, yes GEORGER, you are correct, all of these things cannot be true.
May I suggest that what we have are recollections that cannot be measured to within 500 feet, or 1000 feet, or 5000 feet. It is better to view this with a broader lens and attempt to gain a general understanding and perception of what happened. Otherwise you run the risk of getting caught up on a detail that may well be false. After all, I know with certainty that everything Ammerman and Scott have stated cannot be accurate. It's simply impossible.
Let me add that when Ammerman said a "heading" of 160 degrees he was saying that the airliner was going straight south, or 180 degrees, with respect to the grid lines. The magnetic variation in Portland at the time of the hijacking was about 20 degrees East which means that it must be added to the 160 degrees to determine the direction of travel of the airliner.
Don't let these numbers confuse you. It was standard air traffic control.
-
Let's have some fun here.
1) GEORGER states that Ammerman told him that 305 never left V23.
2) I state that Ammerman qualified his comments to me about that, stating that 305 could have slipped out of the western boundary west of PDX.
3) Tom Kaye states that the controller he spoke with told him that 305 never left V23.
OK, so I reached out to Tom and asked him if it was Ammerman with whom he had the V23 conversation. He told me he didn't know because Geoffrey Gray had handed him the phone and that GG would know.
So, I reached out to GG and he confirmed that yes Ammerman was the controller that Tom spoke with.
So, we have somewhat conflicting info here if we take a hardline view of some of Ammerman's comments on V23. With that in mind, I looked and determined that the furthest east point for centerline V23 is the VOR just NW of Battle Ground. If you measure from that furthest east centerline point to the west 5 statute miles (Ammerman said V23 is 10 miles wide) you arrive at a point over Ridgefield, WA that is west of I-5. Also, following that western boundary up you actually pass over the eastern portion of Woodland, WA on top of I-5.
Therefore, if we accept the hard V23 western boundary, the jet could have actually traveled over the eastern portion of Woodland and over Ridgefield to the west of I-5.
Now, if you accept a western boundary that allows for the jet to slip beyond the five mile western boundary you end up literally on top of Tena Bar.
Consider this, William Scott said he flew to the west of Portland. Ammerman also said that the airliner passed west of Portland but not as far west as Beaverton. In fact, if you hold firm to the hard V23 western boundary it is not possible to pass west of Portland and stay in V23 (if heading 160 per Ammerman). Which version is correct?
In conclusion, yes GEORGER, you are correct, all of these things cannot be true.
May I suggest that what we have are recollections that cannot be measured to within 500 feet, or 1000 feet, or 5000 feet. It is better to view this with a broader lens and attempt to gain a general understanding and perception of what happened. Otherwise you run the risk of getting caught up on a detail that may well be false. After all, I know with certainty that everything Ammerman and Scott have stated cannot be accurate. It's simply impossible.
Oh Good!
Simon says: "Now you can pick on Kaye and GG for a change!"
-
Just got a document, reply. re- F106 assignments that evening:
"A few years ago I was looking through channels for ‘Dawson’, the guy you identified, although I had no idea what the exact name was at the time. I never could get the rank and the name you gave to match and I wasn't aware of the "Dawson" article you passed along. Once I connected this was the Legislator you were talking about things lined up. I got names and e-mail addresses for a few people of the right job classifications who were at the McChord direction center in Nov 71 but none of them a Dawson. I just sent out e-mails asking "are you the one." which in retrospect is kind of funny. One of the guys answered and we exchanged a couple of e-mails. He said he was off duty that night, but that he heard about it the Cooper jacking later. What he related to me was that the F106 crews were called out of a dinner party to be on hot standby while the other two F106 crews were out chasing DB. They were going to make sure 305 didn't deviate and pose a threat. He didn't volunteer anything about who was a director or controller for the 305 operation, and I didn't feel comfortable asking him to "out" someone. At this late date you may never get the full story. But evidently McChord wasn't taking any chances and were prepared to launch if the need arose."
I have replied and asked: "What do you mean by deviate? Deviate from what? From V23? Was there an agreement 305 would stay on or close to V23?"
-
A couple of days ago I emailed Cliff Ammerman the yellow FBI Flight Path map and asked him to look at it and let me know if it looked right to him. He called me back this morning and we spoke quite awhile about the map and the flight path. He clarified a lot.
I am going to succinctly write a post regarding this and have it on the forum within a couple of hours.
-
A couple of days ago I emailed Cliff Ammerman the yellow FBI Flight Path map and asked him to look at it and let me know if it looked right to him. He called me back this morning and we spoke quite awhile about the map and the flight path. He clarified a lot.
I am going to succinctly write a post regarding this and have it on the forum within a couple of hours.
But you already wrote a document about your interviews with Ammerman? So this is nullify your first interview?
These "interviews" have taken on the status of a barking dog!
Ammerman;s contact has been shared with many others now - hopefully somebody will get this barking dog situation straightened out.
-
I sent Cliff Ammerman a copy of the yellow FBI Flight Path map and asked him to review it and let me know if it looked right to him. He called me this morning about the map and said he “would not argue with this track.” In other words, that it may well be correct.
Naturally, I asked him how this all adds up given the comments about turning south east of Kelso and the T-33 not changing headings as it trailed at least five miles behind 305.
Cliff explained to me in great detail how this all works.
First off, he did say that he thought 305 turned south (or SW according to the FBI map) before Battle Ground. But he explained to me that on his radar screen back in 1971, targets resembled an equal (=) sign. And, that the location of the target would actually be located somewhere on that equal sign line which was not very precise.
Cliff stated that this equal sign would align itself perpendicular to the radar station that the data was coming from. Therefore, as the target is moving, the equal sign is ever so slowly realigning itself relative to the radar station that the radar data is coming from.
In addition, he stated that the further away the target is from the radar station the bigger the equal sign gets. In other words, the precise location of the jet is more uncertain.
Cliff told me that his display utilized radar data from a station near Salem, OR. Moreover, that the scale of his screen was probably 150 miles because he was covering two sectors. What this meant was that at the point where 305 was handed off to him, north of Teledo, the equal sign represented a line about 15 miles long. In other words, he would know that the jet was somewhere along that 15-mile-long line.
He stated that as the jet continued south and got closer to the Salem radar site the equal sign would get smaller—in other words, more precise. He estimates that the equal sign measured between 5 to 8 miles wide around the PDX area. What this means is that 305 could have been anywhere along this 5 to 8 mile long equal sign line at that point. Consider, that the orientation of the equal sign display near PDX would be essentially northwest to southeast.
Therefore, looking at his radar display, he could not target precisely where the jet was located. Rather, he had a general idea. Also, he stated that given the 150-mile scale that he was on, he would not notice a change in 305’s direction unless it was something that was held for a little while.
All of this means that the T-33 could have stayed on a consistent heading of 160 even though 305 itself was making turns here and there as depicted on the yellow map. Moreover, that he would not notice these turns on his radar screen. Again, the equal sign target display on his screen would simply show 305 heading south with the T-33 trailing behind.
I asked him about the problems of knowing whether 305 stayed within V23 proper given that the equal sign target display is actually longer than the entire V23 corridor is wide at certain points. He said that what they would normally do is notify the pilots if the center of the equal sign display got to the outer edge of the Victor airway. But, in fact, that the jet may actually already be a few miles out of the airway or a few miles within the airway. In other words, the system was not very precise.
Cliff and I discussed the map and he stated that regardless of who put it together that he would think that they would have to use an array of radar data from different sites to be as accurate as possible. In particular, he stated that Portland Tower radar should be pretty precise because the scale they were working with was probably 40 miles as opposed to the 150-mile scale he was working with.
All of this said, I have a hard time believing the Air Force contacted Portland Tower, or any other non-military radar facility, to get their radar data to craft the flight path. That said, perhaps they did.
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.
-
I sent Cliff Ammerman a copy of the yellow FBI Flight Path map and asked him to review it and let me know if it looked right to him. He called me this morning about the map and said he “would not argue with this track.” In other words, that it may well be correct.
Naturally, I asked him how this all adds up given the comments about turning south east of Kelso and the T-33 not changing headings as it trailed at least five miles behind 305.
Cliff explained to me in great detail how this all works.
First off, he did say that he thought 305 turned south (or SW according to the FBI map) before Battle Ground. But he explained to me that on his radar screen back in 1971, targets resembled an equal (=) sign. And, that the location of the target would actually be located somewhere on that equal sign line which was not very precise.
Cliff stated that this equal sign would align itself perpendicular to the radar station that the data was coming from. Therefore, as the target is moving, the equal sign is ever so slowly realigning itself relative to the radar station that the radar data is coming from.
In addition, he stated that the further away the target is from the radar station the bigger the equal sign gets. In other words, the precise location of the jet is more uncertain.
Cliff told me that his display utilized radar data from a station near Salem, OR. Moreover, that the scale of his screen was probably 150 miles because he was covering two sectors. What this meant was that at the point where 305 was handed off to him, north of Teledo, the equal sign represented a line about 15 miles long. In other words, he would know that the jet was somewhere along that 15-mile-long line.
He stated that as the jet continued south and got closer to the Salem radar site the equal sign would get smaller—in other words, more precise. He estimates that the equal sign measured between 5 to 8 miles wide around the PDX area. What this means is that 305 could have been anywhere along this 5 to 8 mile long equal sign line at that point. Consider, that the orientation of the equal sign display near PDX would be essentially northwest to southeast.
Therefore, looking at his radar display, he could not target precisely where the jet was located. Rather, he had a general idea. Also, he stated that given the 150-mile scale that he was on, he would not notice a change in 305’s direction unless it was something that was held for a little while.
All of this means that the T-33 could have stayed on a consistent heading of 160 even though 305 itself was making turns here and there as depicted on the yellow map. Moreover, that he would not notice these turns on his radar screen. Again, the equal sign target display on his screen would simply show 305 heading south with the T-33 trailing behind.
I asked him about the problems of knowing whether 305 stayed within V23 proper given that the equal sign target display is actually longer than the entire V23 corridor is wide at certain points. He said that what they would normally do is notify the pilots if the center of the equal sign display got to the outer edge of the Victor airway. But, in fact, that the jet may actually already be a few miles out of the airway or a few miles within the airway. In other words, the system was not very precise.
Cliff and I discussed the map and he stated that regardless of who put it together that he would think that they would have to use an array of radar data from different sites to be as accurate as possible. In particular, he stated that Portland Tower radar should be pretty precise because the scale they were working with was probably 40 miles as opposed to the 150-mile scale he was working with.
All of this said, I have a hard time believing the Air Force contacted Portland Tower, or any other non-military radar facility, to get their radar data to craft the flight path. That said, perhaps they did.
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.
Ammerman has had a copy of the FBI and NWA maps since 2010!
-
I sent Cliff Ammerman a copy of the yellow FBI Flight Path map and asked him to review it and let me know if it looked right to him. He called me this morning about the map and said he “would not argue with this track.” In other words, that it may well be correct.
Naturally, I asked him how this all adds up given the comments about turning south east of Kelso and the T-33 not changing headings as it trailed at least five miles behind 305.
Cliff explained to me in great detail how this all works.
First off, he did say that he thought 305 turned south (or SW according to the FBI map) before Battle Ground. But he explained to me that on his radar screen back in 1971, targets resembled an equal (=) sign. And, that the location of the target would actually be located somewhere on that equal sign line which was not very precise.
Cliff stated that this equal sign would align itself perpendicular to the radar station that the data was coming from. Therefore, as the target is moving, the equal sign is ever so slowly realigning itself relative to the radar station that the radar data is coming from.
In addition, he stated that the further away the target is from the radar station the bigger the equal sign gets. In other words, the precise location of the jet is more uncertain.
Cliff told me that his display utilized radar data from a station near Salem, OR. Moreover, that the scale of his screen was probably 150 miles because he was covering two sectors. What this meant was that at the point where 305 was handed off to him, north of Teledo, the equal sign represented a line about 15 miles long. In other words, he would know that the jet was somewhere along that 15-mile-long line.
He stated that as the jet continued south and got closer to the Salem radar site the equal sign would get smaller—in other words, more precise. He estimates that the equal sign measured between 5 to 8 miles wide around the PDX area. What this means is that 305 could have been anywhere along this 5 to 8 mile long equal sign line at that point. Consider, that the orientation of the equal sign display near PDX would be essentially northwest to southeast.
Therefore, looking at his radar display, he could not target precisely where the jet was located. Rather, he had a general idea. Also, he stated that given the 150-mile scale that he was on, he would not notice a change in 305’s direction unless it was something that was held for a little while.
All of this means that the T-33 could have stayed on a consistent heading of 160 even though 305 itself was making turns here and there as depicted on the yellow map. Moreover, that he would not notice these turns on his radar screen. Again, the equal sign target display on his screen would simply show 305 heading south with the T-33 trailing behind.
I asked him about the problems of knowing whether 305 stayed within V23 proper given that the equal sign target display is actually longer than the entire V23 corridor is wide at certain points. He said that what they would normally do is notify the pilots if the center of the equal sign display got to the outer edge of the Victor airway. But, in fact, that the jet may actually already be a few miles out of the airway or a few miles within the airway. In other words, the system was not very precise.
Cliff and I discussed the map and he stated that regardless of who put it together that he would think that they would have to use an array of radar data from different sites to be as accurate as possible. In particular, he stated that Portland Tower radar should be pretty precise because the scale they were working with was probably 40 miles as opposed to the 150-mile scale he was working with.
All of this said, I have a hard time believing the Air Force contacted Portland Tower, or any other non-military radar facility, to get their radar data to craft the flight path. That said, perhaps they did.
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.
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. ;)
-
I sent Cliff Ammerman a copy of the yellow FBI Flight Path map and asked him to review it and let me know if it looked right to him. He called me this morning about the map and said he “would not argue with this track.” In other words, that it may well be correct.
Naturally, I asked him how this all adds up given the comments about turning south east of Kelso and the T-33 not changing headings as it trailed at least five miles behind 305.
Cliff explained to me in great detail how this all works.
First off, he did say that he thought 305 turned south (or SW according to the FBI map) before Battle Ground. But he explained to me that on his radar screen back in 1971, targets resembled an equal (=) sign. And, that the location of the target would actually be located somewhere on that equal sign line which was not very precise.
Cliff stated that this equal sign would align itself perpendicular to the radar station that the data was coming from. Therefore, as the target is moving, the equal sign is ever so slowly realigning itself relative to the radar station that the radar data is coming from.
In addition, he stated that the further away the target is from the radar station the bigger the equal sign gets. In other words, the precise location of the jet is more uncertain.
Cliff told me that his display utilized radar data from a station near Salem, OR. Moreover, that the scale of his screen was probably 150 miles because he was covering two sectors. What this meant was that at the point where 305 was handed off to him, north of Teledo, the equal sign represented a line about 15 miles long. In other words, he would know that the jet was somewhere along that 15-mile-long line.
He stated that as the jet continued south and got closer to the Salem radar site the equal sign would get smaller—in other words, more precise. He estimates that the equal sign measured between 5 to 8 miles wide around the PDX area. What this means is that 305 could have been anywhere along this 5 to 8 mile long equal sign line at that point. Consider, that the orientation of the equal sign display near PDX would be essentially northwest to southeast.
Therefore, looking at his radar display, he could not target precisely where the jet was located. Rather, he had a general idea. Also, he stated that given the 150-mile scale that he was on, he would not notice a change in 305’s direction unless it was something that was held for a little while.
All of this means that the T-33 could have stayed on a consistent heading of 160 even though 305 itself was making turns here and there as depicted on the yellow map. Moreover, that he would not notice these turns on his radar screen. Again, the equal sign target display on his screen would simply show 305 heading south with the T-33 trailing behind.
I asked him about the problems of knowing whether 305 stayed within V23 proper given that the equal sign target display is actually longer than the entire V23 corridor is wide at certain points. He said that what they would normally do is notify the pilots if the center of the equal sign display got to the outer edge of the Victor airway. But, in fact, that the jet may actually already be a few miles out of the airway or a few miles within the airway. In other words, the system was not very precise.
Cliff and I discussed the map and he stated that regardless of who put it together that he would think that they would have to use an array of radar data from different sites to be as accurate as possible. In particular, he stated that Portland Tower radar should be pretty precise because the scale they were working with was probably 40 miles as opposed to the 150-mile scale he was working with.
All of this said, I have a hard time believing the Air Force contacted Portland Tower, or any other non-military radar facility, to get their radar data to craft the flight path. That said, perhaps they did.
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.
*Are these the equal signs Cliff is talking about? This is supposed to be a Sage system screen photo "? These photos were posted at DZ years ago. Can anyone provide a screen shot showing equal signs?
If you are gearing up to claim that the radar returns were no better than Cliff's sighting of equal sign blips on a screen, I think you had better rethink that.
*Why did 305 take V23? Who made the decision and when?
-
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.
-
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?
-
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?
-
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?
So you acknowledge your west path is dependent on 'loopholes'. All +/- errors favor your west path version only - can't possibly favor anything else! The money is at Tena Bar ONLY because there was a west path and a dz that allowed money to be at Tena Bar, and nowhere else, and no other mechanism for delivery. All roads must lead to Rome. And partridge in a pear tree too. No other options happened or can happen.
You might have said, if you were fair: The equal signs on Cliff's screen make it obvious there was built-in error in all of Cliff's observations/decisions. A fair person might ask: so the radar data must be more accurate than Cliff's ability to resolve positions on his screen - yes/no ? - and what are the implications of that.
Cliff has opened new ground here, which needs further examination .... obviously you have all the answers. :congrats:
-
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?
So you acknowledge your west path is dependent on 'loopholes'. All +/- errors favor your west path version only - can't possibly favor anything else! The money is at Tena Bar ONLY because there was a west path and a dz that allowed money to be at Tena Bar, and nowhere else, and no other mechanism for delivery. All roads must lead to Rome. And partridge in a pear tree too. No other options happened or can happen.
You might have said, if you were fair: The equal signs on Cliff's screen make it obvious there was built-in error in all of Cliff's observations/decisions. A fair person might ask: so the radar data must be more accurate than Cliff's ability to resolve positions on his screen - yes/no ? - and what are the implications of that.
Cliff has opened new ground here, which needs further examination .... obviously you have all the answers. :congrats:
Georger, I suggest that you read EU's post above related to Cliff's discussion about the radar image on his screen.
-
I think a refresher is in order here.
As R99 and I have discussed the Western Flight Path we have focused on some facts that are troubling if one supports the FBI Flight Path:
1) Nothing has ever been found in the FBI search area or along the FBI Flight Path as one would expect after 48 years.
2) The placard was found WEST (upwind) of 305 according to the FBI Flight Path.
3) The money was found on Tena Bar which is no where near the FBI search area or flight path.
4) Captain Scott states the jet was 10 miles west of where the FBI was searching and he flew west of Portland.
5) The FBI Flight Path appears erratic and includes some questionable turns, for example, the very sharp turn around the west end of PDX.
Now R99 and I have been torched by a few for actually considering the above stated and not just blindly accepting the FBI Flight Path. Moreover, some have argued that all kinds of witnesses place the jet on the FBI Flight Path as noted below:
1) The F-106 pilots.
2) Portland Tower personnel.
3) ATC controller.
4) George Harrison.
Well if there is one thing I've learned in life it's that people are often full of s#!+, especially when debating a point. Therefore, I have deliberately attempted to get to the truth.
Lo and behold, I speak with Ammerman and it becomes abundantly clear that as the ATC controller he cannot vouch for the FBI Flight Path. Specifically, he said it may be correct, but that is because it falls within the miles-long range of possible points on his radar screen. Now for those who care to look, so too does a Western Flight Path.
So here we are. We have settled the question about what Ammerman saw that night and what that tells us about the flight path. Truth be told, it tells us little about whether the FBI Flight Path is correct, or the Western Flight Path is correct. How can it? After all, his radar display did not account for a level of precision that could identify a jet 500 feet, or 1000 feet, or even 10,000 feet one way or the other.
Now let's get back to the others who apparently can attest to the precise location of 305.
Where is testimony from the F-106 pilots or T-33 pilot claiming to know the precise location of 305? Here's the answer...there won't be.
How about the Portland Tower personnel who can attest to the precise location of 305? Well, apparently there is someone who thinks the jet was further east than the FBI thought. OK, so who is this person? What makes this person think the FBI f'd up in the other direction? Is it at all possible that this unnamed person is just flat out wrong?
Now let's talk about George Harrison. What information and data did he possess that enabled him to precisely identify where 305 was when DB Cooper jumped? How can we measure the veracity of this data if we haven't seen it? How much tolerance was built into this data and results?
How was the FBI Flight Path actually put together by the Air Force and by whom? What data was used? Is there some way to get our hands on this data? Simply coughing up an FBI document that references SAGE radar means little at this point. After all, how do we know that SAGE was involved at all? Who specifically from the Air Force explained to the FBI that SAGE was used? Has it not occurred to anyone that perhaps the comment in the FBI document about SAGE being utilized was incorrect? Have we not all read several FBI documents with similar errors?
In closing, one thing I can say with certainty is that the evidence doesn't lie. It cannot be wrong. The placard was found west of the FBI Flight Path, the money was found on Tena Bar, and nothing has been found in the FBI search area (or near it) after nearly 48 years.
-
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.
-
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?
So you acknowledge your west path is dependent on 'loopholes'. All +/- errors favor your west path version only - can't possibly favor anything else! The money is at Tena Bar ONLY because there was a west path and a dz that allowed money to be at Tena Bar, and nowhere else, and no other mechanism for delivery. All roads must lead to Rome. And partridge in a pear tree too. No other options happened or can happen.
You might have said, if you were fair: The equal signs on Cliff's screen make it obvious there was built-in error in all of Cliff's observations/decisions. A fair person might ask: so the radar data must be more accurate than Cliff's ability to resolve positions on his screen - yes/no ? - and what are the implications of that.
Cliff has opened new ground here, which needs further examination .... obviously you have all the answers. :congrats:
Georger, I suggest that you read EU's post above related to Cliff's discussion about the radar image on his screen.
I am getting a bit tired of EU's reports and interpretations of Ammerman, etc. It is past time for Ammerman to go public and speak for himself! Instead we get these daily bytes from The Prophets of Ammerman', with truck loads of moral advice attached! And claims of technical/professional/electoral superiority attached!
One large point you are missing is the original 'FBI Search map', socalled, is a probability map of estimates for where and when Cooper jumped. If Ammerman was going to dispute that map where has he been for the last fifty years! According to EU, Cliff has never even seen that map before! Not until EU sent him a copy a day ago. We sent him a copy of the map in 2010. Tom Kaye referred him to that map in 2009? Others have interviewed Ammerman also! Until EU came along, Ammerman has never deviated from his central message: 305 never left V23.
What you and EU seem to be doing is replacing the radar tapes (primary evidence) which you can't get and are pissed off about in your failed FOIA requests, with the 'memory of the controller' (Cliff Ammerman). But we don't even get to hear this from Cliff himself. Everything from Ammerman is coming through the filter of Eric Ulis and you! We don't even get to question Cliff directly! We must rely on Ulis and you, as the spokesmen for Clifford Ammerman! :-\
What you and EU are doing isn't science. This is politics.
You and EU are simply recycling old concerns and questions. You can't put new wine in old skins!
-
Disagreeing with a conclusion doesn't mean someone is a "hater". That's a Blevins comment...
post removed
-
Disagreeing with a conclusion doesn't mean someone is a "hater". That's a Blevins comment...
post removed
The ultimate insult. Equating anything I say to Blevins. But that's okay, as I said in the "offending" post, no one defines me.
I stand by my post. A few people have made a cottage industry out of attacking me on a personal level through a combination of outright lies, condescending rhetoric, and petty name calling. You don't want to challenge me on that point.
The acts and the language are pathetic.
-
I'm not challenging anything. The reference I seen was one Robert uses often. It doesn't imply you are blens by the way......I just don't like that term.
-
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.
Someone must know where it is? Maybe Kermit knows.
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, can you give me more details relative to local landmarks of where Crawford is. I'd like to add this dimension to my road trip along "Flight Path Highway - SR 503" BTW, would you like to come along? You could add a lot to the commentary.
I see that Venersborg is a few miles north of Hockinson - kind of half-way between Hockinson and Amboy. Is that half-way area where Crawford is? Can your friend shed any light on the new FBI LZ that they established there in 1975. Do folks know that is where the Feds are saying DB Cooper landed? Did anyone ever see any FBI agents look for DB Cooper there? Etc....
-
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.
Someone must know where it is? Maybe Kermit knows.
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, can you give me more details relative to local landmarks of where Crawford is. I'd like to add this dimension to my road trip along "Flight Path Highway - SR 503" BTW, would you like to come along? You could add a lot to the commentary.
I see that Venersborg is a few miles north of Hockinson - kind of half-way between Hockinson and Amboy. Is that half-way area where Crawford is? Can your friend shed any light on the new FBI LZ that they established there in 1975. Do folks know that is where the Feds are saying DB Cooper landed? Did anyone ever see any FBI agents look for DB Cooper there? Etc....
Is this what 99 and Kermit are talking about? https://washington.hometownlocator.com/wa/clark/crawford.cfm Note the map is adjustable. Looks to me like its in your trip zone? Battle Ground is nearby ... Cedars on Salmon Creek ... Its below Ariel, Amboy, and north of Brush Prairie-Orchards-Hockinson. I found these doing a Google search on Crawford, WA.
Who is saying the Feds said Cooper landed there in 75? After the conference?
-
Crawford, WA ??
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
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.
More baloney. Georger has never "claimed" any such thing! BUT YOU KEEP CLAIMING IT FOR HIM! PLAY IT AGAIN SAM! And start telling the truth for a CHAnge.
Please end your personal attacks or I will start calling you DONALD99!
:rofl:
-
Where is Crawford? Was the map I posted correct or not?
Meanwhile Flyjack is way ahead! Note the date on the 302 page - 11/25. That should answer the person claiming the FBI didnt even have a flight path map yet?
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? Consult Jo Weber for help.
*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?
*** What are EU's special skills? His skill set? Time in lab work, forensics, special courses he has taken at Harvard, his computer skills, . . . systems analysis, systems operations, studio technician, programming skills . . . plays what model of guitar, reads musics, Bubbleology and Karaoke skills in his Elvis act . . .
-
Are these two maps of a Crawford WA, the same place?
Top one is mine, the bottom one is Flyjack's.
-
OK. My loc and FJ's location of Crawford WA are one and the same. The same as Kermit's so far as I can tell. Both places are coterminous with - Battle Ground Lake. So, note this: as per prior discussions about rail lines and Cooper escape routes dating back many years to at least 2000AD in these DB Cooper fora !
There is a long established railroad line passing right through Crawford WA which was there in 1971, which also descends down to the Vancouver area, and by extension right behind the Fazio property going back north to the Seattle area with rail lines also connecting to the Merwin-Ariel area! Just follow the bouncing ball.
This opens up a number of possibilities including the option that no west path going over Tena Bar is even needed, in order to get Cooper and Cooper money south to the Tena Bar area! Hallelujah - the rail escape theory is borne again! The Chosen Won! You can know it - by it's fruits! ;)
Crawford Washington is found! A direct connection to Tena Bar is found, by rail line. :congrats:
Special thanks to all those who helped! :bravo:
*Oh. Forgot to add this for those wishing to check the maps. https://washington.hometownlocator.com/wa/clark/crawford.cfm
Do you see that rail line on both maps? Just trace it!
-
rail line from Crawford to behind Lower River road/Tena Bar Fazio property.
size restriction prevents a larger map ... follow the rail line from Crawford to Tena Bar. Its that simple. Or, to the Columbia, Vancouver Lake, railroad bridge over the Columbia to Portland ... the options are many and connect to many scenarios for getting money to Tena Bar. All it requires is that Cooper is alive or somebody found his money and walked south to the Vancouver-Portland area. Hobo encampments near the rail line at Vamcouver. Possible interaction between hobos and Cooper after he bailed and walked south along the rail line? Money is then found in 1980 at Tena Bar.
-
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.
-
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.
Kermit,
I see highway 503 and if Cooper jumped 4 miles west of 503 and northwest of Crawford, then I think we can disregard the statement from the Portland radar operator. The airliner would be outside the eastern boundary of V-12 and not 1 or 2 miles east of the centerline of V-12.
And the airliner would not be able to get to the "23 DME" point at the time it said it was there.
-
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.
Kermit,
I see highway 503 and if Cooper jumped 4 miles west of 503 and northwest of Crawford, then I think we can disregard the statement from the Portland radar operator. The airliner would be outside the eastern boundary of V-12 and not 1 or 2 miles east of the centerline of V-12.
And the airliner would not be able to get to the "23 DME" point at the time it said it was there.
Once again Robert, you seem to be always trying to twist things just ever so slightly to somehow discredit the findings of so many experts who were actually there in 1971 ! The area that was mentioned was a Possible LZ !
Obviously that’s NOT the flight path unless you are assuming he jumped and went straight down with no wind !
Since there is no evidence to prove he was a no pull, what mileage did you calculate as a drift considering there was indeed a wind factor ? Whether you think Cooper was a no pull or not is irrelevant as formulating a possible landing zone a day or two after jump, it would only be prudent to estimate Cooper’s drift ! Also what’s this V 12 ? All of a sudden you’ve changed from V 23 to V 12. BTW Have you ever driven the 503 ? If you had you’d quickly realize it goes right through the area known as Crawford !
-
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. >:D
Merry Christmas. :offtopicman:
-
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. >:D
Merry Christmas. :offtopicman:
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?
-
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. >:D
Merry Christmas. :offtopicman:
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?
No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.
I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go! ;) I see no point in beating a dead horse.
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. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything! :)
*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.
-
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.
-
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.
Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.
Trust you? That is precisely the problem. Your words/advice are silly. For whatever reason you have chosen to bypass standard protocols, in favor of a social media blitz as if the social media could 'win' you credibility in what very clearly is a scientific, technical, and cultural debate! Now your cheery side has given way to anger, inevitably. :o
R99 filed FOIA requests. Yes? R99 has listed his credentials. (EU has no similar credentials!) R99 could have submitted his 'west path analysis for peer review among his colleagues. To a peer review journal in his field of expertise. Based on positive results from that and support from his peer community of avionics experts, he could have then filed a FOIA request. The normal method is to get 'standing' in a professional field, before asking for support and recognition and evidence!
It seems to me you in particular have the cart before the horse. You come out of nowhere under the logo of ELVIS and immediately ask for the Popular Mechanics Prize! It's silly on its face. ???
Why are you haranguing me or anyone about all of this? Why are you making your case in social forums? Go to Walmart with a sign and see if you can get the Beauty Cream Department to give you the recognition and status you seek! Or try the Automotive Department! Put Marissa Tomei and Vinny on the stand and get their professional testimony - Elvis.
:rofl:
-
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?
No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.
I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go! ;) I see no point in beating a dead horse.
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. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything! :)
*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.
Georger,
I don't have the slightest idea of who "wrote the placard analysis of your work". I wasn't aware that anyone had done such a thing. So if such an analysis actually exists, would they please post it here, or provide a link, so that we can all see it. I would love to be exposed as a quack and/or fraud or whatever. So go to it and please provide progress reports to this site on how you are doing.
EU and I are indeed "up against entrenched doctrine" on the flight path problem. But I think we will both just stick with the facts and go where they lead. EU and I are not in 100 percent agreement on that flight path but we both agree that the so-called FBI flight path simply can't be correct. In any event, I told EU a long time ago that we did not have to agree on anything - not even the time of day.
If Kermit can be patient for a few more days, I will post on a number of things and some will be expanded quite a bit. I am sure he will be interested and probably disagree with the new information.
Georger, you forgot to mention your aeronautical qualifications. Your modesty is overwhelming.
-
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?
No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.
I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go! ;) I see no point in beating a dead horse.
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. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything! :)
*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.
Georger,
I don't have the slightest idea of who "wrote the placard analysis of your work". I wasn't aware that anyone had done such a thing. So if such an analysis actually exists, would they please post it here, or provide a link, so that we can all see it. I would love to be exposed as a quack and/or fraud or whatever. So go to it and please provide progress reports to this site on how you are doing.
EU and I are indeed "up against entrenched doctrine" on the flight path problem. But I think we will both just stick with the facts and go where they lead. EU and I are not in 100 percent agreement on that flight path but we both agree that the so-called FBI flight path simply can't be correct. In any event, I told EU a long time ago that we did not have to agree on anything - not even the time of day.
If Kermit can be patient for a few more days, I will post on a number of things and some will be expanded quite a bit. I am sure he will be interested and probably disagree with the new information.
Georger, you forgot to mention your aeronautical qualifications. Your modesty is overwhelming.
Submit your west path analysis, or, your analysis of the FBI/NWA/USAF search path map - to an accredited peer review journal in your field. Pending the outcome you may get 'standing' to make further requests in the DB Cooper case.
Or, take whatever standing you have and go to Court, maybe? Consult an attorney.
You could have done this years ago!
Otherwise you are whistling Dixie in your bath water.
-
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.
Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.
Trust you? That is precisely the problem. Your words/advice are silly. For whatever reason you have chosen to bypass standard protocols, in favor of a social media blitz as if the social media could 'win' you credibility in what very clearly is a scientific, technical, and cultural debate! Now your cheery side has given way to anger, inevitably. :o
R99 filed FOIA requests. Yes? R99 has listed his credentials. (EU has no similar credentials!) R99 could have submitted his 'west path analysis for peer review among his colleagues. To a peer review journal in his field of expertise. Based on positive results from that and support from his peer community of avionics experts, he could have then filed a FOIA request. The normal method is to get 'standing' in a professional field, before asking for support and recognition and evidence!
It seems to me you in particular have the cart before the horse. You come out of nowhere under the logo of ELVIS and immediately ask for the Popular Mechanics Prize! It's silly on its face. ???
Why are you haranguing me or anyone about all of this? Why are you making your case in social forums? Go to Walmart with a sign and see if you can get the Beauty Cream Department to give you the recognition and status you seek! Or try the Automotive Department! Put Marissa Tomei and Vinny on the stand and get their professional testimony - Elvis.
:rofl:
The above is just more baloney from Georger. For about the last 10 years, I have posted here and on DropZone about the problems with the so-called FBI flight path. And I think I can say with complete certainty that those posts have been read by many "peers" who did not take exception to or even comment on them. The only "unbelievers" seem to be people with little or no professional aeronautical experience or training and don't have the background to evaluate what is fact and what is not. They simply select sides.
ADDENDUM: The same goes for Georger's post #2730 above. And #2732 below. Ditto #2734.
-
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.
Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.
Trust you? That is precisely the problem. Your words/advice are silly. For whatever reason you have chosen to bypass standard protocols, in favor of a social media blitz as if the social media could 'win' you credibility in what very clearly is a scientific, technical, and cultural debate! Now your cheery side has given way to anger, inevitably. :o
R99 filed FOIA requests. Yes? R99 has listed his credentials. (EU has no similar credentials!) R99 could have submitted his 'west path analysis for peer review among his colleagues. To a peer review journal in his field of expertise. Based on positive results from that and support from his peer community of avionics experts, he could have then filed a FOIA request. The normal method is to get 'standing' in a professional field, before asking for support and recognition and evidence!
It seems to me you in particular have the cart before the horse. You come out of nowhere under the logo of ELVIS and immediately ask for the Popular Mechanics Prize! It's silly on its face. ???
Why are you haranguing me or anyone about all of this? Why are you making your case in social forums? Go to Walmart with a sign and see if you can get the Beauty Cream Department to give you the recognition and status you seek! Or try the Automotive Department! Put Marissa Tomei and Vinny on the stand and get their professional testimony - Elvis.
:rofl:
The above is just more baloney from Georger. For about the last 10 years, I have posted here and on DropZone about the problems with the so-called FBI flight path. And I think I can say with complete certainty that those posts have been read by many "peers" who did not take exception to or even comment on them. The only "unbelievers" seem to be people with little or no professional aeronautical experience or training and don't have the background to evaluate what is fact and what is not. They simply select sides.
Ah, the perils of peer review in forums and bars. The stories of barking dogs!
-
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?
No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.
I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go! ;) I see no point in beating a dead horse.
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. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything! :)
*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.
Georger,
I don't have the slightest idea of who "wrote the placard analysis of your work". I wasn't aware that anyone had done such a thing. So if such an analysis actually exists, would they please post it here, or provide a link, so that we can all see it. I would love to be exposed as a quack and/or fraud or whatever. So go to it and please provide progress reports to this site on how you are doing.
EU and I are indeed "up against entrenched doctrine" on the flight path problem. But I think we will both just stick with the facts and go where they lead. EU and I are not in 100 percent agreement on that flight path but we both agree that the so-called FBI flight path simply can't be correct. In any event, I told EU a long time ago that we did not have to agree on anything - not even the time of day.
If Kermit can be patient for a few more days, I will post on a number of things and some will be expanded quite a bit. I am sure he will be interested and probably disagree with the new information.
Georger, you forgot to mention your aeronautical qualifications. Your modesty is overwhelming.
It’s fast approaching 48 years now so of course I’m a very patient person ! What’s the big hurry anyway !
I don’t disagree necessarily with any of your opinions but I do find it interesting that you can state “ the so-called FBI flight path simply CAN’T Be correct “ ! However where are your facts to prove a ton of very very intelligent experts in their field are all incorrect ? Is the answer that you think your intelligence far exceeds everyone ! I’ll give you credit for being a very intelligent individual! However there are a ton of very intelligent people who devised a flight path and they have incredible knowledge also ! I’m awaiting your proof that they are all kinda dumb and your THEORY is actual the real deal. It’s a decent THEORY but very few facts that can be described as proof ! The location of the placard cannot be entered as proof. It was somewhere for over 8 years and no one knows for sure IF it was always where it was found ! We don’t even know for sure where the hunter found it as he brought it back to camp before realizing it might have some real significance! Also the Tina Bar Money find proves nothing EXCEPT it is indeed a small part of the Cooper loot. So I’m awaiting patiently for your latest revision which once again has to be updated since your previous calculations which you based on 4 miles West of I 5 when it turns out that there is actually a 1 S. BTW 1S is now known to be 503 and 503 is quite a way from I 5 ! Of course I guess your new calculations will once again support your Western flight path. You’re good at Math so start your new figuring !
-
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.
Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.
Trust you? That is precisely the problem. Your words/advice are silly. For whatever reason you have chosen to bypass standard protocols, in favor of a social media blitz as if the social media could 'win' you credibility in what very clearly is a scientific, technical, and cultural debate! Now your cheery side has given way to anger, inevitably. :o
R99 filed FOIA requests. Yes? R99 has listed his credentials. (EU has no similar credentials!) R99 could have submitted his 'west path analysis for peer review among his colleagues. To a peer review journal in his field of expertise. Based on positive results from that and support from his peer community of avionics experts, he could have then filed a FOIA request. The normal method is to get 'standing' in a professional field, before asking for support and recognition and evidence!
It seems to me you in particular have the cart before the horse. You come out of nowhere under the logo of ELVIS and immediately ask for the Popular Mechanics Prize! It's silly on its face. ???
Why are you haranguing me or anyone about all of this? Why are you making your case in social forums? Go to Walmart with a sign and see if you can get the Beauty Cream Department to give you the recognition and status you seek! Or try the Automotive Department! Put Marissa Tomei and Vinny on the stand and get their professional testimony - Elvis.
:rofl:
The above is just more baloney from Georger. For about the last 10 years, I have posted here and on DropZone about the problems with the so-called FBI flight path. And I think I can say with complete certainty that those posts have been read by many "peers" who did not take exception to or even comment on them. The only "unbelievers" seem to be people with little or no professional aeronautical experience or training and don't have the background to evaluate what is fact and what is not. They simply select sides.
ADDENDUM: The same goes for Georger's post #2730 above. And #2732 below.
So - why didn't you go for peer review right from the start - clear back when Sluggo posted your material on his website? You start by submitting your material not to some website on DB Cooper, but to a peer review journal in your field, and see if it gets accepted for publication. Acceptance for publication means that some group of peers see merit in the work, enough for public exposure and discussion. Try JSTOR! ;D
Of course all of that takes time and planning and a lead time. I guess you and Ulis are in a hurry? You want immediate acceptance like: 'Aint Nothin But a Hound Dog' which went viral?
That aside, a number of people have noted that your initial basis for a west path begins with a series of assumptions at the Toledo Intersection vs. actual data. Your claim for 305 taking a straight path from Toledo to Canby is not 'data' but 'preference'. Your preference! You have stated your preference in several similar statements: (a) that is what I would do, (b) that is what pilots would do, (c) that is what pilots wishing to avoid PDX with a bomb on board would do, . . . and the like. Your west path claim begins with this assumption, then you try to make things fit by analysing and manipulating data. Then you are forced to bring in the placard position. Your placard analysis then claims to prove '305 flew a straight path between Toledo and Canby, right over Tena Bar which then explains why money was found on Tena Bar (you say).
It all goes back to the original assumption you have made at Toledo. 'That is the path I would take, or good pilots would chose that route, etc etc...'
A simple question to the pilots might have solved this issue: "Did you fly a straight line between Toledo and Canby to avoid PDX and Portland because you had a bomb on board?" Yes or No.
-
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.
Trust me, none of this science and analysis gives a damn about your popularity contest.
Trust you? That is precisely the problem. Your words/advice are silly. For whatever reason you have chosen to bypass standard protocols, in favor of a social media blitz as if the social media could 'win' you credibility in what very clearly is a scientific, technical, and cultural debate! Now your cheery side has given way to anger, inevitably. :o
R99 filed FOIA requests. Yes? R99 has listed his credentials. (EU has no similar credentials!) R99 could have submitted his 'west path analysis for peer review among his colleagues. To a peer review journal in his field of expertise. Based on positive results from that and support from his peer community of avionics experts, he could have then filed a FOIA request. The normal method is to get 'standing' in a professional field, before asking for support and recognition and evidence!
It seems to me you in particular have the cart before the horse. You come out of nowhere under the logo of ELVIS and immediately ask for the Popular Mechanics Prize! It's silly on its face. ???
Why are you haranguing me or anyone about all of this? Why are you making your case in social forums? Go to Walmart with a sign and see if you can get the Beauty Cream Department to give you the recognition and status you seek! Or try the Automotive Department! Put Marissa Tomei and Vinny on the stand and get their professional testimony - Elvis.
:rofl:
The above is just more baloney from Georger. For about the last 10 years, I have posted here and on DropZone about the problems with the so-called FBI flight path. And I think I can say with complete certainty that those posts have been read by many "peers" who did not take exception to or even comment on them. The only "unbelievers" seem to be people with little or no professional aeronautical experience or training and don't have the background to evaluate what is fact and what is not. They simply select sides.
ADDENDUM: The same goes for Georger's post #2730 above. And #2732 below.
So - why didn't you go for peer review right from the start - clear back when Sluggo posted your material on his website? You start by submitting your material not to some website on DB Cooper, but to a peer review journal in your field, and see if it gets accepted for publication. Acceptance for publication means that some group of peers see merit in the work, enough for public exposure and discussion. Try JSTOR! ;D
Of course all of that takes time and planning and a lead time. I guess you and Ulis are in a hurry? You want immediate acceptance like: 'Aint Nothin But a Hound Dog' which went viral?
That aside, a number of people have noted that your initial basis for a west path begins with a series of assumptions at the Toledo Intersection vs. actual data. Your claim for 305 taking a straight path from Toledo to Canby is not 'data' but 'preference'. Your preference! You have stated your preference in several similar statements: (a) that is what I would do, (b) that is what pilots would do, (c) that is what pilots wishing to avoid PDX with a bomb on board would do, . . . and the like. Your west path claim begins with this assumption, then you try to make things fit by analysing and manipulating data. Then you are forced to bring in the placard position. Your placard analysis then claims to prove '305 flew a straight path between Toledo and Canby, right over Tena Bar which then explains why money was found on Tena Bar (you say).
It all goes back to the original assumption you have made at Toledo. 'That is the path I would take, or good pilots would chose that route, etc etc...'
A simple question to the pilots might have solved this issue: "Did you fly a straight line between Toledo and Canby to avoid PDX and Portland because you had a bomb on board?" Yes or No.
Georger,
If you had bothered to read posts other than your own, you would have known that I called attention to the problems with the FBI flight path about 10 years ago and I covered the covered the problems with the entire segment of it.
This is just more nonsense from Georger.
-
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?
No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.
I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go! ;) I see no point in beating a dead horse.
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. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything! :)
*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.
Georger,
I don't have the slightest idea of who "wrote the placard analysis of your work". I wasn't aware that anyone had done such a thing. So if such an analysis actually exists, would they please post it here, or provide a link, so that we can all see it. I would love to be exposed as a quack and/or fraud or whatever. So go to it and please provide progress reports to this site on how you are doing.
EU and I are indeed "up against entrenched doctrine" on the flight path problem. But I think we will both just stick with the facts and go where they lead. EU and I are not in 100 percent agreement on that flight path but we both agree that the so-called FBI flight path simply can't be correct. In any event, I told EU a long time ago that we did not have to agree on anything - not even the time of day.
If Kermit can be patient for a few more days, I will post on a number of things and some will be expanded quite a bit. I am sure he will be interested and probably disagree with the new information.
Georger, you forgot to mention your aeronautical qualifications. Your modesty is overwhelming.
It’s fast approaching 48 years now so of course I’m a very patient person ! What’s the big hurry anyway !
I don’t disagree necessarily with any of your opinions but I do find it interesting that you can state “ the so-called FBI flight path simply CAN’T Be correct “ ! However where are your facts to prove a ton of very very intelligent experts in their field are all incorrect ? Is the answer that you think your intelligence far exceeds everyone ! I’ll give you credit for being a very intelligent individual! However there are a ton of very intelligent people who devised a flight path and they have incredible knowledge also ! I’m awaiting your proof that they are all kinda dumb and your THEORY is actual the real deal. It’s a decent THEORY but very few facts that can be described as proof ! The location of the placard cannot be entered as proof. It was somewhere for over 8 years and no one knows for sure IF it was always where it was found ! We don’t even know for sure where the hunter found it as he brought it back to camp before realizing it might have some real significance! Also the Tina Bar Money find proves nothing EXCEPT it is indeed a small part of the Cooper loot. So I’m awaiting patiently for your latest revision which once again has to be updated since your previous calculations which you based on 4 miles West of I 5 when it turns out that there is actually a 1 S. BTW 1S is now known to be 503 and 503 is quite a way from I 5 ! Of course I guess your new calculations will once again support your Western flight path. You’re good at Math so start your new figuring !
Kermit,
I don't know what your math skills are but here is something that I am sure you will be able to explain.
How could the airliner travel 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and then 6 Nautical Miles in the very next minute while flying at a constant airspeed? That is just one problem with the FBI flight path but please explain how this could happen.
I understand that Georger is a peer reviewer for JSTOR so I am sure he will be able to help you get a paper published there.
-
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?
No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.
I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go! ;) I see no point in beating a dead horse.
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. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything! :)
*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.
Georger,
I don't have the slightest idea of who "wrote the placard analysis of your work". I wasn't aware that anyone had done such a thing. So if such an analysis actually exists, would they please post it here, or provide a link, so that we can all see it. I would love to be exposed as a quack and/or fraud or whatever. So go to it and please provide progress reports to this site on how you are doing.
EU and I are indeed "up against entrenched doctrine" on the flight path problem. But I think we will both just stick with the facts and go where they lead. EU and I are not in 100 percent agreement on that flight path but we both agree that the so-called FBI flight path simply can't be correct. In any event, I told EU a long time ago that we did not have to agree on anything - not even the time of day.
If Kermit can be patient for a few more days, I will post on a number of things and some will be expanded quite a bit. I am sure he will be interested and probably disagree with the new information.
Georger, you forgot to mention your aeronautical qualifications. Your modesty is overwhelming.
It’s fast approaching 48 years now so of course I’m a very patient person ! What’s the big hurry anyway !
I don’t disagree necessarily with any of your opinions but I do find it interesting that you can state “ the so-called FBI flight path simply CAN’T Be correct “ ! However where are your facts to prove a ton of very very intelligent experts in their field are all incorrect ? Is the answer that you think your intelligence far exceeds everyone ! I’ll give you credit for being a very intelligent individual! However there are a ton of very intelligent people who devised a flight path and they have incredible knowledge also ! I’m awaiting your proof that they are all kinda dumb and your THEORY is actual the real deal. It’s a decent THEORY but very few facts that can be described as proof ! The location of the placard cannot be entered as proof. It was somewhere for over 8 years and no one knows for sure IF it was always where it was found ! We don’t even know for sure where the hunter found it as he brought it back to camp before realizing it might have some real significance! Also the Tina Bar Money find proves nothing EXCEPT it is indeed a small part of the Cooper loot. So I’m awaiting patiently for your latest revision which once again has to be updated since your previous calculations which you based on 4 miles West of I 5 when it turns out that there is actually a 1 S. BTW 1S is now known to be 503 and 503 is quite a way from I 5 ! Of course I guess your new calculations will once again support your Western flight path. You’re good at Math so start your new figuring !
Kermit,
I don't know what your math skills are but here is something that I am sure you will be able to explain.
How could the airliner travel 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and then 6 Nautical Miles in the very next minute while flying at a constant airspeed? That is just one problem with the FBI flight path but please explain how this could happen.
I understand that Georger is a peer reviewer for JSTOR so I am sure he will be able to help you get a paper published there.
My Math skills are actually extremely good but obviously nowhere near as good as yours of course!
Most brilliant Math geniuses like yourself will quickly realize why but I’ll just let your mind work at it !
I’m awaiting your new calculations ! Is this your best shot at once again trying to discredit everyone that was ever involved ? Kinda weak but I doubt that will slow you down ! Carry on ! Cooper was a no pull over Tina Bar and that’s the truth ! If anyone doesn’t buy in..... well ......
-
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?
No egg on my face. I didnt do the analysis. If you knew what you were doing instead of spouting off all the time and actually read what people write before you go off on a tangent ......... then you would know who wrote the placard analysis of your work. It wasn't me. Sorry. Next time read what people say.
I believe I am sparing everyone more R99 drama. In fact I know I am! It has come to the point where reducing drama in this forum is a priority. Your west path isnt going anywhere - that's a certain fact, in my estimation. There is nowhere for it go! ;) I see no point in beating a dead horse.
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. I base that opinion in part on the efforts you already have taken to try and penetrate the status quo, with negative results. .......... I wont labor this any further, what appears to me to be obvious. You never read what I write anyway! You are not going to give any credence to anything I say! I am the last person on Earth to give the Great R99 any advice on anything! :)
*BTW you never did reply to Kermit and he deserves an answer.
Georger,
I don't have the slightest idea of who "wrote the placard analysis of your work". I wasn't aware that anyone had done such a thing. So if such an analysis actually exists, would they please post it here, or provide a link, so that we can all see it. I would love to be exposed as a quack and/or fraud or whatever. So go to it and please provide progress reports to this site on how you are doing.
EU and I are indeed "up against entrenched doctrine" on the flight path problem. But I think we will both just stick with the facts and go where they lead. EU and I are not in 100 percent agreement on that flight path but we both agree that the so-called FBI flight path simply can't be correct. In any event, I told EU a long time ago that we did not have to agree on anything - not even the time of day.
If Kermit can be patient for a few more days, I will post on a number of things and some will be expanded quite a bit. I am sure he will be interested and probably disagree with the new information.
Georger, you forgot to mention your aeronautical qualifications. Your modesty is overwhelming.
It’s fast approaching 48 years now so of course I’m a very patient person ! What’s the big hurry anyway !
I don’t disagree necessarily with any of your opinions but I do find it interesting that you can state “ the so-called FBI flight path simply CAN’T Be correct “ ! However where are your facts to prove a ton of very very intelligent experts in their field are all incorrect ? Is the answer that you think your intelligence far exceeds everyone ! I’ll give you credit for being a very intelligent individual! However there are a ton of very intelligent people who devised a flight path and they have incredible knowledge also ! I’m awaiting your proof that they are all kinda dumb and your THEORY is actual the real deal. It’s a decent THEORY but very few facts that can be described as proof ! The location of the placard cannot be entered as proof. It was somewhere for over 8 years and no one knows for sure IF it was always where it was found ! We don’t even know for sure where the hunter found it as he brought it back to camp before realizing it might have some real significance! Also the Tina Bar Money find proves nothing EXCEPT it is indeed a small part of the Cooper loot. So I’m awaiting patiently for your latest revision which once again has to be updated since your previous calculations which you based on 4 miles West of I 5 when it turns out that there is actually a 1 S. BTW 1S is now known to be 503 and 503 is quite a way from I 5 ! Of course I guess your new calculations will once again support your Western flight path. You’re good at Math so start your new figuring !
Kermit,
I don't know what your math skills are but here is something that I am sure you will be able to explain.
How could the airliner travel 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and then 6 Nautical Miles in the very next minute while flying at a constant airspeed? That is just one problem with the FBI flight path but please explain how this could happen.
I understand that Georger is a peer reviewer for JSTOR so I am sure he will be able to help you get a paper published there.
My Math skills are actually extremely good but obviously nowhere near as good as yours of course!
Most brilliant Math geniuses like yourself will quickly realize why but I’ll just let your mind work at it !
I’m awaiting your new calculations ! Is this your best shot at once again trying to discredit everyone that was ever involved ? Kinda weak but I doubt that will slow you down ! Carry on ! Cooper was a no pull over Tina Bar and that’s the truth ! If anyone doesn’t buy in..... well ......
My mind did work on that 3 Nautical Miles one minute and 6 Nautical Miles the next minute while flying at a constant airspeed problem and the result is the western bypass of Portland (roughly Malay to Canby) flight path. There are other problems with the FBI flight path but I am sure you, as a true believer, would not be interested in explaining them.
-
I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.
-
I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.
Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!
Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? Or hear of him? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar.
-
I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.
Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!
Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar.
Yes that will be awesome ! I hope there will be a chance to ask her some questions from the audience.
-
I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.
Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!
Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar.
Yes that will be awesome ! I hope there will be a chance to ask her some questions from the audience.
What about this Eric of Portland? Ever run into him or hear about him, in the Cooper context?
-
I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.
Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!
Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar.
Yes that will be awesome ! I hope there will be a chance to ask her some questions from the audience.
What about this Eric of Portland? Ever run into him or hear about him, in the Cooper context?
No I don’t know this Eric of Portland. Do you have more info on him ?
-
I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.
Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!
Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar.
Yes that will be awesome ! I hope there will be a chance to ask her some questions from the audience.
What about this Eric of Portland? Ever run into him or hear about him, in the Cooper context?
Kermit and Georger are good at patting each other on the back.
At the same time they are supporting the FBI flight path, they are making posts that Captain Scott's daughter said the airliner flew west of Portland and over Tina Bar. Kermit has made several posts just above ridiculing an overflight of Tina Bar.
So congratulations to Kermit and Georger. I don't know if they are the biggest BS's to have ever been on this and the DropZone site, but they are definitely contenders. And that is quite an accomplishment.
I expect that they will now claim that Scott didn't know where he was, and then will deny making that claim in subsequent posts when it serves their purposes.
-
I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.
Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!
Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar.
Yes that will be awesome ! I hope there will be a chance to ask her some questions from the audience.
What about this Eric of Portland? Ever run into him or hear about him, in the Cooper context?
No I don’t know this Eric of Portland. Do you have more info on him ?
I can get it very easily - do you want it? Let me make a call tomorrow and I will get back to you. Thanks.
-
I find it interesting that U&R are ignoring the Tosaw legacy. Tosaw wasnt an engineer and he didn't do math calcs personally, so far as I know, but he hired people who did! That's a fact. He used engineers in several of his well known projects. He consulted with engineers in his Cooper work. He definitely interviewed Scott and Rataczak, several times. He filed a number of FOI's to get govt records - in one of his cases he filed against the US Navy and won records, including the log of a US destroyer. He regularly talked with FBI agents. His calls to the Portland office during one phase of his work was so intense, Portland assigned an agent to take his calls! Several of the people who worked for him said they thought Tosaw was an FBI agent working on the case. He had copies of official documents, and he had a large folded copy of the FBI search (color white), similar people say to the large search maps seen in photos of offcials who were looking for Cooper in 1972.
So far as I know Tosaw never claimed Cooper had landed at Tena Bar. But he did believe Cooper had landed in the Columbia upstream of Caterpillar Island. Tosaw said the FBI's mistake was in the timing and position of where Copper bailed. H never questioned the claimed flight path and he was in a position to do so had he ever uncovered evidence that the flight path was wrong. Tosaw was usually very thorough in the technical side of his research, for cases he handled. He always availed himself of the latest technology available in his searches.
Its worth considering.
-
I find it interesting that U&R are ignoring the Tosaw legacy. Tosaw wasnt an engineer and he didn't do math calcs personally, so far as I know, but he hired people who did! That's a fact. He used engineers in several of his well known projects. He consulted with engineers in his Cooper work. He definitely interviewed Scott and Rataczak, several times. He filed a number of FOI's to get govt records - in one of his cases he filed against the US Navy and won records, including the log of a US destroyer. He regularly talked with FBI agents. His calls to the Portland office during one phase of his work was so intense, Portland assigned an agent to take his calls! Several of the people who worked for him said they thought Tosaw was an FBI agent working on the case. He had copies of official documents, and he had a large folded copy of the FBI search (color white), similar people say to the large search maps seen in photos of offcials who were looking for Cooper in 1972.
So far as I know Tosaw never claimed Cooper had landed at Tena Bar. But he did believe Cooper had landed in the Columbia upstream of Caterpillar Island. Tosaw said the FBI's mistake was in the timing and position of where Copper bailed. H never questioned the claimed flight path and he was in a position to do so had he ever uncovered evidence that the flight path was wrong. Tosaw was usually very thorough in the technical side of his research, for cases he handled. He always availed himself of the latest technology available in his searches.
Its worth considering.
As I have mentioned on a number of occasions, Tosaw's work and interest in the Tina Bar area was definitely considered.
-
I find it interesting that U&R are ignoring the Tosaw legacy. Tosaw wasnt an engineer and he didn't do math calcs personally, so far as I know, but he hired people who did! That's a fact. He used engineers in several of his well known projects. He consulted with engineers in his Cooper work. He definitely interviewed Scott and Rataczak, several times. He filed a number of FOI's to get govt records - in one of his cases he filed against the US Navy and won records, including the log of a US destroyer. He regularly talked with FBI agents. His calls to the Portland office during one phase of his work was so intense, Portland assigned an agent to take his calls! Several of the people who worked for him said they thought Tosaw was an FBI agent working on the case. He had copies of official documents, and he had a large folded copy of the FBI search (color white), similar people say to the large search maps seen in photos of offcials who were looking for Cooper in 1972.
So far as I know Tosaw never claimed Cooper had landed at Tena Bar. But he did believe Cooper had landed in the Columbia upstream of Caterpillar Island. Tosaw said the FBI's mistake was in the timing and position of where Copper bailed. H never questioned the claimed flight path and he was in a position to do so had he ever uncovered evidence that the flight path was wrong. Tosaw was usually very thorough in the technical side of his research, for cases he handled. He always availed himself of the latest technology available in his searches.
Its worth considering.
As I have mentioned on a number of occasions, Tosaw's work and interest in the Tina Bar area was definitely considered.
Mr. Shadow: I may post again at 4:00am and 5:00am, maybe even at 6:00am and 8:00am. Stay tuned for instant intervention - nullification. Knock yourself out.
:rofl:
-
I find it interesting that U&R are ignoring the Tosaw legacy. Tosaw wasnt an engineer and he didn't do math calcs personally, so far as I know, but he hired people who did! That's a fact. He used engineers in several of his well known projects. He consulted with engineers in his Cooper work. He definitely interviewed Scott and Rataczak, several times. He filed a number of FOI's to get govt records - in one of his cases he filed against the US Navy and won records, including the log of a US destroyer. He regularly talked with FBI agents. His calls to the Portland office during one phase of his work was so intense, Portland assigned an agent to take his calls! Several of the people who worked for him said they thought Tosaw was an FBI agent working on the case. He had copies of official documents, and he had a large folded copy of the FBI search (color white), similar people say to the large search maps seen in photos of offcials who were looking for Cooper in 1972.
So far as I know Tosaw never claimed Cooper had landed at Tena Bar. But he did believe Cooper had landed in the Columbia upstream of Caterpillar Island. Tosaw said the FBI's mistake was in the timing and position of where Copper bailed. H never questioned the claimed flight path and he was in a position to do so had he ever uncovered evidence that the flight path was wrong. Tosaw was usually very thorough in the technical side of his research, for cases he handled. He always availed himself of the latest technology available in his searches.
Its worth considering.
As I have mentioned on a number of occasions, Tosaw's work and interest in the Tina Bar area was definitely considered.
Mr. Shadow: I may post again at 4:00am and 5:00am, maybe even at 6:00am and 8:00am. Stay tuned for instant response.
:rofl:
Great! Why don't you describe your aeronautical qualifications in one of those posts.
-
Is there a falsifiable standard to this Western Flight Path? Without it, where does this discussion get us?
-
Is there a falsifiable standard to this Western Flight Path? Without it, where does this discussion get us?
Please explain what you would consider to be a falsifiable standard here.
As Georger has stated above, he has known for years (10+ years?) that Captain Scott had told people that he bypassed Portland on the west side and probably flown over Tina Bar. This same information has come from a number of people other than the ones that Georger cited.
The Malay to Canby bypass only saves about 2 or 3 Nautical Miles in distance flown and at a ground speed of 3 nautical miles per minute this means about 40 seconds to 1 minute in time. And this time is not large enough to show up in the available data.
Time wise, George Harrison's notes describe the airliner as being "23 DME Nautical Miles" from the Portland VORTAC (now named the Battleground VORTAC) and south of Portland at 8:18 PM PST. This puts the airliner on the west edge of V-23 if it flew direct from Malay to Canby. And this also means that the airliner would have a VERY difficult time getting to that point if it was well north of the Portland VORTAC (according to some radar claims) at the claimed 8:13 jump time (which is claimed by some) and stayed on V-23 and the V-23 centerline (as claimed by some).
Three FOIA actions involving the FBI/DOJ/FAA were filed in an attempt to get the unredacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts for the flight south from Seattle. Two of those actions went directly through my US Congressman's Office and the FBI's Congressional Liaison Office. The end result was two pieces of paper, which are posted on this site, and which did not provide any useful information related to the flight path. It should be noted that the information we were seeking was transmitted over regular air traffic control frequencies and could be heard by anyone with a VHF radio receiver. And quite a few people reportedly did listen in.
The communications between the airliner and NWA were conducted over the ARINC radio system to ARINC ground stations. From these ground stations, the information to be passed to NWA would be typed into a teletype and then passed over a ground network to the appropriate NWA station. In the hijacking, a voice communication link was also established so that NWA personnel and the airliner could talk to each other. The ARINC personnel also sent a teletype version of those conversation over the ground link. Normally for short conversations it took about two minutes from the time a voice communication was made until ARINC had a teletype version transmitted. In the case of the "23 DME" transmission, it took four minutes which means that this was probably a longer conversation, other things being equal.
ARINC is a commercial subscription service to the airline industry. Consequently, I did not ask for their transcripts although some were included in the "FBI Notes" and at other places. I only asked for the transcripts of the public transmissions that were made over the Federal Air Traffic Control system.
All of the above has been discussed in greater detail over the last several years.
Any suggestions?
-
Is there a falsifiable standard to this Western Flight Path? Without it, where does this discussion get us?
Please explain what you would consider to be a falsifiable standard here.
As Georger has stated above, he has known for years (10+ years?) that Captain Scott had told people that he bypassed Portland on the west side and probably flown over Tina Bar. This same information has come from a number of people other than the ones that Georger cited.
The Malay to Canby bypass only saves about 2 or 3 Nautical Miles in distance flown and at a ground speed of 3 nautical miles per minute this means about 40 seconds to 1 minute in time. And this time is not large enough to show up in the available data.
Time wise, George Harrison's notes describe the airliner as being "23 DME Nautical Miles" from the Portland VORTAC (now named the Battleground VORTAC) and south of Portland at 8:18 PM PST. This puts the airliner on the west edge of V-23 if it flew direct from Malay to Canby. And this also means that the airliner would have a VERY difficult time getting to that point if it was well north of the Portland VORTAC (according to some radar claims) at the claimed 8:13 jump time (which is claimed by some) and stayed on V-23 and the V-23 centerline (as claimed by some).
Three FOIA actions involving the FBI/DOJ/FAA were filed in an attempt to get the unredacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts for the flight south from Seattle. Two of those actions went directly through my US Congressman's Office and the FBI's Congressional Liaison Office. The end result was two pieces of paper, which are posted on this site, and which did not provide any useful information related to the flight path. It should be noted that the information we were seeking was transmitted over regular air traffic control frequencies and could be heard by anyone with a VHF radio receiver. And quite a few people reportedly did listen in.
The communications between the airliner and NWA were conducted over the ARINC radio system to ARINC ground stations. From these ground stations, the information to be passed to NWA would be typed into a teletype and then passed over a ground network to the appropriate NWA station. In the hijacking, a voice communication link was also established so that NWA personnel and the airliner could talk to each other. The ARINC personnel also sent a teletype version of those conversation over the ground link. Normally for short conversations it took about two minutes from the time a voice communication was made until ARINC had a teletype version transmitted. In the case of the "23 DME" transmission, it took four minutes which means that this was probably a longer conversation, other things being equal.
ARINC is a commercial subscription service to the airline industry. Consequently, I did not ask for their transcripts although some were included in the "FBI Notes" and at other places. I only asked for the transcripts of the public transmissions that were made over the Federal Air Traffic Control system.
All of the above has been discussed in greater detail over the last several years.
Any suggestions?
As Georger has stated above, he has known for years (10+ years?) that Captain Scott had told people that he bypassed Portland on the west side and probably flown over Tina Bar. This same information has come from a number of people other than the ones that Georger cited.
and probably flown over Tina Bar. ? :rofl:
When and where has Georger ever said that ....... or claimed others said that!
This is crazy. :rofl: Stop putting words in my mouth and making shit up!
You did not answer Andrade's question: Is there a falsifiable standard to this Western Flight Path? Without it, where does this discussion get us?
You could start by asking Andrade what he means by: 'falsifiable standard to this Western Flight Path'.
-
I did post this earlier - FROM SNOWMAN! Snowman is not Georger! And nowhere does it say Scott or anyone else claimed 305 flew over Tina Bar.
snowmman
Jul 8, 2008, 7:10 PM
Post #3408 of 45529 (12066 views)
Shortcut
Scott gave at least one talk (1997) [In reply to]
Quote | Reply
________________________________________
I found this news article about a talk Scott gave in 1997 to a local Aero club where he lived.
(edit)
Scott talks about a makeshift waist pack, with money being transferred to it from the original bag. He wouldn't have seen this. So he's interpreting from something. Tina? This would be interesting if there's any truth to it, as it might mean the money arrived on the ground in something other than the bank bag?
He also mentions that turbulence triggered his exchange with Cooper at 2005? So that's interesting.
Note Scott seemed to like the Lake Merwin LZ idea. Maybe they listened to Scott more than Rataczak?
One who was there tells intriguing tales of DB Cooper
Arizona Daily Star - NewsBank - Jan 21, 1997
After a quarter of a century, D.B. Cooper still packs the house.
Well, to be precise, it was actually pilot William Scott's recent talk at the Aero Club of Arizona - an organization for aviation enthusiasts - that pulled in a standing-room-only crowd.
The Aero Club, which has about 100 members in the Tucson and Green Valley area, presents speakers on everything from the Civil Air Patrol to aerobatic flying.
..
When they reached Seattle, they flew in a holding pattern until Cooper's demands were met. Scott didn't tell the plane's 36 passengers what was happening.
``But I think they got the message when the stewardess came down the aisle with a parachute over her shoulder,'' he added, cracking up the audience.
When the plane landed in Seattle, Cooper released the passengers and two of the stewardesses, collected the loot and the three extra parachutes and told Scott to fly to Mexico. They were to stop in Reno, Nev., to refuel.
``I was happy he negotiated over the phone through Tina (Mucklow, the stewardess),'' Scott said.
Once Cooper got his sack of money, he ordered Scott to fly as low and slowly as possible and drop the back steps.
After cutting up a parachute, he emptied the sack of loot and began stuffing $20 bills into his makeshift waist pack.
When Mucklow expressed astonishment at the huge pile of money, Cooper reached over and handed her a stack of bills.
``We can't take tips,'' she said.
Instructing Mucklow to go forward, he told her to pull the curtain between the first class and coach sections. He said that she was to turn the lights down, and she wasn't to look back.
She joined Scott and the co-pilot in the cockpit. Later, the plane ran into turbulence.
Scott wondered if Cooper was still aboard. Turning on the public address system, he inquired, ``Is everything all right, sir?''
``Yeah, everything is fine,'' Cooper replied.
After a while, Scott noticed that the cabin gauges were fluctuating wildly.
``I thought maybe I'd call him, but I thought maybe I'd just not bother him,'' he said.
In Reno, Scott managed to land the plane with the steps down without damaging aircraft.
Before leaving the plane, he and the crew searched for Cooper's briefcase but were unable to find it.
Cooper had jumped in a business suit and street shoes from the plane, which was traveling about 190 miles an hour at 10,000 feet.
At that altitude the temperature was 7 below zero. Cooper - with 20 pounds of money strapped to his waist - had dropped into some of the most rugged country in the Pacific Northwest.
``There was a big reservoir down there with trees in it,'' Scott said. ``I just thought he went down there and got wrapped up in the trees.''
(This post was edited by snowmman on Jul 8, 2008, 10:06 PM)
-
Is there a falsifiable standard to this Western Flight Path? Without it, where does this discussion get us?
Please explain what you would consider to be a falsifiable standard here.
As Georger has stated above, he has known for years (10+ years?) that Captain Scott had told people that he bypassed Portland on the west side and probably flown over Tina Bar. This same information has come from a number of people other than the ones that Georger cited.
The Malay to Canby bypass only saves about 2 or 3 Nautical Miles in distance flown and at a ground speed of 3 nautical miles per minute this means about 40 seconds to 1 minute in time. And this time is not large enough to show up in the available data.
Time wise, George Harrison's notes describe the airliner as being "23 DME Nautical Miles" from the Portland VORTAC (now named the Battleground VORTAC) and south of Portland at 8:18 PM PST. This puts the airliner on the west edge of V-23 if it flew direct from Malay to Canby. And this also means that the airliner would have a VERY difficult time getting to that point if it was well north of the Portland VORTAC (according to some radar claims) at the claimed 8:13 jump time (which is claimed by some) and stayed on V-23 and the V-23 centerline (as claimed by some).
Three FOIA actions involving the FBI/DOJ/FAA were filed in an attempt to get the unredacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts for the flight south from Seattle. Two of those actions went directly through my US Congressman's Office and the FBI's Congressional Liaison Office. The end result was two pieces of paper, which are posted on this site, and which did not provide any useful information related to the flight path. It should be noted that the information we were seeking was transmitted over regular air traffic control frequencies and could be heard by anyone with a VHF radio receiver. And quite a few people reportedly did listen in.
The communications between the airliner and NWA were conducted over the ARINC radio system to ARINC ground stations. From these ground stations, the information to be passed to NWA would be typed into a teletype and then passed over a ground network to the appropriate NWA station. In the hijacking, a voice communication link was also established so that NWA personnel and the airliner could talk to each other. The ARINC personnel also sent a teletype version of those conversation over the ground link. Normally for short conversations it took about two minutes from the time a voice communication was made until ARINC had a teletype version transmitted. In the case of the "23 DME" transmission, it took four minutes which means that this was probably a longer conversation, other things being equal.
ARINC is a commercial subscription service to the airline industry. Consequently, I did not ask for their transcripts although some were included in the "FBI Notes" and at other places. I only asked for the transcripts of the public transmissions that were made over the Federal Air Traffic Control system.
All of the above has been discussed in greater detail over the last several years.
Any suggestions?
Please explain how your placard analysis serves to articulate a whole flight path? Or even a fraction of a flight path?
How does one point make a whole flight path, or orbit, or trajectory path? When you have this discovery worked out be sure and tell NASA!
:chr2:
-
I know for certain that Robert only believes in his own theory and nothing else will ever matter. There’s so much information still out there but Robert actually knows exactly what happened. I will no longer waste my time responding as it will ALWAYS come back to Cooper was a no pull at Tina Bar. How boring and especially since there is no proof to support it except in his mind.
Bruce has a great Tour planned for Nov 24 and it’s free ! I’m not involved but I really think it will be interesting for folks to see the area where all this took place. I hope a lot of Cooperites get aboard ! I’ve read 5 books already about Cooper and might add a few more. I find them all very interesting ! The D B Cooper story is still unsolved in most of our minds and I for one enjoy exploring all the little nicks and crannies.
Not to mention Captain Scott’s daughter appearing and speaking!
Kermit do you know who 'Eric of Portland' was? (a Cooper researcher at Portland circa 2000-8). Whoever he was he claimed to have talked to Scott's family. He reported Scott's family saying 305 flew west of Portland and probably over Tena Bar.
Yes that will be awesome ! I hope there will be a chance to ask her some questions from the audience.
What about this Eric of Portland? Ever run into him or hear about him, in the Cooper context?
No I don’t know this Eric of Portland. Do you have more info on him ?
In the past, Georger has made stronger claims to me than the above about the airliner passing west of Portland. So judge for yourself what he is doing or trying to do.
-
Seattle Times March 15 2001:
"Her husband was convinced Cooper died in the leap, said Frances Scott. "He felt he jumped into Lake Merwin (Cowlitz County) and got tangled up in dead trees and died," she said.
On the 25th anniversary of the heist, Mr. Scott spoke to a local pilots club; 200 people showed up, said his wife.
*From all the available testimony it is clear Scott never said anything about Cooper jumping over Tina Bar, landing anywhere other than near or 'in' Lake Merwin, and he never mentioned Tina Bar. Flying on the west side of PDX is irrelevant to where Scott believed Cooper had jumped and died. Scott's wife confirmed those facts.
-
Doubtful any redaction has taken place. even the FBI makes a reference to no chatter on the radio....it's the company log that's needed..
-
The files in the FBI vault have several pages of one of the transcripts and they redacted them. the photo below shows the FBI file from there website vs the full transcripts we have.
-
Doubtful any redaction has taken place. even the FBI makes a reference to no chatter on the radio....it's the company log that's needed..
What is a "company log"? The Harrison papers are notes taken during the actual hijacking. What we need are the complete Seattle ATC radio transcripts for the flight south and the missing ARINC teletype transcripts that went to the Seattle NWA office.
-
Doubtful any redaction has taken place. even the FBI makes a reference to no chatter on the radio....it's the company log that's needed..
What is a "company log"? The Harrison papers are notes taken during the actual hijacking. What we need are the complete Seattle ATC radio transcripts for the flight south and the missing ARINC teletype transcripts that went to the Seattle NWA office.
That and a General Cooper bibliography! There is no standard Cooper file bibliography. The same and similar documents are being referred to by different names by different people. That has been going on since Cooper discussions started and it only adds to confusion. One case in point is "The Transcript" being used by Tom Kaye. Which transcript? PI Transcript? NWA Transcript? "The Transcript" referred to by Tom Kaye has nothing to do with the PI, NWA, or other socalled transcripts but is a compilation of FBI documents including the Palmer Report!
We need a "General Cooper bibliography" with specific assigned names for specific documents that people can refer to so everyone is on the same page and knows what documents are being referred to!
That bibliography should include tittles like: (a) missing complete Seattle ATC radio transcripts, (b) missing ARINC-NWA teletype transcripts, etc that dont even exist (yet). These documents probably do exist somewhere but have never been made public! "The Company Log" - what does that refer to? Is that the missing ARINC-NWA flight communications teletype transcripts: ?
I agree with your general premise. The need is real.
-
? ? ? ? ?
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF DOCUMENTS:
Crew Interviews – statements by crew members to press or privately
FBI Campbell crew interviews – FBI doc
FBI 302s – msc subjects, time & date stamped
Harrison papers – WSHM doc
Mitchell Interviews - Bill Mitchell passenger interviews
Transcript – Kaye transcripts provided science team by SA Carr, Palmer rept
Transcript – PI flight comms
Transcript – NWA flight comms
Transcript – NWA Company log private NWA-305 communications?
WSHM documents
What is a "company log"? The Harrison papers are notes taken during the actual hijacking. What we need are the complete Seattle ATC radio transcripts for the flight south and the missing ARINC teletype transcripts that went to the Seattle NWA office.
-
Had an interesting talk today with a person who worked for Tosaw. He said he thought that Tosaw was an FBI agent working on the case, due mainly to the documents and maps Tosaw had. I asked: 'why was Tosaw looking where he was looking'? The fellow replied: 'Because of the crew that were flying the plane and the one that noticed something had happened when Cooper jumped'. I replied: 'You mean Anderson' ? The fellow replied 'Yes. That's the guy. Tosaw talked to him and he told Tosaw they were just north of Portland when Cooper jumped. Tosaw had an engineer that told him if Cooper's chute didn't open he might have dropped into the Columbia or close to the Columbia River and drifted down the Columbia'.
;)
-
From Campbell interviews – time of jump.
Anderson stated that approximately 5 to 10 minutes after the last contact with subject at 8:05 pm, they heard and felt an oscillation of the aircraft and commented that the hijacker could have departed causing the unusual vibration since there had been no change in flight parameters or any other external force which would account for this sudden vibration. They telephoned the company representative ( __________ in ___________) shortly thereafter and stated that the ‘oscillation’ which could have been the hijacker’s departure, would have occurred between 8:05 pm and their call to the company five or ten minutes later, the exact time being recorded in the company log. Anderson stated that they had not reached Portland proper but were definitely in the suburbs or immediate vicinity thereof.
Anderson added that no member of the crew went back to check on the presence of the hijacker immediately following the ‘oscillations’ the crew encountered. When the subject let hostess Mucklow go to the cockpit she locked the door behind her.
Anderson added, it had not occurred to them at the time to pinpoint their exact location at the time of the oscillation …
-
Sounds like Rataczak....
-
Sounds like Rataczak....
Thats what I thought. As good as word for word! Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Contrast that with Scott saying he bailed near/over Lake Merwin. :-\
Is it safe to conclude that if Tosaw had talked to Scott, Tosaw would have been dredging Lake Merwin instead of the Columbia ? :rofl:
Is it possible that FBI doc/quote is talking about Anderson and not Ratczk ? Oh I know! It's NORJAK!
-
Sounds like Rataczak....
This is an example of why I always want to see whole documents vs snips from docs. I want to see the date, context etc. Things sometimes overlap with different agents giving different attributions - sometimes from the same source. In this case there is no way two people said the same exact thing!
If I had to guess I would attribute this to Anderson vs. Rataczak. Why? Because in several interviews with Anderson he brings up the issue of a time lag between oscillations and calling in the report to the company. There are only a couple of interviews with Anderson that I am aware of and Anderson brings up the time lag in each interview. In contrast to that I dont know of any interview Rataczak ever gave where he brings up the time delay btwn oscillations and calling in, as is Anderson's consistent focus in all of his interviews. Maybe I am wrong. But, whatever the case there is no way both people spoke the same exact words - no way!
-
The problem with the West Path is that nobody wants to confront the WP supporters about it! Therefore, the WP has fallen into a kind of gulag, or a black hole - whichever you prefer. ... from which it may never and maybe cannot, ever return.
The West Path shall forever remain in storage.
-
If you use the data from the Harrison papers surrounding the 23 miles DME at 8:18 it will present a problem. the plane now has to travel approx. 20 NM to the 23 DME location. Tina Bar is around 8 miles DME arriving at 8:15 so it must travel 20 miles in 3 minutes..
-
The problem with the Rataczak and/or Anderson quotes about the jump time is that it is completely inconsistent with what Rat said on the 2016 History Channel doc. Specifically, that the crew felt the pressure bump and notified flight ops and said, "you may want to mark this spot on the map because our friend may have taken leave of us."
This clearly implies that flight ops was immediately notified after the pressure bump. This is inconsistent with the 302s. Moreover, it is highly unlikely Rat would have immediately notified flight ops about the jump and Anderson to have been unaware of that, therefore leading to Anderson discussing a jump time 5-10 minutes after the bump which apparently went largely unnoticed at the time it occurred.
-
The problem with the Rataczak and/or Anderson quotes about the jump time is that it is completely inconsistent with what Rat said on the 2016 History Channel doc. Specifically, that the crew felt the pressure bump and notified flight ops and said, "you may want to mark this spot on the map because our friend may have taken leave of us."
This clearly implies that flight ops was immediately notified after the pressure bump. This is inconsistent with the 302s. Moreover, it is highly unlikely Rat would have immediately notified flight ops about the jump and Anderson to have been unaware of that, therefore leading to Anderson discussing a jump time 5-10 minutes after the bump which apparently went largely unnoticed at the time it occurred.
I don't see where it's inconsistent. Rataczak states the evening of the hijacking that the time would be recorded in the company log. they were not completely sure he exited. Anderson would see the pressure change on the engineer's panel and notify the pilots of the problem. statements made 45 years later will never match what was said 45 years later. that's the human mind controlling memory. Rataczak was flying the plane. the call was made to Paul Soderlind right after the oscillation. the question surrounds whether or not the bump was recorded vs the oscillation that was on the transcripts. one document states both were felt and other documents separate them. testing showed the oscillation did nothing to the gauges but a noticeable change should of occurred as it's been noted on other copycat hijackings described as a howling noise.
-
The problem with the Rataczak and/or Anderson quotes about the jump time is that it is completely inconsistent with what Rat said on the 2016 History Channel doc. Specifically, that the crew felt the pressure bump and notified flight ops and said, "you may want to mark this spot on the map because our friend may have taken leave of us."
This clearly implies that flight ops was immediately notified after the pressure bump. This is inconsistent with the 302s. Moreover, it is highly unlikely Rat would have immediately notified flight ops about the jump and Anderson to have been unaware of that, therefore leading to Anderson discussing a jump time 5-10 minutes after the bump which apparently went largely unnoticed at the time it occurred.
You provided your own answer: Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?
:rofl:
-
The problem with the Rataczak and/or Anderson quotes about the jump time is that it is completely inconsistent with what Rat said on the 2016 History Channel doc. Specifically, that the crew felt the pressure bump and notified flight ops and said, "you may want to mark this spot on the map because our friend may have taken leave of us."
This clearly implies that flight ops was immediately notified after the pressure bump. This is inconsistent with the 302s. Moreover, it is highly unlikely Rat would have immediately notified flight ops about the jump and Anderson to have been unaware of that, therefore leading to Anderson discussing a jump time 5-10 minutes after the bump which apparently went largely unnoticed at the time it occurred.
I don't see where it's inconsistent. Rataczak states the evening of the hijacking that the time would be recorded in the company log. they were not completely sure he exited. Anderson would see the pressure change on the engineer's panel and notify the pilots of the problem. statements made 45 years later will never match what was said 45 years later. that's the human mind controlling memory. Rataczak was flying the plane. the call was made to Paul Soderlind right after the oscillation. the question surrounds whether or not the bump was recorded vs the oscillation that was on the transcripts. one document states both were felt and other documents separate them. testing showed the oscillation did nothing to the gauges but a noticeable change should of occurred as it's been noted on other copycat hijackings described as a howling noise.
My understanding from the 302s is that Rat contacted Soderman 5-10 minutes after the bump. Rat on the History Channel doc seemed to suggest that immediately after the pressure bump that he contacted Soderman and suggested they mark the spot on their map. Curious as to which version is correct.
-
The problem with the Rataczak and/or Anderson quotes about the jump time is that it is completely inconsistent with what Rat said on the 2016 History Channel doc. Specifically, that the crew felt the pressure bump and notified flight ops and said, "you may want to mark this spot on the map because our friend may have taken leave of us."
This clearly implies that flight ops was immediately notified after the pressure bump. This is inconsistent with the 302s. Moreover, it is highly unlikely Rat would have immediately notified flight ops about the jump and Anderson to have been unaware of that, therefore leading to Anderson discussing a jump time 5-10 minutes after the bump which apparently went largely unnoticed at the time it occurred.
I don't see where it's inconsistent. Rataczak states the evening of the hijacking that the time would be recorded in the company log. they were not completely sure he exited. Anderson would see the pressure change on the engineer's panel and notify the pilots of the problem. statements made 45 years later will never match what was said 45 years later. that's the human mind controlling memory. Rataczak was flying the plane. the call was made to Paul Soderlind right after the oscillation. the question surrounds whether or not the bump was recorded vs the oscillation that was on the transcripts. one document states both were felt and other documents separate them. testing showed the oscillation did nothing to the gauges but a noticeable change should of occurred as it's been noted on other copycat hijackings described as a howling noise.
My understanding from the 302s is that Rat contacted Soderman 5-10 minutes after the bump. Rat on the History Channel doc seemed to suggest that immediately after the pressure bump that he contacted Soderman and suggested they mark the spot on their map. Curious as to which version is correct.
Soderman ? You mean Solderbloom? Hickenlooper? Balvance? Alabama? Florida?
-
I believe they contacted Paul when the radioed Seattle. that's why they make the reference of it being in the company log for the exact time. during there statements they obviously didn't have the information in front of them and used the company log as the reference for a jump time and state 5-10 minutes after the last contact with Cooper was by memory.
-
I believe they contacted Paul when the radioed Seattle. that's why they make the reference of it being in the company log for the exact time. during there statements they obviously didn't have the information in front of them and used the company log as the reference for a jump time and state 5-10 minutes after the last contact with Cooper was by memory.
Do we know the exact time?
-
I believe they contacted Paul when the radioed Seattle. that's why they make the reference of it being in the company log for the exact time. during there statements they obviously didn't have the information in front of them and used the company log as the reference for a jump time and state 5-10 minutes after the last contact with Cooper was by memory.
Harold E Anderson, was interviewed at the Reno Airport, Reno Nevada, late on the evening of November 24, 1971. He identified himself as the Third Officer & Flight Engineer on Northwest Airlines Flight #305.
His testimony was fresh and identical to his testimony 40+ years later.
-
Carr believes they got the oscillation and pressure bump mixed up. I believe Rat told Carr up to 15 minutes after the 8:05 location. I still believe this to be a cluster fuck of issues that none of them were prepared for and Cooper slipped in, or out and caught them with there pants down. we see much improvements with tracking the planes and using beepers in future copycat hijackings and were on top of them rather quickly. lesson learned I believe is a good term...
-
I believe they contacted Paul when the radioed Seattle. that's why they make the reference of it being in the company log for the exact time. during there statements they obviously didn't have the information in front of them and used the company log as the reference for a jump time and state 5-10 minutes after the last contact with Cooper was by memory.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?
Do we know the exact time?
-
Carr believes they got the oscillation and pressure bump mixed up. I believe Rat told Carr up to 15 minutes after the 8:05 location. I still believe this to be a cluster fuck of issues that none of them were prepared for and Cooper slipped in, or out and caught them with there pants down. we see much improvements with tracking the planes and using beepers in future copycat hijackings and were on top of them rather quickly. lesson learned I believe is a good term...
I believe the company log would clear all of this up. Who, what, when ... I believe the company log would confirm Anderson's 1971 testimony the evening after they landed in NWA. I believe Anderson's testimony that evening is the reason Anderson went on the test flight vs any other crew member including Scott or Rataczak! In fact we have a statement from one of the TAG team members that basically confirms that assumption. Who among the crew was actually keeping track of their position and taking notes? Apparently it was Anderson! ??
At this late date people can make up anything they want - Anderson's testimony sets the baseline. Was the company log used to set the time of Cooper's jump and how was it used? That is the issue at debate - not EU's imaginations. :nono:
-
Carr believes they got the oscillation and pressure bump mixed up. I believe Rat told Carr up to 15 minutes after the 8:05 location. I still believe this to be a cluster fuck of issues that none of them were prepared for and Cooper slipped in, or out and caught them with there pants down. we see much improvements with tracking the planes and using beepers in future copycat hijackings and were on top of them rather quickly. lesson learned I believe is a good term...
Why would this be an issue? If it was recorded in the NWO logs the FBI should have the info. Again, do we have anything firm regarding the exact time?
-
I'm not too familiar with current statements. I'm looking at statements made that evening. do we have a exact time, I haven't a clue. they believe they did and now claim he jumped further south. the transcripts show an oscillation occurred but no mention of a pressure bump. that's appears to be the issue. they believe he jumped at 8:12 based on the testing done that recreated the exact samethings as it happened that evening.
Using the simulator and the flight path given the plane arrives at around the same location that's marked on the map. that's using the same speeds, timing, weather and altitude. that's what I found. all the time references and radar statements need to be pulled together and try to make sense of all the confusion. lots of conflicting statements that need addressed. it's a good way to try and make sense of this.
-
I currently have over 50 documents surrounding the flight path. I'm missing a third drop map and data I haven't found yet. I'm going to put them in order by date to look for clues. it's taken a lot of time scrolling through all the 302's. once it's sorted out it will be placed in the vault..
-
Carr believes they got the oscillation and pressure bump mixed up. I believe Rat told Carr up to 15 minutes after the 8:05 location. I still believe this to be a cluster fuck of issues that none of them were prepared for and Cooper slipped in, or out and caught them with there pants down. we see much improvements with tracking the planes and using beepers in future copycat hijackings and were on top of them rather quickly. lesson learned I believe is a good term...
Why would this be an issue? If it was recorded in the NWO logs the FBI should have the info. Again, do we have anything firm regarding the exact time?
YOU need to go back and read the thread!
It was an ISSUE because time passed between when oscillations started and when a bump occured, and when it all got recorded. Anderson makes that clear! Go back and read the thread!
-
Carr believes they got the oscillation and pressure bump mixed up. I believe Rat told Carr up to 15 minutes after the 8:05 location. I still believe this to be a cluster fuck of issues that none of them were prepared for and Cooper slipped in, or out and caught them with there pants down. we see much improvements with tracking the planes and using beepers in future copycat hijackings and were on top of them rather quickly. lesson learned I believe is a good term...
Why would this be an issue? If it was recorded in the NWO logs the FBI should have the info. Again, do we have anything firm regarding the exact time?
The question you should be asking is: Why did Scott say or even think Cooper bailed at Merwin Lake when his own FE Anderson says it happened clear down near Portland and the Columbia?
Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Obviously something is wrong.
-
Why would this be an issue? If it was recorded in the NWO logs the FBI should have the info. Again, do we have anything firm regarding the exact time?
It's recorded and marked by time but was this only the oscillation vs the bump. if Cooper was on the stairs for just a minute then 3 miles already went by.
-
Why would this be an issue? If it was recorded in the NWO logs the FBI should have the info. Again, do we have anything firm regarding the exact time?
It's recorded and marked by time but was this only the oscillation vs the bump. if Cooper was on the stairs for just a minute then 3 miles already went by.
That is why they ran the test flight to try and replicate conditions. To confirm a time and location.
How is it the three cockpit crew can be completely at odds about any of this! ?
-
Let me see if this clears anything up. Eric is correct that it should be noted in the company log for the correct time. however, it appears now this could only be the oscillation and not the actual jump. it gets more confusing because Anderson was on the plane for the testing a the drops made the recreation exact as he felt that evening. if they stated that's where he might of jump then it might be accurate. all of this needs to be pulled together vs bits a pieces.
-
Let me see if this clears anything up. Eric is correct that it should be noted in the company log for the correct time. however, it appears now this could only be the oscillation and not the actual jump. it gets more confusing because Anderson was on the plane for the testing a the drops made the recreation exact as he felt that evening. if they stated that's where he might of jump then it might be accurate. all of this needs to be pulled together vs bits a pieces.
Who if anyone in the crew, had been 'assigned' the task of keeping track of where they were and when things were happening? Anyone? It appears it was the flight engineer. He was the only person not flying the plane or dealing with Cooper. Anderson's interview testimony late the evening when they landed at Reno is the "only" testimony that speaks directly to the issue of when and where Cooper jumped. Scott gives no testimony at all! Rataczak does not address any of these issues in his testimony! It was Anderson who was trying to keep track of things! That is why Anderson was chosen to go on the test flight and became part of the TAG Team.
-
Here is the files I have surrounding the flight path. they are not in order yet but thought some might want to look them over and not have to scroll around file after file...
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1HF3uOHcQ48kKXkPOaXAx6VgwJmN1YrOF?usp=sharing
-
Here is the files I have surrounding the flight path. they are not in order yet but thought some might want to look them over and not have to scroll around file after file...
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1HF3uOHcQ48kKXkPOaXAx6VgwJmN1YrOF?usp=sharing
Good! Glad someone has grouped these all together. :congrats:
What I still have a hard time reconciling is Anderson's testimony late on 11/24 at Reno vs 'someone's belief' that Cooper had bailed clear up at Lake Merwin which sent the FBI scrambling looking in the area of Woodland, Ariel, and in that region?
If my reconstruction is right, the FBI is getting their first impressions of a search zone from ... Paul Soderlind and people at NWA? This is before 305 has even landed at Reno and Anderson has given his testimony later that night ?
It seems to have taken (years!) for Anderson's testimony to be given credence? Years later Scott is still preaching the Merwin Lake scenario. Rataczak is all over the map telling different people different things! Anderson is still giving the same testimony he gave the night of 11-24. In 1972 a huge search is conducted clear up north at Ariel! And NWA has issued a probability map that looks like something the Consumer Lottery published!
And it all revolves around the time issue - when Cooper bailed.
Meanwhile Anderson's original testimony sits .... no one is paying attention until around .... 2008? :rofl:
It's like a Charlie Chaplan movie. Keystone Cooper cops. :-\
Throw into that scenario Himmelsbach's 1975-6 announcement to the press that the new DB Cooper landing zone is somewhere 12 miles north of Portland!
Maybe DB Cooper landed on the Moon! C:-) C:-) C:-)
-
Is there any evidence that they plotted the course. if so they would know exactly where they were. if the clouds were an issue over this area they would of told them the plane was around Merwin lake and give Scott reason to make the statement he made based on there calculations.
Keep in mind the plane has landed and the path is done so they must rely on timing and memory if no plotting had taken place.
-
The problem I see is who ever made the Word file in the vault got Anderson's name in place of Rataczak's by mistake. that's why they are not only similar but one in the same. Gray posted his files after I had posted the Las Vegas files and his were not redacted...
Anderson's statements the night of the hijacking are nowhere to be found. all three stews and both pilots are accounted for but not Anderson?
-
The problem I see is who ever made the Word file in the vault got Anderson's name in place of Rataczak's by mistake. that's why they are not only similar but one in the same. Gray posted his files after I had posted the Las Vegas files and his were not redacted...
Anderson's statements the night of the hijacking are nowhere to be found. all three stews and both pilots are accounted for but not Anderson?
Are the 'Campbell files' the crew interviews from 11/24 at Reno? Dont those files come from GG? Wasn't it GG who released them? Anderson is included in those interviews - the only one missing is Scott. ?????????????????????
-
I even went to Gray's site and didn't see anything on Anderson.....
I got my files way before Gray posted his. mine were redacted while his were not and some difference in Las Vegas files vs Seattle.
-
The problem I see is who ever made the Word file in the vault got Anderson's name in place of Rataczak's by mistake. that's why they are not only similar but one in the same. Gray posted his files after I had posted the Las Vegas files and his were not redacted...
Anderson's statements the night of the hijacking are nowhere to be found. all three stews and both pilots are accounted for but not Anderson?
Are the 'Campbell files' the crew interviews from 11/24 at Reno? Dont those files come from GG? Wasn't it GG who released them? Anderson is included in those interviews - the only one missing is Scott. ?????????????????????
Scott's 302 files from the Reno debriefing only stated that he did not see or have any direct contact with Cooper. He also stated that he was present during the debriefing of Rataczak, Anderson, and Tina and did not have anything to add to their statements.
-
The problem I see is who ever made the Word file in the vault got Anderson's name in place of Rataczak's by mistake. that's why they are not only similar but one in the same. Gray posted his files after I had posted the Las Vegas files and his were not redacted...
Anderson's statements the night of the hijacking are nowhere to be found. all three stews and both pilots are accounted for but not Anderson?
Are the 'Campbell files' the crew interviews from 11/24 at Reno? Dont those files come from GG? Wasn't it GG who released them? Anderson is included in those interviews - the only one missing is Scott. ?????????????????????
Scott's 302 files from the Reno debriefing only stated that he did not see or have any direct contact with Cooper. He also stated that he was present during the debriefing of Rataczak, Anderson, and Tina and did not have anything to add to their statements.
. . . 302 note below. Wouldnt you liek to see the rest! ;D
Are the 'Campbell files' the crew interviews from 11/24 at Reno? Dont those files come from GG? Wasn't it GG who released them? Anderson is included in those interviews - the only one missing is Scott. ??????????????????
-
I don't believe there is anymore to that document. when I post them they are associated with the current discussion and only show details surrounding that subject.
Yes, the Campbell files are the statements taken the evening of the hijacking. I made my files public long before GG made his public. mine are redacted and his are not. Anderson is not in either of the files. I have six separate files in the vault. those are the one's that were sent to me by Reickenbach or how ever his name was spelled. he was part of a group of four that posted under the same username. he grew tired of Blevins and left his site and gave me the files and vanished...
-
I don't believe there is anymore to that document. when I post them they are associated with the current discussion and only show details surrounding that subject.
Yes, the Campbell files are the statements taken the evening of the hijacking. I made my files public long before GG made his public. mine are redacted and his are not. Anderson is not in either of the files. I have six separate files in the vault. those are the one's that were sent to me by Reickenbach or how ever his name was spelled. he was part of a group of four that posted under the same username. he grew tired of Blevins and left his site and gave me the files and vanished...
I got my files from Gray. They are un-redacted. Anderson is named. Intro starts -
"11-24 Harold Anderson :
Harold E Anderson, was interviewed at the Reno Airport, Reno Nevada, late on the evening of November 24, 1971. He identified himself as the Third Officer & Flight Engineer on Northwest Airlines Flight #305.
Anderson advised that according to some notes he made, it was at 2759 Zulu time or 3:59 pm Pacific Standard Time, that he received an emergency signal from hostess Mucklow on the interphone with a series of bells signalling they had trouble onboard. This is a pre-arranged signal for such emergencies and he made a notation in his book of the time of notification. "
-
That's how Rataczak's starts on the file from GG I have?
-
Here is the start of Bills statements from GG files...
-
That's how Rataczak's starts on the file from GG I have?
wow! Something is going on. Let me find my original pdf file I downloaded from GG and I will send you a copy ... later tonight when I get time.
I dont know what to say. My old files are on another computer ... I dont even have it here! I swear 90% of this case is chasing shit around!!!!!
-
I've been discussing this with GG trying to figure it out....
-
I've been discussing this with GG trying to figure it out....
what does he say?
I dont even have my old computer here to access to get to the orig file I downloaded from GG's site.
Is it possible GG had two versions of these Campbell files?
You got your files from someone named Richenbach? Did Gray also get these files from Richenbach? Where did Gray get his Campbell files from?
Who is Richenbach and where did he get these files?
-
Here is the start of Bills statements from GG files...
OK there is something wrong with your files!
1. Your file identifies Rat at the third officer! He was the second officer.
2. My file identifies Rat at the Second Officer!
Apparently there are two sets of the Campbell files! I dont know how that is possible but I think its is a fact!
My unredacted version also identifies Rat at the Second Officer.
I dont know what to say and I am hampered by the fact my old computer is still at IDT .... I will have my secretary get it and bring it to me tonight.
-
Those are from GG's...look in the vault and you will see them at the top. complete with "true-ink watermarks
-
Reichenbach wouldn't tell me who he was. all he said was he was a group of four people using that name. I asked gray where he got his and wouldn't tell me. I asked him if he knew who Reichenbach was and he laughed and said "is that the name he's using" and stopped conversing.....
-
Reichenbach wouldn't tell me who he was. all he said was he was a group of four people using that name. I asked gray where he got his and wouldn't tell me. I asked him if he knew who Reichenbach was and he laughed and said "is that the name he's using" and stopped conversing.....
Well we apparently have two different version of similar files from GG and Richenbach.
Ive run out of time for this ...
-
I took the file straight from GG's site after asking him if it was okay. I knew something was wrong when it said third officer..if you check True-Ink website it will have the same files I have?
-
I took the file straight from GG's site after asking him if it was okay. I knew something was wrong when it said third officer..if you check True-Ink website it will have the same files I have?
That file that identifies Rat as 3rd officer is wrong ....... no matter where it came from.
I said before I thought that file was referring to Anderson - I have solid reasons for saying that not the least of which is actual interviews with ANDERSON! So far as I know ANDERSON is the ONLY crew member that testified about the planes position vs times _ on 11/24! On 11/24 Rat did not say one word about times or position ... oir even oscillations of bump! ONLY ANDERSON TESTIFIED ABOUT THAT ON THE EVENING OF 11/24.
It is possible some dumbass FBI agent identified Rat as Third Officer - that is entirely possible - and it would wind up in some FBI 302 mistakes and all. You apparently have a 302 that makes that mistake.
-
The files appear to have been made from listening to a recording since they use the terms "Ratazcak stated or he also said" which is either getting the data from notes or a tape recording. it's possible they marked the tape with the wrong name...
-
I don't believe there is anymore to that document. when I post them they are associated with the current discussion and only show details surrounding that subject.
Yes, the Campbell files are the statements taken the evening of the hijacking. I made my files public long before GG made his public. mine are redacted and his are not. Anderson is not in either of the files. I have six separate files in the vault. those are the one's that were sent to me by Reickenbach or how ever his name was spelled. he was part of a group of four that posted under the same username. he grew tired of Blevins and left his site and gave me the files and vanished...
I got my files from Gray. They are un-redacted. Anderson is named. Intro starts -
"11-24 Harold Anderson :
Harold E Anderson, was interviewed at the Reno Airport, Reno Nevada, late on the evening of November 24, 1971. He identified himself as the Third Officer & Flight Engineer on Northwest Airlines Flight #305.
Anderson advised that according to some notes he made, it was at 2759 Zulu time or 3:59 pm Pacific Standard Time, that he received an emergency signal from hostess Mucklow on the interphone with a series of bells signalling they had trouble onboard. This is a pre-arranged signal for such emergencies and he made a notation in his book of the time of notification. "
Georger, if you typed that in correctly, then there is a problem with the original document.
First, Zulu time (which is Greenwich Mean Time) only goes from 0000 to 2400 Zulu. There is no such time as 2759 Zulu.
Second, I believe the correct time for the start of the hijacking was 2:58 PM PST on November 24, 1971. In Zulu time, that is 0058 Zulu on November 25, 1971. Zulu time is 8 hours ahead of PST.
-
The files appear to have been made from listening to a recording since they use the terms "Ratazcak stated or he also said" which is either getting the data from notes or a tape recording. it's possible they marked the tape with the wrong name...
Thats my thought too - typist error. Thats what my sec thinks too - and she is always right@! :chr2:
The information is the same regardless of the source, but Im betting the source is Anderson.
-
I don't believe there is anymore to that document. when I post them they are associated with the current discussion and only show details surrounding that subject.
Yes, the Campbell files are the statements taken the evening of the hijacking. I made my files public long before GG made his public. mine are redacted and his are not. Anderson is not in either of the files. I have six separate files in the vault. those are the one's that were sent to me by Reickenbach or how ever his name was spelled. he was part of a group of four that posted under the same username. he grew tired of Blevins and left his site and gave me the files and vanished...
I got my files from Gray. They are un-redacted. Anderson is named. Intro starts -
"11-24 Harold Anderson :
Harold E Anderson, was interviewed at the Reno Airport, Reno Nevada, late on the evening of November 24, 1971. He identified himself as the Third Officer & Flight Engineer on Northwest Airlines Flight #305.
Anderson advised that according to some notes he made, it was at 2759 Zulu time or 3:59 pm Pacific Standard Time, that he received an emergency signal from hostess Mucklow on the interphone with a series of bells signalling they had trouble onboard. This is a pre-arranged signal for such emergencies and he made a notation in his book of the time of notification. "
Georger, if you typed that in correctly, then there is a problem with the original document.
First, Zulu time (which is Greenwich Mean Time) only goes from 0000 to 2400 Zulu. There is no such time as 2759 Zulu.
Second, I believe the correct time for the start of the hijacking was 2:58 PM PST on November 24, 1971. In Zulu time, that is 0058 Zulu on November 25, 1971. Zulu time is 8 hours ahead of PST.
Has nothing to do with me or my typing ... or anyone's typing here.
-
The files appear to have been made from listening to a recording since they use the terms "Ratazcak stated or he also said" which is either getting the data from notes or a tape recording. it's possible they marked the tape with the wrong name...
Thats my thought too - typist error. Thats what my sec thinks too - and she is always right@! :chr2:
The information is the same regardless of the source, but Im betting the source is Anderson.
I see Rats file now that was given to me. it's the first file of six. GG is aware of this now. what he will do is probably nothing. he didn't seem concerned.
-
I don't believe there is anymore to that document. when I post them they are associated with the current discussion and only show details surrounding that subject.
Yes, the Campbell files are the statements taken the evening of the hijacking. I made my files public long before GG made his public. mine are redacted and his are not. Anderson is not in either of the files. I have six separate files in the vault. those are the one's that were sent to me by Reickenbach or how ever his name was spelled. he was part of a group of four that posted under the same username. he grew tired of Blevins and left his site and gave me the files and vanished...
I got my files from Gray. They are un-redacted. Anderson is named. Intro starts -
"11-24 Harold Anderson :
Harold E Anderson, was interviewed at the Reno Airport, Reno Nevada, late on the evening of November 24, 1971. He identified himself as the Third Officer & Flight Engineer on Northwest Airlines Flight #305.
Anderson advised that according to some notes he made, it was at 2759 Zulu time or 3:59 pm Pacific Standard Time, that he received an emergency signal from hostess Mucklow on the interphone with a series of bells signalling they had trouble onboard. This is a pre-arranged signal for such emergencies and he made a notation in his book of the time of notification. "
Georger, if you typed that in correctly, then there is a problem with the original document.
First, Zulu time (which is Greenwich Mean Time) only goes from 0000 to 2400 Zulu. There is no such time as 2759 Zulu.
Second, I believe the correct time for the start of the hijacking was 2:58 PM PST on November 24, 1971. In Zulu time, that is 0058 Zulu on November 25, 1971. Zulu time is 8 hours ahead of PST.
Has nothing to do with me or my typing ... or anyone's typing here.
Georger, are you saying that you did not type in the quotation? Regardless of how the quotation got into your post, it is wrong.
Anderson was acting as flight engineer on the hijacked aircraft but he was also a NWA pilot. That is what those three stripes on his uniform sleeves mean. And I believe that he eventually retired from NWA as a Captain on international flights and flying a 747.
And I am sure that Anderson knew how to tell time and was probably using it in the flight engineer's log he was keeping that day. And I'll bet that NWA typists were also conversant in the Zulu time system.
So your quotation, wherever it came from, is suspect.
-
If you take at look at the file below you will see these statements were written by the agents and not the witnesses. it's obviously the agent was who got the time wrong as well as the name. it's possible they recorded the statements and transferred them to documents or since Campbell appears to have interviewed them used his notes....
-
If you take at look at the file below you will see these statements were written by the agents and not the witnesses. it's obviously the agent was who got the time wrong as well as the name. it's possible they recorded the statements and transferred them to documents or since Campbell appears to have interviewed them used his notes....
Rataczak was the second officer on that flight. This entire file should be trashed and whoever prepared it should be given the boot. But it will probably be passed off as truth from on high simply because it is from the FBI.
-
I don't believe there is anymore to that document. when I post them they are associated with the current discussion and only show details surrounding that subject.
Yes, the Campbell files are the statements taken the evening of the hijacking. I made my files public long before GG made his public. mine are redacted and his are not. Anderson is not in either of the files. I have six separate files in the vault. those are the one's that were sent to me by Reickenbach or how ever his name was spelled. he was part of a group of four that posted under the same username. he grew tired of Blevins and left his site and gave me the files and vanished...
I got my files from Gray. They are un-redacted. Anderson is named. Intro starts -
"11-24 Harold Anderson :
Harold E Anderson, was interviewed at the Reno Airport, Reno Nevada, late on the evening of November 24, 1971. He identified himself as the Third Officer & Flight Engineer on Northwest Airlines Flight #305.
Anderson advised that according to some notes he made, it was at 2759 Zulu time or 3:59 pm Pacific Standard Time, that he received an emergency signal from hostess Mucklow on the interphone with a series of bells signalling they had trouble onboard. This is a pre-arranged signal for such emergencies and he made a notation in his book of the time of notification. "
Georger, if you typed that in correctly, then there is a problem with the original document.
First, Zulu time (which is Greenwich Mean Time) only goes from 0000 to 2400 Zulu. There is no such time as 2759 Zulu.
Second, I believe the correct time for the start of the hijacking was 2:58 PM PST on November 24, 1971. In Zulu time, that is 0058 Zulu on November 25, 1971. Zulu time is 8 hours ahead of PST.
Has nothing to do with me or my typing ... or anyone's typing here.
Georger, are you saying that you did not type in the quotation? Regardless of how the quotation got into your post, it is wrong.
Anderson was acting as flight engineer on the hijacked aircraft but he was also a NWA pilot. That is what those three stripes on his uniform sleeves mean. And I believe that he eventually retired from NWA as a Captain on international flights and flying a 747.
And I am sure that Anderson knew how to tell time and was probably using it in the flight engineer's log he was keeping that day. And I'll bet that NWA typists were also conversant in the Zulu time system.
So your quotation, wherever it came from, is suspect.
It comes from FBI 302's! There are two sources for these 302's - a guy named Richenbach whoever he is and Geoff Gray.
I am assuming the agent got it wrong. Or two versions of the same notes were typed up maybe at two different offices. Its impossible to know. The info is the same but under two names; Rat vs Anderson.
The rest of the story is these docs do not stand alone but are backed up by other testimony so these two conflicting docs could be thrown out and the same info is still in play. No way to deny that. That is why multiple interviews are always a good thing.
Dont jump to conclusions just because you have a bias to sell.
-
If you take at look at the file below you will see these statements were written by the agents and not the witnesses. it's obviously the agent was who got the time wrong as well as the name. it's possible they recorded the statements and transferred them to documents or since Campbell appears to have interviewed them used his notes....
Rataczak was the second officer on that flight. This entire file should be trashed and whoever prepared it should be given the boot. But it will probably be passed off as truth from on high simply because it is from the FBI.
That would be a radical move! You cant give someone the boot - today is 2019! The people responsible are long gone. Might as well try to give Cleopatra the boot! She sits in a museum somewhere!
-
If you take at look at the file below you will see these statements were written by the agents and not the witnesses. it's obviously the agent was who got the time wrong as well as the name. it's possible they recorded the statements and transferred them to documents or since Campbell appears to have interviewed them used his notes....
I am sure there is a history behind this SNAFU. Different forms of the same info being typed up by different offices and different people .... bureaucratic confusion.
Keep in mind at the time this is all happening these people (305 NWA crew) are all new to the agents etc. Pretty easy to get these people and their titles confused.
-
I don't believe there is anymore to that document. when I post them they are associated with the current discussion and only show details surrounding that subject.
Yes, the Campbell files are the statements taken the evening of the hijacking. I made my files public long before GG made his public. mine are redacted and his are not. Anderson is not in either of the files. I have six separate files in the vault. those are the one's that were sent to me by Reickenbach or how ever his name was spelled. he was part of a group of four that posted under the same username. he grew tired of Blevins and left his site and gave me the files and vanished...
I got my files from Gray. They are un-redacted. Anderson is named. Intro starts -
"11-24 Harold Anderson :
Harold E Anderson, was interviewed at the Reno Airport, Reno Nevada, late on the evening of November 24, 1971. He identified himself as the Third Officer & Flight Engineer on Northwest Airlines Flight #305.
Anderson advised that according to some notes he made, it was at 2759 Zulu time or 3:59 pm Pacific Standard Time, that he received an emergency signal from hostess Mucklow on the interphone with a series of bells signalling they had trouble onboard. This is a pre-arranged signal for such emergencies and he made a notation in his book of the time of notification. "
Georger, if you typed that in correctly, then there is a problem with the original document.
First, Zulu time (which is Greenwich Mean Time) only goes from 0000 to 2400 Zulu. There is no such time as 2759 Zulu.
Second, I believe the correct time for the start of the hijacking was 2:58 PM PST on November 24, 1971. In Zulu time, that is 0058 Zulu on November 25, 1971. Zulu time is 8 hours ahead of PST.
Has nothing to do with me or my typing ... or anyone's typing here.
Georger, are you saying that you did not type in the quotation? Regardless of how the quotation got into your post, it is wrong.
Anderson was acting as flight engineer on the hijacked aircraft but he was also a NWA pilot. That is what those three stripes on his uniform sleeves mean. And I believe that he eventually retired from NWA as a Captain on international flights and flying a 747.
And I am sure that Anderson knew how to tell time and was probably using it in the flight engineer's log he was keeping that day. And I'll bet that NWA typists were also conversant in the Zulu time system.
So your quotation, wherever it came from, is suspect.
It comes from FBI 302's! There are two sources for these 302's - a guy named Richenbach whoever he is and Geoff Gray.
I am assuming the agent got it wrong. Or two versions of the same notes were typed up maybe at two different offices. Its impossible to know. The info is the same but under two names; Rat vs Anderson.
The rest of the story is these docs do not stand alone but are backed up by other testimony so these two conflicting docs could be thrown out and the same info is still in play. No way to deny that. That is why multiple interviews are always a good thing.
Dont jump to conclusions just because you have a bias to sell.
Georger,
Regardless of how many sources you have for that document, the information is completely wrong. Only people who have to resort to such false nonsense to support their wild-eyed ideas would have a use for it.
-
I don't believe there is anymore to that document. when I post them they are associated with the current discussion and only show details surrounding that subject.
Yes, the Campbell files are the statements taken the evening of the hijacking. I made my files public long before GG made his public. mine are redacted and his are not. Anderson is not in either of the files. I have six separate files in the vault. those are the one's that were sent to me by Reickenbach or how ever his name was spelled. he was part of a group of four that posted under the same username. he grew tired of Blevins and left his site and gave me the files and vanished...
I got my files from Gray. They are un-redacted. Anderson is named. Intro starts -
"11-24 Harold Anderson :
Harold E Anderson, was interviewed at the Reno Airport, Reno Nevada, late on the evening of November 24, 1971. He identified himself as the Third Officer & Flight Engineer on Northwest Airlines Flight #305.
Anderson advised that according to some notes he made, it was at 2759 Zulu time or 3:59 pm Pacific Standard Time, that he received an emergency signal from hostess Mucklow on the interphone with a series of bells signalling they had trouble onboard. This is a pre-arranged signal for such emergencies and he made a notation in his book of the time of notification. "
Georger, if you typed that in correctly, then there is a problem with the original document.
First, Zulu time (which is Greenwich Mean Time) only goes from 0000 to 2400 Zulu. There is no such time as 2759 Zulu.
Second, I believe the correct time for the start of the hijacking was 2:58 PM PST on November 24, 1971. In Zulu time, that is 0058 Zulu on November 25, 1971. Zulu time is 8 hours ahead of PST.
Has nothing to do with me or my typing ... or anyone's typing here.
Georger, are you saying that you did not type in the quotation? Regardless of how the quotation got into your post, it is wrong.
Anderson was acting as flight engineer on the hijacked aircraft but he was also a NWA pilot. That is what those three stripes on his uniform sleeves mean. And I believe that he eventually retired from NWA as a Captain on international flights and flying a 747.
And I am sure that Anderson knew how to tell time and was probably using it in the flight engineer's log he was keeping that day. And I'll bet that NWA typists were also conversant in the Zulu time system.
So your quotation, wherever it came from, is suspect.
It comes from FBI 302's! There are two sources for these 302's - a guy named Richenbach whoever he is and Geoff Gray.
I am assuming the agent got it wrong. Or two versions of the same notes were typed up maybe at two different offices. Its impossible to know. The info is the same but under two names; Rat vs Anderson.
The rest of the story is these docs do not stand alone but are backed up by other testimony so these two conflicting docs could be thrown out and the same info is still in play. No way to deny that. That is why multiple interviews are always a good thing.
Dont jump to conclusions just because you have a bias to sell.
Georger,
Regardless of how many sources you have for that document, the information is completely wrong. Only people who have to resort to such false nonsense to support their wild-eyed ideas would have a use for it.
Ok. ;)
-
Some things need to be clarified here regarding the crew statements. it appears the names are correct with the statements...
1 Stripe: Third officer/Trainee
2 Stripes: Second officer/Flight engineer, Second officer is the member of an aircraft's flight crew who monitors and operates its complex aircraft systems.
3 Stripes: First officer, First officer is the second pilot (also referred to as the co-pilot) of an aircraft. Assist the captain through flight planning and updating communication and flight mechanisms.
4 Stripes: Captain, The one ultimately in charge of the safety and operations of the flight.
Only the time is not correct in the document....
-
Some things need to be clarified here regarding the crew statements. it appears the names are correct with the statements...
1 Stripe: Third officer/Trainee
2 Stripes: Second officer/Flight engineer, Second officer is the member of an aircraft's flight crew who monitors and operates its complex aircraft systems.
3 Stripes: First officer, First officer is the second pilot (also referred to as the co-pilot) of an aircraft. Assist the captain through flight planning and updating communication and flight mechanisms.
4 Stripes: Captain, The one ultimately in charge of the safety and operations of the flight.
Only the time is not correct in the document....
Here are some "alternate facts" for the stripes in the 1971 time frame.
1 Stripe - Head of the cabin crew.
2 Stripes - Flight Engineer and possibly also the Navigator and Radio Operator if they were required for the specific aircraft operation.
3 Stripes - Rated Co-Pilot but not a rated Captain.
4 Stripes - Rated Captain.
There was no such thing as a "trainee" cockpit rating.
On extended flights exceeding the 8 hours flying time per day permitted by FAA Regulations, two rated Captains would be required and maybe additional Rated Co-Pilots. A Rated Captain could also act as a Co-Pilot.
Anderson had three stripes and was acting as a Flight Engineer on the hijacked airliner. Those three stripes meant that he was a Rated Co-Pilot on some NWA aircraft which was probably also the 727. In the early days of the jet age, an entry path for pilots to secure an airline position was to go through a Flight Engineer course and then get hired as a Flight Engineer. When a pilot slot opened up, they could then move up to a Co-Pilot position. I understand that Anderson was a military trained jet pilot and this would be one way to work himself into a pilots position. In the 1971 era, cockpit crew seniority numbers ruled just about ever thing and Anderson was probably a low number on the Co-Pilot seniority list at the time of the hijacking. Since the hijacking took place during the airline travel off season, he probably elected to continue flying as a Flight Engineer rather than being furloughed (which were notorious in that time period). Of course, he knocked off the lowest number on the Flight Engineer seniority list. But that is the way the system worked back then.
-
airline pilots have two, three or four stripes on their shoulders. This part of the uniform is also referred to as an epaulet. Well, one stripe is not normally used for airline pilots but it is sometimes used for flight trainees?
-
I'm aware of the cockpit duties but was thinking of the stripes to the document. that's where I went wrong....
Have we figured out how the plane was over Tbar at 8:15 and makes 23 DME miles by 8:18 according to the Harrison papers?
-
airline pilots have two, three or four stripes on their shoulders. This part of the uniform is also referred to as an epaulet. Well, one stripe is not normally used for airline pilots but it is sometimes used for flight trainees?
There are no "trainee" stripes in the USA.
-
I'm aware of the cockpit duties but was thinking of the stripes to the document. that's where I went wrong....
Have we figured out how the plane was over Tbar at 8:15 and makes 23 DME miles by 8:18 according to the Harrison papers?
No, but we have figured out how the plane got from Tina Bar at 8:11/8:12, which was the time of the jump (see the "FBI notes"), to the 23 DME point by 8:18.
-
What I have concluded through calculation and simulation is from Malay to north of Woodland is roughly 29 NM. giving a time of roughly 8:09:30. (calculation 9.6 minutes) from that point it's 14 NM to Tbar giving a time of 8:14.30.(calculate 4.6 minutes) basically between 8:14 and 8:15. now the plane must travel 20 NM to arrive at the 23 DME mile in 3-4 minutes to reach the 8:18 mark. calculation from tbar to the 23 mile is 6.6666 minutes. this would give a time of 8:20.30 which is much closer to the 8:22 reported on the transcripts. I believe I arrived at the 23 DME in simulation at 20:30 minutes or 8:20:30. it's 43 NM from Malay to Tbar.
The 3 minute mile can't be used from Seattle to Toledo area due to speed changes. I arrived anywhere between 7:59 up to 8:00 or 23-24 minutes. it's approx. 62 NM from SEA to the turning point at KTDO and approx. 64 NM to Malay from SEA. that could put the time at 8:00 to 8:01. from there it's 43 NM or 14.3 minutes giving a time of approx. 8:15:30.
If you look on the flight path map you will see the 8:15 location just about matches with Tina bar. it's just not much of a deviation with the flight path map vs any other path.
-
I'm aware of the cockpit duties but was thinking of the stripes to the document. that's where I went wrong....
Have we figured out how the plane was over Tbar at 8:15 and makes 23 DME miles by 8:18 according to the Harrison papers?
No, but we have figured out how the plane got from Tina Bar at 8:11/8:12, which was the time of the jump (see the "FBI notes"), to the 23 DME point by 8:18.
What else does your ouija board say?
we have figured out how . . . ? What new facts do yous have, that nobody elses hases!? :rofl:
-
New files are out on the FBI website...
https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper%20/d.b.-cooper-part-41-of-41/view
-
Wow. Jump time is now 8:11?
-
New files are out on the FBI website...
https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper%20/d.b.-cooper-part-41-of-41/view
Can we see the WHOLE document? Date, time, etc. Is this part of a page .... what is it? Where does it come from.
Looks like snips from the flight comms from Nov 24, 71 ?
-
Wow. Jump time is now 8:11?
8:11 when, what date, etc etc etc
To make any sense of this you need the context for it.
I want to see the header on this page. I am tired of guessing.
-
Nobody said you have to guess anything. transcripts are from the date they were spoken, correct? that means it was at approx. 8:10, 11, 12 of November 24, 1971? that is the portion involving the flight path and timing of the jump. they are in the new files which a link was given...
Read the files?
-
Wow. Jump time is now 8:11?
If you read the document it gives three time frames. one exceeds the time of 8:11.
It appears that Cooper went down the stairs at 8:10 and between 8:10 and 8:11. a reference of "fluctuating" occurs and then jumps at 8:12. they report at 8:10 that it's possible he left but obviously didn't since more is said following the 8:10 transmission up to 8:12.
-
Wow. Jump time is now 8:11?
When did it become anything other than 8:11 or 8:12?
-
New files are out on the FBI website...
https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper%20/d.b.-cooper-part-41-of-41/view
These transcripts are for communications with NWA offices over the ARINC radio link and not for communications with the Seattle ATC Center.
They may be the teletype version of those ARINC communications. In any event, they were deleted from the teletype transcripts that Fred Poyner at WSHM had access to just as some transcripts with the Seattle ATC Center were also deleted.
-
They appear to have the 8:11 location on the map where they believe Cooper jumped. an oscillation is reported at 8:12 and 8:10. it still basically puts the jump in the area of 8:11, 12. these were based on logs from Northwest airlines, Seattle and Minneapolis and the recordings of the flight that evening.
-
They appear to have the 8:11 location on the map where they believe Cooper jumped. an oscillation is reported at 8:12 and 8:10. it still basically puts the jump in the area of 8:11, 12. these were based on logs from Northwest airlines, Seattle and Minneapolis and the recordings of the flight that evening.
Fred Poyner and I discussed the ARINC communications system with ARINC personnel a few year ago. This was about two or three weeks before the Malaysian airliner went missing in the Indian Ocean. The ARINC personnel were extremely helpful and informative.
As I remember it, ARINC doesn't keep records for decades. In any event, ARINC is a private company that provides services to the airlines that subscribe to their services. NWA did keep copies of the teletype communications with the hijacked airliner and some of those transcripts had previously been made available to Fred Poyner and his group at the WSHM. Poyner's group made a study of those teletype printouts and determined that some had been deleted from the NWA transcripts.
NWA apparently made a tape recording of the radio communications through the ARINC link and that is what Shutter discusses above. It would be extremely helpful to have access to this recording as well as the deleted teletype printouts and the deleted transcripts of the airliner's communications with the Seattle ATC Center. But don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
-
New DZ maps are supplied with the new files and how they came to conclusions of moving the jump point. the original area was thought to be just north of Highlands Wa. this moves it west of Highland, actually it's southwest of Highland and just east of the centerline of V23...
-
New files are out on the FBI website...
https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper%20/d.b.-cooper-part-41-of-41/view
These transcripts are for communications with NWA offices over the ARINC radio link and not for communications with the Seattle ATC Center.
They may be the teletype version of those ARINC communications. In any event, they were deleted from the teletype transcripts that Fred Poyner at WSHM had access to just as some transcripts with the Seattle ATC Center were also deleted.
So what! ? Fred Poyner at WSHM was not even a party to the communications passing between parties for the purpose of a search, in 1971-72. And neither were you! I seriously doubt anyone in 1971-72 was anticipating or trying to satisfy a Fred Poyner at WSHM or an R99 demanding complete records and documentation ... in 2008-2019 for their own research project!
I see no evidence important evidence was being DELETED or WITHHELD from parties who needed that information to conduct a search, back in 1971-72. In fact there is a sharing of information complete with all the uncertainties, in order to frame an appropriate search for DB Cooper at the time.
The issue in 1971 was a complete and accurate transmission of facts and evidence between all the parties involved at the time in 1971-72, in order for the FBI to conduct a search for Cooper at the time. It looks like a historically accurate portrait of the evidence that was available at the time being shared between NWA and the FBI. If anything is missing it would be information being shared by the Air Force with these parties at the time.
Please specify what information you believe was being concealed at the time, and concealed from whom, by whom?
Your demands for 'all the records' today is a completely separate matter. Moreover, your contention records have been withheld and/or deleted from view today, is not prima facia evidence the NWA/FBI/AF flight path is wrong. And Eric Ulis' squirreling-around of words alleged said by Cliff Ammerman is not solid evidence of anything either!
And, the fact that Cooper money was found near Vancouver is not prima facia evidence the NWA/FBI/AF flight path is wrong either!
-
New files are out on the FBI website...
https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper%20/d.b.-cooper-part-41-of-41/view
These transcripts are for communications with NWA offices over the ARINC radio link and not for communications with the Seattle ATC Center.
They may be the teletype version of those ARINC communications. In any event, they were deleted from the teletype transcripts that Fred Poyner at WSHM had access to just as some transcripts with the Seattle ATC Center were also deleted.
So what! ? Fred Poyner at WSHM was not even a party to the communications passing between parties for the purpose of a search, in 1971-72. And neither were you! I seriously doubt anyone in 1971-72 was anticipating or trying to satisfy a Fred Poyner at WSHM or an R99 demanding complete records and documentation ... in 2008-2019 for their own research project!
I see no evidence important evidence was being DELETED or WITHHELD from parties who needed that information to conduct a search, back in 1971-72. In fact there is a sharing of information complete with all the uncertainties, in order to frame an appropriate search for DB Cooper at the time.
The issue in 1971 was a complete and accurate transmission of facts and evidence between all the parties involved at the time in 1971-72, in order for the FBI to conduct a search for Cooper at the time. It looks like a historically accurate portrait of the evidence that was available at the time being shared between NWA and the FBI. If anything is missing it would be information being shared by the Air Force with these parties at the time.
Please specify what information you believe was being concealed at the time, and concealed from whom?
Your demands for 'all the records' today is a completely separate matter.
Here we go again! Georger, you simply don't know what you are talking about! Apparently you don't need any information to arrive at your conclusions. Like some politicians, you feel you know everything about everything even if you don't know which end of an airplane takes off first - and you don't!
Since you do not have any aeronautical knowledge or experience or any knowledge or experience about navigation, it is easy to understand why you would write "I see no evidence important evidence was being DELETED or WITHHELD from parties who needed that information to conduct a search, back in 1971-1972." Hopefully, no such information was withheld from the searchers.
But Cooper wasn't kidnapped by little green men from Mars. Either he landed in one of the two drop zones that were searched or he didn't and there is absolutely no proof that he did. The deletion of all information related to the flight path in the Portland area strongly suggests that whoever determined those drop zones got it wrong and deleted the information as a CYA gesture.
Neither Fred Poyner nor I am demanding "complete records"! The total deleted records that would determine the flight path would probably be a lot less than 20 pages.
A reputable individual with any genuine scientific training knows the difference between "facts" and "wild eyed speculations". Unfortunately, the facts don't support your conclusions.
-
New DZ maps are supplied with the new files and how they came to conclusions of moving the jump point. the original area was thought to be just north of Highlands Wa. this moves it west of Highland, actually it's southwest of Highland and just east of the centerline of V23...
Does anyone have any information about the GEOREF, or Geographical Reference, and the "Lat & Long" computer program mention in that item? The "plus or minus 1 mile" for the GEOREF program and "plus or minus 1/2 mile" for the "Lat & Long" computer program are not very good for the relatively short distances involved here. The flight crew could probably eye-ball it better than that. Apparently the flight crew were not involved in determining the geographical jump zones.
It will be interesting to see what Captain Scott's daughter has to say at the Portland event next month. She has previously been quoted as saying that Captain Scott said that the claimed flight path was wrong.
-
New files are out on the FBI website...
https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper%20/d.b.-cooper-part-41-of-41/view
These transcripts are for communications with NWA offices over the ARINC radio link and not for communications with the Seattle ATC Center.
They may be the teletype version of those ARINC communications. In any event, they were deleted from the teletype transcripts that Fred Poyner at WSHM had access to just as some transcripts with the Seattle ATC Center were also deleted.
So what! ? Fred Poyner at WSHM was not even a party to the communications passing between parties for the purpose of a search, in 1971-72. And neither were you! I seriously doubt anyone in 1971-72 was anticipating or trying to satisfy a Fred Poyner at WSHM or an R99 demanding complete records and documentation ... in 2008-2019 for their own research project!
I see no evidence important evidence was being DELETED or WITHHELD from parties who needed that information to conduct a search, back in 1971-72. In fact there is a sharing of information complete with all the uncertainties, in order to frame an appropriate search for DB Cooper at the time.
The issue in 1971 was a complete and accurate transmission of facts and evidence between all the parties involved at the time in 1971-72, in order for the FBI to conduct a search for Cooper at the time. It looks like a historically accurate portrait of the evidence that was available at the time being shared between NWA and the FBI. If anything is missing it would be information being shared by the Air Force with these parties at the time.
Please specify what information you believe was being concealed at the time, and concealed from whom?
Your demands for 'all the records' today is a completely separate matter.
Here we go again! Georger, you simply don't know what you are talking about! Apparently you don't need any information to arrive at your conclusions. Like some politicians, you feel you know everything about everything even if you don't know which end of an airplane takes off first - and you don't!
Since you do not have any aeronautical knowledge or experience or any knowledge or experience about navigation, it is easy to understand why you would write "I see no evidence important evidence was being DELETED or WITHHELD from parties who needed that information to conduct a search, back in 1971-1972." Hopefully, no such information was withheld from the searchers.
But Cooper wasn't kidnapped by little green men from Mars. Either he landed in one of the two drop zones that were searched or he didn't and there is absolutely no proof that he did. The deletion of all information related to the flight path in the Portland area strongly suggests that whoever determined those drop zones got it wrong and deleted the information as a CYA gesture.
Neither Fred Poyner nor I am demanding "complete records"! The total deleted records that would determine the flight path would probably be a lot less than 20 pages.
A reputable individual with any genuine scientific training knows the difference between "facts" and "wild eyed speculations". Unfortunately, the facts don't support your conclusions.
So far no FBI record confirms any suspicion that Cooper may have landed near Tina Bar, or in the Washougal basin either. No other record or news interview suggests that suspicion either, prior to money turning up at Tina Bar. No expert consulted by the FBI suggested a Tina Bar landing or that the assumed FBI flight path was radically wrong. No researchers or independent observers have made that suggestion either. Farflung did not make that suggestion. Only you and Ulis. Maybe Blevins and Grey Cop fit in there somewhere . . .
So, only you and Ulis are correct and everyone else is a dumbass who can't know the truth due to a lack of qualifications only you have!
Then it turns out you and Ulis don't even agree. The co-pays are different and too high!
Wonderful -a-wonnerfal. Bring on the Lemon Sisters in their latest version of 'Auld lang syne'. Orchestra please. A one anna two anna three anna . . .
-
Out of curiosity, would The Air Force, radar operators (close by) flight data recorder and pilot testimony fall under "wild eyed speculation"? can we define this a little better?
I just find it hard to believe none of the pilots said they flew a straight line which would be simple to tell? a pilot's license is not required for this. it's basically the opposite for evidence of another path vs the one they concluded. a common route doesn't say a mandatory route must be taken. we now see more transmissions from 305 but I don't see a reason to hide them.
Now, the last time I checked, Paul has more experience than anyone on this board, correct? I find it hard for someone of his expertise to wildly speculate anything nor would the Air Force. wouldn't it be wild speculation to tell the pilots where they were. how did they even find Reno?
The last time I checked the proper procedure for a theory is to dismiss the known evidence and showing the proof. I've heard for years the radar can't be trusted past Toledo and the red dots on the map represent bad returns, correct? then you believe Ammerman 50 years later in the very same area? can anyone say for sure 305 was not to report any location that would give away there position during the hijacking? I've also read it's possible that the FDR did not have minute marks on the foil. a document tends to disagree with that. are we really ready to say the FBI wasted a lot of time and money searching the wrong area due to Paul and the Air Forces speculation?
-
I spoke with Eric on the phone not long ago. we discussed certain parts of the path etc. my conclusion was the case isn't getting any younger and the witnesses are slowly dying off. the remaining pilots have a story and will soon take it to there graves. the chase planes have a story as well. this can go back and forth for decades to come....
-
New files are out on the FBI website...
https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper%20/d.b.-cooper-part-41-of-41/view
These transcripts are for communications with NWA offices over the ARINC radio link and not for communications with the Seattle ATC Center.
They may be the teletype version of those ARINC communications. In any event, they were deleted from the teletype transcripts that Fred Poyner at WSHM had access to just as some transcripts with the Seattle ATC Center were also deleted.
So what! ? Fred Poyner at WSHM was not even a party to the communications passing between parties for the purpose of a search, in 1971-72. And neither were you! I seriously doubt anyone in 1971-72 was anticipating or trying to satisfy a Fred Poyner at WSHM or an R99 demanding complete records and documentation ... in 2008-2019 for their own research project!
I see no evidence important evidence was being DELETED or WITHHELD from parties who needed that information to conduct a search, back in 1971-72. In fact there is a sharing of information complete with all the uncertainties, in order to frame an appropriate search for DB Cooper at the time.
The issue in 1971 was a complete and accurate transmission of facts and evidence between all the parties involved at the time in 1971-72, in order for the FBI to conduct a search for Cooper at the time. It looks like a historically accurate portrait of the evidence that was available at the time being shared between NWA and the FBI. If anything is missing it would be information being shared by the Air Force with these parties at the time.
Please specify what information you believe was being concealed at the time, and concealed from whom?
Your demands for 'all the records' today is a completely separate matter.
Here we go again! Georger, you simply don't know what you are talking about! Apparently you don't need any information to arrive at your conclusions. Like some politicians, you feel you know everything about everything even if you don't know which end of an airplane takes off first - and you don't!
Since you do not have any aeronautical knowledge or experience or any knowledge or experience about navigation, it is easy to understand why you would write "I see no evidence important evidence was being DELETED or WITHHELD from parties who needed that information to conduct a search, back in 1971-1972." Hopefully, no such information was withheld from the searchers.
But Cooper wasn't kidnapped by little green men from Mars. Either he landed in one of the two drop zones that were searched or he didn't and there is absolutely no proof that he did. The deletion of all information related to the flight path in the Portland area strongly suggests that whoever determined those drop zones got it wrong and deleted the information as a CYA gesture.
Neither Fred Poyner nor I am demanding "complete records"! The total deleted records that would determine the flight path would probably be a lot less than 20 pages.
A reputable individual with any genuine scientific training knows the difference between "facts" and "wild eyed speculations". Unfortunately, the facts don't support your conclusions.
So far no FBI record confirms any suspicion that Cooper may have landed near Tina Bar, or in the Washougal basin either. No other record or news interview suggests that suspicion either, prior to money turning up at Tina Bar. No expert consulted by the FBI suggested a Tina Bar landing or that the assumed FBI flight path was radically wrong. No researchers or independent observers have made that suggestion either. Farflung did not make that suggestion. Only you and Ulis. Maybe Blevins and Grey Cop fit in there somewhere . . .
So, only you and Ulis are correct and everyone else is a dumbass who can't know the truth due to a lack of qualifications only you have!
Then it turns out you and Ulis don't even agree. The co-pays are different and too high!
Wonderful -a-wonnerfal. Bring on the Lemon Sisters in their latest version of 'Auld lang syne'. Orchestra please. A one anna two anna three anna . . .
Georger, you finally got one point right and that is that Eric Ulis and I don't agree on what happened after Cooper jumped. We do agree on the western bypass of Portland flight path.
You need to pay a visit to Tina Bar and give some consideration as to how the money got there. Consider both the flight path and what happened after Cooper jumped and what forces would be acting on the money after he was on the ground. Even the FBI has ruled out the Washougal washdown theory I understand and there are several good reasons for doing so just based on the topography of the Tina Bar area.
Why don't you do some honest "field work" and visit Tina Bar. You could also attend EU's event in November and talk to Captain Scott's daughter about what he told her relative to the flight path. So get off your lazy ass and stop pontificating. You might have to work up a sweat or even get wet (there is a lot of rain in Portland during November), but you would at least have some first hand knowledge. You may pontificate but Mother Nature has the final say.
-
Out of curiosity, would The Air Force, radar operators (close by) flight data recorder and pilot testimony fall under "wild eyed speculation"? can we define this a little better?
I just find it hard to believe none of the pilots said they flew a straight line which would be simple to tell? a pilot's license is not required for this. it's basically the opposite for evidence of another path vs the one they concluded. a common route doesn't say a mandatory route must be taken. we now see more transmissions from 305 but I don't see a reason to hide them.
Now, the last time I checked, Paul has more experience than anyone on this board, correct? I find it hard for someone of his expertise to wildly speculate anything nor would the Air Force. wouldn't it be wild speculation to tell the pilots where they were. how did they even find Reno?
The last time I checked the proper procedure for a theory is to dismiss the known evidence and showing the proof. I've heard for years the radar can't be trusted past Toledo and the red dots on the map represent bad returns, correct? then you believe Ammerman 50 years later in the very same area? can anyone say for sure 305 was not to report any location that would give away there position during the hijacking? I've also read it's possible that the FDR did not have minute marks on the foil. a document tends to disagree with that. are we really ready to say the FBI wasted a lot of time and money searching the wrong area due to Paul and the Air Forces speculation?
In this particular instance, the FDR would be about the least reliable thing for determining the flight path. I would suggest that you and Georger download and actually read some of the FAA publications on the Air Traffic Control system, the accuracy of radars, and the accuracy of the VOR systems that the airliner was using.
I assume that the "Paul" is Paul Soderland (spelling?). Did he have anything to use other than the information from sources mentioned in the above paragraph? It appears that the pilot's were not debriefed by the FBI except in Reno on the evening of the hijacking. And I believe a possible jump zone was worked up even before the airliner got to Reno.
I think you and I have a different understanding of what the word "evidence" means.
-
I assume that the "Paul" is Paul Soderland (spelling?). Did he have anything to use other than the information from sources mentioned in the above paragraph? It appears that the pilot's were not debriefed by the FBI except in Reno on the evening of the hijacking. And I believe a possible jump zone was worked up even before the airliner got to Reno.
I believe Paul used every tool available, why wouldn't he? the FBI has nothing to do with any of this other than being told where to look. yes, it's possible the START of finding out where the plane was started on the 24th. we read dozens of documents of changes due to new evidence be it the FDR, radar, or pilot testimony. even the testing in 72. haven't you read the documents of the FBI saying multiple times they got off the phone with Paul surrounding the dropzone or statements from the pilots? they relied on others and didn't plot or calculate anything.
Going to T bar will not resolve the problem. Tom Kaye spent a lot of time there. he doesn't believe the plane flew over the area. I also find it hard to believe Cooper was concealed in a small area surrounded by people on a daily basis. you believe he's dead, other don't. Tbar doesn't show that clue either.
Insulting others for not going there is no fair play either. you have believed Cooper landed on Cat Island for a decade and failed to search the area. it should all be buried right there in that small patch of woods? we don't really know what Paul did. we have bits and pieces of all of it.
-
I assume that the "Paul" is Paul Soderland (spelling?). Did he have anything to use other than the information from sources mentioned in the above paragraph? It appears that the pilot's were not debriefed by the FBI except in Reno on the evening of the hijacking. And I believe a possible jump zone was worked up even before the airliner got to Reno.
I believe Paul used every tool available, why wouldn't he? the FBI has nothing to do with any of this other than being told where to look. yes, it's possible the START of finding out where the plane was started on the 24th. we read dozens of documents of changes due to new evidence be it the FDR, radar, or pilot testimony. even the testing in 72. haven't you read the documents of the FBI saying multiple times they got off the phone with Paul surrounding the dropzone or statements from the pilots? they relied on others and didn't plot or calculate anything.
Going to T bar will not resolve the problem. Tom Kaye spent a lot of time there. he doesn't believe the plane flew over the area. I also find it hard to believe Cooper was concealed in a small area surrounded by people on a daily basis. you believe he's dead, other don't. Tbar doesn't show that clue either.
Insulting others for not going there is no fair play either. you have believed Cooper landed on Cat Island for a decade and failed to search the area. it should all be buried right there in that small patch of woods? we don't really know what Paul did. we have bits and pieces of all of it.
I didn't say that the FBI estimated the initial drop zone. And who said that anything about being "concealed in a small area surrounded by people"? Any search for Cooper today on Caterpillar Island would need such things as ground penetrating radar. If he was originally snagged in one of those man eating briar patches, part of him might still be there but would probably be under a few feet of sand at this point.
The money find at Tina Bar, which was apparently just cash in a hole without any container, is strong evidence that Cooper moved downstream from Caterpillar Island, and probably in the spring 1972 runoff.
Why don't you mention something to Georger about not insulting others? Otherwise, he would probably never think about that.
-
My point was Caterpiller Island is a very busy island which I imagine many people utilize the beach and the woods throughout the year. I consider it a small area when looking at maps and coverage. the chute was on his back and probably could be located with a metal detector vs ground radar along with other items on his body. the list is larger than the one's who have been to Tbar so it insults more than just Georger. Galen has been to Tbar multiple times and with someone who has studied the river and believes it was planted. Eric has been there and believes it was planted. the Army corps of engineers have been there and failed to mention the body should be close by the find. the same goes for Tom Kaye. whats funny is two people (Eric & shutter) noted everyone was in the wrong location where the money was found that has been to Tbar.
In my opinion of the area and not stepping foot on the ground can come to a conclusion that these area's are not untouched or free from curious explorer's that have ventured into the wooded area over the years. I think Cooper would be visible or artifacts with Cooper for sometime after the fact. I think if we were to give credit to a western path Eric's location would be more plausible since the area is basically off limits to the public and free from accidental findings. the odds are better in his case.
I had to tell you and Georger to knock off the attacks/insults several times prior to my getting involved in the conversation.
-
We need to cease all the BS. I think it's best you two stop responding to each other. posting Georger's name is hitting below the belt. this is the second time you have done this. the next hint of an argument will get a month's vacation.
-
We need to cease all the BS. I think it's best you two stop responding to each other. posting Georger's name is hitting below the belt. this is the second time you have done this. the next hint of an argument will get a month's vacation.
How about mentioning to Georger that he should stop posting my name. I have posted my name from time to time but it was for a specific reason.
-
Nope, not the same at all. your name is on the DZ, this website, this forum and was on Sluggo's website for years. you never asked once to have your name kept private or even semi-private. doesn't matter if everyone knows his name. he doesn't like it being mentioned. you have known this for as long as I have, perhaps longer. if it was reversed, I would do the same for you or anyone else on this board. it's pretty simple.
Perhaps later down the road you guys can discuss things but at the moment I think it's best to move on from this issue.
Good Nite.....
-
Nope, not the same at all. your name is on the DZ, this website, this forum and was on Sluggo's website for years. you never asked once to have your name kept private or even semi-private. doesn't matter if everyone knows his name. he doesn't like it being mentioned. you have known this for as long as I have, perhaps longer. if it was reversed, I would do the same for you or anyone else on this board. it's pretty simple.
Perhaps later down the road you guys can discuss things but at the moment I think it's best to move on from this issue.
Good Nite.....
It is what it is - there is nothing to discuss. Now or ever.
-
Its official - could see lights of Portland and specific areas.
" Contrary to our earlier belief, the crew told him that they could see the lights of Portland And other distinctive lights in that area, so given knowledge of the specific area the hijacker could very easily have made a jump to a specific location. "
-
Its official - could see lights of Portland and specific areas.
" Contrary to our earlier belief, the crew told him that they could see the lights of Portland And other distinctive lights in that area, so given knowledge of the specific area the hijacker could very easily have made a jump to a specific location. "
See post #4294 on the Suspects and Confessions thread for more comments on the above.
Cooper did not have any control over the flight path of the airliner. He did not specify any particular route to be flown.
Consequently, there is no way on God's Green Earth that Cooper could have jumped "to a specific location".
-
Its official - could see lights of Portland and specific areas.
" Contrary to our earlier belief, the crew told him that they could see the lights of Portland And other distinctive lights in that area, so given knowledge of the specific area the hijacker could very easily have made a jump to a specific location. "
See post #4294 on the Suspects and Confessions thread for more comments on the above.
Cooper did not have any control over the flight path of the airliner. He did not specify any particular route to be flown.
Consequently, there is no way on God's Green Earth that Cooper could have jumped "to a specific location".
Robert: He didn't need to control the flight path, he only needed to know the general area, which he likely did. If a plane starts in Seattle and is flying to Mexico City or Reno or wherever, then that path is south. By giving a specific altitude, he can have some control of the path as well. Whether or not he knew where he was going is up to interpretation, but there is a strong possibility that he could have had an idea of where he was going and a general area of where to jump and land. He would not have been able to pinpoint a drop zone, but landing in a general area was certainly possible, and if he had help on the ground, then all he needed was a general area.
-
Its official - could see lights of Portland and specific areas.
" Contrary to our earlier belief, the crew told him that they could see the lights of Portland And other distinctive lights in that area, so given knowledge of the specific area the hijacker could very easily have made a jump to a specific location. "
See post #4294 on the Suspects and Confessions thread for more comments on the above.
Cooper did not have any control over the flight path of the airliner. He did not specify any particular route to be flown.
Consequently, there is no way on God's Green Earth that Cooper could have jumped "to a specific location".
Robert: He didn't need to control the flight path, he only needed to know the general area, which he likely did. If a plane starts in Seattle and is flying to Mexico City or Reno or wherever, then that path is south. By giving a specific altitude, he can have some control of the path as well. Whether or not he knew where he was going is up to interpretation, but there is a strong possibility that he could have had an idea of where he was going and a general area of where to jump and land. He would not have been able to pinpoint a drop zone, but landing in a general area was certainly possible, and if he had help on the ground, then all he needed was a general area.
Jumping "in a general area" is not jumping "to a specific location". When Cooper jumped, he may or may not have had an idea about which state he was in [Washington or Oregon], but he didn't have the means to know which city he was near.
-
I hear crow tastes like chicken, is that true Robert99?
-
I hear crow tastes like chicken, is that true Robert99?
I don't know what crows taste like. Georger should be able to tell you. And you should look twice before jumping to conclusions.
-
NASA sky pollution surveys - Portland vs Seattle 1970. The V23 corridor between the two cities is very dark. With dark adaptation Portland would stand out ahead to pilots at 10k ft. no matter the weather. To a photometer Portland would register off scale! There is no cloud cover known on Earth that could obscure sky glow from these cities in 1970-71. Red (+5) is as high as the scale goes in 1950-75.
-
NASA sky pollution surveys - Portland vs Seattle 1970. The V23 corridor between the two cities is very dark. With dark adaptation Portland would stand out ahead to pilots at 10k ft. no matter the weather. There is no cloud cover known on Earth that could obscure sky glow from these cities. Red (+5) is as high as the scale goes in 1950-75.
Georger has apparently never seen a thunderstorm and his remarks about the weather are just more nonsense. For his information, thunderstorms in the USA can reach 40 or 50 thousand feet altitude and up to 70 thousand feet in other parts of the world. In fact, U-2's flying at 70 thousand feet on operational missions have had to detour around them in some parts of the world.
I'll bet the picture Georger posted was made on a clear night or nearly clear night. And if it was a "sky pollution survey" made at night, what were the frequencies that were used in the survey equipment? Were they all in the visual to the human eye range?
-
NASA sky pollution surveys - Portland vs Seattle 1970. The V23 corridor between the two cities is very dark. With dark adaptation Portland would stand out ahead to pilots at 10k ft. no matter the weather. There is no cloud cover known on Earth that could obscure sky glow from these cities. Red (+5) is as high as the scale goes in 1950-75.
Georger has apparently never seen a thunderstorm and his remarks about the weather are just more nonsense. For his information, thunderstorms in the USA can reach 40 or 50 thousand feet altitude and up to 70 thousand feet in other parts of the world. In fact, U-2's flying at 70 thousand feet on operational missions have had to detour around them in some parts of the world.
I'll bet the picture Georger posted was made on a clear night or nearly clear night. And if it was a "sky pollution survey" made at night, what were the frequencies that were used in the survey equipment? Were they all in the visual to the human eye range?
I think you mean wavelengths - as for the rest of your misleading bull - :conspiracy:
Where did you ever get the idea that you are the only weather man that matters! ? Wy dont you just write a book?
Tell us all about dark adaptation in pilots. Is your horn honking? Check your keys .... ;)
Why are you throwing up another roadblock! ? You just spent days saying you always meant to say (and I was too dumb to see it!): "For large cities, Cooper may have been able to see the "glow" from the city lights but he would not be able to determine any land marks."
Make up your mind Scrooge! Are you now denying you just said "For large cities, Cooper may have been able to see the "glow" from the city lights but he would not be able to determine any land marks." ?
The NASA sky brightness atlases are made from satellite photometry, which includes the visual range 380nm to the near IR (800nm). Its the greatest atlas in the history of the world - Americans wanna know! Blah blah blah ... ;)
-
NASA sky pollution surveys - Portland vs Seattle 1970. The V23 corridor between the two cities is very dark. With dark adaptation Portland would stand out ahead to pilots at 10k ft. no matter the weather. There is no cloud cover known on Earth that could obscure sky glow from these cities. Red (+5) is as high as the scale goes in 1950-75.
Georger has apparently never seen a thunderstorm and his remarks about the weather are just more nonsense. For his information, thunderstorms in the USA can reach 40 or 50 thousand feet altitude and up to 70 thousand feet in other parts of the world. In fact, U-2's flying at 70 thousand feet on operational missions have had to detour around them in some parts of the world.
I'll bet the picture Georger posted was made on a clear night or nearly clear night. And if it was a "sky pollution survey" made at night, what were the frequencies that were used in the survey equipment? Were they all in the visual to the human eye range?
I think you mean wavelengths - as for the rest of your misleading bull - :conspiracy:
Where did you ever get the idea that you are the only weather man that matters! ? Wy dont you just write a book?
Tell us all about dark adaptation in pilots. Is your horn honking? Check your keys .... ;)
Why are you throwing up another roadblock! ? You just spent days saying you always meant to say (and I was too dumb to see it!): "For large cities, Cooper may have been able to see the "glow" from the city lights but he would not be able to determine any land marks."
Make up your mind Scrooge! Are you now denying you just said "For large cities, Cooper may have been able to see the "glow" from the city lights but he would not be able to determine any land marks." ?
The NASA sky brightness atlases are made from satellite photometry, which includes the visual range 380nm to the near IR (800nm). Its the greatest atlas in the history of the world - Americans wanna know! Blah blah blah ... ;)
Georger, didn't you claim at one point that you worked on the index for the NASA sky atlas? If so, this is just you honking your own horn.
-
NASA sky pollution surveys - Portland vs Seattle 1970. The V23 corridor between the two cities is very dark. With dark adaptation Portland would stand out ahead to pilots at 10k ft. no matter the weather. There is no cloud cover known on Earth that could obscure sky glow from these cities. Red (+5) is as high as the scale goes in 1950-75.
Georger has apparently never seen a thunderstorm and his remarks about the weather are just more nonsense. For his information, thunderstorms in the USA can reach 40 or 50 thousand feet altitude and up to 70 thousand feet in other parts of the world. In fact, U-2's flying at 70 thousand feet on operational missions have had to detour around them in some parts of the world.
I'll bet the picture Georger posted was made on a clear night or nearly clear night. And if it was a "sky pollution survey" made at night, what were the frequencies that were used in the survey equipment? Were they all in the visual to the human eye range?
I think you mean wavelengths - as for the rest of your misleading bull - :conspiracy:
Where did you ever get the idea that you are the only weather man that matters! ? Wy dont you just write a book?
Tell us all about dark adaptation in pilots. Is your horn honking? Check your keys .... ;)
Why are you throwing up another roadblock! ? You just spent days saying you always meant to say (and I was too dumb to see it!): "For large cities, Cooper may have been able to see the "glow" from the city lights but he would not be able to determine any land marks."
Make up your mind Scrooge! Are you now denying you just said "For large cities, Cooper may have been able to see the "glow" from the city lights but he would not be able to determine any land marks." ?
The NASA sky brightness atlases are made from satellite photometry, which includes the visual range 380nm to the near IR (800nm). Its the greatest atlas in the history of the world - Americans wanna know! Blah blah blah ... ;)
Georger, didn't you claim at one point that you worked on the index for the NASA sky atlas? If so, this is just you honking your own horn.
Well you are close - :rofl:
The Moon. A NASA Lunar Atlas. Three of them. Farouk El-Baz was in charge of the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum, at the time. Maybe you knew him? Years ago I asked you if you knew him and you said 'no'.
When are you going to stop with your Inquisition?
-
Here is why my trip to visit the mothballed 727 was important: I believe it helped me verify that a second piece of 305 was found, but once again, overlooked, by the FBI. Also, I believe this second piece of physical evidence strongly suggests that the FBI Flight Path is incorrect.
Remember, all I have to do is prove that the FBI Flight Path is incorrect in one spot. After all, by proving this it calls into question the veracity of the entire FBI Flight Path. Simply put: If the FBI Flight Path is incorrect in one spot, how do we know it’s not incorrect in some other spot(s)?
There is an FBI document—Part 35, Page 334—that describes a hunter finding an 8” X 40” piece of a 727 that fits “directly above the rear stairs.” The piece was found near Cinebar, WA by a Boeing employee who took the part number and confirmed with the 727 Section that the part is from a 727.
I am convinced that the piece the hunter/Boeing-employee discovered, in early 1975, was one of the missing airstairs railing skirts that are visibly absent in pictures and news footage of 305 after it landed in Reno.
I confirmed that the interior section of the aft airstairs compartment is paneled on the walls and ceiling by a thin and slightly flexible fiberglass sheeting. Moreover, I believe this is the same fiberglass sheeting used for the missing airstairs skirts.
According to the FBI document, the item was found by a hunter near Cinebar, WA. I have pinpointed the hunting grounds around the Cinebar area and learned that they are directly to the east of the town proper. Importantly, the extreme western edge of the hunting grounds is approximately 20 miles from the FBI Flight Path along the section that approaches and turns at Toledo, WA.
Why is this important?
This is important because the same science can be applied to the fiberglass skirt that was applied to the Hicks’ placard. More to the point, the fiberglass skirt drifted in the wind to the northeast just as the placard drifted after it separated from 305 at 10K feet. It is not possible that the fiberglass skirt drifted 20+ miles before landing in the Cinebar hunting grounds. In my opinion the piece likely drifted a few miles—perhaps 3, 4 or 5 miles.
This would appear to indicate that 305 was not situated on the FBI Flight Path as it approached Toledo, but rather that it was several miles east of the FBI Flight Path at this point. I have suspected this but have not been able to prove it, I believe, until now.
One of the reasons I have believed that the jet was further east at this point is because as I have flown out of Seattle many times over the years, jets departing on Runway 16 typically head due south for several miles before turning toward the southwest on the way to Toledo. I believe this suggests that the slow, lumbering and dirty 305 would have departed 16 L and headed directly south to about the Graham, WA or Eatonville, WA area before turning southwest toward the Maylay Intersection—not necessarily Toledo. Then at Maylay, 305 would have turned and headed effectively toward the Canby Intersection—or perhaps paralleled centerline V23 for a few miles before heading for Canby.
The Western Flight Path I’ve just described meets the timing criteria, lines up properly when considering the fiberglass skirt find, lines up properly when considering the Hicks’ placard find, explains the location of the Tena Bar money find, lines up with Captain Scott’s comments regarding flying over Woodland, WA and west of Portland, lines up with Cliff Ammerman’s comments about the headings of the chase planes and what he saw on his radar screen that night, and also explains why after nearly 50 years nothing has ever been found in the FBI Search Area adjacent to the FBI Flight Path.
However, it does not explain the FBI Flight Path. In my mind this is still a big mystery. Does the FBI Flight Path actually loosely track the F106s or T33 versus 305? I simply don’t know.
-
Could we get Lat/Long on that?
-
Could we get Lat/Long on that?
I spoke with Bruce Kitt about this piece. he didn't believe it would last that long in the elements.
-
what I fail to see is a simple statement from the crew saying they flew a straight line? how hard would that of been to explain to everyone involved with the plotting. then we have no indication it was way off and to the west when they obviously seen the map after it was produced. they were part of it? everyone wants to tell the pilots where they flew?
-
Cinbar cords should be 46°36'19.0"N 122°32'20.0"W
-
what I fail to see is a simple statement from the crew saying they flew a straight line? how hard would that of been to explain to everyone involved with the plotting. then we have no indication it was way off and to the west when they obviously seen the map after it was produced. they were part of it? everyone wants to tell the pilots where they flew?
Captain Scott apparently did tell Himmelsbach that he believed they flew about 10 miles west of the FBI search area, specifically over Woodland. Also, he apparently stated they flew west of downtown Portland. Then, of course, we have Rataczack saying he believed the jet traveled east of the FBI Flight Path over the Washougal area. Somebody's wrong.
-
Could we get Lat/Long on that?
I spoke with Bruce Kitt about this piece. he didn't believe it would last that long in the elements.
Bruce Kitt is simply flat out wrong about this.
The piece is made of fiberglass. It would likely survive 200 years let alone 3 years. Consider that the 727 home in Oregon--which has its airstairs permanently deployed and still has the fiberglass skirting in place--hasn't had a problem with the fiberglass skirting rotting away in the elements after decades of exposure.
Common sense is required here. How on God's green earth does a piece of a 727 from inside the airstairs compartment end up in the woods? Moreover, we know with certainty that there were a couple of pieces just like this missing from 305 when it landed in Reno.
What kind of odds would be required to explain the likelihood that this piece is not from 305? What other piece that size, from a 727, situated "above the airstairs" could it possibly be?
-
You are jumping miles ahead. fiberglass will last only as long as it can hold up in the elements. boats can last 50 years but it's a different application. plus it has paint and coating protecting it.
"Fiberglass itself will not break down but instead will break down due to outside factors"
The piece appears to be in the right spot but more info is needed. part number and location of the part number..etc.
-
You are jumping miles ahead. fiberglass will last only as long as it can hold up in the elements. boats can last 50 years but it's a different application. plus it has paint and coating protecting it.
"Fiberglass itself will not break down but instead will break down due to outside factors"
The piece appears to be in the right spot but more info is needed. part number and location of the part number..etc.
The piece was found in very early 1975. It would have been in the elements for only three years.
Also, as noted above, we do not need to speculate. The Boeing 727 home in Hillsboro, OR has its airstairs permanently deployed and still has the original fiberglass skirting in place. This fiberglass has been exposed to the elements for decades and is perfectly fine.
I have discussed the skirting with the owner of the 727 home. He attempted to find a part number on the skirt but wasn't successful...not sure where it would be located.
-
Several things that I think validate a Western Flight Path:
1) The FBI Flight Path is very erratic around the Vancouver and Portland area. For a crew that didn’t even squawk 7700 because they were afraid Cooper may interpret that as “funny stuff,” they apparently were not at all concerned about how he would interpret one sharp turn after another. Not to mention, they apparently weren’t concerned about knocking the “bomb” off the seat with such erratic flying or concerned about flying directly over several areas of dense population.
2) The placard—a piece of evidence—and its drift analysis do not support the FBI Flight Path.
3) The Tena Bar money—a piece of evidence—does not support the FBI Flight Path.
4) The find at Cinnebar, WA—I believe this is one of the two missing fiberglass skirts from the airstairs—and its drift analysis do not support the FBI Flight Path.
If I had to hazard a guess, I would say that the individual at McChord who was tasked with crunching radar data to re-create the flight path two days later, probably used target data from the F-106s not realizing that they were flying several miles east of 305—not behind it—during that very critical portion of the flight.
All of this said, I think R99 and I would both agree that the Western Flight Path theory runs contrary to conventional wisdom, therefore we are obligated to prove we’re right and that everyone else is wrong.
-
Several things that I think validate a Western Flight Path:
1) The FBI Flight Path is very erratic around the Vancouver and Portland area. For a crew that didn’t even squawk 7700 because they were afraid Cooper may interpret that as “funny stuff,” they apparently were not at all concerned about how he would interpret one sharp turn after another. Not to mention, they apparently weren’t concerned about knocking the “bomb” off the seat with such erratic flying or concerned about flying directly over several areas of dense population.
2) The placard—a piece of evidence—and its drift analysis do not support the FBI Flight Path.
3) The Tena Bar money—a piece of evidence—does not support the FBI Flight Path.
4) The find at Cinnebar, WA—I believe this is one of the two missing fiberglass skirts from the airstairs—and its drift analysis do not support the FBI Flight Path.
If I had to hazard a guess, I would say that the individual at McChord who was tasked with crunching radar data to re-create the flight path two days later, probably used target data from the F-106s not realizing that they were flying several miles east of 305—not behind it—during that very critical portion of the flight.
All of this said, I think R99 and I would both agree that the Western Flight Path theory runs contrary to conventional wisdom, therefore we are obligated to prove we’re right and that everyone else is wrong.
There was no "individual at McChord who was tasked with crunching radar data". It was a team of people. And a computer! One member of the team was part of the TAG team. That's basic fact ... but you keep inserting your own facts! :o
Maybe your guy did it all on an abacus in his lap or sitting on the toilet?
-
It would be unfathomable for the Air Force to have tracked the wrong aircraft... for the ENTIRE flight. The original map stretches well south of the area we focus on, and chase aircraft came and went. When did the Air force stop tracking 305... and when did they start tracking it again?
-
What's interesting is the fact of screaming that 305 would never fly over Portland and then say Portland atc probably never tracked them? even though the operator is on record...
-
How many incidents have there been around Portland with "lost" planes in the area or overlooked planes that caused a crash. sometimes it sounds like they couldn't even guide them into the runway?
-
Well, I'm quite certain somebody F'd up somewhere somehow. After all, the money on Tena Bar doesn't lie. The placard doesn't lie. The fiberglass skirt doesn't lie. The haven't-found-a-damn-thing-in-50-years along the FBI Flight Path doesn't lie.
-
Well, I'm quite certain somebody F'd up somewhere somehow. After all, the money on Tena Bar doesn't lie. The placard doesn't lie. The fiberglass skirt doesn't lie. The haven't-found-a-damn-thing-in-50-years along the FBI Flight Path doesn't lie.
Those are odds and assumptions, not facts...you don't know if 305 had the emergency panel and you don't know if the piece found was from 305. the serial number was found on the piece while it hasn't been located to match. wrongful convictions happen like this all the time..I thinks it's possible though..
-
What's interesting is the fact of screaming that 305 would never fly over Portland and then say Portland atc probably never tracked them? even though the operator is on record...
Himmelsbach is on record as indicating that his helicopter stayed on the west and southwest side of Portland. And a member of this thread has previously claimed (but he will probably deny it now) that the National Guard helicopter pilot stated that when Himmelsbach boarded the helicopter at the NG base at PIA, they flew up to Woodland and then south from there. They always remained on the west side of Portland.
-
He must of failed to ask for directions?
-
How many incidents have there been around Portland with "lost" planes in the area or overlooked planes that caused a crash. sometimes it sounds like they couldn't even guide them into the runway?
NWA management in Minneapolis ruled out the suggestion from Rataczak that they climb above the overcast and fly out over the Pacific until Cooper jumped and blew the plane up as the flight crew had been told he would probably do.
Do you think NWA management would approve the airliner circling over Portland until it was blown up?
-
How many incidents have there been around Portland with "lost" planes in the area or overlooked planes that caused a crash. sometimes it sounds like they couldn't even guide them into the runway?
NWA management in Minneapolis ruled out the suggestion from Rataczak that they climb above the overcast and fly out over the Pacific until Cooper jumped and blew the plane up as the flight crew had been told he would probably do.
Do you think NWA management would approve the airliner circling over Portland until it was blown up?
Nope, do you still wish to believe Portland wasn't tracking them?
-
How many incidents have there been around Portland with "lost" planes in the area or overlooked planes that caused a crash. sometimes it sounds like they couldn't even guide them into the runway?
NWA management in Minneapolis ruled out the suggestion from Rataczak that they climb above the overcast and fly out over the Pacific until Cooper jumped and blew the plane up as the flight crew had been told he would probably do.
Do you think NWA management would approve the airliner circling over Portland until it was blown up?
Nope, do you still wish to believe Portland wasn't tracking them?
Who did Portland radar normally track? Did they track traffic that was not in their area of responsibility or did they just track aircraft that were arriving and departing PIA?
-
They are on record circling over "heavily populated" area's in Reno?
-
How many incidents have there been around Portland with "lost" planes in the area or overlooked planes that caused a crash. sometimes it sounds like they couldn't even guide them into the runway?
NWA management in Minneapolis ruled out the suggestion from Rataczak that they climb above the overcast and fly out over the Pacific until Cooper jumped and blew the plane up as the flight crew had been told he would probably do.
Do you think NWA management would approve the airliner circling over Portland until it was blown up?
Nope, do you still wish to believe Portland wasn't tracking them?
Who did Portland radar normally track? Did they track traffic that was not in their area of responsibility or did they just track aircraft that were arriving and departing PIA?
A bomb on a plane becomes everyone's concern...not just management or pilots. especially if it's headed there way...common sense?
-
What I've done here is explain the way my mind processes the info that we have. I certainly understand and appreciate that others process info differently and therefore arrive at different conclusions.
Until something materially changes...e.g., Cooper's parachute, attache' case or money is found near Orchards...I'm quite certain that the FBI Flight Path is off by several miles at the critical moment.
-
How many incidents have there been around Portland with "lost" planes in the area or overlooked planes that caused a crash. sometimes it sounds like they couldn't even guide them into the runway?
NWA management in Minneapolis ruled out the suggestion from Rataczak that they climb above the overcast and fly out over the Pacific until Cooper jumped and blew the plane up as the flight crew had been told he would probably do.
Do you think NWA management would approve the airliner circling over Portland until it was blown up?
Nope, do you still wish to believe Portland wasn't tracking them?
Who did Portland radar normally track? Did they track traffic that was not in their area of responsibility or did they just track aircraft that were arriving and departing PIA?
A bomb on a plane becomes everyone's concern...not just management or pilots. especially if it's headed there way...common sense?
The only people the airliner crew talked to were the Seattle ATC controllers and NWA personnel through the ARINC link. Some of the ARINC communications were relayed through other aircraft. There is a remote Seattle ATC send/receive radio facility on the Oregon side and just across the river from Tina Bar. The airliner crew would not be talking to anyone in the Portland tower.
-
What's interesting is the fact of screaming that 305 would never fly over Portland and then say Portland atc probably never tracked them? even though the operator is on record...
Himmelsbach is on record as indicating that his helicopter stayed on the west and southwest side of Portland. And a member of this thread has previously claimed (but he will probably deny it now) that the National Guard helicopter pilot stated that when Himmelsbach boarded the helicopter at the NG base at PIA, they flew up to Woodland and then south from there. They always remained on the west side of Portland.
I’m just kinda curious what do we mean by flying the west side of Portland. I’ve finished my Postal career delivering mail from 1980 until 2001 on the West side of Portland. Beaverton is only 8 miles away and Hillsboro further Westerly ! Where’s this unpopulated area ? I can name all the areas and cities if you want me to.
-
I understand that but exploiting the fact of a bomb over a city would be plausible to believe it would be tracked in the path it's currently on. even suggesting a change in it's path warning not to fly over cities. today this would be the protocol, in 1971, not so sure since it's documented flying over heavily populated area's in Reno. the heavily populated area was avoided in Portland. could be a mile off to the west as well.
-
I understand that but exploiting the fact of a bomb over a city would be plausible to believe it would be tracked in the path it's currently on. even suggesting a change in it's path warning not to fly over cities. today this would be the protocol, in 1971, not so sure since it's documented flying over heavily populated area's in Reno. the heavily populated area was avoided in Portland. could be a mile off to the west as well.
Where is the documentation that the airliner flew over a heavily populated area in Reno?
-
here....
-
At around 10:33 Oakland was ready for a handoff to Reno but Reno couldn't see the target yet. Oakland responded for them to "stretch" there radar out to the northwest. the target was apparently picked up. I'm sure Portland knew exactly where 305 was that evening...
-
It’s kinda funny how people try to sell this Western Flight plan by using this “ why would they fly over a populated area “ story ! However when I ask a simple question where exactly is this unpopulated area West of Portland..... I get no response ! I lived here most of my life and delivered mail in S W Portland and lived there. Beaverton borders Portland to the West and is home to Nike and a ton of businesses ! Further West is Hillsboro a mere 20 miles from PDX. Interesting!
-
At around 10:33 Oakland was ready for a handoff to Reno but Reno couldn't see the target yet. Oakland responded for them to "stretch" there radar out to the northwest. the target was apparently picked up. I'm sure Portland knew exactly where 305 was that evening...
Read the Oakland ATC radio transcripts and the Reno Tower radio transcripts. The aircraft flight path was never "due east" (with respect to the grid lines) as the FBI report states. The magnetic variation was about 15 to 20 degrees east at Reno in 1971. The controllers were giving directions to the airliner with respect to the magnetic heading. When told to fly a heading of 090 they were actually flying a heading (with respect to the grid lines) of about 115 to 120 degrees or east south east.
The above means that the airliner was approaching Reno from the west north west and passing north of the city of Reno. The controller was trying to get the airliner established on the localizer for runway 16 for a very long final approach. The airliner overshot the localizer by about a mile to the east and was given a heading back toward it. The airliner was told if it had to circle to do so east of the localizer and it did make at least one circle to the east.
In 1971, I doubt if the airliner did much flying over either Reno or Sparks.
-
It’s kinda funny how people try to sell this Western Flight plan by using this “ why would they fly over a populated area “ story ! However when I ask a simple question where exactly is this unpopulated area West of Portland..... I get no response ! I lived here most of my life and delivered mail in S W Portland and lived there. Beaverton borders Portland to the West and is home to Nike and a ton of businesses ! Further West is Hillsboro a mere 20 miles from PDX. Interesting!
Are you suggesting that the area about 10 miles west of PIA was as built up as downtown Portland in 1971?
-
It's on the transcripts...
-
I'm not certain I understand the argument here. The airport is in Reno, therefore the jet had to fly over Reno to get to the Reno airport. This is not the same thing as flying over densely populated areas of Portland/Vancouver unnecessarily which is precisely what the FBI Flight Path depicts.
BTW, I am very familiar with Reno and Reno is a fraction of the size of Portland/Vancouver.
Finally, flying in between downtown Portland and Beaverton in 1971 is not at all the same as flying over downtown Portland. Not to mention flying west of downtown Portland--which Captain Scott apparently insisted he did--is along a straight line when considering a Maylay to Canby path.
-
which Captain Scott apparently insisted he did...
where is that documented as concrete? what I mean is where did any of the pilots state flying a straight line from Malay or surrounding area's. I would of said something if I was part of the crew. "why do you have us over Battleground" ?
-
It's on the transcripts...
What is the point here? In other places the controllers say west north west.
-
which Captain Scott apparently insisted he did...
where is that documented as concrete? what I mean is where did any of the pilots state flying a straight line from Malay or surrounding area's. I would of said something if I was part of the crew. "why do you have us over Battleground" ?
Well according to at least one media report from Himmelsbach's retirement party, that is in effect what Scott stated.
Also, according to Ammerman, he believes he only gave one heading--roughly 160--to the T-38 chase plane as it followed 305 south.
-
media report vs radar data, really?
-
I suspect all of this is futile. People are going to believe what they are going to believe. My task now is to prove that R99 and I are correct.
-
media report vs radar data, really?
OK, so ignore the media report. On the other hand, Ammerman related his info to me face-to-face.
-
I'm trying to make sense of Portland pretty much ignoring a bomb coming there way, but the pilots were concerned and management? then specific data was given by the Portland operator who was very explicit with degree and location? two separate reports near V23 from radar operators?
-
I'm not certain I understand the argument here. The airport is in Reno, therefore the jet had to fly over Reno to get to the Reno airport. This is not the same thing as flying over densely populated areas of Portland/Vancouver unnecessarily which is precisely what the FBI Flight Path depicts.
BTW, I am very familiar with Reno and Reno is a fraction of the size of Portland/Vancouver.
Finally, flying in between downtown Portland and Beaverton in 1971 is not at all the same as flying over downtown Portland. Not to mention flying west of downtown Portland--which Captain Scott apparently insisted he did--is along a straight line when considering a Maylay to Canby path.
The Reno airport is on the east side of Reno. The airliner could not handle high descent rates, as crazy as that may sound, per statements made very early in the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. So the controller kept the airliner well north of Reno and tried to get it established on the localizer for runway 16 (it would be landing to the south). A 10 mile final approach is not out of the ordinary for normal approaches, so an extended final approach would give the airliner more time to get set up for landing but it was not able to land on the first try and had to circle for a second attempt.
-
I'm trying to make sense of Portland pretty much ignoring a bomb coming there way, but the pilots were concerned and management? then specific data was given by the Portland operator who was very explicit with degree and location? two separate reports near V23 from radar operators?
There is nothing to suggest that the Portland radar operator was directly involved with the airliner. And as pointed out some time ago, the airliner was never very far from V-23 even when bypassing Portland on the Malay to Canby line.
-
I'm trying to make sense of Portland pretty much ignoring a bomb coming there way, but the pilots were concerned and management? then specific data was given by the Portland operator who was very explicit with degree and location? two separate reports near V23 from radar operators?
Portland did not handle 305--it was handled by ATC.
Also, I think it's important to remember that there were four jets all in the same area related to the event--305, the T-38 and the two F-106s. Perhaps this fact begins to explain where the FBI Flight Path was derived.
-
It would be unfathomable for the Air Force to have tracked the wrong aircraft... for the ENTIRE flight. The original map stretches well south of the area we focus on, and chase aircraft came and went. When did the Air force stop tracking 305... and when did they start tracking it again?
I still want/demand to know who EU's "individual at McChord who was tasked with crunching radar data" - is! Name the guy! Name his unit? Name anyone he worked with or was a part of!
EU's claim either has substance or it doesn't. Or he just made this up ? Nobody is entitled to make something like this up -
Is EU even aware that several members of the TAG were interviewed several times and they named the people who were working radar etc at McChord that night? We've been over this stuff before.
EU and the Other Guy are going to keep at this until all life is extinguished from the Earth and the pyramids collapse - that much is 1000000000% obvious. Good luck to the lone survivor! ;)
-
Portland did not handle 305--it was handled by ATC.
They don't have to be involved in anything. it's against your own rules about a bomb coming into a populated area...ALL involved on the ground should of been concerned and monitoring the progress of the flight. again, common sense would tell you to be watching..
-
I'm trying to make sense of Portland pretty much ignoring a bomb coming there way, but the pilots were concerned and management? then specific data was given by the Portland operator who was very explicit with degree and location? two separate reports near V23 from radar operators?
Portland did not handle 305--it was handled by ATC.
Also, I think it's important to remember that there were four jets all in the same area related to the event--305, the T-38 and the two F-106s. Perhaps this fact begins to explain where the FBI Flight Path was derived.
How is it important?
-
It would be unfathomable for the Air Force to have tracked the wrong aircraft... for the ENTIRE flight. The original map stretches well south of the area we focus on, and chase aircraft came and went. When did the Air force stop tracking 305... and when did they start tracking it again?
I still want/demand to know who EU's "individual at McChord who was tasked with crunching radar data" - is! Name the guy! Name his unit? Name anyone he worked with or was a part of!
EU's claim either has substance or it doesn't. Or he just made this up ? Nobody is entitled to make something like this up -
Is EU even aware that several members of the TAG were interviewed several times and they named the people who were working radar etc at McChord that night? We've been over this stuff before.
You have absolutely no idea who was personally tasked with plotting the path and melding data from NWO and the FDR, do you? If you do I would very interested to know who all of these people are. I have never seen an identifying document from the FBI, have you?
To suggest that people are infallible when defined in a plural capacity is nonsense. People make mistakes. Period.
-
To suggest that people are infallible when defined in a plural capacity is nonsense. People make mistakes. Period.
The problem I see is you are claiming multiple people from multiple entities are completely wrong...radar, FDR, operator statements etc. civilian radar, Sage radar...
-
It would be unfathomable for the Air Force to have tracked the wrong aircraft... for the ENTIRE flight. The original map stretches well south of the area we focus on, and chase aircraft came and went. When did the Air force stop tracking 305... and when did they start tracking it again?
I still want/demand to know who EU's "individual at McChord who was tasked with crunching radar data" - is! Name the guy! Name his unit? Name anyone he worked with or was a part of!
EU's claim either has substance or it doesn't. Or he just made this up ? Nobody is entitled to make something like this up -
Is EU even aware that several members of the TAG were interviewed several times and they named the people who were working radar etc at McChord that night? We've been over this stuff before.
You have absolutely no idea who was personally tasked with plotting the path and melding data from NWO and the FDR, do you? If you do I would very interested to know who all of these people are. I have never seen an identifying document from the FBI, have you?
To suggest that people are infallible when defined in a plural capacity is nonsense. People make mistakes. Period.
R E EE EE DDDD V E R Y CAREFULLY!
No singe person drew the 305 flight - at McChord or anywhere else. A SYSTEM DID! A COMPUTER! People assessed and reviewed it all multiple times.
Let me do an exhaustive 5 hour search and I will give you the name of the group. Or you can search past posts and find it yourself!
Im sorry but I have serious things to do - my ELVIS time has run out - i mustr leave the bldg. BYE!
-
I have never seen an identifying document from the FBI, have you?
I don't see a reason for the military to give the FBI or NWO anything but the map. why would they have to explain themselves?
-
To suggest that people are infallible when defined in a plural capacity is nonsense. People make mistakes. Period.
The problem I see is you are claiming multiple people from multiple entities are completely wrong...radar, FDR, operator statements etc. civilian radar, Sage radar...
I think if you took inventory on those who attest to the FBI Flight Path you would be surprised. If the proclamations were unanimous, why then did the FBI begin to entertain a Washougal flight path and radically different timing?
-
Like it or not, somebody F'd up.
-
It’s kinda funny how people try to sell this Western Flight plan by using this “ why would they fly over a populated area “ story ! However when I ask a simple question where exactly is this unpopulated area West of Portland..... I get no response ! I lived here most of my life and delivered mail in S W Portland and lived there. Beaverton borders Portland to the West and is home to Nike and a ton of businesses ! Further West is Hillsboro a mere 20 miles from PDX. Interesting!
Are you suggesting that the area about 10 miles west of PIA was as built up as downtown Portland in 1971?
I’m not here to give you a bad time ! I’ll always try to give you as accurate information about what Portland was like in 1970. The Downtown you saw in 2009 wasn’t anything like it was in 1970. The Pearl district where REI is located was far more an Industrial area with the huge Blitz Weinhard brewery there and lots of businesses. So many of the tall residential high rise Appt buildings like the Grant, Lincoln, Sherman Towers were built in the mid 70’s and 80. I’d venture to say almost all the newer high rise in the Pearl weren’t even thought of in 1970. Most of downtown Portland was retail Stores like Meier and Frank etc and office buildings. I read that about 55% lived outside of the downtown area and were commuters. Most of the commuters lived in Mulltnomah county to the East. However from the mid 60’s, Washington County and Yamhill counties were the fastest growing area which was of course West Portland and Beaverton, Tigard areas. Beaverton is about 11 nautical miles from PDX. I lived at 6152 S W Miles ct back then. I’ve given a long honest answer and I’m just saying that there was no place West of Portland that was unpopulated.
-
It’s kinda funny how people try to sell this Western Flight plan by using this “ why would they fly over a populated area “ story ! However when I ask a simple question where exactly is this unpopulated area West of Portland..... I get no response ! I lived here most of my life and delivered mail in S W Portland and lived there. Beaverton borders Portland to the West and is home to Nike and a ton of businesses ! Further West is Hillsboro a mere 20 miles from PDX. Interesting!
Are you suggesting that the area about 10 miles west of PIA was as built up as downtown Portland in 1971?
I’m not here to give you a bad time ! I’ll always try to give you as accurate information about what Portland was like in 1970. The Downtown you saw in 2009 wasn’t anything like it was in 1970. The Pearl district where REI is located was far more an Industrial area with the huge Blitz Weinhard brewery there and lots of businesses. So many of the tall residential high rise Appt buildings like the Grant, Lincoln, Sherman Towers were built in the mid 70’s and 80. I’d venture to say almost all the newer high rise in the Pearl weren’t even thought of in 1970. Most of downtown Portland was retail Stores like Meier and Frank etc and office buildings. I read that about 55% lived outside of the downtown area and were commuters. Most of the commuters lived in Mulltnomah county to the East. However from the mid 60’s, Washington County and Yamhill counties were the fastest growing area which was of course West Portland and Beaverton, Tigard areas. Beaverton is about 11 nautical miles from PDX. I lived at 6152 S W Miles ct back then. I’ve given a long honest answer and I’m just saying that there was no place West of Portland that was unpopulated.
First, I have NEVER claimed that the area west of Portland was "unpopulated".
Second, if you compare 1971 era maps with present day maps of Portland, it is plainly obvious that the area west of Portland was not as congested in 1971 as Portland proper or the east side of Portland.
Would you prefer that the wreckage of a bombed airliner land on top of the REI store or on top of a few ranch houses on the west side of Portland? The point of staying west was to keep the body count down.
As the saying goes, I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you. ::)
-
It’s kinda funny how people try to sell this Western Flight plan by using this “ why would they fly over a populated area “ story ! However when I ask a simple question where exactly is this unpopulated area West of Portland..... I get no response ! I lived here most of my life and delivered mail in S W Portland and lived there. Beaverton borders Portland to the West and is home to Nike and a ton of businesses ! Further West is Hillsboro a mere 20 miles from PDX. Interesting!
Are you suggesting that the area about 10 miles west of PIA was as built up as downtown Portland in 1971?
I’m not here to give you a bad time ! I’ll always try to give you as accurate information about what Portland was like in 1970. The Downtown you saw in 2009 wasn’t anything like it was in 1970. The Pearl district where REI is located was far more an Industrial area with the huge Blitz Weinhard brewery there and lots of businesses. So many of the tall residential high rise Appt buildings like the Grant, Lincoln, Sherman Towers were built in the mid 70’s and 80. I’d venture to say almost all the newer high rise in the Pearl weren’t even thought of in 1970. Most of downtown Portland was retail Stores like Meier and Frank etc and office buildings. I read that about 55% lived outside of the downtown area and were commuters. Most of the commuters lived in Mulltnomah county to the East. However from the mid 60’s, Washington County and Yamhill counties were the fastest growing area which was of course West Portland and Beaverton, Tigard areas. Beaverton is about 11 nautical miles from PDX. I lived at 6152 S W Miles ct back then. I’ve given a long honest answer and I’m just saying that there was no place West of Portland that was unpopulated.
First, I have NEVER claimed that the area west of Portland was "unpopulated".
Second, if you compare 1971 era maps with present day maps of Portland, it is plainly obvious that the area west of Portland was not as congested in 1971 as Portland proper or the east side of Portland.
Would you prefer that the wreckage of a bombed airliner land on top of the REI store or on top of a few ranch houses on the west side of Portland? The point of staying west was to keep the body count down.
As the saying goes, I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you. ::)
Once again you refuse to accept anything that doesn’t validate your western flight plan. You asked about what was about 10 miles west of PIA which is PDX. I told you that Beaverton is about 11 nautical miles from PIA. You have consistently discounted any experts statements that were actually there in 1971. It’s a total wonder why there weren’t daily airline crashes in and around PIA as nobody had any idea where all those planes were ! The U. S Air Force were supposed to protect us from enemies but nobody knew where any planes were. Radar was useless in 1971 I guess. I know for a fact that the pilots saw the glow of the lights of Portland, Vancouver but I guess they must have been wrong also as I guess it was Beaverton or Hillsboro. As the saying goes, I can explain it to you but I can’t understand it for you !😁
-
Like it or not, somebody F'd up.
Maybe you! :congrats:
Maybe, just maybe ... there is no "unredacted" copy of the flight comms, maybe there never was such a document. Maybe such a document was never made from the flight comm tapes? Maybe due to other documents and communications, the need for a socalled 'unredacted' copy of the flight comms never came up!? Has anyone bothered to think of that? :o
-
Like it or not, somebody F'd up.
Maybe you! :congrats:
Maybe, just maybe ... there is no "unredacted" copy of the flight comms, maybe there never was such a document. Maybe such a document was never made from the flight comm tapes? Has anyone bothered to think of that? :o
Contrary to what this poster claims, a complete "unredacted" copy of the entire communications between Air Traffic Control and the hijacked airliner would be routinely made and would be permanently retained by the FAA and the FBI. This means that both the FAA and the FBI have copies of those complete communication transcripts in their files today. But it will take someone like Mark Zaid and a court order to pry them loose. Three efforts through the US House of Representatives FBI office were unsuccessful.
-
Key words are: would be routinely made
I agree! It sounds so simple - straightforward. Maybe the real secret is: it was never made for some reason? That is one of the options! P=N! (N factorial)
[In mathematics, the factorial of a positive integer n, denoted by n!, is the product of all positive integers less than or equal to n: For example, The value of 0! is set at 1, according to the convention for an empty product.]
Claims and Obsessive Insistence do not guarantee Facts! A lot of things are "routine" in a normal world, but not necessarily factual. There ought to be a catfish that is the size of an elephant - where is it!?
Does anyone know how the copy of the flight comms transcript we do have, came to the public through the Post Intelligencer? Who released that document to the PI? ... was it the PI that REDACTED an original document? Who had that document to release it to the PI? Was it someone in the FBI? ;)
*Who at the PI received the flight comm transcript from somebody in the FBI? When did that happen. Its just one of the basic fundamental questions that Cooper sleuths and Geoffrey Gray in particular failed to even address, so far as I know! It's a little like asking: Who was Columbus' mother! :o
IS THERE ANY FACTUAL PROOF THAT AN UNREDACTED COPY OF THE PI TRANSCRIPT EVEN EXISTS?
-
Ammerman said the dots represent other flight noise...we have seen "redacted" transcripts before...below is one.
-
Ammerman said the dots represent other flight noise...we have seen "redacted" transcripts before...below is one.
The dots in the ATC radio transcripts represent redactions regardless of what Ammerman said. "Flight noise" over a radio link that doesn't have a microphone keyed? There is this bridge in Brooklyn that is available for sale and I can get it for you cheap. Just send me a package containing $1,000,000 in unmarked $20 bills and I will handle it from there.
As I have repeatedly stressed over the last 10 years, if you want to see what the Seattle ATC radio transcripts should look like, then just take a look at the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. I don't believe there is a single redaction in the Oakland ATC or Reno Tower radio transcripts.
There doesn't appear to be any "flight noise" in the ARINC transcripts. And the Air Traffic Control radio capabilities are vastly superior to the ARINC capabilities.
It is beyond silly for some people on this site to claim that the Seattle ATC transcripts are complete, when in reality they just trying to remove evidence that does not support their own claims about the flight path. In making these false claims, they are just adding more baloney to the Cooper matter.
-
In the first place, nobody has said or claimed the 'Seattle ATC transcripts are complete'! Stop putting words in people's mouths that dont exist either! :nono:
Maybe the alleged missing communications are in some other document or tapes? The critical period is presumably 8:12 pm to 8:20 pm. We have the following:
8:12 pm t1
305: Getting some oscillations in the cabin. Must be doing something with
the air stairs.
MSP: Roger.
8:13.14 305 Center? 405 (unintel) 20.9 10,000.
SEAR5 Northwest 305 ident
8:15.52 SEAR5 Northwest 305, the Portland uh altimeter 3003.
305 0 0 3
*[ 5 min BLANK PERIOD IN COMMS ? NO MENTION OF COOPER BAILOUT]
8:20 pm t1
305: Called.
MSP: Go to 131.8 (phone patch to company on that freq.)
SEADD: He (?) is already on that frequency.
MSP: Roger. We are on the phone and will be talking to him shortly.
SEADD: Roger.
At 8:20 305 is on the phone talking to "him" on some other frequency? There are no comms with ATC during this period. Why or how would non-existent communications with ATC be included in a Transcript if they didn't even occur? Maybe those comms (people want) are on some other tape and in some other document, or they never existed in the first place with ATC? And the socalled unredacted ATC transcript does not exist because it never existed?
So far after all these years of looking-demanding, not one shred of hard evidence has ever surfaced that an 'unredacted' Transcript even exists, or ever existed except as a figment in some people's minds! ::)
*If people recall, we asked NW Historian Bruce Kit if he had ever seen a flight comm transcript with "HIM" at 8:20. Bruce replied, 'No but I sure would like to!'
-
In the first place, nobody has said or claimed the 'Seattle ATC transcripts are complete'! Stop putting words in people's mouths that dont exist either! :nono:
Maybe the alleged missing communications are in some other document or tapes? The critical period is presumably 8:12 pm to 8:20 pm. We have the following:
8:12 pm t1
305: Getting some oscillations in the cabin. Must be doing something with
the air stairs.
MSP: Roger.
8:13.14 305 Center? 405 (unintel) 20.9 10,000.
SEAR5 Northwest 305 ident
8:15.52 SEAR5 Northwest 305, the Portland uh altimeter 3003.
305 0 0 3
*[ 5 min BLANK PERIOD IN COMMS ? NO MENTION OF COOPER BAILOUT]
8:20 pm t1
305: Called.
MSP: Go to 131.8 (phone patch to company on that freq.)
SEADD: He (?) is already on that frequency.
MSP: Roger. We are on the phone and will be talking to him shortly.
SEADD: Roger.
At 8:20 305 is on the phone talking to "him" on some other frequency? There are no comms with ATC during this period. Why or how would non-existent communications with ATC be included in a Transcript if they didn't even occur? Maybe those comms (people want) are on some other tape and in some other document, or they never existed in the first place with ATC? And the socalled unredacted ATC transcript does not exist because it never existed?
So far after all these years of looking-demanding, not one shred of hard evidence has ever surfaced that an 'unredacted' Transcript even exists, or ever existed except as a figment in some people's minds! ::)
*If people recall, we asked NW Historian Bruce Kit if he had ever seen a flight comm transcript with "HIM" at 8:20. Bruce replied, 'No but I sure would like to!'
There seems to be some confusion by the above poster as to what is a Seattle Air Traffic Control transcript and what is transmitted over the ARINC radio, which included a phone patch, and teletype system and has nothing whatsoever to do with the Seattle Air Traffic Control system.
Only the 8:13:14 and 8:15:52 transmissions above are from the Seattle Air Traffic Control transcripts. The remainder are from the ARINC radio phone patch and teletype system.
The Seattle ATC radio transcripts have 19 redactions indicated. The ARINC transcripts are also incomplete according to a study of them done by Fred Poynter and his staff at the WSHM. This has been discussed at length previously on this site.
The hijacked airliner would have had at least two operating radio transrecivers and could have been talking to both the Seattle ATC controllers and NWA personnel in Minneapolis at the same time.
Air Traffic Control and ARINC are two entirely separate agencies.
-
Where is the Manual for Knowing Redactions ?
I want to know when a redaction has been made.
I want to know how to detect a redacted document - what should I look for?
Can I fill in a redaction that has been made? Is there a manual for doing that?
In the whole history of the Cooper case why hasn't some 'informant' leaked the fact (with documentation) that the PI Transcript is redacted, and some unredacted transcript exists somewhere? Should somebody turn this over to Wiki Leaks? ....... how come its taken years to try to document all of this? :offtopicman:
Who were the Cooper censors who redacted the PI Transcript, or any other transcript? Names pleaze.
WHY IS ANYONE HAVING TO "BEG" FOR THIS! :conspiracy:
-
Who gave the PI Transcript to the PI? Name pleaze.
Who wrote or prepared the PI Transcript? Name pleaze.
Who in the whole "shamoli" of the Cooper case would be able to document redactions being made to the PI Transcript, or any other transcript? Did anyone including WSHM ever document redaction with a name of redactor?
I want to see these Redactions on the Toast! 8)
-
Hi, All.
I've asked this before here, but can someone tell me the goal of, and interest in, the flight path investigation? Usually, "he went thattaway" is a time-sensitive statement. Just watch an episode of The First 48 and you'll see. So the flight path is not about trying to see where Cooper may have landed and gone off on foot, because he would have been gone after a matter of days if not hours.
If we're looking for a body or a parachute, again, I'll say it's a time-sensitive situation as well. They found bodies during the Cooper search. They found the placard and the money in the area within that first decade, and nothing since. Given enough time, say five decades, treasure hunters and everyday citizens will unearth everything in a given area, so we can't reasonably be holding out for a skeleton and briefcase.
If we're trying to prove that the plane was off-course to the west to explain the money being on Tena Bar, the variables such as chute opening, chute not opening, survival vs death, all forms of human intervention etc., still demonstrates nothing about Cooper's fate or identity, just the money. And in all that time, the entire area has been scrutinized by everyone.
What are the goals? Or is this just fun to talk about? What does nailing down the flight path accomplish? Please be detailed.
-
Hi, All.
I've asked this before here, but can someone tell me the goal of, and interest in, the flight path investigation? Usually, "he went thattaway" is a time-sensitive statement. Just watch an episode of The First 48 and you'll see. So the flight path is not about trying to see where Cooper may have landed and gone off on foot, because he would have been gone after a matter of days if not hours.
If we're looking for a body or a parachute, again, I'll say it's a time-sensitive situation as well. They found bodies during the Cooper search. They found the placard and the money in the area within that first decade, and nothing since. Given enough time, say five decades, treasure hunters and everyday citizens will unearth everything in a given area, so we can't reasonably be holding out for a skeleton and briefcase.
If we're trying to prove that the plane was off-course to the west to explain the money being on Tena Bar, the variables such as chute opening, chute not opening, survival vs death, all forms of human intervention etc., still demonstrates nothing about Cooper's fate or identity, just the money. And in all that time, the entire area has been scrutinized by everyone.
What are the goals? Or is this just fun to talk about? What does nailing down the flight path accomplish? Please be detailed.
Unsurelock,
Which planet(s) have you been on for the last 50 years? Please be specific.
-
Hi, All.
I've asked this before here, but can someone tell me the goal of, and interest in, the flight path investigation? Usually, "he went thattaway" is a time-sensitive statement. Just watch an episode of The First 48 and you'll see. So the flight path is not about trying to see where Cooper may have landed and gone off on foot, because he would have been gone after a matter of days if not hours.
If we're looking for a body or a parachute, again, I'll say it's a time-sensitive situation as well. They found bodies during the Cooper search. They found the placard and the money in the area within that first decade, and nothing since. Given enough time, say five decades, treasure hunters and everyday citizens will unearth everything in a given area, so we can't reasonably be holding out for a skeleton and briefcase.
If we're trying to prove that the plane was off-course to the west to explain the money being on Tena Bar, the variables such as chute opening, chute not opening, survival vs death, all forms of human intervention etc., still demonstrates nothing about Cooper's fate or identity, just the money. And in all that time, the entire area has been scrutinized by everyone.
What are the goals? Or is this just fun to talk about? What does nailing down the flight path accomplish? Please be detailed.
This is very funny! :rofl: :bravo: :congrats: Sleep well. :o
-
You two speechless heroes have just demonstrated perfectly that you have dedicated years to a snipe hunt with no hope of gaining anything from this line of inquiry. :bravo:
Still inviting answers.
-
You two speechless heroes have just demonstrated perfectly that you have dedicated years to a snipe hunt with no hope of gaining anything from this line of inquiry. :bravo:
Still inviting answers.
Ok poster. Go back to 2005-08 and start reading every post at DZ; in other words read the thread. Or, go to Google and find a synopsis of the DB Cooper hijacking and read it. Like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._B._Cooper
-
Hi, All.
I've asked this before here, but can someone tell me the goal of, and interest in, the flight path investigation? Usually, "he went thattaway" is a time-sensitive statement. Just watch an episode of The First 48 and you'll see. So the flight path is not about trying to see where Cooper may have landed and gone off on foot, because he would have been gone after a matter of days if not hours.
If we're looking for a body or a parachute, again, I'll say it's a time-sensitive situation as well. They found bodies during the Cooper search. They found the placard and the money in the area within that first decade, and nothing since. Given enough time, say five decades, treasure hunters and everyday citizens will unearth everything in a given area, so we can't reasonably be holding out for a skeleton and briefcase.
If we're trying to prove that the plane was off-course to the west to explain the money being on Tena Bar, the variables such as chute opening, chute not opening, survival vs death, all forms of human intervention etc., still demonstrates nothing about Cooper's fate or identity, just the money. And in all that time, the entire area has been scrutinized by everyone.
What are the goals? Or is this just fun to talk about? What does nailing down the flight path accomplish? Please be detailed.
I've stated that without knowing the correct flight path it is impossible to determine the correct landing zone. Furthermore, if we can determine the landing zone we are well positioned to answer some basic questions if not solve the entire mystery.
Why do I say this?
First, considering the basic questions, if we can accurately identify where DBC landed it can tell us how the money arrived at Tena Bar and by extension whether DBC survived.
Second, considering solving the entire mystery, it is very reasonable to assume that the two parachutes DBC jumped with--if not the attache' case and money--are still out there yet-to-be found. Finding any of these items may well help determine DBC's identity. For example, if we find the attache' case we could likely identify when and where it was purchased (within a certain range). Finding the parachutes may provide some additional clues too.
Also, finding the parachutes or attache' case--not to mention a body--would also enable us to measure the veracity of the FBI's assumptions in some areas. Specifically, if we find DBC's parachutes near the Western Flight Path that would put a fork in the FBI Flight Path--apparently finding the money on Tena Bar was not sufficient to do the same.
You've hit upon an important point, which is to say that one would think if anything was still out there that it would have been found. After all, the area has been lived in, hunted and clear cut for a mighty long time. Considering this, the mere fact that nothing has been found is a clue in-and-of-itself by my way of thinking. It leads me to conclude that the items were either stashed underwater or in a place like the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge (not coincidentally along the Western Flight Path).
Beyond all of this, it's just cool. Indeed, the mystery is 50% figuring out what actually happened, and 50% figuring out who the guy was.
-
I've stated that without knowing the correct flight path it is impossible to determine the correct landing zone. Furthermore, if we can determine the landing zone we are well positioned to answer some basic questions if not solve the entire mystery.
Why do I say this?
First, considering the basic questions, if we can accurately identify where DBC landed it can tell us how the money arrived at Tena Bar and by extension whether DBC survived.
Second, considering solving the entire mystery, it is very reasonable to assume that the two parachutes DBC jumped with--if not the attache' case and money--are still out there yet-to-be found. Finding any of these items may well help determine DBC's identity. For example, if we find the attache' case we could likely identify when and where it was purchased (within a certain range). Finding the parachutes may provide some additional clues too.
Also, finding the parachutes or attache' case--not to mention a body--would also enable us to measure the veracity of the FBI's assumptions in some areas. Specifically, if we find DBC's parachutes near the Western Flight Path that would put a fork in the FBI Flight Path--apparently finding the money on Tena Bar was not sufficient to do the same.
You've hit upon an important point, which is to say that one would think if anything was still out there that it would have been found. After all, the area has been lived in, hunted and clear cut for a mighty long time. Considering this, the mere fact that nothing has been found is a clue in-and-of-itself by my way of thinking. It leads me to conclude that the items were either stashed underwater or in a place like the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge (not coincidentally along the Western Flight Path).
Beyond all of this, it's just cool. Indeed, the mystery is 50% figuring out what actually happened, and 50% figuring out who the guy was.
I agree that it's a cool story, hopefully without sounding like I'm glorifying a criminal. But beyond that...
If Cooper's parachutes are found minus Cooper, people will claim they are not Cooper's. Those who say they are Cooper's will be divided into camps of those who believe he landed at that spot and those who believe he landed somewhere else, and the parachutes were moved by some means. Some will say that Tina Mucklow planted them there because her conscience got to her after so many years of being a silent accomplice. Others will say Cooper came back and planted them there to toy with the FBI, anywhere from one to fifty years later.
If a body is found in a parachute harness with a briefcase and road flares with $190k on him, matching serial numbers, still wearing the loafers and even the damn sunglasses, people will say it's too good to be true so it's a setup.
There was a Cooper researcher named George Nuttall who, along with a partner, spent exorbitant amounts of their final years on this earth walking around islands in the Columbia River, convinced that Cooper had landed on one of them and that his remains had been scattered about by scavengers, thus explaining why nobody had found a corpse. That's pretty specific and pretty sad that they reached that conclusion based on nothing at all, then committed to it with all their retired energy.
Now, with all of that in mind, from a practical standpoint, if we could magically determine and agree upon a landing zone, what then? Will the bickering stop? Will everyone agree on what that means for the other evidence? Will Flyjack say the landing zone proves Cooper must have survived while Shutter says Cooper definitely died, and Georger posts this icon :rofl: And calls them both stupid? I think yes, yes and yes. So again, what are our goals?
Let's say the landing zone puts Cooper further West than originally thought. The landing zone is still huge, part on land and part on water. Scenario 1: Cooper landed right in the fucking Columbia. POW. Unconscious. Drowned. Money floated up on Tena bar, yes? Or perhaps not. Secnario 2: Cooper impaled himself anus-first onto a conifer and was discovered by a gas station worker taking a leak in the woods. Dude took all of the money and over time lost or buried some of it, only after burying Cooper so nobody would know someone local took the money. Scenario 3: Coop got his Chute open and drifted gently toward a riverbank, landing on it, rolling up his chute and hoofing it off to safety, ditching his money after seeing cops. Scenario 4: he came back to twirl his moustache and plant the money on that beach. Scenario 5: Cooper's money defied all odds, and I mean all odds, deciding to hang back and let Coop rot and tumble downstream, all casual without his tie. The money grew hands and feet, walked up the riverbank, and after stacking itself nicely, buried itself in the sand.
It doesn't matter where the landing zone was. All of these are possibilities to the people obsessed with this case. Nuttall's partner had been a cop who had seen a body distributed by wildlife about the countryside. That is why he felt so strongly that THIS HAS TO BE what happened to Cooper. We all think we're special and we have the center-of-the-universe type answer that all others lack.
So again, what are the goals in establishing a landing zone?
For me, I'm gonna stick to the money and the math. The tie could have been anybody's, and was exposed to decades of an FBI evidence room where it could have been contaminated countless times. The landing zone is entirely meaningless. The parachute chosen is meaningless with only four possibilities to choose from, the level of skill in jumping is virtually meaningless, and all investigation up to now has been completely and utterly worthless. The answer is someplace the public hasn't looked, and I don't mean some overlooked clump of trees near Ariel.
-
You two speechless heroes have just demonstrated perfectly that you have dedicated years to a snipe hunt with no hope of gaining anything from this line of inquiry. :bravo:
Still inviting answers.
Ok poster. Go back to 2005-08 and start reading every post at DZ; in other words read the thread. Or, go to Google and find a synopsis of the DB Cooper hijacking and read it. Like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._B._Cooper
No.
-
I've stated that without knowing the correct flight path it is impossible to determine the correct landing zone. Furthermore, if we can determine the landing zone we are well positioned to answer some basic questions if not solve the entire mystery.
Why do I say this?
First, considering the basic questions, if we can accurately identify where DBC landed it can tell us how the money arrived at Tena Bar and by extension whether DBC survived.
Second, considering solving the entire mystery, it is very reasonable to assume that the two parachutes DBC jumped with--if not the attache' case and money--are still out there yet-to-be found. Finding any of these items may well help determine DBC's identity. For example, if we find the attache' case we could likely identify when and where it was purchased (within a certain range). Finding the parachutes may provide some additional clues too.
Also, finding the parachutes or attache' case--not to mention a body--would also enable us to measure the veracity of the FBI's assumptions in some areas. Specifically, if we find DBC's parachutes near the Western Flight Path that would put a fork in the FBI Flight Path--apparently finding the money on Tena Bar was not sufficient to do the same.
You've hit upon an important point, which is to say that one would think if anything was still out there that it would have been found. After all, the area has been lived in, hunted and clear cut for a mighty long time. Considering this, the mere fact that nothing has been found is a clue in-and-of-itself by my way of thinking. It leads me to conclude that the items were either stashed underwater or in a place like the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge (not coincidentally along the Western Flight Path).
Beyond all of this, it's just cool. Indeed, the mystery is 50% figuring out what actually happened, and 50% figuring out who the guy was.
I agree that it's a cool story, hopefully without sounding like I'm glorifying a criminal. But beyond that...
If Cooper's parachutes are found minus Cooper, people will claim they are not Cooper's. Those who say they are Cooper's will be divided into camps of those who believe he landed at that spot and those who believe he landed somewhere else, and the parachutes were moved by some means. Some will say that Tina Mucklow planted them there because her conscience got to her after so many years of being a silent accomplice. Others will say Cooper came back and planted them there to toy with the FBI, anywhere from one to fifty years later.
If a body is found in a parachute harness with a briefcase and road flares with $190k on him, matching serial numbers, still wearing the loafers and even the damn sunglasses, people will say it's too good to be true so it's a setup.
There was a Cooper researcher named George Nuttall who, along with a partner, spent exorbitant amounts of their final years on this earth walking around islands in the Columbia River, convinced that Cooper had landed on one of them and that his remains had been scattered about by scavengers, thus explaining why nobody had found a corpse. That's pretty specific and pretty sad that they reached that conclusion based on nothing at all, then committed to it with all their retired energy.
Now, with all of that in mind, from a practical standpoint, if we could magically determine and agree upon a landing zone, what then? Will the bickering stop? Will everyone agree on what that means for the other evidence? Will Flyjack say the landing zone proves Cooper must have survived while Shutter says Cooper definitely died, and Georger posts this icon :rofl: And calls them both stupid? I think yes, yes and yes. So again, what are our goals?
Let's say the landing zone puts Cooper further West than originally thought. The landing zone is still huge, part on land and part on water. Scenario 1: Cooper landed right in the fucking Columbia. POW. Unconscious. Drowned. Money floated up on Tena bar, yes? Or perhaps not. Secnario 2: Cooper impaled himself anus-first onto a conifer and was discovered by a gas station worker taking a leak in the woods. Dude took all of the money and over time lost or buried some of it, only after burying Cooper so nobody would know someone local took the money. Scenario 3: Coop got his Chute open and drifted gently toward a riverbank, landing on it, rolling up his chute and hoofing it off to safety, ditching his money after seeing cops. Scenario 4: he came back to twirl his moustache and plant the money on that beach. Scenario 5: Cooper's money defied all odds, and I mean all odds, deciding to hang back and let Coop rot and tumble downstream, all casual without his tie. The money grew hands and feet, walked up the riverbank, and after stacking itself nicely, buried itself in the sand.
It doesn't matter where the landing zone was. All of these are possibilities to the people obsessed with this case. Nuttall's partner had been a cop who had seen a body distributed by wildlife about the countryside. That is why he felt so strongly that THIS HAS TO BE what happened to Cooper. We all think we're special and we have the center-of-the-universe type answer that all others lack.
So again, what are the goals in establishing a landing zone?
For me, I'm gonna stick to the money and the math. The tie could have been anybody's, and was exposed to decades of an FBI evidence room where it could have been contaminated countless times. The landing zone is entirely meaningless. The parachute chosen is meaningless with only four possibilities to choose from, the level of skill in jumping is virtually meaningless, and all investigation up to now has been completely and utterly worthless. The answer is someplace the public hasn't looked, and I don't mean some overlooked clump of trees near Ariel.
So, you are "Army Joe" in the podcast. ? What's the covert OP all about or not about? What are you saying? That Geo Nuttall had the right solution to the DB Cooper case, which was . . . ?
George Nuttall said: "A: My book is about What cops and police work are really like, and that U.S. law enforcement is in dire need of reform. And that the unsolved D.B. Cooper skyjacking case can be solved by congressional or federal grand jury hearings and investigations through interviews and interrogations of those named on my list of potential material witnesses and those I suspect of aiding and abetting in a cover-up conspiracy. My list has been secured with my attorney, and available by means of congressional and/or federal grand jury subpoenas
Q: Do you plan to write another book?
A: Yes. I am now in the early stages of authoring a book exposing the dozens of facts and circumstances I discovered during my 16 years of investigation of the so-called unsolved D.B Cooper skyjacking case. And when I have received enough royalties from my “Cops, Crooks and Other Crazies” book to pay my ghost writer to author my book “The Rail Kill” about a genius black boy in Atlanta, including some little-known black military history and heroes, I will do so."
I talked to George three times over the phone and found him quite civil-rational - a different persona when not on stage performing or promoting.
-
I've stated that without knowing the correct flight path it is impossible to determine the correct landing zone. Furthermore, if we can determine the landing zone we are well positioned to answer some basic questions if not solve the entire mystery.
Why do I say this?
First, considering the basic questions, if we can accurately identify where DBC landed it can tell us how the money arrived at Tena Bar and by extension whether DBC survived.
Second, considering solving the entire mystery, it is very reasonable to assume that the two parachutes DBC jumped with--if not the attache' case and money--are still out there yet-to-be found. Finding any of these items may well help determine DBC's identity. For example, if we find the attache' case we could likely identify when and where it was purchased (within a certain range). Finding the parachutes may provide some additional clues too.
Also, finding the parachutes or attache' case--not to mention a body--would also enable us to measure the veracity of the FBI's assumptions in some areas. Specifically, if we find DBC's parachutes near the Western Flight Path that would put a fork in the FBI Flight Path--apparently finding the money on Tena Bar was not sufficient to do the same.
You've hit upon an important point, which is to say that one would think if anything was still out there that it would have been found. After all, the area has been lived in, hunted and clear cut for a mighty long time. Considering this, the mere fact that nothing has been found is a clue in-and-of-itself by my way of thinking. It leads me to conclude that the items were either stashed underwater or in a place like the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge (not coincidentally along the Western Flight Path).
Beyond all of this, it's just cool. Indeed, the mystery is 50% figuring out what actually happened, and 50% figuring out who the guy was.
I agree that it's a cool story, hopefully without sounding like I'm glorifying a criminal. But beyond that...
If Cooper's parachutes are found minus Cooper, people will claim they are not Cooper's. Those who say they are Cooper's will be divided into camps of those who believe he landed at that spot and those who believe he landed somewhere else, and the parachutes were moved by some means. Some will say that Tina Mucklow planted them there because her conscience got to her after so many years of being a silent accomplice. Others will say Cooper came back and planted them there to toy with the FBI, anywhere from one to fifty years later.
If a body is found in a parachute harness with a briefcase and road flares with $190k on him, matching serial numbers, still wearing the loafers and even the damn sunglasses, people will say it's too good to be true so it's a setup.
There was a Cooper researcher named George Nuttall who, along with a partner, spent exorbitant amounts of their final years on this earth walking around islands in the Columbia River, convinced that Cooper had landed on one of them and that his remains had been scattered about by scavengers, thus explaining why nobody had found a corpse. That's pretty specific and pretty sad that they reached that conclusion based on nothing at all, then committed to it with all their retired energy.
Now, with all of that in mind, from a practical standpoint, if we could magically determine and agree upon a landing zone, what then? Will the bickering stop? Will everyone agree on what that means for the other evidence? Will Flyjack say the landing zone proves Cooper must have survived while Shutter says Cooper definitely died, and Georger posts this icon :rofl: And calls them both stupid? I think yes, yes and yes. So again, what are our goals?
Let's say the landing zone puts Cooper further West than originally thought. The landing zone is still huge, part on land and part on water. Scenario 1: Cooper landed right in the fucking Columbia. POW. Unconscious. Drowned. Money floated up on Tena bar, yes? Or perhaps not. Secnario 2: Cooper impaled himself anus-first onto a conifer and was discovered by a gas station worker taking a leak in the woods. Dude took all of the money and over time lost or buried some of it, only after burying Cooper so nobody would know someone local took the money. Scenario 3: Coop got his Chute open and drifted gently toward a riverbank, landing on it, rolling up his chute and hoofing it off to safety, ditching his money after seeing cops. Scenario 4: he came back to twirl his moustache and plant the money on that beach. Scenario 5: Cooper's money defied all odds, and I mean all odds, deciding to hang back and let Coop rot and tumble downstream, all casual without his tie. The money grew hands and feet, walked up the riverbank, and after stacking itself nicely, buried itself in the sand.
It doesn't matter where the landing zone was. All of these are possibilities to the people obsessed with this case. Nuttall's partner had been a cop who had seen a body distributed by wildlife about the countryside. That is why he felt so strongly that THIS HAS TO BE what happened to Cooper. We all think we're special and we have the center-of-the-universe type answer that all others lack.
So again, what are the goals in establishing a landing zone?
For me, I'm gonna stick to the money and the math. The tie could have been anybody's, and was exposed to decades of an FBI evidence room where it could have been contaminated countless times. The landing zone is entirely meaningless. The parachute chosen is meaningless with only four possibilities to choose from, the level of skill in jumping is virtually meaningless, and all investigation up to now has been completely and utterly worthless. The answer is someplace the public hasn't looked, and I don't mean some overlooked clump of trees near Ariel.
Your post strikes me as something that a lawyer would argue in a courtroom setting and not something a person familiar with the physical sciences would argue in any setting. Are you an attorney?
Nuttall was not immune from jumping to conclusions. For instance, on one page he might make an argument (and did) that there is a POSSIBILITY that A + B = C. Then on the very next page he might claim (and did) that having PROVEN that A + B = C we can conclude . . . . .
Did J. Edgar Hoover cover up the Cooper hijacking? That is not very likely. Reportedly, Hoover, who died in 1972 within a few months of the hijacking, was leaning on the FBI agents in Seattle and Portland to solve the case. Regardless of Hoover's wardrobe preferences, there is nothing to support Nuttall's claims about a cover up.
If the Cooper hijacking is ever actually solved, it will be done in Mother Nature's courtroom and nowhere else. In Her courtroom, facts are facts and nothing else matters.
In my personal opinion, there are probably less than five facts that are of any value in resolving the Cooper hijacking. And determining the actual flight path of the airliner is mandatory if any progress at all is to be made.
-
So, you are "Army Joe" in the podcast. ? What's the covert OP all about or not about? What are you saying? That Geo Nuttall had the right solution to the DB Cooper case, which was . . . ?
George Nuttall said: "A: My book is about What cops and police work are really like, and that U.S. law enforcement is in dire need of reform. And that the unsolved D.B. Cooper skyjacking case can be solved by congressional or federal grand jury hearings and investigations through interviews and interrogations of those named on my list of potential material witnesses and those I suspect of aiding and abetting in a cover-up conspiracy. My list has been secured with my attorney, and available by means of congressional and/or federal grand jury subpoenas
Q: Do you plan to write another book?
A: Yes. I am now in the early stages of authoring a book exposing the dozens of facts and circumstances I discovered during my 16 years of investigation of the so-called unsolved D.B Cooper skyjacking case. And when I have received enough royalties from my “Cops, Crooks and Other Crazies” book to pay my ghost writer to author my book “The Rail Kill” about a genius black boy in Atlanta, including some little-known black military history and heroes, I will do so."
I talked to George three times over the phone and found him quite civil-rational - a different persona when not on stage performing or promoting.
Congratulations.
-
Your post strikes me as something that a lawyer would argue in a courtroom setting and not something a person familiar with the physical sciences would argue in any setting. Are you an attorney?
Nuttall was not immune from jumping to conclusions. For instance, on one page he might make an argument (and did) that there is a POSSIBILITY that A + B = C. Then on the very next page he might claim (and did) that having PROVEN that A + B = C we can conclude . . . . .
Did J. Edgar Hoover cover up the Cooper hijacking? That is not very likely. Reportedly, Hoover, who died in 1972 within a few months of the hijacking, was leaning on the FBI agents in Seattle and Portland to solve the case. Regardless of Hoover's wardrobe preferences, there is nothing to support Nuttall's claims about a cover up.
If the Cooper hijacking is ever actually solved, it will be done in Mother Nature's courtroom and nowhere else. In Her courtroom, facts are facts and nothing else matters.
In my personal opinion, there are probably less than five facts that are of any value in resolving the Cooper hijacking. And determining the actual flight path of the airliner is mandatory if any progress at all is to be made.
I am not an attorney. As far as the science, feel free to call me and quiz me. I'd be happy to tell you which valence shells of an atom contain what number of electrons, or the difference between bacteria and paramecia. Why I feel Aristotle's categorizations of everything have cause a societal overkill today. Ask me about xylem and phloem. Sending signals out of phase. A/C vs D/C. How benzoquinone darkens apples while hydroquinone darkens latent silver images. How the primary ingredient in the survival of the fittest is the death of everything else.
Nuttall is not the only one who pretended to not have tunnel vision. I used to see that Naked Archaeologist guy do the same thing in episode after episode. "Could it be that A+B=C? ... (a few long shots of a new location) ... Now that we have established that A+B=C..." It proves premeditation. Nuttall knew his conclusion was flawed, but he believed it blindly and with purpose. I don't fault him. I fault Cooper.
Your last paragraph is interesting. I agree with the first sentence. Now please tell me why the second sentence is true.
-
Your post strikes me as something that a lawyer would argue in a courtroom setting and not something a person familiar with the physical sciences would argue in any setting. Are you an attorney?
Nuttall was not immune from jumping to conclusions. For instance, on one page he might make an argument (and did) that there is a POSSIBILITY that A + B = C. Then on the very next page he might claim (and did) that having PROVEN that A + B = C we can conclude . . . . .
Did J. Edgar Hoover cover up the Cooper hijacking? That is not very likely. Reportedly, Hoover, who died in 1972 within a few months of the hijacking, was leaning on the FBI agents in Seattle and Portland to solve the case. Regardless of Hoover's wardrobe preferences, there is nothing to support Nuttall's claims about a cover up.
If the Cooper hijacking is ever actually solved, it will be done in Mother Nature's courtroom and nowhere else. In Her courtroom, facts are facts and nothing else matters.
In my personal opinion, there are probably less than five facts that are of any value in resolving the Cooper hijacking. And determining the actual flight path of the airliner is mandatory if any progress at all is to be made.
I am not an attorney. As far as the science, feel free to call me and quiz me. I'd be happy to tell you which valence shells of an atom contain what number of electrons, or the difference between bacteria and paramecia. Why I feel Aristotle's categorizations of everything have cause a societal overkill today. Ask me about xylem and phloem. Sending signals out of phase. A/C vs D/C. How benzoquinone darkens apples while hydroquinone darkens latent silver images. How the primary ingredient in the survival of the fittest is the death of everything else.
Nuttall is not the only one who pretended to not have tunnel vision. I used to see that Naked Archaeologist guy do the same thing in episode after episode. "Could it be that A+B=C? ... (a few long shots of a new location) ... Now that we have established that A+B=C..." It proves premeditation. Nuttall knew his conclusion was flawed, but he believed it blindly and with purpose. I don't fault him. I fault Cooper.
Your last paragraph is interesting. I agree with the first sentence. Now please tell me why the second sentence is true.
I think your first paragraph gives evidence of considerable training in chemistry and plant biology. However, I see only limited training in physics. But what is your problem with Aristotle? Are you claiming that the sum of the parts is less than the whole?
Full Disclosure: My initial training and degree was in Aeronautical Engineering (aerodynamics, flight dynamics, physics, mathematics, etc.). And I have two additional degrees (Economics and an MBA). I have been a pilot since the age of 15 and did a wee bit of skydiving in the early 1960s. One of the three Piper Cubs used in my pilot training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing "Dash 80" (the Boeing 707 prototype) in the museum on the east side of Dulles International Airport near Washington, DC. So I didn't tear them all up! In skydiving, my equipment was all WW2 surplus. I have never jumped even a low porosity canopy much less a square one.
Why is determining the actual flight path so important? If you want to find physical evidence related to the flight to Reno, including places where Cooper might have landed or impacted, then I strongly suggest that the flight path is where you should start.
-
I think your first paragraph gives evidence of considerable training in chemistry and plant biology. However, I see only limited training in physics. But what is your problem with Aristotle? Are you claiming that the sum of the parts is less than the whole?
Full Disclosure: My initial training and degree was in Aeronautical Engineering (aerodynamics, flight dynamics, physics, mathematics, etc.). And I have two additional degrees (Economics and an MBA). I have been a pilot since the age of 15 and did a wee bit of skydiving in the early 1960s. One of the three Piper Cubs used in my pilot training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing "Dash 80" (the Boeing 707 prototype) in the museum on the east side of Dulles International Airport near Washington, DC. So I didn't tear them all up! In skydiving, my equipment was all WW2 surplus. I have never jumped even a low porosity canopy much less a square one.
Why is determining the actual flight path so important? If you want to find physical evidence related to the flight to Reno, including places where Cooper might have landed or impacted, then I strongly suggest that the flight path is where you should start.
Why is determining the actual flight path so important? If you want to find physical evidence related to the flight to Reno, including places where Cooper might have landed or impacted, then I strongly suggest that the flight path is where you should start.
Let's do this then: Let's not try to narrow down the search area, lets widen it. Let's add the original flight path with any and all proposed flight paths, adjust for the strongest and mildest winds and directions, and get the biggest patch of land possible for a dropzone from a 727 in flight on that rough trajectory.
It's been fifty years. They've looked. The cops. The feds. The Guard. The treasure hunters. The land developers. The hunters and campers and fishermen and joggers and hikers and little kids. The freaks with metal detectors and planes. They've covered all of it. Every plot of land is owned by someone, and has been surveyed and sold probably several times each since '71, and they didn't mention a body clutching a bomb. Perhaps nobody looked hard enough? Or perhaps they didn't know what to look for?
Actually, they did. With all of the trash to be found in the woods, someone found a placard from a 727 rear stairs and correctly identified it. They knew the story. Everybody knew. And all they found was that and the money. And the money was found by a guy from Oklahoma, who still tied it to Cooper, because everybody knew what to look for. And they did. And they found nothing.
The flight path is only relevant if it can establish a search area. Fifty years has expanded and exhausted that search area, rendering the flight path meaningless except in the event that Bill Rataczak came out and said, "yeah, I flew East to drown the bastard," which he hasn't. And I have no reason not to believe him.
So using the concept of a calculated search perimeter, if a subject is on the run on foot, you calculate the distance they are capable of traveling during the time it took you to mobilize, and you set up a radius around the spot they started from. In this case, all of that is blown, because nobody was able to properly react. Cooper could have been long gone before any of them got close to his landing zone.
Is it possible that Cooper's body is there somewhere? Only as possible as logic will allow for. On Thanksgiving 1971, it was extremely possible. After the cops searched it was less possible. After the FBI and Nat'l Guard searched, even less. After the public searched all year, it became improbable. After all of the above searched for 50 years, we have to admit that the dingo ate the baby. Rather Cooper got away. OR that someone got away with robbing his corpse and burying him wrapped in his chute. Because the only thing worth taking is the money, which was partially found. Nothing else he had was found.
Try this: Go to Zillow.com and search for homes in that area to see how well-developed the land is now. Backhoes and diggers putting in sewers and foundations for half a century. No skyjackers found.
So what physical evidence would you look for, and where would you look?
-
I think your first paragraph gives evidence of considerable training in chemistry and plant biology. However, I see only limited training in physics. But what is your problem with Aristotle? Are you claiming that the sum of the parts is less than the whole?
Full Disclosure: My initial training and degree was in Aeronautical Engineering (aerodynamics, flight dynamics, physics, mathematics, etc.). And I have two additional degrees (Economics and an MBA). I have been a pilot since the age of 15 and did a wee bit of skydiving in the early 1960s. One of the three Piper Cubs used in my pilot training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing "Dash 80" (the Boeing 707 prototype) in the museum on the east side of Dulles International Airport near Washington, DC. So I didn't tear them all up! In skydiving, my equipment was all WW2 surplus. I have never jumped even a low porosity canopy much less a square one.
Why is determining the actual flight path so important? If you want to find physical evidence related to the flight to Reno, including places where Cooper might have landed or impacted, then I strongly suggest that the flight path is where you should start.
Why is determining the actual flight path so important? If you want to find physical evidence related to the flight to Reno, including places where Cooper might have landed or impacted, then I strongly suggest that the flight path is where you should start.
Let's do this then: Let's not try to narrow down the search area, lets widen it. Let's add the original flight path with any and all proposed flight paths, adjust for the strongest and mildest winds and directions, and get the biggest patch of land possible for a dropzone from a 727 in flight on that rough trajectory.
It's been fifty years. They've looked. The cops. The feds. The Guard. The treasure hunters. The land developers. The hunters and campers and fishermen and joggers and hikers and little kids. The freaks with metal detectors and planes. They've covered all of it. Every plot of land is owned by someone, and has been surveyed and sold probably several times each since '71, and they didn't mention a body clutching a bomb. Perhaps nobody looked hard enough? Or perhaps they didn't know what to look for?
Actually, they did. With all of the trash to be found in the woods, someone found a placard from a 727 rear stairs and correctly identified it. They knew the story. Everybody knew. And all they found was that and the money. And the money was found by a guy from Oklahoma, who still tied it to Cooper, because everybody knew what to look for. And they did. And they found nothing.
The flight path is only relevant if it can establish a search area. Fifty years has expanded and exhausted that search area, rendering the flight path meaningless except in the event that Bill Rataczak came out and said, "yeah, I flew East to drown the bastard," which he hasn't. And I have no reason not to believe him.
So using the concept of a calculated search perimeter, if a subject is on the run on foot, you calculate the distance they are capable of traveling during the time it took you to mobilize, and you set up a radius around the spot they started from. In this case, all of that is blown, because nobody was able to properly react. Cooper could have been long gone before any of them got close to his landing zone.
Is it possible that Cooper's body is there somewhere? Only as possible as logic will allow for. On Thanksgiving 1971, it was extremely possible. After the cops searched it was less possible. After the FBI and Nat'l Guard searched, even less. After the public searched all year, it became improbable. After all of the above searched for 50 years, we have to admit that the dingo ate the baby. Rather Cooper got away. OR that someone got away with robbing his corpse and burying him wrapped in his chute. Because the only thing worth taking is the money, which was partially found. Nothing else he had was found.
Try this: Go to Zillow.com and search for homes in that area to see how well-developed the land is now. Backhoes and diggers putting in sewers and foundations for half a century. No skyjackers found.
So what physical evidence would you look for, and where would you look?
I see that you are not familiar with the Tina Bar area. It is not actually developed even today. The search area is relevant only if the flight path is known.
What should any searcher be looking for today? The parachute container and and equipment have a long life expectancy even in salt water. And the two to three pounds of metal in that equipment would survive. Also, Cooper had on a rain coat and the parachute equipment was over it. So it is possible that portions of the rain coat are still contained within the parachute equipment and some of Cooper's bones may well be within that rain coat. If anything from Cooper remains in the Tina Bar area, it is probably buried under sand and probably would have been buried during the 1972 spring flooding.
But don't expect to find any more money. The three packets of money found at Tina Bar were probably still in the damaged money bag when they arrived there. But if the money bag was still attached to Cooper at that point, it has long gone on down stream and so has Cooper.
Where to look? Tina Bar and I have recently explained and posted why here.
-
I think your first paragraph gives evidence of considerable training in chemistry and plant biology. However, I see only limited training in physics. But what is your problem with Aristotle? Are you claiming that the sum of the parts is less than the whole?
Full Disclosure: My initial training and degree was in Aeronautical Engineering (aerodynamics, flight dynamics, physics, mathematics, etc.). And I have two additional degrees (Economics and an MBA). I have been a pilot since the age of 15 and did a wee bit of skydiving in the early 1960s. One of the three Piper Cubs used in my pilot training now hangs over the right wing of the Boeing "Dash 80" (the Boeing 707 prototype) in the museum on the east side of Dulles International Airport near Washington, DC. So I didn't tear them all up! In skydiving, my equipment was all WW2 surplus. I have never jumped even a low porosity canopy much less a square one.
Why is determining the actual flight path so important? If you want to find physical evidence related to the flight to Reno, including places where Cooper might have landed or impacted, then I strongly suggest that the flight path is where you should start.
Why is determining the actual flight path so important? If you want to find physical evidence related to the flight to Reno, including places where Cooper might have landed or impacted, then I strongly suggest that the flight path is where you should start.
Let's do this then: Let's not try to narrow down the search area, lets widen it. Let's add the original flight path with any and all proposed flight paths, adjust for the strongest and mildest winds and directions, and get the biggest patch of land possible for a dropzone from a 727 in flight on that rough trajectory.
It's been fifty years. They've looked. The cops. The feds. The Guard. The treasure hunters. The land developers. The hunters and campers and fishermen and joggers and hikers and little kids. The freaks with metal detectors and planes. They've covered all of it. Every plot of land is owned by someone, and has been surveyed and sold probably several times each since '71, and they didn't mention a body clutching a bomb. Perhaps nobody looked hard enough? Or perhaps they didn't know what to look for?
Actually, they did. With all of the trash to be found in the woods, someone found a placard from a 727 rear stairs and correctly identified it. They knew the story. Everybody knew. And all they found was that and the money. And the money was found by a guy from Oklahoma, who still tied it to Cooper, because everybody knew what to look for. And they did. And they found nothing.
The flight path is only relevant if it can establish a search area. Fifty years has expanded and exhausted that search area, rendering the flight path meaningless except in the event that Bill Rataczak came out and said, "yeah, I flew East to drown the bastard," which he hasn't. And I have no reason not to believe him.
So using the concept of a calculated search perimeter, if a subject is on the run on foot, you calculate the distance they are capable of traveling during the time it took you to mobilize, and you set up a radius around the spot they started from. In this case, all of that is blown, because nobody was able to properly react. Cooper could have been long gone before any of them got close to his landing zone.
Is it possible that Cooper's body is there somewhere? Only as possible as logic will allow for. On Thanksgiving 1971, it was extremely possible. After the cops searched it was less possible. After the FBI and Nat'l Guard searched, even less. After the public searched all year, it became improbable. After all of the above searched for 50 years, we have to admit that the dingo ate the baby. Rather Cooper got away. OR that someone got away with robbing his corpse and burying him wrapped in his chute. Because the only thing worth taking is the money, which was partially found. Nothing else he had was found.
Try this: Go to Zillow.com and search for homes in that area to see how well-developed the land is now. Backhoes and diggers putting in sewers and foundations for half a century. No skyjackers found.
So what physical evidence would you look for, and where would you look?
Too bad you werent around when Farflung was - you two would make a potent pair! Its refreshing to have some sound logic applied in this forum! :congrats:
-
I see that you are not familiar with the Tina Bar area. It is not actually developed even today. The search area is relevant only if the flight path is known.
What should any searcher be looking for today? The parachute container and and equipment have a long life expectancy even in salt water. And the two to three pounds of metal in that equipment would survive. Also, Cooper had on a rain coat and the parachute equipment was over it. So it is possible that portions of the rain coat are still contained within the parachute equipment and some of Cooper's bones may well be within that rain coat. If anything from Cooper remains in the Tina Bar area, it is probably buried under sand and probably would have been buried during the 1972 spring flooding.
But don't expect to find any more money. The three packets of money found at Tina Bar were probably still in the damaged money bag when they arrived there. But if the money bag was still attached to Cooper at that point, it has long gone on down stream and so has Cooper.
Where to look? Tina Bar and I have recently explained and posted why here.
Tena Bar is undeveloped? Would that include the very large sand company that completely surrounds it on all sides but for the river? The inner-roads and driveways on their land? How about the massive agricultural plots surrounding that business, or the roads built and telephone wires installed to service that area? I'm looking at Tena Bar right now on Google Maps' satellite view. All those perfect rectangles and parallelograms surrounding it, the road a couple of hundred feet from it, the corn stalks visible on street view, everything looks pretty well-developed and well-traveled to me. Perhaps I lack the ability to adequately interpret what it means when ransom money is found while digging in sand...belonging to the only people on that river for miles who make their living digging in sand.
Tena Bar and its surrounding area have been under close scrutiny since Jimmy Carter was president. There's nothing there. You'll likely find more by digging under the corn field across the street in my opinion.
I'm not unfamiliar with the area surrounding Tena Bar. I was through that area in 2006, the Gorge, all up around Mount St. Helens, all of that sightseeing crap. One of the most desolate drives of my life, that volcano - nothing but trees. Had the worst hot dog and relish of my life on a picnic bench in that area. But what I'm talking about is the potential "reasonable doubt" landing zone. Meaning let's take all reasonable proposals and use them to expand the landing zone, then whittle down a search zone from it.
Now let's talk math. Take the percentage of that enlarged landing zone which is developed. What are the odds that Cooper would splat on developed land and go unnoticed all this time? Let's call it 0% while reserving the right to be off by a rounding error. So subtract all developed land (developed in 1971 or 2020, doesn't matter) from the whole and you have a narrower search area. Also subtract any private property. Nobody is leaving their property untouched for 50 years, and the words, "Fido, what's that you found?" spring to mind.
Next, take all of the places we can say for certain were searched and nothing was found. What are the odds that the authorities and treasure hunters were standing on Coop's shattered, purple torso and didn't smell him? Let's also call it 0% if there was a parachute deployed, 1-5% if not. [Side note: There was a dead deer in the woods along my drive to work last fall. Even with the windows rolled up the smell was overpowering. It lasted a month until I switched routes.] Got a better guess? I'm all ears. Subtract that land area from the remainder above.
What's left over now is a combination of water and land. A lot of what has been written about is Lake Merwin, which cannot feed a spoonful to Tena Bar, so eliminate it, and all of the trickles around it, in the search for a corpse or physical evidence. If Cooper landed in or around Merwin, either he survived and left, or someone took his loot and "disappeared" him, because that money didn't find its way to Tena Bar naturally. So either way, we can cross that area off of the list, too, when searching.
How about the Washougal? Anybody talk to Jerry Thomas lately? Is he still searching out there? If so, he can probably tell us what to eliminate from that area. Also, let's cross off the islands in the river where Nuttall and his buddy searched their hearts out. Plus all of the river area that Tosaw knocked out, et cetera.
What's left is a patchwork of neglected spots in the forest that we can assume - though not safely - have been at least passed through at some point in a half-century, and admittedly pine needles can cover up a lot. Those spots, plus the places on bank of the Columbia that have not significantly been covered, make up our our search zone, which I will bet anything is smaller and with significantly less controversy than any new landing zone created by an alternate flight path. So what percentage of the enlarged landing zone can be eliminated? Probably most of it - by far. Different take on the above? I'm all ears.
I saw you and a team of people on the beach at Tena Bar with metal detectors. I'm not currently convinced of any future significance of Tena Bar to the Cooper investigation, barring the unlikely scenario that the Fazios ended up with the cash. And if that is the only purpose of investigating the flight path further, I would pack it in and say job well done. You've highlighted a very plausible scenario that others had not given much thought to prior. Bravo.
Having said that, anybody have details on what other stretches of the Columbia have been searched/dredged/developed and can be eliminated? Maybe I'll save that for the Tena Bar thread.
-
I see that you are not familiar with the Tina Bar area. It is not actually developed even today. The search area is relevant only if the flight path is known.
What should any searcher be looking for today? The parachute container and and equipment have a long life expectancy even in salt water. And the two to three pounds of metal in that equipment would survive. Also, Cooper had on a rain coat and the parachute equipment was over it. So it is possible that portions of the rain coat are still contained within the parachute equipment and some of Cooper's bones may well be within that rain coat. If anything from Cooper remains in the Tina Bar area, it is probably buried under sand and probably would have been buried during the 1972 spring flooding.
But don't expect to find any more money. The three packets of money found at Tina Bar were probably still in the damaged money bag when they arrived there. But if the money bag was still attached to Cooper at that point, it has long gone on down stream and so has Cooper.
Where to look? Tina Bar and I have recently explained and posted why here.
Tena Bar is undeveloped? Would that include the very large sand company that completely surrounds it on all sides but for the river? The inner-roads and driveways on their land? How about the massive agricultural plots surrounding that business, or the roads built and telephone wires installed to service that area? I'm looking at Tena Bar right now on Google Maps' satellite view. All those perfect rectangles and parallelograms surrounding it, the road a couple of hundred feet from it, the corn stalks visible on street view, everything looks pretty well-developed and well-traveled to me. Perhaps I lack the ability to adequately interpret what it means when ransom money is found while digging in sand...belonging to the only people on that river for miles who make their living digging in sand.
Tena Bar and its surrounding area have been under close scrutiny since Jimmy Carter was president. There's nothing there. You'll likely find more by digging under the corn field across the street in my opinion.
I'm not unfamiliar with the area surrounding Tena Bar. I was through that area in 2006, the Gorge, all up around Mount St. Helens, all of that sightseeing crap. One of the most desolate drives of my life, that volcano - nothing but trees. Had the worst hot dog and relish of my life on a picnic bench in that area. But what I'm talking about is the potential "reasonable doubt" landing zone. Meaning let's take all reasonable proposals and use them to expand the landing zone, then whittle down a search zone from it.
Now let's talk math. Take the percentage of that enlarged landing zone which is developed. What are the odds that Cooper would splat on developed land and go unnoticed all this time? Let's call it 0% while reserving the right to be off by a rounding error. So subtract all developed land (developed in 1971 or 2020, doesn't matter) from the whole and you have a narrower search area. Also subtract any private property. Nobody is leaving their property untouched for 50 years, and the words, "Fido, what's that you found?" spring to mind.
Next, take all of the places we can say for certain were searched and nothing was found. What are the odds that the authorities and treasure hunters were standing on Coop's shattered, purple torso and didn't smell him? Let's also call it 0% if there was a parachute deployed, 1-5% if not. [Side note: There was a dead deer in the woods along my drive to work last fall. Even with the windows rolled up the smell was overpowering. It lasted a month until I switched routes.] Got a better guess? I'm all ears. Subtract that land area from the remainder above.
What's left over now is a combination of water and land. A lot of what has been written about is Lake Merwin, which cannot feed a spoonful to Tena Bar, so eliminate it, and all of the trickles around it, in the search for a corpse or physical evidence. If Cooper landed in or around Merwin, either he survived and left, or someone took his loot and "disappeared" him, because that money didn't find its way to Tena Bar naturally. So either way, we can cross that area off of the list, too, when searching.
How about the Washougal? Anybody talk to Jerry Thomas lately? Is he still searching out there? If so, he can probably tell us what to eliminate from that area. Also, let's cross off the islands in the river where Nuttall and his buddy searched their hearts out. Plus all of the river area that Tosaw knocked out, et cetera.
What's left is a patchwork of neglected spots in the forest that we can assume - though not safely - have been at least passed through at some point in a half-century, and admittedly pine needles can cover up a lot. Those spots, plus the places on bank of the Columbia that have not significantly been covered, make up our our search zone, which I will bet anything is smaller and with significantly less controversy than any new landing zone created by an alternate flight path. So what percentage of the enlarged landing zone can be eliminated? Probably most of it - by far. Different take on the above? I'm all ears.
I saw you and a team of people on the beach at Tena Bar with metal detectors. I'm not currently convinced of any future significance of Tena Bar to the Cooper investigation, barring the unlikely scenario that the Fazios ended up with the cash. And if that is the only purpose of investigating the flight path further, I would pack it in and say job well done. You've highlighted a very plausible scenario that others had not given much thought to prior. Bravo.
Having said that, anybody have details on what other stretches of the Columbia have been searched/dredged/developed and can be eliminated? Maybe I'll save that for the Tena Bar thread.
I posted months ago about the searches that commenced at the end of the FBI excavation at Tina Bar in 1980 - monitored by Himmelsbah at Portland etal and John Powelson at Aquatic Sports (The Dive Shop) at Portland. Tosaw joined the chase in 1983-84. These searches covered the area from the Lewis River outlet clear up to Hayden Island (river, wing dams, adjoining beachfront, and a few searches on land eg. Vancouver Lake area). Searches were still being conducted to about 2008! JT was reportedly searching in Washougal areas. Others were searching inland areas, as you reported.
-
Has anyone ever proposed that Cooper's destination was Phoenix and not Mexico City? He did suggest it as a stop, apparently, also mentioning Yuma, which he may have familiarized himself with while brainstorming. And he could have known what the jet's range was under those conditions. An Amtrak ticket from New York to D.C. will get you to Philadelphia without alerting people to your destination.
-
Nope. Never heard that before.
-
Nope. Never heard that before.
The Shanghai destination has never been revealed .... soon!
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
-
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
Walk yourself through it. You're Cooper. You want to go to Arizona. You don't want to advertise it. You have several ways of getting off the plane - jumping or landing, and you're open to whichever way gets you to safety. You think of having the plane fly over your destination. What would your destination have to be? You decide on Mexico City - that will give you time to get away while they're still tracking the plane. So you say, "Take me to Mexico City," waiting for them to answer with, "We have to refuel." You say, "Gee, you're right...how about Phoenix?" Flawless execution, until...
They point out problems with Phoenix and push Reno. At that point, you're already on plan B, which is jumping ASAP after takeoff. Why? Multiple reasons - head start time, proximity to another airport, perhaps familiar territory. But you have to keep the facade of "Mexico City." If you change destinations, they may catch on that you're screwing around, possibly now more committed to jumping, and you want to keep them guessing to keep them confused and divided. So you stick to the advertised destination and get out of Dodge.
Like I said, McCoy did something similar. Not without precident. Gotta go back and re-read everything about the refueling conversation.
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
Possibly along these lines is one of his requests. According to Alice he asked for the money, parachutes, crew meals, fuel, and maps. But she forgot what type of maps he asked for. This seems to have all happened before the pilots told him they could not get to Mexico City and ended up with Reno. Did the maps indicate something of use for the investigation? The map request seems to be something you would not forget.
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
Possibly along these lines is one of his requests. According to Alice he asked for the money, parachutes, crew meals, fuel, and maps. But she forgot what type of maps he asked for. This seems to have all happened before the pilots told him they could not get to Mexico City and ended up with Reno. Did the maps indicate something of use for the investigation? The map request seems to be something you would not forget.
There is no record of Cooper actually asking for any maps or crew meals. The flight crew needed information as to where Cooper wanted to go so they could get the appropriate maps. Upon learning that Cooper wanted to go to Mexico, Al Lee got together as many maps as he could for such a Seattle to Mexico flight and included four crew meals apparently without being asked and not including one for Cooper.
A flight from Seattle to Mexico or Reno to Mexico would not pass anywhere near Phoenix. Cooper did not specify any flight path to get to Mexico. He only agreed to head to Reno after the flight crew suggested it.
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
Possibly along these lines is one of his requests. According to Alice he asked for the money, parachutes, crew meals, fuel, and maps. But she forgot what type of maps he asked for. This seems to have all happened before the pilots told him they could not get to Mexico City and ended up with Reno. Did the maps indicate something of use for the investigation? The map request seems to be something you would not forget.
There is no record of Cooper actually asking for any maps or crew meals. The flight crew needed information as to where Cooper wanted to go so they could get the appropriate maps. Upon learning that Cooper wanted to go to Mexico, Al Lee got together as many maps as he could for such a Seattle to Mexico flight and included four crew meals apparently without being asked and not including one for Cooper.
A flight from Seattle to Mexico or Reno to Mexico would not pass anywhere near Phoenix. Cooper did not specify any flight path to get to Mexico. He only agreed to head to Reno after the flight crew suggested it.
The flight crew mentioned Reno, yes, that is my understanding as well. Is it also your understanding that he suggested Phoenix and Yuma?
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
Possibly along these lines is one of his requests. According to Alice he asked for the money, parachutes, crew meals, fuel, and maps. But she forgot what type of maps he asked for. This seems to have all happened before the pilots told him they could not get to Mexico City and ended up with Reno. Did the maps indicate something of use for the investigation? The map request seems to be something you would not forget.
There is no record of Cooper actually asking for any maps or crew meals. The flight crew needed information as to where Cooper wanted to go so they could get the appropriate maps. Upon learning that Cooper wanted to go to Mexico, Al Lee got together as many maps as he could for such a Seattle to Mexico flight and included four crew meals apparently without being asked and not including one for Cooper.
A flight from Seattle to Mexico or Reno to Mexico would not pass anywhere near Phoenix. Cooper did not specify any flight path to get to Mexico. He only agreed to head to Reno after the flight crew suggested it.
The flight crew mentioned Reno, yes, that is my understanding as well. Is it also your understanding that he suggested Phoenix and Yuma?
There is no record of Cooper suggesting anything other than that he wanted to go to Mexico. He did not mention any route or city to get to Mexico. He only agreed to what the flight crew suggested.
-
There is no record of Cooper suggesting anything other than that he wanted to go to Mexico. He did not mention any route or city to get to Mexico. He only agreed to what the flight crew suggested.
My understanding regarding this is somewhat different. Specifically, I think it's well established that DBC offered up Phoenix as a refueling option.
However, it is not crystal clear who offered up Yuma. I tend to lean toward DBC offering Yuma which is interesting to ponder. After all, how many people have any idea where Yuma is? Moreover, Yuma is home to a Marine Air Base and Boeing has flight tested aircraft in and around Yuma for decades--perhaps further suggesting a Boeing connection.
-
There is no record of Cooper suggesting anything other than that he wanted to go to Mexico. He did not mention any route or city to get to Mexico. He only agreed to what the flight crew suggested.
My understanding regarding this is somewhat different. Specifically, I think it's well established that DBC offered up Phoenix as a refueling option.
However, it is not crystal clear who offered up Yuma. I tend to lean toward DBC offering Yuma which is interesting to ponder. After all, how many people have any idea where Yuma is? Moreover, Yuma is home to a Marine Air Base and Boeing has flight tested aircraft in and around Yuma for decades--perhaps further suggesting a Boeing connection.
Do you have a source for Cooper making any suggestions for a refueling stops or for any stops before getting to Mexico? The airliner could not have made it to Phoenix non-stop from Seattle in the configuration Cooper specified. In fact, it wasn't until the airliner was in the Portland area that they knew they could make it to Reno non-stop.
In 1971, it was Douglas that had a flight test facility at Yuma so there was no Boeing connection at that time. Of course, Douglas was merged into Boeing at a later date.
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
Possibly along these lines is one of his requests. According to Alice he asked for the money, parachutes, crew meals, fuel, and maps. But she forgot what type of maps he asked for. This seems to have all happened before the pilots told him they could not get to Mexico City and ended up with Reno. Did the maps indicate something of use for the investigation? The map request seems to be something you would not forget.
There is no record of Cooper actually asking for any maps or crew meals. The flight crew needed information as to where Cooper wanted to go so they could get the appropriate maps. Upon learning that Cooper wanted to go to Mexico, Al Lee got together as many maps as he could for such a Seattle to Mexico flight and included four crew meals apparently without being asked and not including one for Cooper.
A flight from Seattle to Mexico or Reno to Mexico would not pass anywhere near Phoenix. Cooper did not specify any flight path to get to Mexico. He only agreed to head to Reno after the flight crew suggested it.
Robert: Page 161 to 163 in Martin Andrade's book has a FBI debrief with Alice Hancock. She states in this that he asked for maps and meals. I'd have to do some looking through files to see what file that actually comes from, or ask someone who has cataloged the 302's to see if it is in there.
Alice said he asked for maps and meals. Granted she did not have a lot of contact with Cooper, so it may have been her impression and may not have actually happened.
Part of his gentleman persona has come from the meal request.
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
Possibly along these lines is one of his requests. According to Alice he asked for the money, parachutes, crew meals, fuel, and maps. But she forgot what type of maps he asked for. This seems to have all happened before the pilots told him they could not get to Mexico City and ended up with Reno. Did the maps indicate something of use for the investigation? The map request seems to be something you would not forget.
There is no record of Cooper actually asking for any maps or crew meals. The flight crew needed information as to where Cooper wanted to go so they could get the appropriate maps. Upon learning that Cooper wanted to go to Mexico, Al Lee got together as many maps as he could for such a Seattle to Mexico flight and included four crew meals apparently without being asked and not including one for Cooper.
A flight from Seattle to Mexico or Reno to Mexico would not pass anywhere near Phoenix. Cooper did not specify any flight path to get to Mexico. He only agreed to head to Reno after the flight crew suggested it.
Robert: Page 161 to 163 in Martin Andrade's book has a FBI debrief with Alice Hancock. She states in this that he asked for maps and meals. I'd have to do some looking through files to see what file that actually comes from, or ask someone who has cataloged the 302's to see if it is in there.
Alice said he asked for maps and meals. Granted she did not have a lot of contact with Cooper, so it may have been her impression and may not have actually happened.
Part of his gentleman persona has come from the meal request.
Part of his gentleman persona has come from the meal request.
Really! How so? You mean like feeding prisoners in jails? Compassion.
Did Cooper own a tux and attend the opera? Which opera?
Did Cooper wash his feet? Did Hancock ask?
-
Do you have a source for Cooper making any suggestions for a refueling stops or for any stops before getting to Mexico? The airliner could not have made it to Phoenix non-stop from Seattle in the configuration Cooper specified. In fact, it wasn't until the airliner was in the Portland area that they knew they could make it to Reno non-stop.
In 1971, it was Douglas that had a flight test facility at Yuma so there was no Boeing connection at that time. Of course, Douglas was merged into Boeing at a later date.
The Phoenix and Yuma suggestions are in the FBI files, off the top of my head not sure where. It's clear from these files that Cooper suggested Phoenix. It's a little hazy as to how Yuma entered the conversation. It may have been Cooper saying the he knew the jet could make it to Yuma or something similar.
Boeing tested at Edwards (I believe) with the 727 and may have flown to other regional areas as part of the Edwards testing--even if only as an emergency landing spot if a problem arrived. And yes, Boeing started actively testing in Yuma in the 80's if I'm not mistaken even though Douglas was already there.
-
Do you have a source for Cooper making any suggestions for a refueling stops or for any stops before getting to Mexico? The airliner could not have made it to Phoenix non-stop from Seattle in the configuration Cooper specified. In fact, it wasn't until the airliner was in the Portland area that they knew they could make it to Reno non-stop.
In 1971, it was Douglas that had a flight test facility at Yuma so there was no Boeing connection at that time. Of course, Douglas was merged into Boeing at a later date.
The Phoenix and Yuma suggestions are in the FBI files, off the top of my head not sure where. It's clear from these files that Cooper suggested Phoenix. It's a little hazy as to how Yuma entered the conversation. It may have been Cooper saying the he knew the jet could make it to Yuma or something similar.
Boeing tested at Edwards (I believe) with the 727 and may have flown to other regional areas as part of the Edwards testing--even if only as an emergency landing spot if a problem arrived. And yes, Boeing started actively testing in Yuma in the 80's if I'm not mistaken even though Douglas was already there.
You mean in the PI ATC Transcript? Maybe go look? ::)
-
Brand new INTERPRETATIONS by FKYJACK! (to fit his suspect of course) ;)
FLYJACK
#61817
1 hour ago (edited)
Cooper’s initial demand was Mexico City, non stop in US for any reason. It wasn’t nonstop to Mexico City, the plane could refuel in Mexico. His initial demand was also airstairs lowered inflight. NOT airstairs down on takeoff, that came up later.
The problem everyone is noodling is why make a demand the plane's range couldn’t achieve flying dirty that would be rejected.
The logical answer is either Cooper believed the demand was achievable or he was engaged in some sort of misdirection.
Everyone has accepted the theory that he knew it was unachievable and was somehow instigating some negotiation. I disagree, this makes no sense and there is no evidence for it..
IMO, Cooper thought the plane could reach Mexico.. when he made his initial demand.
So, if Cooper was knowledgable about the 727 aircraft and had flying experience how did he make such an obvious error. He got the range way off if the 727 was flying in that configuration.
Everybody has made the assumption that Cooper made a demand he knew was unachievable and would be rejected.
That assumption may be wrong.
Here is a theory nobody has brought up..
All of Cooper’s demands regarding Mexico and the plane configuration were passed to the crew orally through Tina.
What if Tina didn’t convey the instructions to the pilots exactly as Cooper intended.
What if he initially wanted the dirty configuration applied when the airstairs were lowered inflight by the stew, not the entire flightpath. We only have Tina’s interpretation of Cooper’s demand to go by.
It is extremely unlikely Cooper made the initial demand of "no stops in US for any reason" knowing it was unachievable. It makes no sense for Cooper to make a demand that he knew would be rejected.
IMO, Cooper’s initial plan was to jump outside the US.. airstairs lowered inflight by Tina. She conveyed his instructions slightly inaccurately to the pilots and they went back to Cooper to negotiate a stop in Reno. When Reno was agreed to Cooper changed his plan to jump before the plane landed in Reno. That is when the airstairs down on takeoff came up. Cooper’s LZ wasn’t his initial plan, it was ad hoc.
Other factors,, Cooper wasn’t dressed for a PNW jump and Cooper's money demand was referred to as “US” currency by Tina and “American” currency by pilots… that suggests a foreign element. Why define the currency as US/American.. AND Cooper was described as swarthy, latin, Mexican in features and appearance..
Edited 1 hour ago by FLYJACK
* What are suspect peddler cultists going to do if Cooper turns out to have been Chinese! :rofl:
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
Possibly along these lines is one of his requests. According to Alice he asked for the money, parachutes, crew meals, fuel, and maps. But she forgot what type of maps he asked for. This seems to have all happened before the pilots told him they could not get to Mexico City and ended up with Reno. Did the maps indicate something of use for the investigation? The map request seems to be something you would not forget.
There is no record of Cooper actually asking for any maps or crew meals. The flight crew needed information as to where Cooper wanted to go so they could get the appropriate maps. Upon learning that Cooper wanted to go to Mexico, Al Lee got together as many maps as he could for such a Seattle to Mexico flight and included four crew meals apparently without being asked and not including one for Cooper.
A flight from Seattle to Mexico or Reno to Mexico would not pass anywhere near Phoenix. Cooper did not specify any flight path to get to Mexico. He only agreed to head to Reno after the flight crew suggested it.
Robert: Page 161 to 163 in Martin Andrade's book has a FBI debrief with Alice Hancock. She states in this that he asked for maps and meals. I'd have to do some looking through files to see what file that actually comes from, or ask someone who has cataloged the 302's to see if it is in there.
Alice said he asked for maps and meals. Granted she did not have a lot of contact with Cooper, so it may have been her impression and may not have actually happened.
Part of his gentleman persona has come from the meal request.
This has actually been discussed in detail here recently. Alice and Flo were interviewed by the FBI in Seattle just after they got off the plane. Alice mentions the maps and meals. Flo does not and she was probably in the cockpit when they would have been requested and delivered. Tina does not mention either the maps or meals in her FBI interview later that night in Reno.
Tina is the one who carried everything onto the airplane in Seattle. If Cooper had asked for maps and meals, he probably would have done it through Tina and she would have passed the information by the interphone to Flo who was in the cockpit and writing notes of Cooper's requests. The cockpit crew would then have passed that information to Al Lee. But there is nothing to suggest that Cooper made such a request. Alice may have seen the meals and maps in a box that Tina carried onboard and assumed that Cooper asked for them. But there were only four crew meals and not one for Cooper.
When Cooper stated that he wanted to go to Mexico, Al Lee would automatically have started gathering the necessary flight maps, approach plates, and such without being asked. He included four meals for his crew because he knew they hadn't eaten in several hours and still had an unknown number of hours to go. Al Lee was just taking care of his NWA crew.
-
After all, how many people have any idea where Yuma is?
Military parachutists. Not sure how far back it goes, but Yuma has been a well established training ground for military jumpers as long as I've been aware of it. (I started in '79)
-
Do you have a source for Cooper making any suggestions for a refueling stops or for any stops before getting to Mexico? The airliner could not have made it to Phoenix non-stop from Seattle in the configuration Cooper specified. In fact, it wasn't until the airliner was in the Portland area that they knew they could make it to Reno non-stop.
In 1971, it was Douglas that had a flight test facility at Yuma so there was no Boeing connection at that time. Of course, Douglas was merged into Boeing at a later date.
The Phoenix and Yuma suggestions are in the FBI files, off the top of my head not sure where. It's clear from these files that Cooper suggested Phoenix. It's a little hazy as to how Yuma entered the conversation. It may have been Cooper saying the he knew the jet could make it to Yuma or something similar.
Boeing tested at Edwards (I believe) with the 727 and may have flown to other regional areas as part of the Edwards testing--even if only as an emergency landing spot if a problem arrived. And yes, Boeing started actively testing in Yuma in the 80's if I'm not mistaken even though Douglas was already there.
Again, I have not seen any evidence that Cooper suggested any location except Mexico. But Cooper did agree to land at Reno after the flight crew explained the range problem to him. The 727 did visit, repeat visit, other locations during its testing. For instance, cold weather testing was probably done in Alaska and some one of the test aircraft took advantage of some unusual weather conditions and did some testing in high crosswinds in New Mexico. But this doesn't mean that they were in these locations for more than a few days. That is, no permanent facilities there.
Some of the 777 hot weather testing was done at Sky Harbor in Phoenix. The 777 test aircraft, with just its green paint primer on, was parked at the business terminal at Sky Harbor on a really hot day and stayed there until it was thoroughly heat soaked. It had to be parked on steel plates to keep the wheels from sinking into the blacktop.
Boeing and Douglas merged on August 1, 1997, almost 26 years after the hijacking.
-
Alice may have seen the meals and maps in a box that Tina carried onboard and assumed that Cooper asked for them. But there were only four crew meals and not one for Cooper.
When Cooper stated that he wanted to go to Mexico, Al Lee would automatically have started gathering the necessary flight maps, approach plates, and such without being asked. He included four meals for his crew because he knew they hadn't eaten in several hours and still had an unknown number of hours to go. Al Lee was just taking care of his NWA crew.
I think that's very solid.
Next thing we will be hearing - is Cooper asked for maps to Nicaragua! Or to Hahneman's back door! ;)
And the maps came in "packets with paper straps" and had termite damage too ? :D It's only logical!
-
McCoy attempted to confuse the authorities as to his destination, giving them a list of cities to fly over. I'm only exploring what Cooper's Arizona suggestion could have been based on.
The obvious question then becomes: If DBC was planning to jump near Phoenix, why then did he jump near Vancouver?
Possibly along these lines is one of his requests. According to Alice he asked for the money, parachutes, crew meals, fuel, and maps. But she forgot what type of maps he asked for. This seems to have all happened before the pilots told him they could not get to Mexico City and ended up with Reno. Did the maps indicate something of use for the investigation? The map request seems to be something you would not forget.
There is no record of Cooper actually asking for any maps or crew meals. The flight crew needed information as to where Cooper wanted to go so they could get the appropriate maps. Upon learning that Cooper wanted to go to Mexico, Al Lee got together as many maps as he could for such a Seattle to Mexico flight and included four crew meals apparently without being asked and not including one for Cooper.
A flight from Seattle to Mexico or Reno to Mexico would not pass anywhere near Phoenix. Cooper did not specify any flight path to get to Mexico. He only agreed to head to Reno after the flight crew suggested it.
Robert: Page 161 to 163 in Martin Andrade's book has a FBI debrief with Alice Hancock. She states in this that he asked for maps and meals. I'd have to do some looking through files to see what file that actually comes from, or ask someone who has cataloged the 302's to see if it is in there.
Alice said he asked for maps and meals. Granted she did not have a lot of contact with Cooper, so it may have been her impression and may not have actually happened.
Part of his gentleman persona has come from the meal request.
Part of his gentleman persona has come from the meal request.
Really! How so? You mean like feeding prisoners in jails? Compassion.
Did Cooper own a tux and attend the opera? Which opera?
Did Cooper wash his feet? Did Hancock ask?
Georger: Pleasant as always, even in a pandemic. Where did DB Cooper's gentleman persona come from then? The way he dressed, the way he talked, offering a tip to the stews? All of that helped. Are you saying that the crew meals did not play a role in establishing that persona through the years? If people think he asked for meals, and that has been referenced through the years, then it played a role in building the gentleman persona.
Whether or not he was a gentleman is debatable, but there are those who believe it.
From Citizen Sleuths: "While in the air, he opened his brief case showing a bomb to the flight attendant and hijacked the plane. The plane landed in Seattle where he demanded 200K in cash, four parachutes and food for the crew before releasing all the passengers"
Weren't you a Citizen Sleuth Georger? Regardless, there are a lot of names on that list.
I don't post BS here, it's all because I'm curious. Take a nap or pills or something.
-
Cooper himself recommended Phoenix and Yuma. See here: http://www.thedbcooperforum.com/db-cooper/clues-documents-and-evidence-about-the-case/msg26430/#msg26430
-
Cooper himself recommended Phoenix and Yuma. See here: http://www.thedbcooperforum.com/db-cooper/clues-documents-and-evidence-about-the-case/msg26430/#msg26430
Yes. There was debate btwn Snowmman and FLYJACK about this clear back in 2018? Proving nothing ever gets resolved between COMPETITORS in Cooper cultland. What matters is the internet competition ......... case left on the battle field of personal competition!
-
...Tina is the one who carried everything onto the airplane in Seattle....
Not according to the passengers I've spoken with about the matter. Larry Finegold, the younger MacPherson, and Jack Almstad told me that two men brought the money onboard and Tina got from them at the forward door, then carried it back to Cooper in the rear.
Once the passengers were released, Tina made three trips down to Al Lee and brought the four parachutes aboard, as I understand her subsequent actions regarding the ransom exchange.
Ah, if only Tina would talk to us.... sigh...
...and I wonder if she would tell us the truth, and how many of us would believe her? Some would. Some not, I suppose.
-
Didn't Tina say that she went out to get the money? I saw this on the case closed doc, but I don't remember if it was the 2016 interview, or if it was footage of the press conference from right after the hijacking. But I thought at some point she said something like that. I'll go back and look when I get a chance.
-
Georger: Pleasant as always, even in a pandemic. Where did DB Cooper's gentleman persona come from then? The way he dressed, the way he talked, offering a tip to the stews? All of that helped. Are you saying that the crew meals did not play a role in establishing that persona through the years? If people think he asked for meals, and that has been referenced through the years, then it played a role in building the gentleman persona.
Whether or not he was a gentleman is debatable, but there are those who believe it.
From Citizen Sleuths: "While in the air, he opened his brief case showing a bomb to the flight attendant and hijacked the plane. The plane landed in Seattle where he demanded 200K in cash, four parachutes and food for the crew before releasing all the passengers"
Weren't you a Citizen Sleuth Georger? Regardless, there are a lot of names on that list.
I don't post BS here, it's all because I'm curious. Take a nap or pills or something.
fcastle866 is right about this...that is, a gentleman persona was developed by virtue of DBC's appearance and manners.
Specifically, the suit and tie, the bourbon and 7, the fact that Tina stated during the press conference that DBC was courteous, and the fact that even during firmer moments DBC didn't say "no funny stuff or I'll blow you and everyone else to F'ing smitherines." Rather, DBC spoke with a euphemism and said he would "do the job."
These are subtle, but important, points in my mind inasmuch as they appear to suggest that DBC was out of his element. In other words, not a hardened, or career, criminal.
-
Georger: Pleasant as always, even in a pandemic. Where did DB Cooper's gentleman persona come from then? The way he dressed, the way he talked, offering a tip to the stews? All of that helped. Are you saying that the crew meals did not play a role in establishing that persona through the years? If people think he asked for meals, and that has been referenced through the years, then it played a role in building the gentleman persona.
Whether or not he was a gentleman is debatable, but there are those who believe it.
From Citizen Sleuths: "While in the air, he opened his brief case showing a bomb to the flight attendant and hijacked the plane. The plane landed in Seattle where he demanded 200K in cash, four parachutes and food for the crew before releasing all the passengers"
Weren't you a Citizen Sleuth Georger? Regardless, there are a lot of names on that list.
I don't post BS here, it's all because I'm curious. Take a nap or pills or something.
fcastle866 is right about this...that is, a gentleman persona was developed by virtue of DBC's appearance and manners.
Specifically, the suit and tie, the bourbon and 7, the fact that Tina stated during the press conference that DBC was courteous, and the fact that even during firmer moments DBC didn't say "no funny stuff or I'll blow you and everyone else to F'ing smitherines." Rather, DBC spoke with a euphemism and said he would "do the job."
These are subtle, but important, points in my mind inasmuch as they appear to suggest that DBC was out of his element. In other words, not a hardened, or career, criminal.
I try not to waste my time on such 'nonsense'.
I seriously doubt Cooper's identity (his whole life and personality) is summed up by his hijacking. We dont know who he was! That's the point!
We dont know if he was a nice guy, a mean guy, a lazy guy, a wealthy guy, a poor guy, a truthful guy etc, or a candlestick maker .... in the rest of his life.
To assert that we 'know Cooper' based on the hijacking alone is pure bunk. It's lazy stereotyping and its based on what socalled facts? There are no facts that we can be confident of. I can't and I am a former licensed psychologist! Any judgement about Cooper is going to be based on an incomplete sampling. His behavior during the hijacking may very well not define him!
Attempts to define the Unabomber went through countless revisions and failed for years. Fitzgerald etal finally took a different approach concentrating on the bomber's written material (the bomber's Ideolect). That approach connected dots fairly quickly with the public's help.
Gentleman Persona is meaningless! It's a journalistic invention, and a figment. It may have no efficacy when compared to the actual hijacker and his life and personality. So far as anyone knows Cooper never wrote a manifesto to compare anything with!
There is a partial dna profile for the guy I guess, but the FBI wont release it! And there is at least one FBI guy who wants Cooper found by investigators who have their hands tied behind their backs talking 'gentleman persona' .... and nothing else. It's ludicrous on its face!
-
DB Cooper partial dna profile:
A full CODIS-13 DNA profile of a suspect means that tests have identified at least 13 loci of a suspect to a statistically reliable level to be used in Court.
A “partial CODIS-13 DNA match” means a full CODIS DNA profile of a suspect is lacking, but some number of loci have been identified to a statistically reliable level, after x-number of tests.
A “partial CODIS-13 DNA match” means that a suspect can only be “excluded.” from a list of suspects, but not “included” to a high degree of accuracy needed to prosecute.
One problem is, the FBI has not defined how many loci are necessary for a “partial DNA match” to allow a prosecutor to follow the pathway to a “familial” partial DNA match, to ultimately obtaining a full profile of some relation who may be the actual Cooper.
And in the Cooper sample, the FBI has not told us how many loci they have identified in their Partial profile, and what those loci are. Without that information we are unable to even speculate about DB Cooper’s physical traits or compare him to any other supposed suspect!
(above 5 paragraphs written by Georger)
See: https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet From this FBI fact sheet, read below:
19. What are the CODIS core loci?
Effective January 1, 2017, the CODIS Core Loci include the following 20 loci:
CSF1PO
FGA
THO1
TPOX
VWA
D3S1358
D5S818
D7S820
D8S1179
D13S317
D16S539
D18S51
D21S11
D1S1656
D2S441
D2S1338
D10S1248
D12S391
D19S433
D22S1045
The Original CODIS Core Loci, required from October 1998 until December 31, 2016, included the following 13 loci: These are the loci tested for in the Cooper case as per our last information, which yielded a Partial result after at least 3 tests -
CSF1PO
FGA
THO1
TPOX
VWA
D3S1358
D5S818
D7S820
D8S1179
D13S317
D16S539
D18S51
D21S11
-
From this url we find Partial Match explained, below: https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet
28. What is a partial match at NDIS?
A: Occasionally a partial match between a forensic profile and an offender profile is observed during a routine NDIS database search. The FBI defines a partial match as a moderate stringency candidate match between two single source profiles having at each locus all of the alleles of one sample represented in the other sample (see illustration below). A “partial match” is not an exact match of the two profiles. When evaluating whether a candidate match is viable and should be processed through to confirmation, a forensic scientist may discover that the candidate offender profile is, in fact, excluded as the possible source of the profile obtained from crime scene evidence. Because of a similarity in alleles between the forensic unknown and the candidate offender profile, the scientist may conclude that a close biological relative of the offender may be the source of the forensic unknown.
The following illustrates a hypothetical partial match as seen in the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM) Recommendations to the FBI Director on the “Interim Plan for the Release of Information in the Event of a ‘Partial Match’ at NDIS” at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/archive/oct2009/standard_guidlines/swgdam.html (with correction at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/communications/swgdamv3/swgdam.html).
Locus Forensic Unknown Candidate Offender Match Stringency
D8S1179 13 13, 14 Moderate
D21S11 28, 31.2 28, 31.2 High
D7S820 12 10, 12 Moderate
D7S820 10, 12 10 Moderate
D3S1358 15, 17 15, 17 High
TH01 8 7, 8 Moderate
D13S317 9, 12 9 Moderate
D16S539 11, 12 12 Moderate
VWA 17 15, 17 Moderate
TPOX 8, 11 8 Moderate
D18S51 24 16, 24 Moderate
D5S818 9, 12 12 Moderate
FGA 24, 25 24, 25 High
29. Can partial match information at NDIS be disclosed?
Since a partial match is not an exact profile match to an offender profile and therefore cannot be subject to NDIS-defined confirmation procedures, the FBI has authorized procedures for the release of partial match information. NDIS laboratories that identify a partial match resulting from an NDIS search and wish to identify the offender profile should refer to Appendix G of the NDIS Operational Procedures Manual and contact the FBI’s CODIS Unit for further information.
30. Is there any guidance on how to address these partial matches?
At the FBI’s request, the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM) reviewed the scientific issues relating to partial matches and developed recommendations to assist in the evaluation of this information. Those recommendations are available in Forensic Science Communications at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/archive/oct2009/standard_guidlines/swgdam.html (with correction at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/communications/swgdamv3/swgdam.html).
31. How successful are partial matches at locating potential suspects?
As explained in SWGDAM’s recommendations “Moderate stringency CODIS matches, in general, have very low efficiency in locating true relatives in offender databases. There is little useful probative value in the majority of partial matches using the current CODIS searching rules and algorithms. There are two main reasons for this: (1) true siblings will very rarely share alleles at all CODIS core loci; (2) as offender DNA databases get large, the number of unrelated people that do share at least one allele at all loci increases very rapidly. The original intent for allowing moderate stringency CODIS searches was the realization and acknowledgment that crime scene profiles often may be partially degraded and/or contain DNA from more than one contributor. Additionally, different primer sets may have been used between profiles. Allowing the detection of partial matches can help accommodate these two scenarios and allow the ultimate detection of full, high-stringency matches that might otherwise not have been found.” The Committee’s complete list of recommendations is available at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/archive/oct2009/standard_guidlines/swgdam.html (with correction at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/communications/swgdamv3/swgdam.html).
32. Are partial matches the same as familial searches?
No. A partial match, as indicated above, is the spontaneous product of a routine database search where a candidate offender profile is not identical to the forensic profile but because of a similarity in the number of alleles shared between the forensic profile and the candidate profile, the offender may be a close biological relative of the source of the forensic profile. Familial searching is an intentional or deliberate search of the database conducted after a routine search for the purpose of potentially identifying close biological relatives of the unknown forensic sample associated with the crime scene profile.
33. Are familial searches performed at NDIS?
No, familial searching is not currently performed at NDIS. See also Familial Searching and Federal Register Vol. 73, No. 238 (December 10, 2008 at page 74937).
... see the whole document at url above for fuller explanation . . .
-
So, if you have followed any of the above a smart person would ask: what do any of these 13 "loci" tell about Cooper's physical traits etc? That is where the rubber meets the road. The answers to that must wait until I am free to think and compose something. But Google any of these loci to make your own estimates! Good luck Keep in mind we dont know how many of these loci the FBI lab has identified .. to qualify as a Partial. Could be 7, 11, but must be at least 5. ;)
CSF1PO
FGA
THO1
TPOX
VWA
D3S1358
D5S818
D7S820
D8S1179
D13S317
D16S539
D18S51
D21S11
-
Didn't Tina say that she went out to get the money? I saw this on the case closed doc, but I don't remember if it was the 2016 interview, or if it was footage of the press conference from right after the hijacking. But I thought at some point she said something like that. I'll go back and look when I get a chance.
That is the standard narrative. As a result, I was shocked to hear a different story from the passengers. Made me wonder if "little while lies" might be the tip of a covering-up iceberg.
Specifically, how did the FBI and NWO alter the story of who did what and when? Then we need to ask WHY?
The money retrieval is one item. Also in dispute is when the passengers were moved up to the front of the plane. Most passengers say they moved up near the end of the flight, with one guy saying they were one final approach. Again, this is counter to the official narrative.
Further, the two-hours circling around Seattle were not a piece of cake as the official story suggests. Rather, there was at least one drunken disturbance that required significant intervention by the FAs, and even DBC reported raised his voice to shut someone up in Row 12.
Perhaps the most disturbing piece of information from the passengers is the report from Larry Finegold that one of the men who brought the money onboard was an FBI agent. The SA's name was "John" and Finegold, a Seattle USADA, knew him from the courts.
Was all the scrubbing of truth necessary to protect NWO's public image? Maybe. Was it more? Maybe.
Did Tina participate willingly in all of this? Maybe. Maybe not. If not, was she shut up somehow? Is that why she went into hiding for 30 years? Maybe. Maybe not.
Is Tina complicit in this narrative spin? Did she "kind of" lie to help the NWO and the FBI appear to be honest when they were deceiving the public? Is her complicity the leverage that the FBI has over her? That is, if they actually have any leverage over her. That is total speculation on my part, but others share it, such as Galen. Remember, Tina seems to do what the FBI want her to do when they want her to do it, such as appear in the 2016 HC docu, or lie through her teeth in the 2012 Eugene Weekly interview.
Bottom Line: Talk to me Tina or face the implications of your silence. Tina could clear ALL of this up in five minutes. Or at least go on the record with her explanation for all of these incidents.
-
Didn't Tina say that she went out to get the money? I saw this on the case closed doc, but I don't remember if it was the 2016 interview, or if it was footage of the press conference from right after the hijacking. But I thought at some point she said something like that. I'll go back and look when I get a chance.
That is the standard narrative. As a result, I was shocked to hear a different story from the passengers. Made me wonder if "little while lies" might be the tip of a covering-up iceberg.
Specifically, how did the FBI and NWO alter the story of who did what and when? Then we need to ask WHY?
The money retrieval is one item. Also in dispute is when the passengers were moved up to the front of the plane. Most passengers say they moved up near the end of the flight, with one guy saying they were one final approach. Again, this is counter to the official narrative.
Further, the two-hours circling around Seattle were not a piece of cake as the official story suggests. Rather, there was at least one drunken disturbance that required significant intervention by the FAs, and even DBC reported raised his voice to shut someone up in Row 12.
Perhaps the most disturbing piece of information from the passengers is the report from Larry Finegold that one of the men who brought the money onboard was an FBI agent. The SA's name was "John" and Finegold, a Seattle USADA, knew him from the courts.
Was all the scrubbing of truth necessary to protect NWO's public image? Maybe. Was it more? Maybe.
Did Tina participate willingly in all of this? Maybe. Maybe not. If not, was she shut up somehow? Is that why she went into hiding for 30 years? Maybe. Maybe not.
Is Tina complicit in this narrative spin? Did she "kind of" lie to help the NWO and the FBI appear to be honest when they were deceiving the public? Is her complicity the leverage that the FBI has over her? That is, if they actually have any leverage over her. That is total speculation on my part, but others share it, such as Galen. Remember, Tina seems to do what the FBI want her to do when they want her to do it, such as appear in the 2016 HC docu, or lie through her teeth in the 2012 Eugene Weekly interview.
Bottom Line: Talk to me Tina or face the implications of your silence. Tina could clear ALL of this up in five minutes. Or at least go on the record with her explanation for all of these incidents.
Try isnt going to talk to you or Galen in any event. YOu can bank on that.
-
So, if you have followed any of the above a smart person would ask: what do any of these 13 "loci" tell about Cooper's physical traits etc? That is where the rubber meets the road. The answers to that must wait until I am free to think and compose something. But Google any of these loci to make your own estimates! Good luck Keep in mind we dont know how many of these loci the FBI lab has identified .. to qualify as a Partial. Could be 7, 11, but must be at least 5. ;)
CSF1PO
FGA
THO1
TPOX
VWA
D3S1358
D5S818
D7S820
D8S1179
D13S317
D16S539
D18S51
D21S11
continuing... let's pause. Most people dont care!
Note: the Original CODIS Core Loci, required from October 1998 until December 31, 2016, relied on and tested for 13 loci pictured above. The 13 loci system was updated: Effective January 1, 2017, the CODIS Core Loci will include 20 loci. The only known FBI Codis13 profile for Cooper was a 13 loci profile, which reportedly yielded a partial profile at best, according to Galen Cook. So, was the Cooper test updated effective Jan 1, 2017 to test for the larger 20 loci sample? That's an open question which may rely on the strength of the old Codis-13 "partial" profile the FBI lab has. But, since the FBI closed the Cooper case in 2016 there is no apparent need for an updated 20-loci test! The FBI may have elected not to try for new tests under the newer CODIS system ? Only the FBI could clarify that issue. As a footnote to all of this: the FBI moved to a 20-loci test in 2017 to bring its testing platform up to International standards, since the European and Canadian International system has relied on a 23-loci test platform for years.
In addition, Galen Cook and a few select others 'claim' to know 'quite a lot' about the "partial" dna profile the FBI has for DB Cooper and the extensive repetitious sampling that was required to obtain even a partial result! Cook paints a very bleak picture based on conversations he says he has had with SA Curtis Eng.. Rumor has it a prodigious effort was required with repeated tests conducted, in order to get any result! Maybe some day Cook will share with the rest of the world what he knows about Cooper's Partial dna profile and the story behind it ... representing very arduous efforts with virtually useless results ! ?
It needs to be said that it is also to the advantage of anyone peddling a suspect to maintain that the FBI's partial profile for Cooper is worthless ... and cannot even exclude people! This is called "nullification" - a well known defense strategy in the legal system.
:chr2:
-
The partial DNA profile the FBI has can do one thing only: Exclude suspects.
It cannot definitively point to DBC and it cannot tell us anything about DBC's heritage or any other such traits.
-
The partial DNA profile the FBI has can do one thing only: Exclude suspects.
It cannot definitively point to DBC and it cannot tell us anything about DBC's heritage or any other such traits.
Yes, I found your earlier news article/interview on the subject. You are not even conversant in these matters - you are simply parroting what others have said or told you!
How many loci has the FBI identified and what are they? Can you supply any written labs reports?
What you are saying depends completely on the nature of the Partial(s) the FBI has. See this from the FBI's own page on Partials.
https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet
28. What is a partial match at NDIS?
A: Occasionally a partial match between a forensic profile and an offender profile is observed during a routine NDIS database search. The FBI defines a partial match as a moderate stringency candidate match between two single source profiles having at each locus all of the alleles of one sample represented in the other sample (see illustration below). A “partial match” is not an exact match of the two profiles. When evaluating whether a candidate match is viable and should be processed through to confirmation, a forensic scientist may discover that the candidate offender profile is, in fact, excluded as the possible source of the profile obtained from crime scene evidence. Because of a similarity in alleles between the forensic unknown and the candidate offender profile, the scientist may conclude that a close biological relative of the offender may be the source of the forensic unknown.
The following illustrates a hypothetical partial match as seen in the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM) Recommendations to the FBI Director on the “Interim Plan for the Release of Information in the Event of a ‘Partial Match’ at NDIS” at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/archive/oct2009/standard_guidlines/swgdam.html (with correction at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/communications/swgdamv3/swgdam.html).
Locus Forensic Unknown Candidate Offender Match Stringency
D8S1179 13 13, 14 Moderate
D21S11 28, 31.2 28, 31.2 High
D7S820 12 10, 12 Moderate
D7S820 10, 12 10 Moderate
D3S1358 15, 17 15, 17 High
TH01 8 7, 8 Moderate
D13S317 9, 12 9 Moderate
D16S539 11, 12 12 Moderate
VWA 17 15, 17 Moderate
TPOX 8, 11 8 Moderate
D18S51 24 16, 24 Moderate
D5S818 9, 12 12 Moderate
FGA 24, 25 24, 25 High
-
The partial DNA profile the FBI has can do one thing only: Exclude suspects.
It cannot definitively point to DBC and it cannot tell us anything about DBC's heritage or any other such traits.
Yes, I found your earlier article/interview on the subject. You are not even conversant in these matters - you are simply parroting what others have said or told you!
How many loci has the FBI identified and what are they? Can you supply any written labs reports?
What you are saying depends completely on the nature of the Partial(s) the FBI has.
You are the one not conversant in these matters. I know precisely how many loci the FBI identified and how many they were attempting to identify. Believe it or not GEORGER, there are people actually doing a lot of work on this case who know a lot more than you think. Of course, there are others who speak in tongues and parables and thrive on giving people $#!+.
-
The partial DNA profile the FBI has can do one thing only: Exclude suspects.
It cannot definitively point to DBC and it cannot tell us anything about DBC's heritage or any other such traits.
Yes, I found your earlier article/interview on the subject. You are not even conversant in these matters - you are simply parroting what others have said or told you!
How many loci has the FBI identified and what are they? Can you supply any written labs reports?
What you are saying depends completely on the nature of the Partial(s) the FBI has.
You are the one not conversant in these matters. I know precisely how many loci the FBI identified and how many they were attempting to identify. Believe it or not GEORGER, there are people actually doing a lot of work on this case who know a lot more than you think. Of course, there are others who speak in tongues and parables and thrive on giving people $#!+.
I see, so 30+ years in this field does not qualify me?
I know precisely how many loci the FBI identified and how many they were attempting to identify.
So STOP the bullshit and High Stakes Holdem Politics and just tell us what you know, for a change! WHAT LOCI HAS THE FBI IDENTIFIED ACCORDING TO YOU! ?
I will pass this on to geneticists I used to work with. These are the people who invented the kits and methods the FBI uses. Your contribution to this field is what?
* I thot you were here to work on the Cooper case! Apparently you are here for Politics and a Takeover ? With your superior knowledge ;) you claim are you going to help or not? I can connect you in thirty seconds to actual researchers in the field ... if you like ... so put up or ....
You are out of your element here, bud! I suggest you revise your pitch and your approach!
Should we just add your authoritative BS to Galen Cook's claims? Are you here to work on the Cooper case or what! ?
-
You are out of your element here, bud! I suggest you revise your pitch and your approach!
I'm not your "bud" and never will be your "bud." I do not like people like you.
Moreover, I could care less what you and others like you know or think that I know or don't know.
-
You are out of your element here, bud! I suggest you revise your pitch and your approach!
I'm not your "bud" and never will be your "bud." I do not like people like you.
Moreover, I could care less what you and others like you know or think that I know or don't know.
Mister Ulis, long time DB Cooper Researcher and film maker/politician running for office and High Stake Holdem TV Star .......... and book writer?
Your statement is: I know precisely how many loci the FBI identified and how many they were attempting to identify...
How many DB Cooper loci has the FBI identified, and what are they? You either know or you are lying.
-
You either know or you are lying.
You are absolutely right.
-
You either know or you are lying.
You are absolutely right.
More smarm from the guy. I will take it you dont even know what you are talking about. Good luck with your DB Cooper political campaign takeover.
Could it be the FBI only has identified 5 loci out of 13? And they might be:
DNA marker Mother Child Alleged father
D21S11 28, 30 28, 31.2 29, 31.2
D7S820 9, 10 10, 11 11, 12
TH01 6, 9.3 9, 9.3 8, 9
D13S317 10, 12 12, 13 11, 13
D19S433 14, 16.2 14, 15 14.2, 15
Which contrary to Mr. Ulis' information is precisely those loci needed to run a familial trace! I dont know but Ulis claims to know.
This isnt some popularity contest but actual science. Either Ulis knows what he's talking about or he is playing games and FOS.
Since this is all an 'Event Sociologique' Ulis has devised ......... you decide. And be prepared to live with the results!
-
You either know or you are lying.
You are absolutely right.
More smarm from the guy. I will take it you dont even know what you are talking about. Good luck with your DB Cooper political campaign takeover.
Could it be the FBI only has identified 5 loci out of 13? And they might be:
DNA marker Mother Child Alleged father
D21S11 28, 30 28, 31.2 29, 31.2
D7S820 9, 10 10, 11 11, 12
TH01 6, 9.3 9, 9.3 8, 9
D13S317 10, 12 12, 13 11, 13
D19S433 14, 16.2 14, 15 14.2, 15
Which contrary to Mr. Ulis' information is precisely those loci needed to run a familial trace! I dont know but Ulis claims to know.
This isnt some popularity contest but actual science. Either Ulis knows what he's talking about or he is playing games and FOS.
Since this is all an 'Event Sociologique' Ulis has devised ......... you decide. And be prepared to live with the results!
This reminds me a lot of what we went through with Galen Cook and his supposed privileged information about the dna FBI has supposedly been able to extract from three organic samples on the tie - but Cook would never give any details he said SA Eng had given him!
So WTF is going on here! Why is the FBI revealing is sacred genetic evidence about DB Cooper to RANK AMATEURS who dont know the difference between a nucleic acid and 49 Chevy ! ? It defies belief!
Somebody is playing games here, or passing a line of Cooper bullshit 5000 miles long, the public can never recover from! It gives the word EXTORTION a brand new meaning! The hijacking of ... the hijacking ?
My advice is: dont speculate about this. Dont believe anything any amateur Cooper speculator-opportunist says ... wait for the FBI to release what they have which could take years, or never. Listen to only credible qualified people with credentials so far as Cooper dna is concerned. Anything else is a media and internet driven fraud. Especially during the dangerous time we are all living in.
There are no credible reports that the Arc of the Covenant has actually been found! :nono:
-
The partial DNA profile the FBI has can do one thing only: Exclude suspects.
It (the FBI Cooper profile) cannot definitively point to DBC and it cannot tell us anything about DBC's heritage or any other such traits.
Are you sure of your facts you state above, Dr. Ulis?
I ask because the FBI DNA page suggests a different interpretation, and ... we have three known cases of the FBI using its partial profile to compare with suspects .... which contradicts your statements above! I mean if you are going to give statements/interviews to newspapers about these matters, shouldn't you at least have some working knowledge of these matters and know what you are talking about? Apparently not!
You state: " it cannot tell us anything about DBC's heritage".
Quoting Agent Gutt: ""The DNA that they were able to extract from uncle L.D. Cooper's daughter, who was born after the fact, did not match the partial sample of DNA that we have in our files for DB Cooper," Gutt said."
So here is a clear cut instance of the FBI lab using their DB Cooper partial profile and comparing it to FAMILIAL DNA in Marla's family, and LD Cooper's daughter. That, Mr Ulis, is heritage ie familial! Moreover, that comparison that was done requires the presence of at least five core loci in the two samples being compared, before any comparison can be made. If true, that is a revelation about the FBI's DB Cooper partial profile. These comparisons rely on standard lab protocols being followed between two standardised samples each with a common set of the same five core loci! (see the FBI CODIS HERITAGE fact sheet!)
How do you explain that?
If the partial on file can be compared to a relative of a suspect (heritage dna ... familial dna), why could it not be used to compare to anyone's relative or familial line including Cooper's own familial line? The answer is: it has already been done on Marla's relative's familial line.... duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
I dont expect you to know how it can be done because you dont know squat about these matters in spite of your running around preaching about these matters to news outlets.... I will only say the answer is right on the FBI's own face page in their discussion about Loci: (Cod13, Cod20, Ancestral loci, etc)
Today we use "partial profiles" to compare unwanted children and potential parents, in every State in this country, for the assessment of child support claims! It appears the FBI used the same techniques using the same core loci to compare their Cooper partial to Marla's relative, testing if he was related to DB Cooper. The techniques are the same and the loci needed are the same. That probably means we now have five core loci in the DB Cooper partial profile. Do you want me to state them and render a judgement about what each means? (There is actually more going on here than I have stated but let's leave that until another time.)
Your turn Dr. Ulis-Elvis! :o
Again: here is the FBI Codis Fact Sheet Im using: https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet
-
Let me help you with this GEORGER, expert of all things...
...heritage meaning...Latin, Italian, Middle Eastern, etc...
...other traits meaning...blue eyes, black hair, aversion to garlic, etc...
Stop whining about everyone and everything.
EU (Elvis) out!
-
Let me help you with this GEORGER, expert of all things...
...heritage meaning...Latin, Italian, Middle Eastern, etc...
...other traits meaning...blue eyes, black hair, aversion to garlic, etc...
Stop whining about everyone and everything.
EU (Elvis) out!
Well once again you're OFF TOPIC. Get your attitude fixed! :D
Heritage and paternity genetic testing, has its roots in the early 1990s, as I recall. CODIS-13 had been established in October 1998. Integrated DNA of Iowa City began making test kits and oligos for Federal use and university research around the same time. The Human Genome Project took hold about 1989 (Craig Venter) and that would develop into an offshoot company named "23 & Me" which still exists today. During the 1990s Universal Genetics Inc began consultations with a number of people proposing standards for commercial DNA paternity testing. The core loci systems established during that era have stayed pretty much the backbone of testing in America, until now.
That means that the testing of LD Cooper's relative in 2011 occurred under those protocols. The testing of LD's daughter is what allows us to make an intelligent guess about five core loci the FBI must have in their Cooper partial ... without which outside comparison testing might not have been done. I mean, the FBI and other agencies have a funny habit of sticking to statistically proven protocols which have standing in Courts of Law - the horse doesn't usually wander too far from the barn in these matters! It's very likely the FBI Lab used established protocols and loci in comparing LD's daughter's sample to their DB Cooper partial. That requires comparing specific loci in both samples, plus D19S433.
Spare us your disruptive smarm, Elvis! :))
-
Nobody should be surprised when suspect peddlers DONT WANT Cooper's genome known or explored!
I mean why destroy a free ride to fame and news coverage! Belittle anyone trying to open that box. Take the high road and claim you know more than they do. Claim they are trouble makers. Who cares about the actual case at issue!
It works every time! :congrats:
-
Nobody should be surprised when suspect peddlers DONT WANT Cooper's genome known or explored!
I mean why destroy a free ride to fame and news coverage! Belittle anyone trying to open that box. Take the high road and claim you know more than they do. Claim they are trouble makers. Who cares about the actual case at issue!
It works every time! :congrats:
Georger, except for the term "suspect peddler," you just described yourself.
-
Nobody should be surprised when suspect peddlers DONT WANT Cooper's genome known or explored!
I mean why destroy a free ride to fame and news coverage! Belittle anyone trying to open that box. Take the high road and claim you know more than they do. Claim they are trouble makers. Who cares about the actual case at issue!
It works every time! :congrats:
Georger, except for the term "suspect peddler," you just described yourself.
How so? Explain? I have no suspects. My only suspect is DB Cooper!
You have no interest in knowing Cooper's partial profile and if he had one eye or two? You have something against "loci" and vaccinations and education?
FACT* I have had the IGNORE button active on you for almost a year - I will no longer over ride the Ignore button to read your posts - My assessment is you have nothing of value. And it isn't worth the struggle trying to keep you happy! Bye bye.
-
Nobody should be surprised when suspect peddlers DONT WANT Cooper's genome known or explored!
I mean why destroy a free ride to fame and news coverage! Belittle anyone trying to open that box. Take the high road and claim you know more than they do. Claim they are trouble makers. Who cares about the actual case at issue!
It works every time! :congrats:
Georger, except for the term "suspect peddler," you just described yourself.
How so? Explain? I have no suspects. My only suspect is DB Cooper!
You have no interest in knowing Cooper's partial profile and if he had one eye or two? You have something against "loci" and vaccinations and education?
FACT* I have had the IGNORE button active on you for almost a year - I will no longer over ride the Ignore button to read your posts - My assessment is you have nothing of value. And it isn't worth the struggle trying to keep you happy! Bye bye.
Are you sure you read my post right? Because I acknowledged that you didn't have any Cooper suspects.
And there's no sense in lying. Here's how you show people they have nothing of value:
Let's do this then: Let's not try to narrow down the search area, lets widen it. Let's add the original flight path with any and all proposed flight paths, adjust for the strongest and mildest winds and directions, and get the biggest patch of land possible for a dropzone from a 727 in flight on that rough trajectory.
It's been fifty years. They've looked. The cops. The feds. The Guard. The treasure hunters. The land developers. The hunters and campers and fishermen and joggers and hikers and little kids. The freaks with metal detectors and planes. They've covered all of it. Every plot of land is owned by someone, and has been surveyed and sold probably several times each since '71, and they didn't mention a body clutching a bomb. Perhaps nobody looked hard enough? Or perhaps they didn't know what to look for?
Actually, they did. With all of the trash to be found in the woods, someone found a placard from a 727 rear stairs and correctly identified it. They knew the story. Everybody knew. And all they found was that and the money. And the money was found by a guy from Oklahoma, who still tied it to Cooper, because everybody knew what to look for. And they did. And they found nothing.
The flight path is only relevant if it can establish a search area. Fifty years has expanded and exhausted that search area, rendering the flight path meaningless except in the event that Bill Rataczak came out and said, "yeah, I flew East to drown the bastard," which he hasn't. And I have no reason not to believe him.
So using the concept of a calculated search perimeter, if a subject is on the run on foot, you calculate the distance they are capable of traveling during the time it took you to mobilize, and you set up a radius around the spot they started from. In this case, all of that is blown, because nobody was able to properly react. Cooper could have been long gone before any of them got close to his landing zone.
Is it possible that Cooper's body is there somewhere? Only as possible as logic will allow for. On Thanksgiving 1971, it was extremely possible. After the cops searched it was less possible. After the FBI and Nat'l Guard searched, even less. After the public searched all year, it became improbable. After all of the above searched for 50 years, we have to admit that the dingo ate the baby. Rather Cooper got away. OR that someone got away with robbing his corpse and burying him wrapped in his chute. Because the only thing worth taking is the money, which was partially found. Nothing else he had was found.
Try this: Go to Zillow.com and search for homes in that area to see how well-developed the land is now. Backhoes and diggers putting in sewers and foundations for half a century. No skyjackers found.
So what physical evidence would you look for, and where would you look?
Too bad you werent around when Farflung was - you two would make a potent pair! Its refreshing to have some sound logic applied in this forum! :congrats:
This carrot or stick technique, where you reward people (carrot) for agreeing with you then attack them (stick) for disagreeing with you, is a classic sign of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. There are coping skills that can be learned that can help repair damaged relationships in people's lives. It's worth looking into. In the meantime, you are utterly transparent.
-
Had an interesting talk with Shutter today which led to the realization that there are essentially six drop zones advocated in some manner or another:
1) FBI Drop Zone
2) Washougal Drop Zone
3) Cle Elum Drop Zone (Reca)
4) Columbia River Drop Zone (Near PDX)
5) Caterpillar Island Drop Zone (R99)
6) Ridgefield Drop Zone (EU)
With this in mind, it's interesting to consider each of these drop zones, the evidence, their viability, and the ability for each of them to provide answers for such things as: How did the money arrive at Tena Bar? or How did Cooper escape once he landed?
-
Remember, there are two FBI drop zones. The first one was Amboy, circa 1971-1972.
The second one is Hockinson, circa 1975. This LZ is about 10 miles south of Amboy and is wide-open dairy lands. And within walking distance to PDX.... a long walk at 20 miles, but still...
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
No! I think you miss the POINT. Actually two or three or four points. (1) R saw the GLOW of Portland/Vancouver. That is his answer. (2) There is no other skyglow flying south from Seattle to Reno in the same position. Of the roughly 700 mile separation between Reno and Seattle, the skyglow R saw defines a less than 2% area on the whole trip, which can ONLY be Vancouver/Portland. To a person jumping from 10,000 feet on a 700 mile journey that sky glow puts Cooper to within only 14 miles of his target, if Vancouver/Portland was his target. (3) Cooper was able to identify cities from the air - there is direct evidence of that. Cooper knew where he was, from the air. (4) The fact of overcast and cloud layers is - IRRELEVANT. In fact the clouds might have created an advantage so far as identifying large areas of sky glow representing urban arreas, are concerned. !
Likewise, keep track of the fact that your colleague Galen Cook says that Cooper was timing the flight by burning matches in his match book - so Cooper had a clock according to Cook - match burning.
However, you will continue your narrative because you have no choice. That is the position you have put yourself in! So go back to talking about Cooper's 'psychology' and why he could not see sky glow from an airplane in clouds. Search for something in Thermodynamics, like water runs down hill, to bolster your narrative. West path vs FBI path is irrelevant. It's the place R saw the sky glow that matters. You might concentrate on how Cooper cannot see out of airplanes. Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply? It's your choice .... or your move. Good luck. Try arts & crafts. ;D
:rofl:
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
No! I think you miss the POINT. Actually two or three or four points. (1) R saw the GLOW of Portland/Vancouver. That is his answer. (2) There is no other skyglow flying south from Seattle to Reno in the same position. Of the roughly 700 mile separation between Reno and Seattle, the skyglow R saw defines a less than 2% area on the whole trip, which can ONLY be Vancouver/Portland. To a person jumping from 10,000 feet on a 700 mile journey that sky glow puts Cooper to within only 14 miles of his target, if Vancouver/Portland was his target. (3) Cooper was able to identify cities from the air - there is direct evidence of that. Cooper knew where he was, from the air. (4) The fact of overcast and cloud layers is - IRRELEVANT. In fact the clouds might have created an advantage so far as identifying large areas of sky glow representing urban arreas, are concerned. !
Likewise, keep track of the fact that your colleague Galen Cook says that Cooper was timing the flight by burning matches in his match book - so Cooper had a clock according to Cook - match burning.
However, you will continue your narrative because you have no choice. That is the position you have put yourself in! So go back to talking about Cooper's 'psychology' and why he could not see sky glow from an airplane in clouds. Search for something in Thermodynamics, like water runs down hill, to bolster your narrative. West path vs FBI path is irrelevant. It's the place R saw the sky glow that matters. You might concentrate on how Cooper cannot see out of airplanes. Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply? It's your choice .... or your move. Good luck. Try arts & crafts. ;D
:rofl:
Georger, your reply above is absolute nonsense. There is "sky glow" from EVER populated area whether it is Wick, Iowa (population 40 people) or Los Angeles, California (population 10 million plus and counting). A thin cloud layer under the airliner would eliminate the glow from Wick, Iowa but the glow from LA could probably penetrate heavy cloud layers to 30,000+ feet. Rataczak knew he was looking at the glow from Portland/Vancouver because he was involved in the navigation of the airliner as was Scott and Anderson and they damn well got paid to know where they were.
Burning matches to time the flight distances? I must say that no one mentioned such a thing to me in my 50 or so piloting years! In 1971, I was using my Accutron wrist watch to time things. But there are a few minor problems here. Cooper didn't know the airliner's indicated airspeed, he didn't know the airliner's true airspeed, and he didn't know the winds aloft speeds or directions. Consequently, there is NO way that Cooper could have determined the ground speed which is what is important here. Further, Cooper didn't even know the route that the airliner was flying since he never discussed such a thing with the flight crew. And if Rataczak hadn't been over ruled by NWA senior management, Cooper would have found himself jumping into the Pacific Ocean (which would have been a fitting climax to the hijacking in my opinion).
Georger, you need to get an emergency appointment with your Psychiatrist. When was the last time you took a cognitive test? Before you take another one, you need to brush up on what alligators, elephants, and camels looks like. And good luck on the test. Give it your best shot!
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
Not necessarily, depending on factors. I think that could be way too wide a range. It's said Cooper knew the area from the air. How familiar was he with the area? Was he an experienced jumper (spotting)? How thick/thin were the clouds under them, how defined was the glow? I once spotted a load through clouds from 12500 AGL and all I could see was a familiar freeway offramp that was like 3-5 miles away. We came through the clouds directly over the dz. But I was experienced at spotting and knew the area well. The point is that if Cooper was familiar enough with the area and knew which side of the 'glow' he was on, he might well have had a fairly defined idea of where he was.
Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply?
Huh? I've been spotting ground references from flying airplanes for over forty years, and that's a new one on me.
-
The reference about Blevins surrounds people in the cabin. it's another angle he tries to make up for Kenny being short or the same height as Tina..she would know if he was taller than she was..Tina was 5' 8" which is the same as Kenny..he likes to destroy eye witness testimony by using other crimes. the problem is most crimes last seconds which gives little time for a accurate description..
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
No! I think you miss the POINT. Actually two or three or four points. (1) R saw the GLOW of Portland/Vancouver. That is his answer. (2) There is no other skyglow flying south from Seattle to Reno in the same position. Of the roughly 700 mile separation between Reno and Seattle, the skyglow R saw defines a less than 2% area on the whole trip, which can ONLY be Vancouver/Portland. To a person jumping from 10,000 feet on a 700 mile journey that sky glow puts Cooper to within only 14 miles of his target, if Vancouver/Portland was his target. (3) Cooper was able to identify cities from the air - there is direct evidence of that. Cooper knew where he was, from the air. (4) The fact of overcast and cloud layers is - IRRELEVANT. In fact the clouds might have created an advantage so far as identifying large areas of sky glow representing urban arreas, are concerned. !
Likewise, keep track of the fact that your colleague Galen Cook says that Cooper was timing the flight by burning matches in his match book - so Cooper had a clock according to Cook - match burning.
However, you will continue your narrative because you have no choice. That is the position you have put yourself in! So go back to talking about Cooper's 'psychology' and why he could not see sky glow from an airplane in clouds. Search for something in Thermodynamics, like water runs down hill, to bolster your narrative. West path vs FBI path is irrelevant. It's the place R saw the sky glow that matters. You might concentrate on how Cooper cannot see out of airplanes. Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply? It's your choice .... or your move. Good luck. Try arts & crafts. ;D
:rofl:
Kermit-thanks for that update, really good info.
Georger: I'm in general agreement with your post. I had not considered the matches before, and this is the first I've heard about it, but it does remind me of a survival manual I read once that showed airmen burning cigarettes, and that at the time it was suggested that a cigarette would burn 7 minutes or so (just lit, not smoked) and that someone could use a cigarette as a rudimentary timer. I tried it once on a firecracker set up and it worked as a delay. I can't picture a time though that Cooper had cigarettes lit from Seattle to Portland though. Maybe.
Robert99-We've "argued" this one before. I believe leaving Seattle, heading south towards Portland with flaps at 15 degrees and landing gear down, that Cooper would know the general speed of the plane, and he would have had some idea of the winds, and if he was an experienced flyer, then he could have had some general idea of his location aided by the fact that there are no lights south of Tacoma until he gets to Portland. I was not in the plane, but I have to imagine he knew when he was over the cities. Does this put him in an exact spot? No. Does it mean he knew where he was? No, but it could mean that he thought he knew where he was. If his plan was to jump just before Portland, then he only needed to have some basic timing and knowledge of the speed/wind, etc. This was not a long trip. Air speed vs ground speed with winds figured in is just not a whole lot of variance over 130 miles, so if he knew air speed, he should have had a general idea of where he was. Even if it was within 20 miles, it may have given him the advantage he needed to start his escape. At some point in his descent he should have been able to get some idea of his location while under the canopy.
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
No! I think you miss the POINT. Actually two or three or four points. (1) R saw the GLOW of Portland/Vancouver. That is his answer. (2) There is no other skyglow flying south from Seattle to Reno in the same position. Of the roughly 700 mile separation between Reno and Seattle, the skyglow R saw defines a less than 2% area on the whole trip, which can ONLY be Vancouver/Portland. To a person jumping from 10,000 feet on a 700 mile journey that sky glow puts Cooper to within only 14 miles of his target, if Vancouver/Portland was his target. (3) Cooper was able to identify cities from the air - there is direct evidence of that. Cooper knew where he was, from the air. (4) The fact of overcast and cloud layers is - IRRELEVANT. In fact the clouds might have created an advantage so far as identifying large areas of sky glow representing urban arreas, are concerned. !
Likewise, keep track of the fact that your colleague Galen Cook says that Cooper was timing the flight by burning matches in his match book - so Cooper had a clock according to Cook - match burning.
However, you will continue your narrative because you have no choice. That is the position you have put yourself in! So go back to talking about Cooper's 'psychology' and why he could not see sky glow from an airplane in clouds. Search for something in Thermodynamics, like water runs down hill, to bolster your narrative. West path vs FBI path is irrelevant. It's the place R saw the sky glow that matters. You might concentrate on how Cooper cannot see out of airplanes. Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply? It's your choice .... or your move. Good luck. Try arts & crafts. ;D
:rofl:
Georger, your reply above is absolute nonsense. There is "sky glow" from EVER populated area whether it is Wick, Iowa (population 40 people) or Los Angeles, California (population 10 million plus and counting). A thin cloud layer under the airliner would eliminate the glow from Wick, Iowa but the glow from LA could probably penetrate heavy cloud layers to 30,000+ feet. Rataczak knew he was looking at the glow from Portland/Vancouver because he was involved in the navigation of the airliner as was Scott and Anderson and they damn well got paid to know where they were.
Burning matches to time the flight distances? I must say that no one mentioned such a thing to me in my 50 or so piloting years! In 1971, I was using my Accutron wrist watch to time things. But there are a few minor problems here. Cooper didn't know the airliner's indicated airspeed, he didn't know the airliner's true airspeed, and he didn't know the winds aloft speeds or directions. Consequently, there is NO way that Cooper could have determined the ground speed which is what is important here. Further, Cooper didn't even know the route that the airliner was flying since he never discussed such a thing with the flight crew. And if Rataczak hadn't been over ruled by NWA senior management, Cooper would have found himself jumping into the Pacific Ocean (which would have been a fitting climax to the hijacking in my opinion).
Georger, you need to get an emergency appointment with your Psychiatrist. When was the last time you took a cognitive test? Before you take another one, you need to brush up on what alligators, elephants, and camels looks like. And good luck on the test. Give it your best shot!
The fact you reach again to a personal attack against me - nullifies every idiotic thing you say. Get rest.
-
There is no known causal connection between the flight path in 1971 and the money find nine years later in 1980. Himmelsbach tried to forge a connection between the money find and the Washgougal River including an eastward revision of the flight path, but nobody bought that! There is no proven connection between the Cooper money and anything else that is known. That is why most people select the dredging in 1974 as the most likely candidate, because it is the only known outside connection between where the money was found, and anything being dumped on that beach where the money was found. Hydrologists consulted speculate that artifacts from the 1974 dredging could have migrated 'hundreds of yards to the north of their original location', in the direction of flow.
Tom Kaye keeps saying the money was probably deposited on Tina Bar as early as 1971 ... by some scenario Tom has yet to lay out ?
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
No! I think you miss the POINT. Actually two or three or four points. (1) R saw the GLOW of Portland/Vancouver. That is his answer. (2) There is no other skyglow flying south from Seattle to Reno in the same position. Of the roughly 700 mile separation between Reno and Seattle, the skyglow R saw defines a less than 2% area on the whole trip, which can ONLY be Vancouver/Portland. To a person jumping from 10,000 feet on a 700 mile journey that sky glow puts Cooper to within only 14 miles of his target, if Vancouver/Portland was his target. (3) Cooper was able to identify cities from the air - there is direct evidence of that. Cooper knew where he was, from the air. (4) The fact of overcast and cloud layers is - IRRELEVANT. In fact the clouds might have created an advantage so far as identifying large areas of sky glow representing urban arreas, are concerned. !
Likewise, keep track of the fact that your colleague Galen Cook says that Cooper was timing the flight by burning matches in his match book - so Cooper had a clock according to Cook - match burning.
However, you will continue your narrative because you have no choice. That is the position you have put yourself in! So go back to talking about Cooper's 'psychology' and why he could not see sky glow from an airplane in clouds. Search for something in Thermodynamics, like water runs down hill, to bolster your narrative. West path vs FBI path is irrelevant. It's the place R saw the sky glow that matters. You might concentrate on how Cooper cannot see out of airplanes. Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply? It's your choice .... or your move. Good luck. Try arts & crafts. ;D
:rofl:
Kermit-thanks for that update, really good info.
Georger: I'm in general agreement with your post. I had not considered the matches before, and this is the first I've heard about it, but it does remind me of a survival manual I read once that showed airmen burning cigarettes, and that at the time it was suggested that a cigarette would burn 7 minutes or so (just lit, not smoked) and that someone could use a cigarette as a rudimentary timer. I tried it once on a firecracker set up and it worked as a delay. I can't picture a time though that Cooper had cigarettes lit from Seattle to Portland though. Maybe.
Robert99-We've "argued" this one before. I believe leaving Seattle, heading south towards Portland with flaps at 15 degrees and landing gear down, that Cooper would know the general speed of the plane, and he would have had some idea of the winds, and if he was an experienced flyer, then he could have had some general idea of his location aided by the fact that there are no lights south of Tacoma until he gets to Portland. I was not in the plane, but I have to imagine he knew when he was over the cities. Does this put him in an exact spot? No. Does it mean he knew where he was? No, but it could mean that he thought he knew where he was. If his plan was to jump just before Portland, then he only needed to have some basic timing and knowledge of the speed/wind, etc. This was not a long trip. Air speed vs ground speed with winds figured in is just not a whole lot of variance over 130 miles, so if he knew air speed, he should have had a general idea of where he was. Even if it was within 20 miles, it may have given him the advantage he needed to start his escape. At some point in his descent he should have been able to get some idea of his location while under the canopy.
Fcastle866, What is your basis for assuming that Cooper was an "experienced flyer"? There are plenty of lights south of Tacoma although the glow from them might not have been making it through the several cloud layers and overcast that were under the airliner that night.
Based on the information that was available to Cooper, what is your estimate of the true airspeed, winds aloft speed and direction, and ground speed of the airliner, plus the flight path of the airliner?
If under canopy, I doubt if Cooper could see much of anything until he was within a few hundred feet of the ground. It really was a "dark and stormy night".
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
Not necessarily, depending on factors. I think that could be way too wide a range. It's said Cooper knew the area from the air. How familiar was he with the area? Was he an experienced jumper (spotting)? How thick/thin were the clouds under them, how defined was the glow? I once spotted a load through clouds from 12500 AGL and all I could see was a familiar freeway offramp that was like 3-5 miles away. We came through the clouds directly over the dz. But I was experienced at spotting and knew the area well. The point is that if Cooper was familiar enough with the area and knew which side of the 'glow' he was on, he might well have had a fairly defined idea of where he was.
Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply?
Huh? I've been spotting ground references from flying airplanes for over forty years, and that's a new one on me.
Did you spot that 12,500 foot jump through an overcast and several cloud layers on a dark and rainy night? As quoted by Kermit, Rataczak said that they could only see the glow of the light through the clouds and could not see the lights themselves.
All indications of where Cooper wanted to jump is that he wanted to do so soon after takeoff and just south of Seattle.
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
No! I think you miss the POINT. Actually two or three or four points. (1) R saw the GLOW of Portland/Vancouver. That is his answer. (2) There is no other skyglow flying south from Seattle to Reno in the same position. Of the roughly 700 mile separation between Reno and Seattle, the skyglow R saw defines a less than 2% area on the whole trip, which can ONLY be Vancouver/Portland. To a person jumping from 10,000 feet on a 700 mile journey that sky glow puts Cooper to within only 14 miles of his target, if Vancouver/Portland was his target. (3) Cooper was able to identify cities from the air - there is direct evidence of that. Cooper knew where he was, from the air. (4) The fact of overcast and cloud layers is - IRRELEVANT. In fact the clouds might have created an advantage so far as identifying large areas of sky glow representing urban arreas, are concerned. !
Likewise, keep track of the fact that your colleague Galen Cook says that Cooper was timing the flight by burning matches in his match book - so Cooper had a clock according to Cook - match burning.
However, you will continue your narrative because you have no choice. That is the position you have put yourself in! So go back to talking about Cooper's 'psychology' and why he could not see sky glow from an airplane in clouds. Search for something in Thermodynamics, like water runs down hill, to bolster your narrative. West path vs FBI path is irrelevant. It's the place R saw the sky glow that matters. You might concentrate on how Cooper cannot see out of airplanes. Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply? It's your choice .... or your move. Good luck. Try arts & crafts. ;D
:rofl:
The above post is just more nonsense!
So an overcast and several cloud layers make it easier for the airliner to identify the Portland/Vancouver area than a cloud less evening?
Comment removed...
-
....
...Tom Kaye keeps saying the money was probably deposited on Tina Bar as early as 1971 ... by some scenario Tom has yet to lay out ?
At the 2011 Symposium TK speculated that the money was deposited by a guilt-stricken driver who had unwittingly given DB Cooper a ride hitch-hiking. Only after getting the 6K did the fellow feel remorse, burying it at T-Bar to save his immortal soul, etc...
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
No! I think you miss the POINT. Actually two or three or four points. (1) R saw the GLOW of Portland/Vancouver. That is his answer. (2) There is no other skyglow flying south from Seattle to Reno in the same position. Of the roughly 700 mile separation between Reno and Seattle, the skyglow R saw defines a less than 2% area on the whole trip, which can ONLY be Vancouver/Portland. To a person jumping from 10,000 feet on a 700 mile journey that sky glow puts Cooper to within only 14 miles of his target, if Vancouver/Portland was his target. (3) Cooper was able to identify cities from the air - there is direct evidence of that. Cooper knew where he was, from the air. (4) The fact of overcast and cloud layers is - IRRELEVANT. In fact the clouds might have created an advantage so far as identifying large areas of sky glow representing urban arreas, are concerned. !
Likewise, keep track of the fact that your colleague Galen Cook says that Cooper was timing the flight by burning matches in his match book - so Cooper had a clock according to Cook - match burning.
However, you will continue your narrative because you have no choice. That is the position you have put yourself in! So go back to talking about Cooper's 'psychology' and why he could not see sky glow from an airplane in clouds. Search for something in Thermodynamics, like water runs down hill, to bolster your narrative. West path vs FBI path is irrelevant. It's the place R saw the sky glow that matters. You might concentrate on how Cooper cannot see out of airplanes. Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply? It's your choice .... or your move. Good luck. Try arts & crafts. ;D
:rofl:
Kermit-thanks for that update, really good info.
Georger: I'm in general agreement with your post. I had not considered the matches before, and this is the first I've heard about it, but it does remind me of a survival manual I read once that showed airmen burning cigarettes, and that at the time it was suggested that a cigarette would burn 7 minutes or so (just lit, not smoked) and that someone could use a cigarette as a rudimentary timer. I tried it once on a firecracker set up and it worked as a delay. I can't picture a time though that Cooper had cigarettes lit from Seattle to Portland though. Maybe.
Robert99-We've "argued" this one before. I believe leaving Seattle, heading south towards Portland with flaps at 15 degrees and landing gear down, that Cooper would know the general speed of the plane, and he would have had some idea of the winds, and if he was an experienced flyer, then he could have had some general idea of his location aided by the fact that there are no lights south of Tacoma until he gets to Portland. I was not in the plane, but I have to imagine he knew when he was over the cities. Does this put him in an exact spot? No. Does it mean he knew where he was? No, but it could mean that he thought he knew where he was. If his plan was to jump just before Portland, then he only needed to have some basic timing and knowledge of the speed/wind, etc. This was not a long trip. Air speed vs ground speed with winds figured in is just not a whole lot of variance over 130 miles, so if he knew air speed, he should have had a general idea of where he was. Even if it was within 20 miles, it may have given him the advantage he needed to start his escape. At some point in his descent he should have been able to get some idea of his location while under the canopy.
Fcastle866, What is your basis for assuming that Cooper was an "experienced flyer"? There are plenty of lights south of Tacoma although the glow from them might not have been making it through the several cloud layers and overcast that were under the airliner that night.
Based on the information that was available to Cooper, what is your estimate of the true airspeed, winds aloft speed and direction, and ground speed of the airliner, plus the flight path of the airliner?
If under canopy, I doubt if Cooper could see much of anything until he was within a few hundred feet of the ground. It really was a "dark and stormy night".
Robert: Is it generally safe to say that ground speed is almost the same as air speed if there are no winds? If so, then Cooper had to know a general air speed given the flap configuration, and landing gear being down. We do know from the 302's that he had to tell the pilots to slow the plane down before he jumped, so he may have thought the plane was going slower than it actually was. There is no way to know for sure if Cooper had flying experience, but my opinion and many others is that he did have flight experience. Some think he had a lot, some not a lot. I'm of the belief that he was at least comfortable in the air.
I think he "winged it" on a lot of things, and luck was in his favor. Luck being preparation meeting opportunity. I hypothesize that Cooper planned for a best case scenario of knowing the time/distance/general winds, and the direction, as well as having a plan to jump before Portland, whether that was right after the plane took off or before it hit the Oregon border.
One big piece for me is the turn that V23 takes on the flight path. If he knew that the plane might take V23, then he would know to look or listen for a major turn north of Vancouver. The placard find lends some credence to this.
If it were me and I wanted to hit an exact spot (within a mile or two), I would have used a radio and pulled late. But we don't know if Cooper did either of these things. I still believe that one probable scenario is that Cooper planned using the distance and time, knowing that the longest he'd be in the air would be around 40 minutes, and the least around 35 minutes. He knew the general area where he would land, and planned for that. I totally concede that the had the plane taken off over the ocean or flew off course that Cooper's plan would have changed dramatically, just as it would have if the plane never landed in Seattle, or the snipers got him, or someone on the plane. A lot of things went his way that day from getting his seat to getting away.
I have not jumped at night in badly overcast weather, so I can't be sure what he would see while under canopy. But I think he would have seen something useful. I'll defer to 377 and others like yourself for commentary.
What lights would he see south of Tacoma? Lake Merwin Dam, Fort Lewis, an airport beacon. Etc. Could he not have planned to use these as landmarks?
-
If there was ever a case that begged for more lab work and closer inspection - this is one of those. But it may be too late.
Likewise so many unanswered questions in general. Several weird coincidences; Tina the gospel advocate vs a hijacker! I guess you never know who you are going to run into on a hijacking! Tina with Bible and what appears to be a wrist watch - time piece mandatory for all crew? Not one word in the transcripts of Cooper asking Tina, 'what time is it?'. And yet he bails before too much time has run out almost guaranteeing he is still somewhere in Washington-Oregon, based on time alone.
That Bible and wrist watch may be two central players in the Cooper hijacking.
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
Hopefully, that puts that point to rest. Basically, this means that Cooper could not have known exactly (or to within 20 or 30 miles) where he was when he jumped.
No! I think you miss the POINT. Actually two or three or four points. (1) R saw the GLOW of Portland/Vancouver. That is his answer. (2) There is no other skyglow flying south from Seattle to Reno in the same position. Of the roughly 700 mile separation between Reno and Seattle, the skyglow R saw defines a less than 2% area on the whole trip, which can ONLY be Vancouver/Portland. To a person jumping from 10,000 feet on a 700 mile journey that sky glow puts Cooper to within only 14 miles of his target, if Vancouver/Portland was his target. (3) Cooper was able to identify cities from the air - there is direct evidence of that. Cooper knew where he was, from the air. (4) The fact of overcast and cloud layers is - IRRELEVANT. In fact the clouds might have created an advantage so far as identifying large areas of sky glow representing urban arreas, are concerned. !
Likewise, keep track of the fact that your colleague Galen Cook says that Cooper was timing the flight by burning matches in his match book - so Cooper had a clock according to Cook - match burning.
However, you will continue your narrative because you have no choice. That is the position you have put yourself in! So go back to talking about Cooper's 'psychology' and why he could not see sky glow from an airplane in clouds. Search for something in Thermodynamics, like water runs down hill, to bolster your narrative. West path vs FBI path is irrelevant. It's the place R saw the sky glow that matters. You might concentrate on how Cooper cannot see out of airplanes. Blevins claim optical physics changes in the cabins of airplanes might apply? It's your choice .... or your move. Good luck. Try arts & crafts. ;D
:rofl:
The above post is just more nonsense!
So an overcast and several cloud layers make it easier for the airliner to identify the Portland/Vancouver area than a cloud less evening?
Georger, you definitely need an immediate intervention. Get together with your shrink fast!
OK - stick to your script. So far its all you have. Its sad but nothing anyone can do about it.
-
If it were me and I wanted to hit an exact spot (within a mile or two)
You need up to date info from the cockpit to make a jump is that small of an area. McCoy was like a co-pilot getting information on a constant basis. you need to know exactly where you are prior to jumping..McNally also went into the cockpit.
-
Fcastle, if you listen to the podcast with McNally he goes through the whole hijacking. including the freefall spin, losing the money. what he could see during his decent and a hard landing..his story didn't change from a podcast a couple years ago..it gives an excellent view into the criminal mind. he had the co-pilot open the backdoor. both were worried of being sucked out the back.
The podcast was really well produced. this was why he wouldn't let me quote or say anything publicly he told me until it was released.
-
More from McNaly sent to me back in may about the chutes..
The reserve chute: easy to clip on but needed help with the harness. Never put on a harness before that. Told AA I wanted 5 parachutes & 2 harnesses; I expected back chutes & front too. When I saw they delivered only reserve chutes, I looked at my watch & determined that I didn't have time to demand back chutes !!!! I was pissed & knew they were trying to kill me. Time was up, I had to go with it. I asked AA to send in somebody to show me how to put on a harness. A dude came on & I could see that he didn't know what he was doing so I told him to get off the plane !!!! I was right---he was an FBI agent sent aboard to stop me. As it was, I kept him 15' from me to demonstrate how to do the harness. I was able to have the 4 stewardesses help me get the harness on. Gave those girls $ 2,000 in tips after they said they'd keep it. Yeah, we won't turn it in. They lied !!!! When I learned that I was pissed !!!!
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
The co-pilot's response makes sense, given the facts. Fact-1 is there was a considerable dark space between SEA and the next center of light pollution, Portland-Vancouver. This gives ample time for the pilot's eyes to dark adapt so they are going to be dark-adapted and sensitive to light by the time Portland-Vancouver appears ahead.
Fact-2 NOAA/NASA skyglow chart for 1970 north-west region. This was presented once before. An estimate of the sky glow ahead they might have seen - note from the NOAA chart that the sky glow area around Portland-Vancouver is well defined in 1970. Thus, Rataczak's statement makes sense given the facts in play. If R's observation was made around 8:05, Cooper bails some 10-12 minutes later when the light glow of Portland is even closer.
-
They would have to be close to Portland to make any ground detection..8:05 is way out of the area to see lights with heavy cloud cover..
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG0fTKAqZ5g
-
Thanks, Shut. I loved seeing the Aurora Borealis from ABOVE. Never thought about what that might look like.
-
They would have to be close to Portland to make any ground detection..8:05 is way out of the area to see lights with heavy cloud cover..
The pilots probably had complete eye dark adaption by the time they took off from Seattle at 7:36 PM PST. According to the FBI map, at 8:05 PM PST the airliner would have been 40 statute miles northwest of Portland International Airport and in the Kelso area.
The cockpit lights of aircraft in the 1971 time frame, and earlier, were designed to facilitate eye dark adaption by the use of red lighting and luminous paint on the instruments. This is not as important in the modern day aircraft.
Kermit's quote of Rataczak indicates that in addition to the several cloud layers and overcast ("undercast") below the airliner, there were also clouds and an overcast above the airliner and that would eliminate even star light. Consequently, the airliner would have to rely only on the aircraft instrumentation with nothing but "glow" from some urban areas being visible as they passed.
-
Does anyone have a copy of the 302s/memos that indicate the FBI revised their jump and LZ sites? Orchards and Hochinson, from Battleground and Amboy.
I can't find my copies. Thanks.
-
So if Rataczak is to be believed, 305 was north of the metro Portland area when Cooper jumped. Therefore, one can logically conclude that Cooper did not land in the Columbia River south of Tena Bar. After all, jumping near PDX is in the middle of the Portland metro area.
All of that said, how does the money arrive at Tena Bar if the FBI Flight Path is correct, and Cooper did not land in the Columbia River?
The only logical conclusion would be that he walked.
Well, there are a few major flaws with this scenario.
1) It entails Cooper travelling a good 30 to 40 miles that evening.
2) It necessitates Cooper walking through populated areas carrying a large white 20 lbs. bag of cash.
3) Even if he utilized the railroad tracks, he would have to literally travel through downtown Vancouver before either continuing north up to Ridgefield, where he would then have to cross over Lake River via the River "S" Bridge before walking another 8 miles south to Tena Bar...or he would have to walk 8 miles north up to Tena Bar from the Vancouver railroad yard, all the while avoiding cars and people while carrying the aforementioned 20 lbs of ransom before walking the same 8 miles back to Vancouver to leave the area.
BZZZZZZ.
None of that makes any sense.
What does make sense is that the jet flew the Western Flight Path, he jumped near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, he walked south via the only road out of the area which coincidentally brought him to Tena Bar, he temporarily buried the ransom before he walked into town, and the rest is history.
By the way, regarding the testimony of some who claim that they heard 305 fly right over their homes...perhaps what they actually heard were the F-106s which were--you guessed it--tracking 305 from a position several miles east of the airliner.
-
They would have to be close to Portland to make any ground detection..8:05 is way out of the area to see lights with heavy cloud cover..
Does your simulator adjust for sky glow from cities and cloud cover under and over the plane ?
-
Not to be used as evidence with actual glow from cities under cloud coverage..most cloud coverage washes all light out from the ground.
-
So if Rataczak is to be believed, 305 was north of the metro Portland area when Cooper jumped. Therefore, one can logically conclude that Cooper did not land in the Columbia River south of Tena Bar. After all, jumping near PDX is in the middle of the Portland metro area.
All of that said, how does the money arrive at Tena Bar if the FBI Flight Path is correct, and Cooper did not land in the Columbia River?
The only logical conclusion would be that he walked.
Well, there are a few major flaws with this scenario.
1) It entails Cooper travelling a good 30 to 40 miles that evening.
2) It necessitates Cooper walking through populated areas carrying a large white 20 lbs. bag of cash.
3) Even if he utilized the railroad tracks, he would have to literally travel through downtown Vancouver before either continuing north up to Ridgefield, where he would then have to cross over Lake River via the River "S" Bridge before walking another 8 miles south to Tena Bar...or he would have to walk 8 miles north up to Tena Bar from the Vancouver railroad yard, all the while avoiding cars and people while carrying the aforementioned 20 lbs of ransom before walking the same 8 miles back to Vancouver to leave the area.
BZZZZZZ.
None of that makes any sense.
What does make sense is that the jet flew the Western Flight Path, he jumped near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, he walked south via the only road out of the area which coincidentally brought him to Tena Bar, he temporarily buried the ransom before he walked into town, and the rest is history.
By the way, regarding the testimony of some who claim that they heard 305 fly right over their homes...perhaps what they actually heard were the F-106s which were--you guessed it--tracking 305 from a position several miles east of the airliner.
R's statement says nothing about when Cooper jumped. R's statement is: “ No, we did not see those lights (of Vancouver-Portland) that night; only their glow. "
My guess is, Carr's statement about Rataczak was pulled from some 302 Carr found, which interprets Rataczak's earlier testimony to the FBI .... ?
-
A few posters have been aware I’ve contacted William Rataczak last August. I received a very nice response on Sept 11, 2019. I asked him only one question “ Did you see the lights of Portland/Vancouver on flight 305 ? “.
His direct answer was “ No, we did not see those lights that night; only their glow. The reason is that we were flying in heavy over and undercast skies. “ Since I was born about 25 miles from his present home, we exchanged a number of familiarities.
I’d like to add my thoughts regarding William Rataczak. Nov 24, 1971 is only one day in his incredible life’s accomplishments! I have never met him but it would be a great honor if I ever had the opportunity. He has accomplished so much more in serving his community and is widely admired for his deeds.
-
Tell us more, Kerm.
-
Fcastle, if you listen to the podcast with McNally he goes through the whole hijacking. including the freefall spin, losing the money. what he could see during his decent and a hard landing..his story didn't change from a podcast a couple years ago..it gives an excellent view into the criminal mind. he had the co-pilot open the backdoor. both were worried of being sucked out the back.
The podcast was really well produced. this was why he wouldn't let me quote or say anything publicly he told me until it was released.
Shutter-I'll definitely check out the McNally podcast. Thanks.
-
So if Rataczak is to be believed, 305 was north of the metro Portland area when Cooper jumped. Therefore, one can logically conclude that Cooper did not land in the Columbia River south of Tena Bar. After all, jumping near PDX is in the middle of the Portland metro area.
All of that said, how does the money arrive at Tena Bar if the FBI Flight Path is correct, and Cooper did not land in the Columbia River?
The only logical conclusion would be that he walked.
Well, there are a few major flaws with this scenario.
1) It entails Cooper travelling a good 30 to 40 miles that evening.
2) It necessitates Cooper walking through populated areas carrying a large white 20 lbs. bag of cash.
3) Even if he utilized the railroad tracks, he would have to literally travel through downtown Vancouver before either continuing north up to Ridgefield, where he would then have to cross over Lake River via the River "S" Bridge before walking another 8 miles south to Tena Bar...or he would have to walk 8 miles north up to Tena Bar from the Vancouver railroad yard, all the while avoiding cars and people while carrying the aforementioned 20 lbs of ransom before walking the same 8 miles back to Vancouver to leave the area.
BZZZZZZ.
None of that makes any sense.
What does make sense is that the jet flew the Western Flight Path, he jumped near the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, he walked south via the only road out of the area which coincidentally brought him to Tena Bar, he temporarily buried the ransom before he walked into town, and the rest is history.
By the way, regarding the testimony of some who claim that they heard 305 fly right over their homes...perhaps what they actually heard were the F-106s which were--you guessed it--tracking 305 from a position several miles east of the airliner.
The easy answer to your question is that he did, in fact, land in the Columbia River.
The central flight path is accurate, but Cooper jumped just south of Battle Ground, splashed own in the river, and the money traveled along the river and ended up on Tena Bar.
I think it’s much more logical to assume that the flight path was accurate and the jump was a few miles south, than to suggest that the jump spot was accurate but the flight path was off by dozens of miles.
-
But can you prove the central flight path is accurate?
-
The easy answer to your question is that he did, in fact, land in the Columbia River.
The central flight path is accurate, but Cooper jumped just south of Battle Ground, splashed own in the river, and the money traveled along the river and ended up on Tena Bar.
Ah, my Dear Chaucer, can you explain how DBC jumped "just south of Battleground" and then ended up in the Columbia? Those of us 'blowing in the wind' from the SW with gusts to 15 mph, are a-wonderin'.
-
But can you prove the central flight path is accurate?
Not anymore than you can prove it isn’t.
If things in this case were easily provable, none of us would be here! Lol
-
Ah, that is why I speak - and write - with so much relativistic wordage. You ain't never gonna catch me saying, "the central flight path is accurate."
Rather, I say things like:
1. The central flight path is accurate, according to the FBI.
2. The CFP is accurate, according to Tom Kaye in his presentation at the 2011 Symposium, even though Cliff Ammerman, the ATC handling Flight 305 at the time of the jump, has stated to several researchers that Cooper was in the westernmost part of Victor-23 when he exited his aircraft.
3. The CFP is considered accurate by many researchers despite the lack of any corroboration, as not even radar transcripts from the FAA and SAGE have ever been made public. Further, Captain Scott has publically stated that 305 was over Woodland, WA and flew west of Portland in the time frame when Cooper jumped.
Etc.
It's not a complaint, Chauce. Only a request for all to check their absolute-ness at the Door to Cooper World before entering...
-
I apologize if I came off as an absolutist. I’m quite the opposite. You’re quite right. I should have chosen my words better. I’m a college professor and professional researcher. I deal in logic, reason, and probability - none of which are absolute.
Yes, I think the central flight path favored by the FBI is the most likely one. I think most would agree including many with greater knowledge about the case than myself. Further, I think the jump spot is very debatable. The pressure bump is a good clue, but I think he could have jumped anywhere from Ariel to the Portland airport.
My personal opinion is that the most likely explanation for the money ending up on Tena Bar is that it ended up there accidentally rather than intentionally placed. It was likely in the water prior to burial in the sand. If the money was in the water, then Cooper was most likely in the water as well since he was the last one seen with the money. If Cooper was in the water, then he likely landed in there moments after he jumped. An unexpected, cold water landing, at night, without proper equipment, with several extra pounds strapped to you, provides a low probability of survival.
Certainly, you can find more elaborate explanations, but then you begin slowly cutting your own wrists with Occam’s Razor.
-
But can you prove the central flight path is accurate?
What can you PROVE? Anything?
-
I apologize if I came off as an absolutist. I’m quite the opposite. You’re quite right. I should have chosen my words better. I’m a college professor and professional researcher. I deal in logic, reason, and probability - none of which are absolute.
Yes, I think the central flight path favored by the FBI is the most likely one. I think most would agree including many with greater knowledge about the case than myself. Further, I think the jump spot is very debatable. The pressure bump is a good clue, but I think he could have jumped anywhere from Ariel to the Portland airport.
My personal opinion is that the most likely explanation for the money ending up on Tena Bar is that it ended up there accidentally rather than intentionally placed. It was likely in the water prior to burial in the sand. If the money was in the water, then Cooper was most likely in the water as well since he was the last one seen with the money. If Cooper was in the water, then he likely landed in there moments after he jumped. An unexpected, cold water landing, at night, without proper equipment, with several extra pounds strapped to you, provides a low probability of survival.
Certainly, you can find more elaborate explanations, but then you begin slowly cutting your own wrists with Occam’s Razor.
Your theory is very close to Tosaw's conclusion.
My personal opinion is that the most likely explanation for the money ending up on Tena Bar is that it ended up there accidentally rather than intentionally placed.
That is a rational response and just maybe the only 'best guess' possible. One key is when did Rataczak actually report Cooper has jumped ... all evidence points to later than 8:10. That central issue is one of the reasons Carr came to DZ, to open that issue up for debate/opinion. Then the debate strayed because you can never keep 'great egos' focusing for very long on anything at internet forums. So Carr's central issue got swept aside by things like: was Tina a zombie from an MKULTRA church? So Carr's central issue got swept aside and still lingers after all these years. Post Colbert, post Cook/Smith, post EU, post R99, post RMB, etc the issue is still here waiting to be addressed. It was the single issue that kept Sluggo at DZ; when the issue wilted Sluggo left. When did Cooper bail? Where was the plane at that time.
So your theory is very much at the center of the whole Cooper debate. Congrats on bringing it back! :bravo:
-
Thanks, georger. That’s high praise coming from you.
I think you have to begin with the Tena Bar find and work backwards. How did it end up there? It was either intentionally placed there or ended up there by chance. If it was intentionally placed there, then you have to explain how and why Cooper jumped where most think he did and then travel all the way to Tena Bar to bury the money. And for what purpose? To “throw off the feds”? He’d already gotten away with it. Why provide the feds more evidence? And if you did want to plant evidence to throw off the feds, then why use a nice portion of the money you just risked your life to acquire? You simply can’t square a jump spot along the FBI flight path and the money ending up on Tena Bar without some very low probability circumstances taking place.
Yes, you could move the flight path dozens of miles west, but isn’t easier and more likely to just assume that Cooper jumped three or four minutes later than is guessed?
If you start with Tena Bar and work back, keeping your eye on all the known evidence about the money, then I think it becomes clear that the most likely scenario is that Cooper jumped a little farther south than believed and splashed down in the Columbia, losing the money and probably his life in the process. Outside of that, you become mired in unlikely and, in some cases, outlandish theories to reconcile an Ariel/Hockinson drop zone and the Tena Bar money find.
I’m certainly open to hearing evidence that contradicts my theory.
-
Thanks, georger. That’s high praise coming from you.
I think you have to begin with the Tena Bar find and work backwards. How did it end up there? It was either intentionally placed there or ended up there by chance. If it was intentionally placed there, then you have to explain how and why Cooper jumped where most think he did and then travel all the way to Tena Bar to bury the money. And for what purpose? To “throw off the feds”? He’d already gotten away with it. Why provide the feds more evidence? And if you did want to plant evidence to throw off the feds, then why use a nice portion of the money you just risked your life to acquire? You simply can’t square a jump spot along the FBI flight path and the money ending up on Tena Bar without some very low probability circumstances taking place.
Yes, you could move the flight path dozens of miles west, but isn’t easier and more likely to just assume that Cooper jumped three or four minutes later than is guessed?
If you start with Tena Bar and work back, keeping your eye on all the known evidence about the money, then I think it becomes clear that the most likely scenario is that Cooper jumped a little farther south than believed and splashed down in the Columbia, losing the money and probably his life in the process. Outside of that, you become mired in unlikely and, in some cases, outlandish theories to reconcile an Ariel/Hockinson drop zone and the Tena Bar money find.
I’m certainly open to hearing evidence that contradicts my theory.
At DZ we broke this into pieces considering each an independent question with no known causal connection between the two: (a) flight path bail time/place, (b) TBar money on its own. Kaye was hired, so to speak, to explore the money. Kaye ended up exploring other forensic issues also. Kaye came to the conclusion the money had been buried on Tina Bar in 1971 - but he never explained why he concluded that. I still want to know why he thinks that.
Sluggo and others worked the flight path/bail point issue. After talking to many people Sluggo decided the time Rataczak had actually called in the oscillations/we think he has jumped 'call', the actual call was after 8:10pm. Perhaps even as late as 8:13. A subsequent interview of Anderson not only confirmed Sluggo's suspicions but expanded it further! Anderson added the fact there had been actual discussion between the pilots and engineer about whether the crew should call in and report what was happening! According to Anderson, Rataczak settled the matter by simply calling in to the company and reporting what had happened. Carr reports Rataczak eventually said something like: 'the oscillations and bump occurred five to ten minutes after our last contact with Cooper at 8:05, and we could see the lights of Portland coming up...'. Sluggo decided there was enough latitude in when and where these events had happened, that Cooper probably had bailed later than believed somewhere near Orchards ... and that is where the issue was left at Dropzone (I dont remember the year without looking it up).
Tosaw also interviewed Rataczak and came to a conclusion similar to Sluggo's, but Tosaw stretched it all the way to the Columbia itself.
Col. Dawson at McChord offered a scenario similar to Tosaw's except that Dawson places Cooper's landing closer to Hayden Island.
If it can be shown that Cooper landed somewhere in the Columbia Basin then some water involved conveyance of the money to Tena Bar, is logical. But I prefer to keep the two issues separated until some data actually links them - perhaps via the dredging in 1974. I still want to know why Tom thinks the money was on Tina Bar in 1971! Maybe Tom knows something or thinks he knows something that everyone else is missing ?
Thanks.
-
Thanks, georger. That’s high praise coming from you.
I think you have to begin with the Tena Bar find and work backwards. How did it end up there? It was either intentionally placed there or ended up there by chance. If it was intentionally placed there, then you have to explain how and why Cooper jumped where most think he did and then travel all the way to Tena Bar to bury the money. And for what purpose? To “throw off the feds”? He’d already gotten away with it. Why provide the feds more evidence? And if you did want to plant evidence to throw off the feds, then why use a nice portion of the money you just risked your life to acquire? You simply can’t square a jump spot along the FBI flight path and the money ending up on Tena Bar without some very low probability circumstances taking place.
Yes, you could move the flight path dozens of miles west, but isn’t easier and more likely to just assume that Cooper jumped three or four minutes later than is guessed?
If you start with Tena Bar and work back, keeping your eye on all the known evidence about the money, then I think it becomes clear that the most likely scenario is that Cooper jumped a little farther south than believed and splashed down in the Columbia, losing the money and probably his life in the process. Outside of that, you become mired in unlikely and, in some cases, outlandish theories to reconcile an Ariel/Hockinson drop zone and the Tena Bar money find.
I’m certainly open to hearing evidence that contradicts my theory.
Chaucer, there is plenty of evidence to contradict your theory both on this site and DropZone. In a post just above, Bruce Smith writes that Captain Scott said (probably to his daughter) that the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side. If the airliner flew essentially direct from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, it would pass almost directly overhead of Tina Bar. In fact, it would have flown straight down the Columbia River for about 10 miles since the river runs from the south to the north at Tina Bar.
The Washugal wash down theory has been completely disproven and the location of the placard that separated from the airliner strongly supports what is currently referred to as the Western Flight Path.
-
Thanks, georger. That’s high praise coming from you.
I think you have to begin with the Tena Bar find and work backwards. How did it end up there? It was either intentionally placed there or ended up there by chance. If it was intentionally placed there, then you have to explain how and why Cooper jumped where most think he did and then travel all the way to Tena Bar to bury the money. And for what purpose? To “throw off the feds”? He’d already gotten away with it. Why provide the feds more evidence? And if you did want to plant evidence to throw off the feds, then why use a nice portion of the money you just risked your life to acquire? You simply can’t square a jump spot along the FBI flight path and the money ending up on Tena Bar without some very low probability circumstances taking place.
Yes, you could move the flight path dozens of miles west, but isn’t easier and more likely to just assume that Cooper jumped three or four minutes later than is guessed?
If you start with Tena Bar and work back, keeping your eye on all the known evidence about the money, then I think it becomes clear that the most likely scenario is that Cooper jumped a little farther south than believed and splashed down in the Columbia, losing the money and probably his life in the process. Outside of that, you become mired in unlikely and, in some cases, outlandish theories to reconcile an Ariel/Hockinson drop zone and the Tena Bar money find.
I’m certainly open to hearing evidence that contradicts my theory.
Chaucer, there is plenty of evidence to contradict your theory both on this site and DropZone. In a post just above, Bruce Smith writes that Captain Scott said (probably to his daughter) that the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side. If the airliner flew essentially direct from the Malay Intersection to the Canby Intersection, it would pass almost directly overhead of Tina Bar. In fact, it would have flown straight down the Columbia River for about 10 miles since the river runs from the south to the north at Tina Bar.
The Washugal wash down theory has been completely disproven and the location of the placard that separated from the airliner strongly supports what is currently referred to as the Western Flight Path.
Scott's daughter? We have been over that EU canard before!
Scott's wife was interviewed: "Bill was convinced Cooper died in the leap", said Frances Scott. "He felt he jumped into Lake Merwin (Cowlitz County) and got tangled up in dead trees and died," she said.
So, Scott's daughter and Scott's wife, and Scott .... all need to consult and agree on something! ;)
-
I’m not sure that you can label something someone may have said to a third party off the record “evidence”.
I never said anything about the Washougal. I think the money went from the plane to the Columbia via Cooper. Also, I think the location of the placard supports the central flight path rather than a western one. Can you explain how its location supports a western one?
Also, you said that lots of evidence contradicts my theory, but you only mentioned two, one of which isn’t really evidence. Can you provide more please?
-
You're in it now, Chaucer! Welcome.
BTW, what do you teach? English Lit?
-
Georger, a few posts back you asked me what I've "proven." We all know the answer to that question - nothing. It ain't my job. I'm a storyteller. My job is to tell a good story about what everybody else is proving, or trying to, at least.
As for the story unfolding before us at the moment, I find it fascinating that the CFP has so much momentum. How come so few believe Cliff Ammerman?
Further, how come the FBI has never interviewed him? Imagine, the guy actually handling the aircraft at the time of the jump had never been interviewed by anyone - not even journalists - until 2019 when Eric Ulis did so. I find that incredible.
-
G, Captain Scott claimed the Woodland, WA/west of Portland flight path to a number of people. Most famously he talked about it at Himmelsbach's retirement party in 1980, as reported by What's His Name for the Seattle Times, I believe. Also included in Calame and Rhodes' book. Obviously, he also told Catherine, who told us all at the 2019 CooperCon. She was an absolute joy - a wonderful person to spend time with - teaching polo to Midshipmen at the US Naval Academy? Whew...
-
Scott's daughter? We have been over that EU canard before!
Scott's wife was interviewed: "Bill was convinced Cooper died in the leap", said Frances Scott. "He felt he jumped into Lake Merwin (Cowlitz County) and got tangled up in dead trees and died," she said.
So, Scott's daughter and Scott's wife, and Scott .... all need to consult and agree on something! ;)
Family confusion is quite a phenomenon, eh, G. the Scott imbroglio reminds me of the Ingram Mishagasum on Tina Bar.
Yup, Capt. Billy said a lot of strange things about DBC. I wonder why. I strongly suspect that he was the kind of guy who would say things to make people think he agreed with them. A people pleaser, if you will. He strikes me as a man committed to not making waves, and as a company man, he certainly didn't want his airlines to be embroiled in on-going disputes. Bad for ticket sales, etc...
Remember, he didn't handle unexpected drama very well. He almost lost control of the aircraft when he learned his plane was being hijacked, as Rataczak relayed to me. R had to help Scotty pull it together.
-
Also, I think the location of the placard supports the central flight path rather than a western one. Can you explain how its location supports a western one?
Also, you said that lots of evidence contradicts my theory, but you only mentioned two, one of which isn’t really evidence. Can you provide more please?
Let's remember my earlier post referenced the remarks from Rataczak who stated they could see the glow of Portland. I believe Rataczak may have also been credited earlier with saying they--meaning 305--weren't over Portland but they could see the glow of Portland ahead--or words to that effect.
As noted in my earlier post, if this is accurate then the jet could not have been over the Columbia River--utilizing the FBI Flight Path--because that would put the jet very near PDX--which is in the middle of the metro area--when DBC jumped.
Also, the placard find absolutely proves the FBI Flight Path is incorrect at that point because of the wind drift analysis which has been discussed at length here in the past. The placard drifted several miles to the northeast after being separated from the airliner at 10K feet.
Now, Captain Scott's testimony regarding the flight path is a little more muddled. Indeed, he did state that he believed they flew over the Woodland area. However, he also stated that he believed that DBC probably died in Lake Merwin.
The problem here is that Scott's remarks are contradictory. However, unless he is very familiar with the region, it's a contradiction that is easy to make without understanding why. Also, consider that Scott's "Lake Merwin" comments were made several years after the money was found on Tena Bar. Needless to say, it is physically impossible for the money to have traveled by natural means from Lake Merwin or the Lewis River upstream eight miles to Tena Bar. Therefore, DBC getting killed in Lake Merwin on 11/24/71 is impossible.
My point concerning Scott is that his recollections about where the jet flew--i.e., over Woodland--are of much greater value than his theories about where, when and how DBC died.
-
Also, I think the location of the placard supports the central flight path rather than a western one. Can you explain how its location supports a western one?
Also, you said that lots of evidence contradicts my theory, but you only mentioned two, one of which isn’t really evidence. Can you provide more please?
Let's remember my earlier post referenced the remarks from Rataczak who stated they could see the glow of Portland. I believe Rataczak may have also been credited earlier with saying they--meaning 305--weren't over Portland but they could see the glow of Portland ahead--or words to that effect.
As noted in my earlier post, if this is accurate then the jet could not have been over the Columbia River--utilizing the FBI Flight Path--because that would put the jet very near PDX--which is in the middle of the metro area--when DBC jumped.
Also, the placard find absolutely proves the FBI Flight Path is incorrect at that point because of the wind drift analysis which has been discussed at length here in the past. The placard drifted several miles to the northeast after being separated from the airliner at 10K feet.
Now, Captain Scott's testimony regarding the flight path is a little more muddled. Indeed, he did state that he believed they flew over the Woodland area. However, he also stated that he believed that DBC probably died in Lake Merwin.
The problem here is that Scott's remarks are contradictory. However, unless he is very familiar with the region, it's a contradiction that is easy to make without understanding why. Also, consider that Scott's "Lake Merwin" comments were made several years after the money was found on Tena Bar. Needless to say, it is physically impossible for the money to have traveled by natural means from Lake Merwin or the Lewis River upstream eight miles to Tena Bar. Therefore, DBC getting killed in Lake Merwin on 11/24/71 is impossible.
My point concerning Scott is that his recollections about where the jet flew--i.e., over Woodland--are of much greater value than his theories about where, when and how DBC died.
You have R's exact words from several sources. Why scramble it all! ? The scramble is yours, not Rataczak's. :)
Rataczak was the one involved in a hijacking in 1971 - not you! Sorry.
-
Scott's daughter? We have been over that EU canard before!
Scott's wife was interviewed: "Bill was convinced Cooper died in the leap", said Frances Scott. "He felt he jumped into Lake Merwin (Cowlitz County) and got tangled up in dead trees and died," she said.
So, Scott's daughter and Scott's wife, and Scott .... all need to consult and agree on something! ;)
Family confusion is quite a phenomenon, eh, G. the Scott imbroglio reminds me of the Ingram Mishagasum on Tina Bar.
Yup, Capt. Billy said a lot of strange things about DBC. I wonder why. I strongly suspect that he was the kind of guy who would say things to make people think he agreed with them. A people pleaser, if you will. He strikes me as a man committed to not making waves, and as a company man, he certainly didn't want his airlines to be embroiled in on-going disputes. Bad for ticket sales, etc...
Remember, he didn't handle unexpected drama very well. He almost lost control of the aircraft when he learned his plane was being hijacked, as Rataczak relayed to me. R had to help Scotty pull it together.
But you missed the real story! R99 now admits there was light coming from Vancouver/Portland. Clouds and black holes and all. It has taken years. GO REPORT IT!
It;s a miracle.
-
I’m not sure that you can label something someone may have said to a third party off the record “evidence”.
I never said anything about the Washougal. I think the money went from the plane to the Columbia via Cooper. Also, I think the location of the placard supports the central flight path rather than a western one. Can you explain how its location supports a western one?
Also, you said that lots of evidence contradicts my theory, but you only mentioned two, one of which isn’t really evidence. Can you provide more please?
Chaucer, welcome to Cooper World. Please list your "evidence" that supports a central flight path. I absolutely would love to know what you have on that point.
All available information indicates that attempts by the T-33 and F-102/F-106s to intercept the airliner were made on the west and southwest sides of Portland.
Georger told me a few years ago that he had interviewed the pilot of the Army National Guard helicopter that FBI Agent Himmelsbach boarded and that that pilot said they flew up to Woodland. But Georger being Georger, he will probably deny making such a claim now.
Himmelsbach wrote in his book that he could see the area where he lived on the southwest side of Portland during the time that the helicopter was flying around.
There is no indication that this helicopter was ever over or east of Portland.
And as EU states in another post earlier today, the placard would have to drift upwind for several miles if the FBI flight path was correct.
-
Scott's daughter? We have been over that EU canard before!
Scott's wife was interviewed: "Bill was convinced Cooper died in the leap", said Frances Scott. "He felt he jumped into Lake Merwin (Cowlitz County) and got tangled up in dead trees and died," she said.
So, Scott's daughter and Scott's wife, and Scott .... all need to consult and agree on something! ;)
Family confusion is quite a phenomenon, eh, G. the Scott imbroglio reminds me of the Ingram Mishagasum on Tina Bar.
Yup, Capt. Billy said a lot of strange things about DBC. I wonder why. I strongly suspect that he was the kind of guy who would say things to make people think he agreed with them. A people pleaser, if you will. He strikes me as a man committed to not making waves, and as a company man, he certainly didn't want his airlines to be embroiled in on-going disputes. Bad for ticket sales, etc...
Remember, he didn't handle unexpected drama very well. He almost lost control of the aircraft when he learned his plane was being hijacked, as Rataczak relayed to me. R had to help Scotty pull it together.
But you missed the real story! R99 now admits there was light coming from Vancouver/Portland. Clouds and black holes and all. It has taken years. GO REPORT IT!
It;s a miracle.
Georger's comment above is an outright lie! I have always stated that the flight crew could see the "glow" of the lights from the Vancouver/Portland area but that they could not see the actual lights. A recent post here by Kermit states that Rataczak made the same statement to him.
-
EU,
We do know that the placard was found southeast of Toutle and east of Headquarters. This is basically along the presumed FBI flight path. I will concede that the placard indicates a flight path that is two or three miles west from the exact center of V 23, but it is certainly within the route’s 8 mile width. It’s not far enough west to place it over Tena Bar several minutes later.
More to the point, to have the FBI flight path be off to the west by 10 to 15 miles would require us to ignore that this was the height of the Cold War, and that the Western Air Defense Sector based at McChord (other than Alaska) was THE eyes and ears of the American military and was on constant look out for unusual air traffic - Soviet nuke bombers first among them. They had the most sophisticated radar in the world at the time. Once those F-106s took pursuit, the military knew EXACTLY where they were and the feds knew EXACTLY where that plane was from the moment it took off from Seattle to the moment it touched down in Reno. Normal planes did just fly around willy nilly with a “general idea” of where they were, and they weren’t just guessing where this special plane was either. The FBI files indicate clearly that they used this military radar data to construct the flight path. The FBI files also list specific towns where the plane pinged radar, and this is exactly along the presumed flight path. Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path.
The technical and physical data along with historical knowledge and common sense overwhelmly support the FBIs flight path regardless of any anecdotal data given after the fact.
That said, a western flight path is the second most logical conclusion to draw based on the Tena Bar money find. It is far more logical than a DZ to the east and then the money magically appearing in the sand at the river’s edge 15 miles west.
-
EU,
We do know that the placard was found southeast of Toutle and east of Headquarters. This is basically along the presumed FBI flight path. I will concede that the placard indicates a flight path that is two or three miles west from the exact center of V 23, but it is certainly within the route’s 8 mile width. It’s not far enough west to place it over Tena Bar several minutes later.
More to the point, to have the FBI flight path be off to the west by 10 to 15 miles would require us to ignore that this was the height of the Cold War, and that the Western Air Defense Sector based at McChord (other than Alaska) was THE eyes and ears of the American military and was on constant look out for unusual air traffic - Soviet nuke bombers first among them. They had the most sophisticated radar in the world at the time. Once those F-106s took pursuit, the military knew EXACTLY where they were and the feds knew EXACTLY where that plane was from the moment it took off from Seattle to the moment it touched down in Reno. Normal planes did just fly around willy nilly with a “general idea” of where they were, and they weren’t just guessing where this special plane was either. The FBI files indicate clearly that they used this military radar data to construct the flight path. The FBI files also list specific towns where the plane pinged radar, and this is exactly along the presumed flight path. Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path.
The technical and physical data along with historical knowledge and common sense overwhelmly support the FBIs flight path regardless of any anecdotal data given after the fact.
That said, a western flight path is the second most logical conclusion to draw based on the Tena Bar money find. It is far more logical than a DZ to the east and then the money magically appearing in the sand at the river’s edge 15 miles west.
Chaucer,
How about amplifying on your claims in the second paragraph above. There are posters on this site who were involved in national defense activities in the 1971 time frame, and that includes me, who are mystified by your remarks.
Your third paragraph is simply not correct.
-
EU,
We do know that the placard was found southeast of Toutle and east of Headquarters. This is basically along the presumed FBI flight path. I will concede that the placard indicates a flight path that is two or three miles west from the exact center of V 23, but it is certainly within the route’s 8 mile width. It’s not far enough west to place it over Tena Bar several minutes later.
More to the point, to have the FBI flight path be off to the west by 10 to 15 miles would require us to ignore that this was the height of the Cold War, and that the Western Air Defense Sector based at McChord (other than Alaska) was THE eyes and ears of the American military and was on constant look out for unusual air traffic - Soviet nuke bombers first among them. They had the most sophisticated radar in the world at the time. Once those F-106s took pursuit, the military knew EXACTLY where they were and the feds knew EXACTLY where that plane was from the moment it took off from Seattle to the moment it touched down in Reno. Normal planes did just fly around willy nilly with a “general idea” of where they were, and they weren’t just guessing where this special plane was either. The FBI files indicate clearly that they used this military radar data to construct the flight path. The FBI files also list specific towns where the plane pinged radar, and this is exactly along the presumed flight path. Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path.
The technical and physical data along with historical knowledge and common sense overwhelmly support the FBIs flight path regardless of any anecdotal data given after the fact.
That said, a western flight path is the second most logical conclusion to draw based on the Tena Bar money find. It is far more logical than a DZ to the east and then the money magically appearing in the sand at the river’s edge 15 miles west.
This is an area where we have to be very careful about what we actually know versus what we think we know.
Specifically, the Air Force was the organization that put together the "FBI Flight Path" a couple of days after the skyjacking. We do not know how it was put together or by whom. That said, an FBI agent references SAGE in the files, however we cannot be certain SAGE was actually used, and even if it was working properly that evening--SAGE had many issues and according to a source via 377 SAGE was NOT working that night as it relates to communication with the F-106s.
Also, the Western Flight Path is only about seven miles west of the FBI Flight Path near the Woodland/Ridgefield area. Moreover, I have discussed this at length with Cliff Ammerman--which will be part of the History Channel show this winter--and there is nothing that can point to a precise location of 305.
Concerning the placard, the mathematical analysis completed indicates a drift of approximately seven miles as I recall. This is very significant. Additionally, factoring in the location of the fiberglass skirt found near Cinnebar, WA this also indicates the FBI Flight Path is off at that point too--albeit to the west.
My version of the Western Flight Path differs slightly from R99's, nonetheless it's quite close. More to the point, I believe 305 took off and continued south to about Eatonville. At this point I believe 305 turned to the southwest and flew directly to the Maylay intersection--not around Toledo as is typically shown--and turned almost due south toward Canby at that point.
This brings the airliner over Woodland and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge during the 8:12 minute. It is in this area that DBC would have jumped and therefore landed. Walking south from this point--using the railroad tracks and Lower River Road--Cooper would end up at Tena Bar.
-
EU,
We do know that the placard was found southeast of Toutle and east of Headquarters. This is basically along the presumed FBI flight path. I will concede that the placard indicates a flight path that is two or three miles west from the exact center of V 23, but it is certainly within the route’s 8 mile width. It’s not far enough west to place it over Tena Bar several minutes later.
More to the point, to have the FBI flight path be off to the west by 10 to 15 miles would require us to ignore that this was the height of the Cold War, and that the Western Air Defense Sector based at McChord (other than Alaska) was THE eyes and ears of the American military and was on constant look out for unusual air traffic - Soviet nuke bombers first among them. They had the most sophisticated radar in the world at the time. Once those F-106s took pursuit, the military knew EXACTLY where they were and the feds knew EXACTLY where that plane was from the moment it took off from Seattle to the moment it touched down in Reno. Normal planes did just fly around willy nilly with a “general idea” of where they were, and they weren’t just guessing where this special plane was either. The FBI files indicate clearly that they used this military radar data to construct the flight path. The FBI files also list specific towns where the plane pinged radar, and this is exactly along the presumed flight path. Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path.
The technical and physical data along with historical knowledge and common sense overwhelmly support the FBIs flight path regardless of any anecdotal data given after the fact.
That said, a western flight path is the second most logical conclusion to draw based on the Tena Bar money find. It is far more logical than a DZ to the east and then the money magically appearing in the sand at the river’s edge 15 miles west.
Chaucer,
How about amplifying on your claims in the second paragraph above. There are posters on this site who were involved in national defense activities in the 1971 time frame, and that includes me, who are mystified by your remarks.
Your third paragraph is simply not correct.
Mr. Blevins,
Can you point out specifically what is not accurate in my second paragraph?
Also, you said my third paragraph is incorrect, but have provided no evidence to the contrary. I’d appreciate hearing what you have to offer.
-
EU,
We do know that the placard was found southeast of Toutle and east of Headquarters. This is basically along the presumed FBI flight path. I will concede that the placard indicates a flight path that is two or three miles west from the exact center of V 23, but it is certainly within the route’s 8 mile width. It’s not far enough west to place it over Tena Bar several minutes later.
More to the point, to have the FBI flight path be off to the west by 10 to 15 miles would require us to ignore that this was the height of the Cold War, and that the Western Air Defense Sector based at McChord (other than Alaska) was THE eyes and ears of the American military and was on constant look out for unusual air traffic - Soviet nuke bombers first among them. They had the most sophisticated radar in the world at the time. Once those F-106s took pursuit, the military knew EXACTLY where they were and the feds knew EXACTLY where that plane was from the moment it took off from Seattle to the moment it touched down in Reno. Normal planes did just fly around willy nilly with a “general idea” of where they were, and they weren’t just guessing where this special plane was either. The FBI files indicate clearly that they used this military radar data to construct the flight path. The FBI files also list specific towns where the plane pinged radar, and this is exactly along the presumed flight path. Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path.
The technical and physical data along with historical knowledge and common sense overwhelmly support the FBIs flight path regardless of any anecdotal data given after the fact.
That said, a western flight path is the second most logical conclusion to draw based on the Tena Bar money find. It is far more logical than a DZ to the east and then the money magically appearing in the sand at the river’s edge 15 miles west.
This is an area where we have to be very careful about what we actually know versus what we think we know.
Specifically, the Air Force was the organization that put together the "FBI Flight Path" a couple of days after the skyjacking. We do not know how it was put together or by whom. That said, an FBI agent references SAGE in the files, however we cannot be certain SAGE was actually used, and even if it was working properly that evening--SAGE had many issues and according to a source via 377 SAGE was NOT working that night as it relates to communication with the F-106s.
Also, the Western Flight Path is only about seven miles west of the FBI Flight Path near the Woodland/Ridgefield area. Moreover, I have discussed this at length with Cliff Ammerman--which will be part of the History Channel show this winter--and there is nothing that can point to a precise location of 305.
Concerning the placard, the mathematical analysis completed indicates a drift of approximately seven miles as I recall. This is very significant. Additionally, factoring in the location of the fiberglass skirt found near Cinnebar, WA this also indicates the FBI Flight Path is off at that point too--albeit to the west.
My version of the Western Flight Path differs slightly from R99's, nonetheless it's quite close. More to the point, I believe 305 took off and continued south to about Eatonville. At this point I believe 305 turned to the southwest and flew directly to the Maylay intersection--not around Toledo as is typically shown--and turned almost due south toward Canby at that point.
This brings the airliner over Woodland and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge during the 8:12 minute. It is in this area that DBC would have jumped and therefore landed. Walking south from this point--using the railroad tracks and Lower River Road--Cooper would end up at Tena Bar.
Yes, I will agree that the plane was likely slightly west (2 to 3 miles) of the accepted flight path. I don’t think the placard indicates a severe western path. Given the free fall time and the crosswind from the southwest, it still puts the plane within the V23. Also, there’s no way we can know how long the placard fell. It could have gotten caught in updrafts, etc. That goes for the other alleged debris from the plane as well.
The military radar and tracking is the Achilles heel of your argument, and it doesn’t surprise me that you would call the reliability of the equipment into question. Until real evidence is presented rather than anecdotal evidence that SAGE was not working that night, I’ll trust the FBI files that it was, and that it was used to reconstruct the flight path.
Lastly, my concern is less about the flight path and more about where Cooper jumped. Cooper could have jumped anywhere upstream from Tena Bar, so even if he jumped directly south of Vancouver Lake and my theory - that he ended up in the Columbia - would still stand.
-
EU,
We do know that the placard was found southeast of Toutle and east of Headquarters. This is basically along the presumed FBI flight path. I will concede that the placard indicates a flight path that is two or three miles west from the exact center of V 23, but it is certainly within the route’s 8 mile width. It’s not far enough west to place it over Tena Bar several minutes later.
More to the point, to have the FBI flight path be off to the west by 10 to 15 miles would require us to ignore that this was the height of the Cold War, and that the Western Air Defense Sector based at McChord (other than Alaska) was THE eyes and ears of the American military and was on constant look out for unusual air traffic - Soviet nuke bombers first among them. They had the most sophisticated radar in the world at the time. Once those F-106s took pursuit, the military knew EXACTLY where they were and the feds knew EXACTLY where that plane was from the moment it took off from Seattle to the moment it touched down in Reno. Normal planes did just fly around willy nilly with a “general idea” of where they were, and they weren’t just guessing where this special plane was either. The FBI files indicate clearly that they used this military radar data to construct the flight path. The FBI files also list specific towns where the plane pinged radar, and this is exactly along the presumed flight path. Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path.
The technical and physical data along with historical knowledge and common sense overwhelmly support the FBIs flight path regardless of any anecdotal data given after the fact.
That said, a western flight path is the second most logical conclusion to draw based on the Tena Bar money find. It is far more logical than a DZ to the east and then the money magically appearing in the sand at the river’s edge 15 miles west.
Chaucer,
How about amplifying on your claims in the second paragraph above. There are posters on this site who were involved in national defense activities in the 1971 time frame, and that includes me, who are mystified by your remarks.
Your third paragraph is simply not correct.
Mr. Blevins,
Can you point out specifically what is not accurate in my second paragraph?
Also, you said my third paragraph is incorrect, but have provided no evidence to the contrary. I’d appreciate hearing what you have to offer.
"Mr. Blevins"? Hell's bells! I think you have me confused with a poster on DropZone who is not permitted on this site. Unless, of course, "Chaucer" is actually "RobertMBlevins".
In the second paragraph, your whole premise is wrong. General aviation and military aircraft did not just fly around "willy nilly" with only a general idea of where they were. Interceptor aircraft were parked on the ground and, when scrambled, they had special climb corridors which they used to get to their operational altitudes really fast.
SAGE was part of a weapons system and it was not involved with air traffic control functions. The radar that was apparently used to construct the FBI map was located at McChord AFB and used by the FAA Air Traffic Control System. The Seattle Air Traffic Control personnel were looking at displays that presented information from that radar and which had been processed through at least one computer program before they saw it.
The FBI personnel described the flight path by towns that the airliner passed close to and not by the airways and off-airways specific routes that it used.
"Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path." Specifically what DMEs are you talking about?
Your third paragraph is simply not true. The reasons have already been explained at length here.
You need to visit Tina Bar and take a good look at the money find location. It is highly unlikely that the money arrived there by normal river flow or by dredging. It had to get there by some extraordinary event such as flooding from the Caterpillar Island area (my idea) or by human means (EUs idea).
-
Scott's daughter? We have been over that EU canard before!
Scott's wife was interviewed: "Bill was convinced Cooper died in the leap", said Frances Scott. "He felt he jumped into Lake Merwin (Cowlitz County) and got tangled up in dead trees and died," she said.
So, Scott's daughter and Scott's wife, and Scott .... all need to consult and agree on something! ;)
Family confusion is quite a phenomenon, eh, G. the Scott imbroglio reminds me of the Ingram Mishagasum on Tina Bar.
Yup, Capt. Billy said a lot of strange things about DBC. I wonder why. I strongly suspect that he was the kind of guy who would say things to make people think he agreed with them. A people pleaser, if you will. He strikes me as a man committed to not making waves, and as a company man, he certainly didn't want his airlines to be embroiled in on-going disputes. Bad for ticket sales, etc...
Remember, he didn't handle unexpected drama very well. He almost lost control of the aircraft when he learned his plane was being hijacked, as Rataczak relayed to me. R had to help Scotty pull it together.
But you missed the real story! R99 now admits there was light coming from Vancouver/Portland. Clouds and black holes and all. It has taken years. GO REPORT IT!
It;s a miracle.
Georger's comment above is an outright lie! I have always stated that the flight crew could see the "glow" of the lights from the Vancouver/Portland area but that they could not see the actual lights. A recent post here by Kermit states that Rataczak made the same statement to him.
well R99 here it is in your own words - your own prolific posts on this issue over the years, and there is even more:
[b]clouds below them that night were so thick that they could not see the light glow from the Portland and Vancouver areas." ..May 21, 2012 in reply to Snowmman[/b]
...Due to several cloud layers and an undercast, it is very unlikely that Cooper could have identified anything in the Lake Merwin area or that NWA 305 even passed close to that area. Bohan's flight path probably fits the Lake Merwin area better. December 21, 2010 DZ in reply to Quade.
...You apparently don't seem to understand that the weather in the Portland area at the time of the jump consisted of several cloud layers plus a complete overcast. Cooper could not see even the lights of Portland when he jumped. Regardless of the parachute's color, it would not be overly visible...June 5, 2011 in reply to Quade etal.
...The weather information published in some of the books indicates that there was a complete overcast (total cloud cover) plus several additional broken layers of cloud . This effectively eliminates the possibility of seeing anything on the ground even by looking straight down. Sailshaw is trying to ...July 1, 2011 DZ in reply to Sailshaw…
...The quote in Nuttall's book only addresses the fact that there was a dense cloud cover and overcast that prevented the airliner, flying at about 10,000 feet, from even seeing a "cloud glow" from those two cities. The ground conditions are meaningless in this case. However, the cloud layers , or...July 6, 2011 in reply to Hominid
...all reliable weather sources indicate that there was an overcast at 5000 feet and three broken cloud layers below that. HOWEVER, I have stated that there was no storm in the Portland area and, basically, it was just routine Oregon/Washington weather that night.October 5, 2011
.there was a broken cloud layer at 3500 feet (which constituted the ceiling) and a complete overcast at 5000 feet. This puts Janet and Marla in the same category. I don't think the cloud layers would have stopped .. the sound, and what does that have to do with Marla? The cloud layers don't change...December 2, 2011.
...the airliner was above an overcast and several cloud layers when it passed through the Portland area. The people on the airliner could not see the ground. And vice-versa, the people on the ground could not see the airliner. The Janet story, and other such claims, are nonsense.February 6, 2012
...I have looked down at night time through clouds at quite a few areas of light glow, coming from various cities, over the last 50+ years. Nevertheless, the flight crew of the hijacked airliner said that the overcast and several layers of clouds below them that night were so thick that they could not see the light glow from the Portland and Vancouver areas." ...May 21, 2012 in reply to Snowmman
-
EU,
We do know that the placard was found southeast of Toutle and east of Headquarters. This is basically along the presumed FBI flight path. I will concede that the placard indicates a flight path that is two or three miles west from the exact center of V 23, but it is certainly within the route’s 8 mile width. It’s not far enough west to place it over Tena Bar several minutes later.
More to the point, to have the FBI flight path be off to the west by 10 to 15 miles would require us to ignore that this was the height of the Cold War, and that the Western Air Defense Sector based at McChord (other than Alaska) was THE eyes and ears of the American military and was on constant look out for unusual air traffic - Soviet nuke bombers first among them. They had the most sophisticated radar in the world at the time. Once those F-106s took pursuit, the military knew EXACTLY where they were and the feds knew EXACTLY where that plane was from the moment it took off from Seattle to the moment it touched down in Reno. Normal planes did just fly around willy nilly with a “general idea” of where they were, and they weren’t just guessing where this special plane was either. The FBI files indicate clearly that they used this military radar data to construct the flight path. The FBI files also list specific towns where the plane pinged radar, and this is exactly along the presumed flight path. Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path.
The technical and physical data along with historical knowledge and common sense overwhelmly support the FBIs flight path regardless of any anecdotal data given after the fact.
That said, a western flight path is the second most logical conclusion to draw based on the Tena Bar money find. It is far more logical than a DZ to the east and then the money magically appearing in the sand at the river’s edge 15 miles west.
Chaucer,
How about amplifying on your claims in the second paragraph above. There are posters on this site who were involved in national defense activities in the 1971 time frame, and that includes me, who are mystified by your remarks.
Your third paragraph is simply not correct.
Mr. Blevins,
Can you point out specifically what is not accurate in my second paragraph?
Also, you said my third paragraph is incorrect, but have provided no evidence to the contrary. I’d appreciate hearing what you have to offer.
"Mr. Blevins"? Hell's bells! I think you have me confused with a poster on DropZone who is not permitted on this site. Unless, of course, "Chaucer" is actually "RobertMBlevins".
In the second paragraph, your whole premise is wrong. General aviation and military aircraft did not just fly around "willy nilly" with only a general idea of where they were. Interceptor aircraft were parked on the ground and, when scrambled, they had special climb corridors which they used to get to their operational altitudes really fast.
SAGE was part of a weapons system and it was not involved with air traffic control functions. The radar that was apparently used to construct the FBI map was located at McChord AFB and used by the FAA Air Traffic Control System. The Seattle Air Traffic Control personnel were looking at displays that presented information from that radar and which had been processed through at least one computer program before they saw it.
The FBI personnel described the flight path by towns that the airliner passed close to and not by the airways and off-airways specific routes that it used.
"Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path." Specifically what DMEs are you talking about?
Your third paragraph is simply not true. The reasons have already been explained at length here.
You need to visit Tina Bar and take a good look at the money find location. It is highly unlikely that the money arrived there by normal river flow or by dredging. It had to get there by some extraordinary event such as flooding from the Caterpillar Island area (my idea) or by human means (EUs idea).
Ha! I’m sorry, Robert. Newbie mistake. I apologize!
I think you confused what I was saying. I agree 100% that military and civilian aircraft did NOT fly willy nilly.
I also agree that the plane was tracked both by civilian and military radar and that data (along with other) was used to recreate the flight path. No argument there.
The DMEs that I refer to are the distance measuring equipment (radio beacons) that are referred to in the transcripts. By calculating the times of the radio pings you can estimate speed and distance travelled between locations. Doing so reveals a flight path similar to the FBIs.
-
EU,
We do know that the placard was found southeast of Toutle and east of Headquarters. This is basically along the presumed FBI flight path. I will concede that the placard indicates a flight path that is two or three miles west from the exact center of V 23, but it is certainly within the route’s 8 mile width. It’s not far enough west to place it over Tena Bar several minutes later.
More to the point, to have the FBI flight path be off to the west by 10 to 15 miles would require us to ignore that this was the height of the Cold War, and that the Western Air Defense Sector based at McChord (other than Alaska) was THE eyes and ears of the American military and was on constant look out for unusual air traffic - Soviet nuke bombers first among them. They had the most sophisticated radar in the world at the time. Once those F-106s took pursuit, the military knew EXACTLY where they were and the feds knew EXACTLY where that plane was from the moment it took off from Seattle to the moment it touched down in Reno. Normal planes did just fly around willy nilly with a “general idea” of where they were, and they weren’t just guessing where this special plane was either. The FBI files indicate clearly that they used this military radar data to construct the flight path. The FBI files also list specific towns where the plane pinged radar, and this is exactly along the presumed flight path. Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path.
The technical and physical data along with historical knowledge and common sense overwhelmly support the FBIs flight path regardless of any anecdotal data given after the fact.
That said, a western flight path is the second most logical conclusion to draw based on the Tena Bar money find. It is far more logical than a DZ to the east and then the money magically appearing in the sand at the river’s edge 15 miles west.
This is an area where we have to be very careful about what we actually know versus what we think we know.
Specifically, the Air Force was the organization that put together the "FBI Flight Path" a couple of days after the skyjacking. We do not know how it was put together or by whom. That said, an FBI agent references SAGE in the files, however we cannot be certain SAGE was actually used, and even if it was working properly that evening--SAGE had many issues and according to a source via 377 SAGE was NOT working that night as it relates to communication with the F-106s.
Also, the Western Flight Path is only about seven miles west of the FBI Flight Path near the Woodland/Ridgefield area. Moreover, I have discussed this at length with Cliff Ammerman--which will be part of the History Channel show this winter--and there is nothing that can point to a precise location of 305.
Concerning the placard, the mathematical analysis completed indicates a drift of approximately seven miles as I recall. This is very significant. Additionally, factoring in the location of the fiberglass skirt found near Cinnebar, WA this also indicates the FBI Flight Path is off at that point too--albeit to the west.
My version of the Western Flight Path differs slightly from R99's, nonetheless it's quite close. More to the point, I believe 305 took off and continued south to about Eatonville. At this point I believe 305 turned to the southwest and flew directly to the Maylay intersection--not around Toledo as is typically shown--and turned almost due south toward Canby at that point.
This brings the airliner over Woodland and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge during the 8:12 minute. It is in this area that DBC would have jumped and therefore landed. Walking south from this point--using the railroad tracks and Lower River Road--Cooper would end up at Tena Bar.
Yes, I will agree that the plane was likely slightly west (2 to 3 miles) of the accepted flight path. I don’t think the placard indicates a severe western path. Given the free fall time and the crosswind from the southwest, it still puts the plane within the V23. Also, there’s no way we can know how long the placard fell. It could have gotten caught in updrafts, etc. That goes for the other alleged debris from the plane as well.
The military radar and tracking is the Achilles heel of your argument, and it doesn’t surprise me that you would call the reliability of the equipment into question. Until real evidence is presented rather than anecdotal evidence that SAGE was not working that night, I’ll trust the FBI files that it was, and that it was used to reconstruct the flight path.
Lastly, my concern is less about the flight path and more about where Cooper jumped. Cooper could have jumped anywhere upstream from Tena Bar, so even if he jumped directly south of Vancouver Lake and my theory - that he ended up in the Columbia - would still stand.
Where and WHEN Cooper jumped ...... is central. How long did the crew discuss the oscillation/pressure bump/etc before Rataczak finally called it in? The plane is traveling south the whole time while the crew is debating. 1-3 minutes? Rataczak finally just picks up the mic and calls it in according to Anderson's interview. But now he has to reconstruct time. He uses 8:05 as his last known time of reference. He estimates the oscillations/pressure spike at '5-10 minutes after our last contact with him' at 8:05. Is Rataczak including the time the crew spent in discussion in his 5-10 minute timeline? We have no record of Rataczak's call to the company and what all parties said. All we have is that NWA Search Map some call the FBI Search Map, divided into zones of probability ... but if the timeline is wrong by 1-3 minutes the jump point moves south toward the Columbia Basin.
-
Scott's daughter? We have been over that EU canard before!
Scott's wife was interviewed: "Bill was convinced Cooper died in the leap", said Frances Scott. "He felt he jumped into Lake Merwin (Cowlitz County) and got tangled up in dead trees and died," she said.
So, Scott's daughter and Scott's wife, and Scott .... all need to consult and agree on something! ;)
Family confusion is quite a phenomenon, eh, G. the Scott imbroglio reminds me of the Ingram Mishagasum on Tina Bar.
Yup, Capt. Billy said a lot of strange things about DBC. I wonder why. I strongly suspect that he was the kind of guy who would say things to make people think he agreed with them. A people pleaser, if you will. He strikes me as a man committed to not making waves, and as a company man, he certainly didn't want his airlines to be embroiled in on-going disputes. Bad for ticket sales, etc...
Remember, he didn't handle unexpected drama very well. He almost lost control of the aircraft when he learned his plane was being hijacked, as Rataczak relayed to me. R had to help Scotty pull it together.
But you missed the real story! R99 now admits there was light coming from Vancouver/Portland. Clouds and black holes and all. It has taken years. GO REPORT IT!
It;s a miracle.
Georger's comment above is an outright lie! I have always stated that the flight crew could see the "glow" of the lights from the Vancouver/Portland area but that they could not see the actual lights. A recent post here by Kermit states that Rataczak made the same statement to him.
well R99 here it is in your own words - your own prolific posts on this issue over the years, and there is even more:
[b]clouds below them that night were so thick that they could not see the light glow from the Portland and Vancouver areas." ..May 21, 2012 in reply to Snowmman[/b]
...Due to several cloud layers and an undercast, it is very unlikely that Cooper could have identified anything in the Lake Merwin area or that NWA 305 even passed close to that area. Bohan's flight path probably fits the Lake Merwin area better. December 21, 2010 DZ in reply to Quade.
...You apparently don't seem to understand that the weather in the Portland area at the time of the jump consisted of several cloud layers plus a complete overcast. Cooper could not see even the lights of Portland when he jumped. Regardless of the parachute's color, it would not be overly visible...June 5, 2011 in reply to Quade etal.
...The weather information published in some of the books indicates that there was a complete overcast (total cloud cover) plus several additional broken layers of cloud . This effectively eliminates the possibility of seeing anything on the ground even by looking straight down. Sailshaw is trying to ...July 1, 2011 DZ in reply to Sailshaw…
...The quote in Nuttall's book only addresses the fact that there was a dense cloud cover and overcast that prevented the airliner, flying at about 10,000 feet, from even seeing a "cloud glow" from those two cities. The ground conditions are meaningless in this case. However, the cloud layers , or...July 6, 2011 in reply to Hominid
...all reliable weather sources indicate that there was an overcast at 5000 feet and three broken cloud layers below that. HOWEVER, I have stated that there was no storm in the Portland area and, basically, it was just routine Oregon/Washington weather that night.October 5, 2011
.there was a broken cloud layer at 3500 feet (which constituted the ceiling) and a complete overcast at 5000 feet. This puts Janet and Marla in the same category. I don't think the cloud layers would have stopped .. the sound, and what does that have to do with Marla? The cloud layers don't change...December 2, 2011.
...the airliner was above an overcast and several cloud layers when it passed through the Portland area. The people on the airliner could not see the ground. And vice-versa, the people on the ground could not see the airliner. The Janet story, and other such claims, are nonsense.February 6, 2012
...I have looked down at night time through clouds at quite a few areas of light glow, coming from various cities, over the last 50+ years. Nevertheless, the flight crew of the hijacked airliner said that the overcast and several layers of clouds below them that night were so thick that they could not see the light glow from the Portland and Vancouver areas." ...May 21, 2012 in reply to Snowmman
First, I do not find any indication that I made a post to Snowmman on May 21, 2012. I did have several post exchanges with Sailshaw on May 21, 2012 and adjacent days and following is a direct quote from one of those exchanges:
"My specific source for the above is on page 95 of George Nuttal's book which discusses a conversation between Harry L. Grady (Nuttall's friend and researcher for his book) and FBI Agent Ralph Himmelsbach. Following is the specific quote written by Grady:
'He (Ralph Himmelsbach) guesses that flight 305 was a little east of V-23 but in debriefing the pilots could not say how far. He said that the co-pilot did all the flying that night and that the storm was severe with a strong wind coming at them from 245 degrees. There was a cloud cover below them when they passed over Vancouver that was so thick that they couldn't see landmarks or even the glow of city lights.' "
So it was Himmelsbach making the statement based on his information. There were apparently other sources supporting Himmelsbach's statement at that time. And I was simply passing that information along and using it at face value. And it has been a long time since I accepted that claim. In any event, the original claim did not originate with me but with sources that I quoted.
However, subsequent sources have become available that do not support the claim that there was a severe storm in the Vancouver/Portland area on the evening of the hijacking. There apparently had been a frontal passage in the Seattle area earlier on the day of the hijacking. But the barometric pressure was above standard in Seattle and increased further as the airliner flew south. Increasing barometric pressure is an indication of improving weather.
Hominid apparently did a comprehensive analysis of the weather in the Pacific Northwest on the evening of the hijacking and I referred to his analysis in that same post. I don't remember what he said but you are free to check it out.
-
EU,
We do know that the placard was found southeast of Toutle and east of Headquarters. This is basically along the presumed FBI flight path. I will concede that the placard indicates a flight path that is two or three miles west from the exact center of V 23, but it is certainly within the route’s 8 mile width. It’s not far enough west to place it over Tena Bar several minutes later.
More to the point, to have the FBI flight path be off to the west by 10 to 15 miles would require us to ignore that this was the height of the Cold War, and that the Western Air Defense Sector based at McChord (other than Alaska) was THE eyes and ears of the American military and was on constant look out for unusual air traffic - Soviet nuke bombers first among them. They had the most sophisticated radar in the world at the time. Once those F-106s took pursuit, the military knew EXACTLY where they were and the feds knew EXACTLY where that plane was from the moment it took off from Seattle to the moment it touched down in Reno. Normal planes did just fly around willy nilly with a “general idea” of where they were, and they weren’t just guessing where this special plane was either. The FBI files indicate clearly that they used this military radar data to construct the flight path. The FBI files also list specific towns where the plane pinged radar, and this is exactly along the presumed flight path. Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path.
The technical and physical data along with historical knowledge and common sense overwhelmly support the FBIs flight path regardless of any anecdotal data given after the fact.
That said, a western flight path is the second most logical conclusion to draw based on the Tena Bar money find. It is far more logical than a DZ to the east and then the money magically appearing in the sand at the river’s edge 15 miles west.
Chaucer,
How about amplifying on your claims in the second paragraph above. There are posters on this site who were involved in national defense activities in the 1971 time frame, and that includes me, who are mystified by your remarks.
Your third paragraph is simply not correct.
Mr. Blevins,
Can you point out specifically what is not accurate in my second paragraph?
Also, you said my third paragraph is incorrect, but have provided no evidence to the contrary. I’d appreciate hearing what you have to offer.
"Mr. Blevins"? Hell's bells! I think you have me confused with a poster on DropZone who is not permitted on this site. Unless, of course, "Chaucer" is actually "RobertMBlevins".
In the second paragraph, your whole premise is wrong. General aviation and military aircraft did not just fly around "willy nilly" with only a general idea of where they were. Interceptor aircraft were parked on the ground and, when scrambled, they had special climb corridors which they used to get to their operational altitudes really fast.
SAGE was part of a weapons system and it was not involved with air traffic control functions. The radar that was apparently used to construct the FBI map was located at McChord AFB and used by the FAA Air Traffic Control System. The Seattle Air Traffic Control personnel were looking at displays that presented information from that radar and which had been processed through at least one computer program before they saw it.
The FBI personnel described the flight path by towns that the airliner passed close to and not by the airways and off-airways specific routes that it used.
"Furthermore, the DMEs coincide with the presumed flight path." Specifically what DMEs are you talking about?
Your third paragraph is simply not true. The reasons have already been explained at length here.
You need to visit Tina Bar and take a good look at the money find location. It is highly unlikely that the money arrived there by normal river flow or by dredging. It had to get there by some extraordinary event such as flooding from the Caterpillar Island area (my idea) or by human means (EUs idea).
Ha! I’m sorry, Robert. Newbie mistake. I apologize!
I think you confused what I was saying. I agree 100% that military and civilian aircraft did NOT fly willy nilly.
I also agree that the plane was tracked both by civilian and military radar and that data (along with other) was used to recreate the flight path. No argument there.
The DMEs that I refer to are the distance measuring equipment (radio beacons) that are referred to in the transcripts. By calculating the times of the radio pings you can estimate speed and distance travelled between locations. Doing so reveals a flight path similar to the FBIs.
Chaucer, apology accepted. If you had been aware of what was going on years ago on DropZone, you would completely understand my objections. And that was long before DropZone became a pornographic site.
The military and the Seattle Air Traffic Control people were in all probability using the same radar site at McChord AFB.
There are three DME locations given for the airliner in the Seattle and Portland areas. Those DME's are located in the ARINC teletype transcripts and all three support the Western Flight Path.
-
Georger - I agree completely re: where and when DBC jumped. We can all agree that the plane was somewhere between Tena Bar and the Washougal from west to east. The question is where along the north-south axis did he jump? Was it the original latitude near Lake Merwin? Or one further south near the Columbia? If he landed on ground then the money find becomes more perplexing. If he jumped near the Columbia then it becomes easier to understand.
R99 - I guess we will have to disagree with the DMEs. I agree with you on all other points you mentioned re: radar.
-
The military and the Seattle Air Traffic Control people were in all probability using the same radar site at McChord AFB.
Seattle Air Traffic Control utilized the radar site near Salem, OR to track 305 from Seattle south.
-
The military and the Seattle Air Traffic Control people were in all probability using the same radar site at McChord AFB.
Seattle Air Traffic Control utilized the radar site near Salem, OR to track 305 from Seattle south.
I would suggest that the Salem, OR radar didn't come into play until the airliner was getting very close to Portland. Perhaps Ammerman had data from that site on his display. At 10,000 feet, the airliner was probably visible to an air traffic control radar during the entire flight from Seattle to Reno. The Minimum Communications Altitude was also 10,000 feet which means that line-of-sight VHF communications were possible along the entire route from Seattle to Northern California as well as after the airliner climbed to 11,000 feet before turning towards Reno. Reno also had a radar according to the radio transcripts.
-
Georger - I agree completely re: where and when DBC jumped. We can all agree that the plane was somewhere between Tena Bar and the Washougal from west to east. The question is where along the north-south axis did he jump? Was it the original latitude near Lake Merwin? Or one further south near the Columbia? If he landed on ground then the money find becomes more perplexing. If he jumped near the Columbia then it becomes easier to understand.
R99 - I guess we will have to disagree with the DMEs. I agree with you on all other points you mentioned re: radar.
Chaucer, why do we disagree about the DMEs. All three are on V-23.
-
The military and the Seattle Air Traffic Control people were in all probability using the same radar site at McChord AFB.
Seattle Air Traffic Control utilized the radar site near Salem, OR to track 305 from Seattle south.
I would suggest that the Salem, OR radar didn't come into play until the airliner was getting very close to Portland. Perhaps Ammerman had data from that site on his display. At 10,000 feet, the airliner was probably visible to an air traffic control radar during the entire flight from Seattle to Reno. The Minimum Communications Altitude was also 10,000 feet which means that line-of-sight VHF communications were possible along the entire route from Seattle to Northern California as well as after the airliner climbed to 11,000 feet before turning towards Reno. Reno also had a radar according to the radio transcripts.
Ammerman took control of 305 just north of Malay. He told me that his display was utilizing data from Salem the entire time. We actually discussed this at length.
-
Georger - I agree completely re: where and when DBC jumped. We can all agree that the plane was somewhere between Tena Bar and the Washougal from west to east. The question is where along the north-south axis did he jump? Was it the original latitude near Lake Merwin? Or one further south near the Columbia? If he landed on ground then the money find becomes more perplexing. If he jumped near the Columbia then it becomes easier to understand.
R99 - I guess we will have to disagree with the DMEs. I agree with you on all other points you mentioned re: radar.
Chaucer, why do we disagree about the DMEs. All three are on V-23.
My understanding is that there were two DMEs. One for Seattle and one for PDX (Battle Ground). What was the third?
My point is that using the DMEs you can know the speed, altitude, and distance traveled between those two points. Using that calculation, the western flight path is eliminated because it’s impossible to get from Seattle to Battle Ground in that amount of time if you detour around Portland to the west.
I can elaborate on this if you’d like.
-
Georger - I agree completely re: where and when DBC jumped. We can all agree that the plane was somewhere between Tena Bar and the Washougal from west to east. The question is where along the north-south axis did he jump? Was it the original latitude near Lake Merwin? Or one further south near the Columbia? If he landed on ground then the money find becomes more perplexing. If he jumped near the Columbia then it becomes easier to understand.
R99 - I guess we will have to disagree with the DMEs. I agree with you on all other points you mentioned re: radar.
Chaucer, why do we disagree about the DMEs. All three are on V-23.
My understanding is that there were two DMEs. One for Seattle and one for PDX (Battle Ground). What was the third?
My point is that using the DMEs you can know the speed, altitude, and distance traveled between those two points. Using that calculation, the western flight path is eliminated because it’s impossible to get from Seattle to Battle Ground in that amount of time if you detour around Portland to the west.
I can elaborate on this if you’d like.
Question: or, if you detour around Portland to the west, in the same way that R99 requires/wants, ... meaning, 'too far to the west side of Portland'?
Yes. Please elaborate!
Ammerman stated 305 went through Portland 'on V23' ... almost down the center line of V23! That shocked me. I had not expected that answer. I transmitted Ammerman's statement to R99 and neither 99 or I were satisfied at the time ... in fact I was shocked! That was NOT what I had expected Ammerman to say. I called Ammerman back several days later and asked: "are you sure about that? right down the center line of V23?" That lead to a discussion ............ and some uncertainty?
Much depends on what is meant by: 'on the west side of Portland' and how 305 got to that point..
My honest appraisal is, R99 has been looking for a way out of Ammerman's original statement, ever since. At the time I was almost supporting a west path simply to explain the money at Tina Bar, but Ammerman brought me back to the FBI fp as the best correct solution...
-
Georger - I agree completely re: where and when DBC jumped. We can all agree that the plane was somewhere between Tena Bar and the Washougal from west to east. The question is where along the north-south axis did he jump? Was it the original latitude near Lake Merwin? Or one further south near the Columbia? If he landed on ground then the money find becomes more perplexing. If he jumped near the Columbia then it becomes easier to understand.
R99 - I guess we will have to disagree with the DMEs. I agree with you on all other points you mentioned re: radar.
Chaucer, why do we disagree about the DMEs. All three are on V-23.
My understanding is that there were two DMEs. One for Seattle and one for PDX (Battle Ground). What was the third?
My point is that using the DMEs you can know the speed, altitude, and distance traveled between those two points. Using that calculation, the western flight path is eliminated because it’s impossible to get from Seattle to Battle Ground in that amount of time if you detour around Portland to the west.
I can elaborate on this if you’d like.
Please elaborate. But first let's discuss DMEs a bit.
The airliner's navigational equipment consisted of two VOR receivers, two DME receivers, and two ADF receivers. In the low VHF frequency range (check the FAA literature if you are interested in the actual frequencies)
several frequencies were dedicated to navigational frequencies and the communication frequencies were just above that. The VOR, DME, GS, and Localizer frequencies were paired and all the pilot had to do was tune to the VOR frequency and the other instruments were automatically tuned in if the appropriate instruments were installed. All VOR frequencies on V-23 also included DME equipment.
DME receiver equipment was install on the airliner. Consequently, the ARINC teletype print outs list three instances of where the location of the airliner is stated using DME read outs. At 7:42 PM PST, the airliner crew stated that they were "Out SEA 14 miles on V-23 out SEA." Translated from the Greek, this means that they were 14 DME miles (or Nautical Miles) south of the SEA VORTAC on V-23. The SEA VORTAC was located between the south ends of the parallel runways on the SEATAC airport and the airliner passed within about 1000 feet of that station as it was taking off.
At 7:45 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 19 DME miles south of the SEA VORTAC and on V-23.
At 8:22 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 23 DME miles south of Portland. It should be remembered that what is now known as the Battleground VORTAC was known as the Portland VORTAC at the time of the hijacking. Other evidence indicates that the messages were transmitted by the airliner at approximately 7:40 PM, 7:43 PM, and 8:18 PM PST, respectively.
Chaucer, Eric Ulis has a book out in which the above information is discussed in greater detail. I suggest that you get a copy of it.
The times listed above are the time on the ARINC teletype print outs.
-
Georger - I agree completely re: where and when DBC jumped. We can all agree that the plane was somewhere between Tena Bar and the Washougal from west to east. The question is where along the north-south axis did he jump? Was it the original latitude near Lake Merwin? Or one further south near the Columbia? If he landed on ground then the money find becomes more perplexing. If he jumped near the Columbia then it becomes easier to understand.
R99 - I guess we will have to disagree with the DMEs. I agree with you on all other points you mentioned re: radar.
Chaucer, why do we disagree about the DMEs. All three are on V-23.
My understanding is that there were two DMEs. One for Seattle and one for PDX (Battle Ground). What was the third?
My point is that using the DMEs you can know the speed, altitude, and distance traveled between those two points. Using that calculation, the western flight path is eliminated because it’s impossible to get from Seattle to Battle Ground in that amount of time if you detour around Portland to the west.
I can elaborate on this if you’d like.
Please elaborate. But first let's discuss DMEs a bit.
The airliner's navigational equipment consisted of two VOR receivers, two DME receivers, and two ADF receivers. In the low VHF frequency range (check the FAA literature if you are interested in the actual frequencies)
several frequencies were dedicated to navigational frequencies and the communication frequencies were just above that. The VOR, DME, GS, and Localizer frequencies were paired and all the pilot had to do was tune to the VOR frequency and the other instruments were automatically tuned in if the appropriate instruments were installed. All VOR frequencies on V-23 also included DME equipment.
DME receiver equipment was install on the airliner. Consequently, the ARINC teletype print outs list three instances of where the location of the airliner is stated using DME read outs. At 7:42 PM PST, the airliner crew stated that they were "Out SEA 14 miles on V-23 out SEA." Translated from the Greek, this means that they were 14 DME miles (or Nautical Miles) south of the SEA VORTAC on V-23. The SEA VORTAC was located between the south ends of the parallel runways on the SEATAC airport and the airliner passed within about 1000 feet of that station as it was taking off.
At 7:45 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 19 DME miles south of the SEA VORTAC and on V-23.
At 8:22 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 23 DME miles south of Portland. It should be remembered that what is now known as the Battleground VORTAC was known as the Portland VORTAC at the time of the hijacking. Other evidence indicates that the messages were transmitted by the airliner at approximately 7:40 PM, 7:43 PM, and 8:18 PM PST, respectively.
Chaucer, Eric Ulis has a book out in which the above information is discussed in greater detail. I suggest that you get a copy of it.
The times listed above are the time on the ARINC teletype print outs.
Where is the Ulis BOOK so anyone may see it? ::)
-
Georger - I agree completely re: where and when DBC jumped. We can all agree that the plane was somewhere between Tena Bar and the Washougal from west to east. The question is where along the north-south axis did he jump? Was it the original latitude near Lake Merwin? Or one further south near the Columbia? If he landed on ground then the money find becomes more perplexing. If he jumped near the Columbia then it becomes easier to understand.
R99 - I guess we will have to disagree with the DMEs. I agree with you on all other points you mentioned re: radar.
Chaucer, why do we disagree about the DMEs. All three are on V-23.
My understanding is that there were two DMEs. One for Seattle and one for PDX (Battle Ground). What was the third?
My point is that using the DMEs you can know the speed, altitude, and distance traveled between those two points. Using that calculation, the western flight path is eliminated because it’s impossible to get from Seattle to Battle Ground in that amount of time if you detour around Portland to the west.
I can elaborate on this if you’d like.
Please elaborate. But first let's discuss DMEs a bit.
The airliner's navigational equipment consisted of two VOR receivers, two DME receivers, and two ADF receivers. In the low VHF frequency range (check the FAA literature if you are interested in the actual frequencies)
several frequencies were dedicated to navigational frequencies and the communication frequencies were just above that. The VOR, DME, GS, and Localizer frequencies were paired and all the pilot had to do was tune to the VOR frequency and the other instruments were automatically tuned in if the appropriate instruments were installed. All VOR frequencies on V-23 also included DME equipment.
DME receiver equipment was install on the airliner. Consequently, the ARINC teletype print outs list three instances of where the location of the airliner is stated using DME read outs. At 7:42 PM PST, the airliner crew stated that they were "Out SEA 14 miles on V-23 out SEA." Translated from the Greek, this means that they were 14 DME miles (or Nautical Miles) south of the SEA VORTAC on V-23. The SEA VORTAC was located between the south ends of the parallel runways on the SEATAC airport and the airliner passed within about 1000 feet of that station as it was taking off.
At 7:45 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 19 DME miles south of the SEA VORTAC and on V-23.
At 8:22 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 23 DME miles south of Portland. It should be remembered that what is now known as the Battleground VORTAC was known as the Portland VORTAC at the time of the hijacking. Other evidence indicates that the messages were transmitted by the airliner at approximately 7:40 PM, 7:43 PM, and 8:18 PM PST, respectively.
Chaucer, Eric Ulis has a book out in which the above information is discussed in greater detail. I suggest that you get a copy of it.
The times listed above are the time on the ARINC teletype print outs.
Where is the Ulis BOOK so anyone may see it? ::)
Georger, you know damn well where the Ulis book is located. But you have previously stated that you are not going to pay a couple of bucks to buy it. Cheap! Cheap! Cheap! All you are looking for is free hand outs.
-
Georger - I agree completely re: where and when DBC jumped. We can all agree that the plane was somewhere between Tena Bar and the Washougal from west to east. The question is where along the north-south axis did he jump? Was it the original latitude near Lake Merwin? Or one further south near the Columbia? If he landed on ground then the money find becomes more perplexing. If he jumped near the Columbia then it becomes easier to understand.
R99 - I guess we will have to disagree with the DMEs. I agree with you on all other points you mentioned re: radar.
Chaucer, why do we disagree about the DMEs. All three are on V-23.
My understanding is that there were two DMEs. One for Seattle and one for PDX (Battle Ground). What was the third?
My point is that using the DMEs you can know the speed, altitude, and distance traveled between those two points. Using that calculation, the western flight path is eliminated because it’s impossible to get from Seattle to Battle Ground in that amount of time if you detour around Portland to the west.
I can elaborate on this if you’d like.
Please elaborate. But first let's discuss DMEs a bit.
The airliner's navigational equipment consisted of two VOR receivers, two DME receivers, and two ADF receivers. In the low VHF frequency range (check the FAA literature if you are interested in the actual frequencies)
several frequencies were dedicated to navigational frequencies and the communication frequencies were just above that. The VOR, DME, GS, and Localizer frequencies were paired and all the pilot had to do was tune to the VOR frequency and the other instruments were automatically tuned in if the appropriate instruments were installed. All VOR frequencies on V-23 also included DME equipment.
DME receiver equipment was install on the airliner. Consequently, the ARINC teletype print outs list three instances of where the location of the airliner is stated using DME read outs. At 7:42 PM PST, the airliner crew stated that they were "Out SEA 14 miles on V-23 out SEA." Translated from the Greek, this means that they were 14 DME miles (or Nautical Miles) south of the SEA VORTAC on V-23. The SEA VORTAC was located between the south ends of the parallel runways on the SEATAC airport and the airliner passed within about 1000 feet of that station as it was taking off.
At 7:45 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 19 DME miles south of the SEA VORTAC and on V-23.
At 8:22 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 23 DME miles south of Portland. It should be remembered that what is now known as the Battleground VORTAC was known as the Portland VORTAC at the time of the hijacking. Other evidence indicates that the messages were transmitted by the airliner at approximately 7:40 PM, 7:43 PM, and 8:18 PM PST, respectively.
Chaucer, Eric Ulis has a book out in which the above information is discussed in greater detail. I suggest that you get a copy of it.
The times listed above are the time on the ARINC teletype print outs.
Where is the Ulis BOOK so anyone may see it? ::)
Georger, you know damn well where the Ulis book is located. But you have previously stated that you are not going to pay a couple of bucks to buy it. Cheap! Cheap! Cheap! All you are looking for is free hand outs.
Could not find any title registered to ELVIS ....... nothing at Amazon etc. My eight year old granddaughter has published ten books so far this year - a nickle 5c each. Interested? She also sells lemonaide to golfers. Her books with drawings of golfers are very popular on the golf course. She and her brother have made $200 this year ... her 9 year old brother sells honey from his own bee hives ... which is probably more than ELVIS has made on his unknown Cooper book somewhere!
Such is life! :rofl: :congrats:
-
Ammerman
A lot is being said about what Ammerman said. But where did he say it?
A few posts above, Georger, you mentioned that Ammerman said that Flight 305 flew over Portland in the middle of V-23, or words to that effect. Where did he say that?
Ammerman was quite clear with me in my interview with him in 2019 - 305 was on the western side of V-23 and never strayed from it. However, at some point south of Woodland he put 305 and the T-33 on a vector to Eugene. That route would presumably pass Portland to the west.
Shortly, I'll be posting the flight path chapter from the 3rd Edition, as this issue is heating up. It'll include what Ammerman told me.
-
Yes, R99, I know what DMEs are and how they work. Again, they do nothing to either confirm a western flight path nor eliminate a central one.
Again, I will need to see physical evidence before i believe that the federal government didn’t know exactly where that plane was at all time.
Also, the debate about the flight path is sort of moot. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
-
Ammerman
A lot is being said about what Ammerman said. But where did he say it?
A few posts above, Georger, you mentioned that Ammerman said that Flight 305 flew over Portland in the middle of V-23, or words to that effect. Where did he say that?
Ammerman was quite clear with me in my interview with him in 2019 - 305 was on the western side of V-23 and never strayed from it. However, at some point south of Woodland he put 305 and the T-33 on a vector to Eugene. That route would presumably pass Portland to the west.
I reported on this years ago .... 'right down the center line of V23 or very close to it and if off at all was slightly west of the center line' ...
-
Yes, R99, I know what DMEs are and how they work. Again, they do nothing to either confirm a western flight path nor eliminate a central one.
Again, I will need to see physical evidence before i believe that the federal government didn’t know exactly where that plane was at all time.
Also, the debate about the flight path is sort of moot. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
Absolutely.
I believe the real motivation for a west path is to account for the money site at Tina Bar. That was my original motivation looking for a direct connection that would account for the money find ......... but then two USGS hydrologists educated me! They think the money found by Ingram had migrated NORTH of its original location, which was somewhere south possible near the north-most dredging spoil dump site. They sited flow pressures, the usual direction debris moves when being pushed north along Tina Bar until it winds up back in the river, etc .... they say it would be common for things to migrate hundreds (if not thousands!) of yards ...things migrate NORTH in the direction of flow at Tina Bar .... and on all sand bars in this area as a universal fact.
That makes any need for a west path go away. That takes us back to the FBI path and when Cooper actually bailed on NWA's timeline.
Agree. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
-
Georger - I agree completely re: where and when DBC jumped. We can all agree that the plane was somewhere between Tena Bar and the Washougal from west to east. The question is where along the north-south axis did he jump? Was it the original latitude near Lake Merwin? Or one further south near the Columbia? If he landed on ground then the money find becomes more perplexing. If he jumped near the Columbia then it becomes easier to understand.
R99 - I guess we will have to disagree with the DMEs. I agree with you on all other points you mentioned re: radar.
Chaucer, why do we disagree about the DMEs. All three are on V-23.
My understanding is that there were two DMEs. One for Seattle and one for PDX (Battle Ground). What was the third?
My point is that using the DMEs you can know the speed, altitude, and distance traveled between those two points. Using that calculation, the western flight path is eliminated because it’s impossible to get from Seattle to Battle Ground in that amount of time if you detour around Portland to the west.
I can elaborate on this if you’d like.
Please elaborate. But first let's discuss DMEs a bit.
The airliner's navigational equipment consisted of two VOR receivers, two DME receivers, and two ADF receivers. In the low VHF frequency range (check the FAA literature if you are interested in the actual frequencies)
several frequencies were dedicated to navigational frequencies and the communication frequencies were just above that. The VOR, DME, GS, and Localizer frequencies were paired and all the pilot had to do was tune to the VOR frequency and the other instruments were automatically tuned in if the appropriate instruments were installed. All VOR frequencies on V-23 also included DME equipment.
DME receiver equipment was install on the airliner. Consequently, the ARINC teletype print outs list three instances of where the location of the airliner is stated using DME read outs. At 7:42 PM PST, the airliner crew stated that they were "Out SEA 14 miles on V-23 out SEA." Translated from the Greek, this means that they were 14 DME miles (or Nautical Miles) south of the SEA VORTAC on V-23. The SEA VORTAC was located between the south ends of the parallel runways on the SEATAC airport and the airliner passed within about 1000 feet of that station as it was taking off.
At 7:45 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 19 DME miles south of the SEA VORTAC and on V-23.
At 8:22 PM PST, the airliner reported that it was 23 DME miles south of Portland. It should be remembered that what is now known as the Battleground VORTAC was known as the Portland VORTAC at the time of the hijacking. Other evidence indicates that the messages were transmitted by the airliner at approximately 7:40 PM, 7:43 PM, and 8:18 PM PST, respectively.
Chaucer, Eric Ulis has a book out in which the above information is discussed in greater detail. I suggest that you get a copy of it.
The times listed above are the time on the ARINC teletype print outs.
Where is the Ulis BOOK so anyone may see it? ::)
Georger, you know damn well where the Ulis book is located. But you have previously stated that you are not going to pay a couple of bucks to buy it. Cheap! Cheap! Cheap! All you are looking for is free hand outs.
Could not find any title registered to ELVIS ....... nothing at Amazon etc. My eight year old granddaughter has published ten books so far this year - a nickle 5c each. Interested? She also sells lemonaide to golfers. Her books with drawings of golfers are very popular on the golf course. She and her brother have made $200 this year ... her 9 year old brother sells honey from his own bee hives ... which is probably more than ELVIS has made on his unknown Cooper book somewhere!
Such is life! :rofl: :congrats:
Georger, stop acting like a politician. You have known since day one that you can get a copy of the book from EU.
-
Ammerman
A lot is being said about what Ammerman said. But where did he say it?
A few posts above, Georger, you mentioned that Ammerman said that Flight 305 flew over Portland in the middle of V-23, or words to that effect. Where did he say that?
Ammerman was quite clear with me in my interview with him in 2019 - 305 was on the western side of V-23 and never strayed from it. However, at some point south of Woodland he put 305 and the T-33 on a vector to Eugene. That route would presumably pass Portland to the west.
Shortly, I'll be posting the flight path chapter from the 3rd Edition, as this issue is heating up. It'll include what Ammerman told me.
Bruce, when will the 3rd edition be available? I'll buy a copy of it just as I bought a copy of the previous edition.
Judging from some of the other posts on this thread today, I may be one of the last big spenders here. That is, I'm willing to pay money for books. ;D
Also, the airliner was never more than three or four miles west of V-23 during the time it bypassed Portland.
-
Yes, R99, I know what DMEs are and how they work. Again, they do nothing to either confirm a western flight path nor eliminate a central one.
Again, I will need to see physical evidence before i believe that the federal government didn’t know exactly where that plane was at all time.
Also, the debate about the flight path is sort of moot. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
Absolutely.
I believe the real motivation for a west path is to account for the money site at Tina Bar. That was my original motivation looking for a direct connection that would account for the money find ......... but then two USGS hydrologists educated me! They think the money found by Ingram had migrated NORTH of its original location, which was somewhere south possible near the north-most dredging spoil dump site. They sited flow pressures, the usual direction debris moves when being pushed north along Tina Bar until it winds up back in the river, etc .... they say it would be common for things to migrate hundreds (if not thousands!) of yards ...things migrate NORTH in the direction of flow at Tina Bar .... and on all sand bars in this area as a universal fact.
That makes any need for a west path go away. That takes us back to the FBI path and when Cooper actually bailed on NWA's timeline.
Agree. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
Georger, actually the real reason for my claiming a western bypass of Portland is because that is what the facts support.
-
Yes, R99, I know what DMEs are and how they work. Again, they do nothing to either confirm a western flight path nor eliminate a central one.
Again, I will need to see physical evidence before i believe that the federal government didn’t know exactly where that plane was at all time.
Also, the debate about the flight path is sort of moot. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
Chaucer, the federal government DID KNOW where the plane was at all times. But the federal government doesn't want us to know and that is why there are 19 redactions in the Seattle Air Traffic Control transcripts. There are no redactions in any other radio transcripts.
The real question is where Cooper jumped. The time of his jump is known to within about a minute give or take another minute.
-
Yes, R99, I know what DMEs are and how they work. Again, they do nothing to either confirm a western flight path nor eliminate a central one.
Again, I will need to see physical evidence before i believe that the federal government didn’t know exactly where that plane was at all time.
Also, the debate about the flight path is sort of moot. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
Chaucer, the federal government DID KNOW where the plane was at all times. But the federal government doesn't want us to know and that is why there are 19 redactions in the Seattle Air Traffic Control transcripts. There are no redactions in any other radio transcripts.
The real question is where Cooper jumped. The time of his jump is known to within about a minute give or take another minute.
Your scenario requires that where Ingram found the money IS the original money deposit site, or the result of an inland scenario where drainage from some higher elevation brings the money to where Ingram found it. And you have never specified where along your west path Cooper is supposed to have bailed and landed, that brings money to the Ingram find site by some undefined drainage scenario where "water runs down hill" (your words).?
What are the 19 redactions you claim exist supposed to say, that is missing ? Why 19 vs. 22 or 37 or 3 ?
-
Ammerman, continued
I just posted my chapter on the flight path at the Mountain News.
https://themountainnewswa.net/2020/07/31/db-cooper-controversy-continues-concerning-the-flight-path/
As for the 3rd Edition and when it will be available, that's a bit up in the air. My goal is to get it published by a mainstream publishing house, and that could take many months, if not a year.
The alternative is to continue self-pubbing it at Amazon.
Regardless, it will be out by November 24, 2021 for the 50th Anniversary.
In the meantime, I'm happy to share elected chapters and passages with anyone who would like to do a little "Beta Reading...." R99? I'll post the current Table of Contents in the "News" thread and you can take your pick.
-
Yes, R99, I know what DMEs are and how they work. Again, they do nothing to either confirm a western flight path nor eliminate a central one.
Again, I will need to see physical evidence before i believe that the federal government didn’t know exactly where that plane was at all time.
Also, the debate about the flight path is sort of moot. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
Chaucer, the federal government DID KNOW where the plane was at all times. But the federal government doesn't want us to know and that is why there are 19 redactions in the Seattle Air Traffic Control transcripts. There are no redactions in any other radio transcripts.
The real question is where Cooper jumped. The time of his jump is known to within about a minute give or take another minute.
Your scenario requires that where Ingram found the money IS the original money deposit site, or the result of an inland scenario where drainage from some higher elevation brings the money to where Ingram found it. And you have never specified where along your west path Cooper is supposed to have bailed and landed, that brings money to the Ingram find site by some undefined drainage scenario where "water runs down hill" (your words).?
What are the 19 redactions you claim exist supposed to say, that is missing ? Why 19 vs. 22 or 37 or 3 ?
"Your scenario" doesn't require any such thing. As you know but won't admit, this has been discussed to death for the last 10 years here and on DropZone. Why 19 redactions? Because they didn't need 20 redactions to remove the relevant data and 18 redactions were not sufficient.
-
Yes, R99, I know what DMEs are and how they work. Again, they do nothing to either confirm a western flight path nor eliminate a central one.
Again, I will need to see physical evidence before i believe that the federal government didn’t know exactly where that plane was at all time.
Also, the debate about the flight path is sort of moot. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
Chaucer, the federal government DID KNOW where the plane was at all times. But the federal government doesn't want us to know and that is why there are 19 redactions in the Seattle Air Traffic Control transcripts. There are no redactions in any other radio transcripts.
The real question is where Cooper jumped. The time of his jump is known to within about a minute give or take another minute.
Your scenario requires that where Ingram found the money IS the original money deposit site, or the result of an inland scenario where drainage from some higher elevation brings the money to where Ingram found it. And you have never specified where along your west path Cooper is supposed to have bailed and landed, that brings money to the Ingram find site by some undefined drainage scenario where "water runs down hill" (your words).?
What are the 19 redactions you claim exist supposed to say, that is missing ? Why 19 vs. 22 or 37 or 3 ?
"Your scenario" doesn't require any such thing. As you know but won't admit, this has been discussed to death for the last 10 years here and on DropZone. Why 19 redactions? Because they didn't need 20 redactions to remove the relevant data and 18 redactions were not sufficient.
Who and Where were THEY ? :conspiracy:
-
Ammerman, continued
I just posted my chapter on the flight path at the Mountain News.
https://themountainnewswa.net/2020/07/31/db-cooper-controversy-continues-concerning-the-flight-path/
As for the 3rd Edition and when it will be available, that's a bit up in the air. My goal is to get it published by a mainstream publishing house, and that could take many months, if not a year.
The alternative is to continue self-pubbing it at Amazon.
Regardless, it will be out by November 24, 2021 for the 50th Anniversary.
In the meantime, I'm happy to share elected chapters and passages with anyone who would like to do a little "Beta Reading...." R99? I'll post the current Table of Contents in the "News" thread and you can take your pick.
Bruce, I have done a fast read of the chapter you linked to above and I do believe I will be able to help you by filling in some of the details, correcting some misstatements, etc.. I would like to point out that this is the first time that I have seen anything about your and EU's interview with Ammerman. And I haven't seen anything about what happened at last years Cooper event in Portland. But I have a couple of comments at this point.
First, my 70+ year old memory on this point is that Victor airways were 10 STATUTE MILES wide when I started flying but were changed at some point to being 8 NAUTICAL MILES wide (which is 9.2 STATUTE MILES). Ammerman apparently told you and EU that Victor airways were still 10 STATUTE MILES wide in 1971. In working up the bypass flight path, I tried to determine when the change in width was made but could not find any information on when it was done. Ammerman keeps the bypass flight path very close to V-23 at all points.
On the Expedition Unknown filming at Tina Bar in 2016, you, Meyer Louie, and I were involved with that. The bypass flight path was explained during that filming but the program went with a jump near Reno. Our explanation at Tina Bar obviously ended up on "the cutting room floor" or wherever the digital version of the filming goes in this day and age.
-
Yes, R99, I know what DMEs are and how they work. Again, they do nothing to either confirm a western flight path nor eliminate a central one.
Again, I will need to see physical evidence before i believe that the federal government didn’t know exactly where that plane was at all time.
Also, the debate about the flight path is sort of moot. The real question is when Cooper jumped.
Chaucer, the federal government DID KNOW where the plane was at all times. But the federal government doesn't want us to know and that is why there are 19 redactions in the Seattle Air Traffic Control transcripts. There are no redactions in any other radio transcripts.
The real question is where Cooper jumped. The time of his jump is known to within about a minute give or take another minute.
Your scenario requires that where Ingram found the money IS the original money deposit site, or the result of an inland scenario where drainage from some higher elevation brings the money to where Ingram found it. And you have never specified where along your west path Cooper is supposed to have bailed and landed, that brings money to the Ingram find site by some undefined drainage scenario where "water runs down hill" (your words).?
What are the 19 redactions you claim exist supposed to say, that is missing ? Why 19 vs. 22 or 37 or 3 ?
"Your scenario" doesn't require any such thing. As you know but won't admit, this has been discussed to death for the last 10 years here and on DropZone. Why 19 redactions? Because they didn't need 20 redactions to remove the relevant data and 18 redactions were not sufficient.
Who and Where were THEY ? :conspiracy:
Think "FBI".
-
Ammerman, continued
I just posted my chapter on the flight path at the Mountain News.
https://themountainnewswa.net/2020/07/31/db-cooper-controversy-continues-concerning-the-flight-path/
As for the 3rd Edition and when it will be available, that's a bit up in the air. My goal is to get it published by a mainstream publishing house, and that could take many months, if not a year.
The alternative is to continue self-pubbing it at Amazon.
Regardless, it will be out by November 24, 2021 for the 50th Anniversary.
In the meantime, I'm happy to share elected chapters and passages with anyone who would like to do a little "Beta Reading...." R99? I'll post the current Table of Contents in the "News" thread and you can take your pick.
Overwhelmerd.
Headline: CONSPIRACY ICEBERG 'SMITHIE" HITS HIJACKED PLANE ! NO SURVIVORS. 7000 PARTS FOUND! GHOULISH SCENE - MKULTRA RUSHING TO SCENE.
-
Ammerman, continued
I just posted my chapter on the flight path at the Mountain News.
https://themountainnewswa.net/2020/07/31/db-cooper-controversy-continues-concerning-the-flight-path/
As for the 3rd Edition and when it will be available, that's a bit up in the air. My goal is to get it published by a mainstream publishing house, and that could take many months, if not a year.
The alternative is to continue self-pubbing it at Amazon.
Regardless, it will be out by November 24, 2021 for the 50th Anniversary.
In the meantime, I'm happy to share elected chapters and passages with anyone who would like to do a little "Beta Reading...." R99? I'll post the current Table of Contents in the "News" thread and you can take your pick.
Bruce, I have done a fast read of the chapter you linked to above and I do believe I will be able to help you by filling in some of the details, correcting some misstatements, etc.. I would like to point out that this is the first time that I have seen anything about your and EU's interview with Ammerman. And I haven't seen anything about what happened at last years Cooper event in Portland. But I have a couple of comments at this point.
First, my 70+ year old memory on this point is that Victor airways were 10 STATUTE MILES wide when I started flying but were changed at some point to being 8 NAUTICAL MILES wide (which is 9.2 STATUTE MILES). Ammerman apparently told you and EU that Victor airways were still 10 STATUTE MILES wide in 1971. In working up the bypass flight path, I tried to determine when the change in width was made but could not find any information on when it was done. Ammerman keeps the bypass flight path very close to V-23 at all points.
On the Expedition Unknown filming at Tina Bar in 2016, you, Meyer Louie, and I were involved with that. The bypass flight path was explained during that filming but the program went with a jump near Reno. Our explanation at Tina Bar obviously ended up on "the cutting room floor" or wherever the digital version of the filming goes in this day and age.
1. V-23
Yes, I do believe the discrepancy has to do with 8 nautical miles versus 10 statute miles. I think you've explained it well. However, I thought 1 nm is 1.3 statute miles, which makes 8 nm 10.4 statute miles, no?
2. Josh Gates and the WFP.
Yes, the three amigos of you, Meyer, and I were interviewed by Josh and the Gang at T-Bar. However, the version of the broadcast I saw did include a discussion of the wfp, which pleased me. Yes, the show did end with Joshie jumping out over the sagebrush of Reno, which was disappointing. Alas - and a warning to all DB Cooper aficionados when Hollywood comes a-knocking - ya probably gonna get a kick in the balls at some point, and ya may never see it comin'...
...OOPS. I just did the math. 1 nm is 1.15 statute miles. Hence, 8 nm is 9.2 statute miles. I had been mis-informed.
-
Ammerman, continued
I just posted my chapter on the flight path at the Mountain News.
https://themountainnewswa.net/2020/07/31/db-cooper-controversy-continues-concerning-the-flight-path/
As for the 3rd Edition and when it will be available, that's a bit up in the air. My goal is to get it published by a mainstream publishing house, and that could take many months, if not a year.
The alternative is to continue self-pubbing it at Amazon.
Regardless, it will be out by November 24, 2021 for the 50th Anniversary.
In the meantime, I'm happy to share elected chapters and passages with anyone who would like to do a little "Beta Reading...." R99? I'll post the current Table of Contents in the "News" thread and you can take your pick.
Bruce, I have done a fast read of the chapter you linked to above and I do believe I will be able to help you by filling in some of the details, correcting some misstatements, etc.. I would like to point out that this is the first time that I have seen anything about your and EU's interview with Ammerman. And I haven't seen anything about what happened at last years Cooper event in Portland. But I have a couple of comments at this point.
First, my 70+ year old memory on this point is that Victor airways were 10 STATUTE MILES wide when I started flying but were changed at some point to being 8 NAUTICAL MILES wide (which is 9.2 STATUTE MILES). Ammerman apparently told you and EU that Victor airways were still 10 STATUTE MILES wide in 1971. In working up the bypass flight path, I tried to determine when the change in width was made but could not find any information on when it was done. Ammerman keeps the bypass flight path very close to V-23 at all points.
On the Expedition Unknown filming at Tina Bar in 2016, you, Meyer Louie, and I were involved with that. The bypass flight path was explained during that filming but the program went with a jump near Reno. Our explanation at Tina Bar obviously ended up on "the cutting room floor" or wherever the digital version of the filming goes in this day and age.
1. V-23
Yes, I do believe the discrepancy has to do with 8 nautical miles versus 10 statute miles. I think you've explained it well. However, I thought 1 nm is 1.3 statute miles, which makes 8 nm 10.4 statute miles, no?
2. Josh Gates and the WFP.
Yes, the three amigos of you, Meyer, and I were interviewed by Josh and the Gang at T-Bar. However, the version of the broadcast I saw did include a discussion of the wfp, which pleased me. Yes, the show did end with Joshie jumping out over the sagebrush of Reno, which was disappointing. Alas - and a warning to all DB Cooper aficionados when Hollywood comes a-knocking - ya probably gonna get a kick in the balls at some point, and ya may never see it comin'...
...OOPS. I just did the math. 1 nm is 1.15 statute miles. Hence, 8 nm is 9.2 statute miles. I had been mis-informed.
Smith, according to your interview of Ammerman, where did 305 and the T33 connect, north of Portland or below Portland near Lake Oswego ?
You dont cover this in your chapter.
EU has previously posted: "Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX."
The FBI fp has 305 very clearly arriving from the north and north east across Vancouver toward Portland, as shown below! Is Ammerman now saying the whole FBI flight path is radically wrongo-dongo in a cabanna for the insane! ?
-
Smith, you say:
"Nevertheless, the Western Flight Path is now highly regarded by most DB Cooper aficionados. In fact, Josh Gates and his Expedition Unknown telecast crew on the Travel Channel filmed an episode on this very issue in 2016."
Who are these "most DB Cooper aficionados" and where are they? Have they ever had a meeting somewhere on Earth?
Has Ammerman had a chance to read your chapter and what does he say about it, especially your and EU's words attributed to him?
Will Ammerman ever be given that opportunity without interference from you or EU? ;)
-
Here are your choices "most DB Cooper aficionados" !
:conspiracy: :conspiracy: :conspiracy: :conspiracy: :conspiracy:
Report to Headquarters tomorrow for your Instructions and a Blessing...
:rofl:
ps: PLEASE CHANGE YOUR MANUALS - INSERT ON PAGE 1876 - "When Cooper jumped no longer matters. It never did matter." *This comes from the Highest DB Cooper Aficionados Authority.
-
Ammerman, continued
I just posted my chapter on the flight path at the Mountain News.
https://themountainnewswa.net/2020/07/31/db-cooper-controversy-continues-concerning-the-flight-path/
As for the 3rd Edition and when it will be available, that's a bit up in the air. My goal is to get it published by a mainstream publishing house, and that could take many months, if not a year.
The alternative is to continue self-pubbing it at Amazon.
Regardless, it will be out by November 24, 2021 for the 50th Anniversary.
In the meantime, I'm happy to share elected chapters and passages with anyone who would like to do a little "Beta Reading...." R99? I'll post the current Table of Contents in the "News" thread and you can take your pick.
Bruce, I have done a fast read of the chapter you linked to above and I do believe I will be able to help you by filling in some of the details, correcting some misstatements, etc.. I would like to point out that this is the first time that I have seen anything about your and EU's interview with Ammerman. And I haven't seen anything about what happened at last years Cooper event in Portland. But I have a couple of comments at this point.
First, my 70+ year old memory on this point is that Victor airways were 10 STATUTE MILES wide when I started flying but were changed at some point to being 8 NAUTICAL MILES wide (which is 9.2 STATUTE MILES). Ammerman apparently told you and EU that Victor airways were still 10 STATUTE MILES wide in 1971. In working up the bypass flight path, I tried to determine when the change in width was made but could not find any information on when it was done. Ammerman keeps the bypass flight path very close to V-23 at all points.
On the Expedition Unknown filming at Tina Bar in 2016, you, Meyer Louie, and I were involved with that. The bypass flight path was explained during that filming but the program went with a jump near Reno. Our explanation at Tina Bar obviously ended up on "the cutting room floor" or wherever the digital version of the filming goes in this day and age.
1. V-23
Yes, I do believe the discrepancy has to do with 8 nautical miles versus 10 statute miles. I think you've explained it well. However, I thought 1 nm is 1.3 statute miles, which makes 8 nm 10.4 statute miles, no?
2. Josh Gates and the WFP.
Yes, the three amigos of you, Meyer, and I were interviewed by Josh and the Gang at T-Bar. However, the version of the broadcast I saw did include a discussion of the wfp, which pleased me. Yes, the show did end with Joshie jumping out over the sagebrush of Reno, which was disappointing. Alas - and a warning to all DB Cooper aficionados when Hollywood comes a-knocking - ya probably gonna get a kick in the balls at some point, and ya may never see it comin'...
...OOPS. I just did the math. 1 nm is 1.15 statute miles. Hence, 8 nm is 9.2 statute miles. I had been mis-informed.
Smith, according to your interview of Ammerman, where did 305 and the T33 connect, north of Portland or below Portland near Lake Oswego ?
You dont cover this in your chapter.
EU has previously posted: "Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX."
The FBI fp has 305 very clearly arriving from the north and north east across Vancouver toward Portland, as shown below! Is Ammerman now saying the whole FBI flight path is radically wrongo-dongo in a cabanna for the insane! ?
My memory says that Cliff told me that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 above Portland. The "NNW of PDX" sounds familiar. I'll check my notes, shortly, but not now.
Yes, I would say that Ammerman's recollections are at odds with the FBI's official perspective. Adding to doubt of the FBI, the feds never talked to Ammerman. Poor police work, at the very least.
-
Here are your choices "most DB Cooper aficionados" !
:conspiracy: :conspiracy: :conspiracy: :conspiracy: :conspiracy:
Report to Headquarters tomorrow for your Instructions and a Blessing...
:rofl:
ps: PLEASE CHANGE YOUR MANUALS - INSERT ON PAGE 1876 - "When Cooper jumped no longer matters. It never did matter." *This comes from the Highest DB Cooper Aficionados Authority.
Georger, you have previously claimed a number of times, including just a day or two ago, that Ammerman told you that the airliner stayed on the centerline of V-23 in the Portland area. Your claimed statement alone completely contradicts the FBI flight path that meanders all over the Pacific Northwest and does so especially in the Portland/Vancouver area.
-
The Ammerman story is getting somewhat twisted. Here is what he conveyed to me on multiple occasions, including when I met with him in-person:
1) 305 appeared to stay within V-23.
2) Given the location of the radar source (Salem) and the size of the depicted target on his screen, 305 could be located anywhere on the target display which involves several miles from one side to the other. Therefore, even though a portion of the target may be within V-23, in reality the jet could be on the left side of the target and therefore a handful of miles outside of V-23 proper.
3) The trailing T-33 was given one heading as it followed 305, thereby indicating that it did not need to make the erratic turns that the FBI Flight Path depicts...which suggests that 305 flew a straight line and not all over the place as if GEORGER were behind the wheel.
4) That said, if 305 did turn left, then right, then left again as shown on the FBI Flight Path map, he (Ammerman) wouldn't necessarily notice such activity on his screen---the resolution was not of a necessary high quality.
-
The Ammerman story is getting somewhat twisted. Here is what he conveyed to me on multiple occasions, including when I met with him in-person:
1) 305 appeared to stay within V-23.
2) Given the location of the radar source (Salem) and the size of the depicted target on his screen, 305 could be located anywhere on the target display which involves several miles from one side to the other. Therefore, even though a portion of the target may be within V-23, in reality the jet could be on the left side of the target and therefore a handful of miles outside of V-23 proper.
3) The trailing T-33 was given one heading as it followed 305, thereby indicating that it did not need to make the erratic turns that the FBI Flight Path depicts...which suggests that 305 flew a straight line and not all over the place as if GEORGER were behind the wheel.
4) That said, if 305 did turn left, then right, then left again as shown on the FBI Flight Path map, he (Ammerman) wouldn't necessarily notice such activity on his screen---the resolution was not of a necessary high quality.
OK - #1 seems secure and agrees with what A told me several years before your interview.
#2 EU has previously posted: "Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX."
The previous Ammerman testimony is that he brought the T33 and 305 together south of Portland near Lake Oswego. This was shared with the whole Cooper community along with graphics and people discussed it. I seem to recall the T33 pilot was also interviewed ?
Keep in mind the T33 launched from the Natl Guard base at PDX then flew north and turned south .... and was brought in behind 305 near Lake Oswego by Ammerman personally, according to Ammerman's prior testimony. ? In order to achieve this intersection Ammerman had to talk to the T33 pilot on a military frequency (a separate radio) and that was the period, according to Ammerman, when he turned away from his screen briefly during which time 305 had made his turn to the south 'just' on the west side of Portland ... Ammerman looked back at his screen to get 305's current position and THAT is when Ammerman gave the T33 instructions for a rendezvous with 305, which happened near Lake Oswego south of Portland. This sequence of events has been posted and talk about for years, based on Ammerman's own description of events . Now this all changes with your interview for some reason! This is a wholesale revision of the facts previously given by Ammerman, according to you, EU.
It's my understanding the T33 was launched from PDX. It was not already in the air waiting when 305 was approaching PDX. Ammerman was very specific! Ammerman had to set up a rendezvous between T33 and 305 and that could only happen after 305 turned south. 305 was never north in the T33's intercept sector to make an intercept NORTH of Portland happen! By the time Ammerman wads done talking to the T33 pilot and looked back at his screen to set up a rendevois, 305 had turned south ... which now made an intercept of 305 by the T33 possible. 305 was never NNW of Portland to have a rendezvous with, as Mr. Ulis describes it!
-
The Ammerman story is getting somewhat twisted. Here is what he conveyed to me on multiple occasions, including when I met with him in-person:
1) 305 appeared to stay within V-23.
2) Given the location of the radar source (Salem) and the size of the depicted target on his screen, 305 could be located anywhere on the target display which involves several miles from one side to the other. Therefore, even though a portion of the target may be within V-23, in reality the jet could be on the left side of the target and therefore a handful of miles outside of V-23 proper.
3) The trailing T-33 was given one heading as it followed 305, thereby indicating that it did not need to make the erratic turns that the FBI Flight Path depicts...which suggests that 305 flew a straight line and not all over the place as if GEORGER were behind the wheel.
4) That said, if 305 did turn left, then right, then left again as shown on the FBI Flight Path map, he (Ammerman) wouldn't necessarily notice such activity on his screen---the resolution was not of a necessary high quality.
OK - #1 seems secure and agrees with what A told me several years before your interview.
#2 EU has previously posted: "Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX."
The previous Ammerman testimony is that he brought the T33 and 305 together south of Portland near Lake Oswego. This was shared with the whole Cooper community along with graphics and people discussed it. I seem to recall the T33 pilot was also interviewed ?
Keep in mind the T33 launched from the Natl Guard base at PDX then flew north and turned south .... and was brought in behind 305 near Lake Oswego by Ammerman personally, according to Ammerman's prior testimony. ? In order to achieve this intersection Ammerman had to talk to the T33 pilot on a military frequency (a separate radio) and that was the period, according to Ammerman, when he turned away from his screen briefly during which time 305 had made his turn to the south 'just' on the west side of Portland ... Ammerman looked back at his screen to get 305's current position and THAT is when Ammerman gave the T33 instructions for a rendezvous with 305, which happened near Lake Oswego south of Portland. This sequence of events has been posted and talk about for years, based on Ammerman's own description of events . Now this all changes with your interview for some reason! This is a wholesale revision of the facts previously given by Ammerman, according to you, EU.
It's my understanding the T33 was launched from PDX. It was not already in the air waiting when 305 was approaching PDX. Ammerman was very specific! Ammerman had to set up a rendezvous between T33 and 305 and that could only happen after 305 turned south. 305 was never north in the T33's intercept sector to make an intercept NORTH of Portland happen! By the time Ammerman wads done talking to the T33 pilot and looked back at his screen to set up a rendevois, 305 had turned south ... which now made an intercept of 305 by the T33 possible. 305 was never NNW of Portland to have a rendezvous with, as Mr. Ulis describes it!
Georger, the T-33 took off from PIA and headed WEST on a training mission. It was headed to a practice area (the location of which is never stated) or maybe to the Pacific Ocean.
The Malay Intersecton on V-23 is North Northwest (NNW) of Portland and that means the airliner was NNW of Portland as it approached Portland. Nothing supports the idea that the airliner was east of Portland.
It appears that everything Ammerman told EU and Bruce Smith supports the Western Flight Path.
-
The Ammerman story is getting somewhat twisted. Here is what he conveyed to me on multiple occasions, including when I met with him in-person:
1) 305 appeared to stay within V-23.
2) Given the location of the radar source (Salem) and the size of the depicted target on his screen, 305 could be located anywhere on the target display which involves several miles from one side to the other. Therefore, even though a portion of the target may be within V-23, in reality the jet could be on the left side of the target and therefore a handful of miles outside of V-23 proper.
3) The trailing T-33 was given one heading as it followed 305, thereby indicating that it did not need to make the erratic turns that the FBI Flight Path depicts...which suggests that 305 flew a straight line and not all over the place as if GEORGER were behind the wheel.
4) That said, if 305 did turn left, then right, then left again as shown on the FBI Flight Path map, he (Ammerman) wouldn't necessarily notice such activity on his screen---the resolution was not of a necessary high quality.
OK - #1 seems secure and agrees with what A told me several years before your interview.
#2 EU has previously posted: "Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX."
The previous Ammerman testimony is that he brought the T33 and 305 together south of Portland near Lake Oswego. This was shared with the whole Cooper community along with graphics and people discussed it. I seem to recall the T33 pilot was also interviewed ?
Keep in mind the T33 launched from the Natl Guard base at PDX then flew north and turned south .... and was brought in behind 305 near Lake Oswego by Ammerman personally, according to Ammerman's prior testimony. ? In order to achieve this intersection Ammerman had to talk to the T33 pilot on a military frequency (a separate radio) and that was the period, according to Ammerman, when he turned away from his screen briefly during which time 305 had made his turn to the south 'just' on the west side of Portland ... Ammerman looked back at his screen to get 305's current position and THAT is when Ammerman gave the T33 instructions for a rendezvous with 305, which happened near Lake Oswego south of Portland. This sequence of events has been posted and talk about for years, based on Ammerman's own description of events . Now this all changes with your interview for some reason! This is a wholesale revision of the facts previously given by Ammerman, according to you, EU.
It's my understanding the T33 was launched from PDX. It was not already in the air waiting when 305 was approaching PDX. Ammerman was very specific! Ammerman had to set up a rendezvous between T33 and 305 and that could only happen after 305 turned south. 305 was never north in the T33's intercept sector to make an intercept NORTH of Portland happen! By the time Ammerman wads done talking to the T33 pilot and looked back at his screen to set up a rendevois, 305 had turned south ... which now made an intercept of 305 by the T33 possible. 305 was never NNW of Portland to have a rendezvous with, as Mr. Ulis describes it!
Georger, the T-33 took off from PIA and headed WEST on a training mission. It was headed to a practice area (the location of which is never stated) or maybe to the Pacific Ocean.
The Malay Intersecton on V-23 is North Northwest (NNW) of Portland and that means the airliner was NNW of Portland as it approached Portland. Nothing supports the idea that the airliner was east of Portland.
It appears that everything Ammerman told EU and Bruce Smith supports the Western Flight Path.
The T33 training mission was cancelled! The T33 was never near Malay. Malay has nothing to do with this. The T33 Instructor-Pilot Norman Battaglia was interviewed and a synopsis of his mission intercepting 305 was published - as you very well know! More fun and games from R99 I see.
The T33 most certainly did not intercept 305 anywhere near Malay, if that is what you are trying to claim!
More later.
-
The Ammerman story is getting somewhat twisted. Here is what he conveyed to me on multiple occasions, including when I met with him in-person:
1) 305 appeared to stay within V-23.
2) Given the location of the radar source (Salem) and the size of the depicted target on his screen, 305 could be located anywhere on the target display which involves several miles from one side to the other. Therefore, even though a portion of the target may be within V-23, in reality the jet could be on the left side of the target and therefore a handful of miles outside of V-23 proper.
3) The trailing T-33 was given one heading as it followed 305, thereby indicating that it did not need to make the erratic turns that the FBI Flight Path depicts...which suggests that 305 flew a straight line and not all over the place as if GEORGER were behind the wheel.
4) That said, if 305 did turn left, then right, then left again as shown on the FBI Flight Path map, he (Ammerman) wouldn't necessarily notice such activity on his screen---the resolution was not of a necessary high quality.
OK - #1 seems secure and agrees with what A told me several years before your interview.
#2 EU has previously posted: "Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX."
The previous Ammerman testimony is that he brought the T33 and 305 together south of Portland near Lake Oswego. This was shared with the whole Cooper community along with graphics and people discussed it. I seem to recall the T33 pilot was also interviewed ?
Keep in mind the T33 launched from the Natl Guard base at PDX then flew north and turned south .... and was brought in behind 305 near Lake Oswego by Ammerman personally, according to Ammerman's prior testimony. ? In order to achieve this intersection Ammerman had to talk to the T33 pilot on a military frequency (a separate radio) and that was the period, according to Ammerman, when he turned away from his screen briefly during which time 305 had made his turn to the south 'just' on the west side of Portland ... Ammerman looked back at his screen to get 305's current position and THAT is when Ammerman gave the T33 instructions for a rendezvous with 305, which happened near Lake Oswego south of Portland. This sequence of events has been posted and talk about for years, based on Ammerman's own description of events . Now this all changes with your interview for some reason! This is a wholesale revision of the facts previously given by Ammerman, according to you, EU.
It's my understanding the T33 was launched from PDX. It was not already in the air waiting when 305 was approaching PDX. Ammerman was very specific! Ammerman had to set up a rendezvous between T33 and 305 and that could only happen after 305 turned south. 305 was never north in the T33's intercept sector to make an intercept NORTH of Portland happen! By the time Ammerman wads done talking to the T33 pilot and looked back at his screen to set up a rendevois, 305 had turned south ... which now made an intercept of 305 by the T33 possible. 305 was never NNW of Portland to have a rendezvous with, as Mr. Ulis describes it!
Georger, the T-33 took off from PIA and headed WEST on a training mission. It was headed to a practice area (the location of which is never stated) or maybe to the Pacific Ocean.
The Malay Intersecton on V-23 is North Northwest (NNW) of Portland and that means the airliner was NNW of Portland as it approached Portland. Nothing supports the idea that the airliner was east of Portland.
It appears that everything Ammerman told EU and Bruce Smith supports the Western Flight Path.
The T33 training mission was cancelled! The T33 was never near Malay. Malay has nothing to do with this. The T33 Instructor-Pilot Norman Battaglia was interviewed and a synopsis of his mission intercepting 305 was published - as you very well know! More fun and games from R99 I see.
The T33 most certainly did not intercept 305 anywhere near Malay, if that is what you are trying to claim!
More later.
Thank G, do you know if the interview is anywhere online?
-
The Ammerman story is getting somewhat twisted. Here is what he conveyed to me on multiple occasions, including when I met with him in-person:
1) 305 appeared to stay within V-23.
2) Given the location of the radar source (Salem) and the size of the depicted target on his screen, 305 could be located anywhere on the target display which involves several miles from one side to the other. Therefore, even though a portion of the target may be within V-23, in reality the jet could be on the left side of the target and therefore a handful of miles outside of V-23 proper.
3) The trailing T-33 was given one heading as it followed 305, thereby indicating that it did not need to make the erratic turns that the FBI Flight Path depicts...which suggests that 305 flew a straight line and not all over the place as if GEORGER were behind the wheel.
4) That said, if 305 did turn left, then right, then left again as shown on the FBI Flight Path map, he (Ammerman) wouldn't necessarily notice such activity on his screen---the resolution was not of a necessary high quality.
OK - #1 seems secure and agrees with what A told me several years before your interview.
#2 EU has previously posted: "Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX."
The previous Ammerman testimony is that he brought the T33 and 305 together south of Portland near Lake Oswego. This was shared with the whole Cooper community along with graphics and people discussed it. I seem to recall the T33 pilot was also interviewed ?
Keep in mind the T33 launched from the Natl Guard base at PDX then flew north and turned south .... and was brought in behind 305 near Lake Oswego by Ammerman personally, according to Ammerman's prior testimony. ? In order to achieve this intersection Ammerman had to talk to the T33 pilot on a military frequency (a separate radio) and that was the period, according to Ammerman, when he turned away from his screen briefly during which time 305 had made his turn to the south 'just' on the west side of Portland ... Ammerman looked back at his screen to get 305's current position and THAT is when Ammerman gave the T33 instructions for a rendezvous with 305, which happened near Lake Oswego south of Portland. This sequence of events has been posted and talk about for years, based on Ammerman's own description of events . Now this all changes with your interview for some reason! This is a wholesale revision of the facts previously given by Ammerman, according to you, EU.
It's my understanding the T33 was launched from PDX. It was not already in the air waiting when 305 was approaching PDX. Ammerman was very specific! Ammerman had to set up a rendezvous between T33 and 305 and that could only happen after 305 turned south. 305 was never north in the T33's intercept sector to make an intercept NORTH of Portland happen! By the time Ammerman wads done talking to the T33 pilot and looked back at his screen to set up a rendevois, 305 had turned south ... which now made an intercept of 305 by the T33 possible. 305 was never NNW of Portland to have a rendezvous with, as Mr. Ulis describes it!
Georger, the T-33 took off from PIA and headed WEST on a training mission. It was headed to a practice area (the location of which is never stated) or maybe to the Pacific Ocean.
The Malay Intersecton on V-23 is North Northwest (NNW) of Portland and that means the airliner was NNW of Portland as it approached Portland. Nothing supports the idea that the airliner was east of Portland.
It appears that everything Ammerman told EU and Bruce Smith supports the Western Flight Path.
The T33 training mission was cancelled! The T33 was never near Malay. Malay has nothing to do with this. The T33 Instructor-Pilot Norman Battaglia was interviewed and a synopsis of his mission intercepting 305 was published - as you very well know! More fun and games from R99 I see.
The T33 most certainly did not intercept 305 anywhere near Malay, if that is what you are trying to claim!
More later.
Georger, you need to start reading the posts before replying to them.
Of course the T-33 training mission was cancelled when Air Traffic Control asked it to intercept the airliner!
No one has ever claimed that the T-33 was anywhere near the Malay Intersection and your claim above that it went NORTH is nonsense. And 305 was NNW of Portland if it was anywhere close to V-23. You need to take a look at an aeronautical chart.
-
Robert99 and others,
What physical, contemporaneous evidence is there that indicates a western flight path? So far all I’ve heard is anecdotal evidence decades after the fact.
Also, I’m not familiar with everyone’s pet theories, but some of you seem to suggest it involves government conspiracies and cover ups. That strikes me as a convenient “deus ex machine” when the evidence trail runs out.
-
Robert99 and others,
What physical, contemporaneous evidence is there that indicates a western flight path? So far all I’ve heard is anecdotal evidence decades after the fact.
Also, I’m not familiar with everyone’s pet theories, but some of you seem to suggest it involves government conspiracies and cover ups. That strikes me as a convenient “deus ex machine” when the evidence trail runs out.
Chaucer, if all you have heard is "anecdotal evidence" then you must have missed the posts above, and elsewhere, by EU, Bruce Smith, and others including myself. In fact, I think you and I have been through this at least one or more times already.
Your acceptance at face value of the so-called "FBI Map" needs to be reconsidered. First, I believe it was FBI agent Larry Carr who posted that map on DropZone and asked if anyone knew where it came from. There is no proof that the FBI generated that map or that it came from the USAF.
The radar facility at McChord AFB was probably a joint operation between the DOD and the FAA. It was probably manned by military personnel, civilian employees of DOD, and civilian employees of the FAA.
There is information online somewhere, and probably in 302s as well, that describes McChord AFB military personnel giving radar data and maps to what were apparently FBI agents. There is also information online stating that apparently the same information was sent to the NWA headquarters in Minneapolis.
Consequently, the so-called "FBI map" could be the work of DOD personnel, FBI agents, NWA personnel, all of the above, none of the above, little green men from Mars, or maybe some lunatic in a nut house. Who knows? But one thing is certain. No airliner would fly a route like that under those circumstances.
To point out a very simple and easy to see problem with the "FBI Map", at one time the airliner had a constant ground speed of approximately 180 Knots (Nautical Miles Per Hour) and the map indicates it flew 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and 6 Nautical miles in the very next minute. Would you care to attempt an explanation as to how that could have happened? Other such oddities exist.
Lastly, the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test. It simply does not make sense.
-
The Ammerman story is getting somewhat twisted. Here is what he conveyed to me on multiple occasions, including when I met with him in-person:
1) 305 appeared to stay within V-23.
2) Given the location of the radar source (Salem) and the size of the depicted target on his screen, 305 could be located anywhere on the target display which involves several miles from one side to the other. Therefore, even though a portion of the target may be within V-23, in reality the jet could be on the left side of the target and therefore a handful of miles outside of V-23 proper.
3) The trailing T-33 was given one heading as it followed 305, thereby indicating that it did not need to make the erratic turns that the FBI Flight Path depicts...which suggests that 305 flew a straight line and not all over the place as if GEORGER were behind the wheel.
4) That said, if 305 did turn left, then right, then left again as shown on the FBI Flight Path map, he (Ammerman) wouldn't necessarily notice such activity on his screen---the resolution was not of a necessary high quality.
OK - #1 seems secure and agrees with what A told me several years before your interview.
#2 EU has previously posted: "Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX."
The previous Ammerman testimony is that he brought the T33 and 305 together south of Portland near Lake Oswego. This was shared with the whole Cooper community along with graphics and people discussed it. I seem to recall the T33 pilot was also interviewed ?
Keep in mind the T33 launched from the Natl Guard base at PDX then flew north and turned south .... and was brought in behind 305 near Lake Oswego by Ammerman personally, according to Ammerman's prior testimony. ? In order to achieve this intersection Ammerman had to talk to the T33 pilot on a military frequency (a separate radio) and that was the period, according to Ammerman, when he turned away from his screen briefly during which time 305 had made his turn to the south 'just' on the west side of Portland ... Ammerman looked back at his screen to get 305's current position and THAT is when Ammerman gave the T33 instructions for a rendezvous with 305, which happened near Lake Oswego south of Portland. This sequence of events has been posted and talk about for years, based on Ammerman's own description of events . Now this all changes with your interview for some reason! This is a wholesale revision of the facts previously given by Ammerman, according to you, EU.
It's my understanding the T33 was launched from PDX. It was not already in the air waiting when 305 was approaching PDX. Ammerman was very specific! Ammerman had to set up a rendezvous between T33 and 305 and that could only happen after 305 turned south. 305 was never north in the T33's intercept sector to make an intercept NORTH of Portland happen! By the time Ammerman wads done talking to the T33 pilot and looked back at his screen to set up a rendevois, 305 had turned south ... which now made an intercept of 305 by the T33 possible. 305 was never NNW of Portland to have a rendezvous with, as Mr. Ulis describes it!
Georger, the T-33 took off from PIA and headed WEST on a training mission. It was headed to a practice area (the location of which is never stated) or maybe to the Pacific Ocean.
The Malay Intersecton on V-23 is North Northwest (NNW) of Portland and that means the airliner was NNW of Portland as it approached Portland. Nothing supports the idea that the airliner was east of Portland.
It appears that everything Ammerman told EU and Bruce Smith supports the Western Flight Path.
The T33 training mission was cancelled! The T33 was never near Malay. Malay has nothing to do with this. The T33 Instructor-Pilot Norman Battaglia was interviewed and a synopsis of his mission intercepting 305 was published - as you very well know! More fun and games from R99 I see.
The T33 most certainly did not intercept 305 anywhere near Malay, if that is what you are trying to claim!
More later.
Thank G, do you know if the interview is anywhere online?
Im told Galen Cook has a copy of Tosaw's interview of Battaglia. Tosaw covers Battaglia in his book referenced by Snowmman in 2009 ... see:
https://www.dropzone.com/search/?q=T33&quick=1 or
https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56036-db-cooper/page/156/?tab=comments#comment-3083293
Ammerman's report to me matches Tosaw's Battaglia report including turning Battaglia toward Lake Oswego for an intercept with 305 near Lake Oswego ... SOUTH of Portland not NNW of Portland as per R99 and EU.
Snow posts in 2008:
" snowmman
August 1, 2008
we're correct on all the previous F-106 detail. that's as stated on Sluggo's site. (377: I mentioned before how apparently the F-106 were pretty bad at downward radar in a cluttered terrain scenario. Do you know any more about that? And no doppler radar? I took that all to mean that any F-106 painting of 305 was pretty poor)
The F-102's were additionally dispatched from Idaho Air National Guard, from Boise. But they didn't make contact.
The T33 trainer jet was diverted to follow.
Details from the T33. Note that Lake Oswego is south of Portland, so all their info doesn't help, since it was after the jump.
Norman Battaglia was going to Portland Air Base for a night training mission, about 5:30 pm. He and pilot Dick Perry went thru their pre-flight, took off around 7:50. Battaglia was Air National Guard officer, in back seat as instructor-pilot.
Shortly after they were airborne, they were told to switch radio to Seattle Center, and Seattle told them to trail 305....
They turned toward Lake Oswego, putting them about 3 miles behind 305. They made radar contact and noted 305 was changing course 45 degrees every 30 seconds. He had to throttle back to 135 knots and fly with landing gear and flaps down to maintain contact.
Near Eugene they were told to break contact, go to Kingsley Field in Klamath Falls.
They say they never saw the 727. At one point they were about 3/4 mile away.
Quote
Snow and others also posted about Battaglia in the 2008/2009 period. But again, when I interviewed Ammerman about the T33/305 intercept Ammerman's account was the same as Battaglia's account, to the letter.
-
Robert99 and others,
What physical, contemporaneous evidence is there that indicates a western flight path? So far all I’ve heard is anecdotal evidence decades after the fact.
Also, I’m not familiar with everyone’s pet theories, but some of you seem to suggest it involves government conspiracies and cover ups. That strikes me as a convenient “deus ex machine” when the evidence trail runs out.
Chaucer, if all you have heard is "anecdotal evidence" then you must have missed the posts above, and elsewhere, by EU, Bruce Smith, and others including myself. In fact, I think you and I have been through this at least one or more times already.
Your acceptance at face value of the so-called "FBI Map" needs to be reconsidered. First, I believe it was FBI agent Larry Carr who posted that map on DropZone and asked if anyone knew where it came from. There is no proof that the FBI generated that map or that it came from the USAF.
The radar facility at McChord AFB was probably a joint operation between the DOD and the FAA. It was probably manned by military personnel, civilian employees of DOD, and civilian employees of the FAA.
There is information online somewhere, and probably in 302s as well, that describes McChord AFB military personnel giving radar data and maps to what were apparently FBI agents. There is also information online stating that apparently the same information was sent to the NWA headquarters in Minneapolis.
Consequently, the so-called "FBI map" could be the work of DOD personnel, FBI agents, NWA personnel, all of the above, none of the above, little green men from Mars, or maybe some lunatic in a nut house. Who knows? But one thing is certain. No airliner would fly a route like that under those circumstances.
To point out a very simple and easy to see problem with the "FBI Map", at one time the airliner had a constant ground speed of approximately 180 Knots (Nautical Miles Per Hour) and the map indicates it flew 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and 6 Nautical miles in the very next minute. Would you care to attempt an explanation as to how that could have happened? Other such oddities exist.
Lastly, the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test. It simply does not make sense.
This is flat-out bs.
We have the history of who and what the evolution of the socalled FBI Flight Path is. Which by the way you contributed damned near nothing to! Others did the heavy lifting. You have been nothing more than a spectator during this whole affair eventually generating your own socalled WEST PATH which Sluggo allowed you to post on his site!
See the attached! :rofl:
-
But one thing is certain. No airliner would fly a route like that under those circumstances.
Why? And weren’t you the one who told me to be careful of talking in absolutes?
Lastly, the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test. It simply does not make sense
Why not? Again, gut feelings and “smell tests” aren’t evidence.
My point is that the only reason you and others push for a western flight path is to explain the Tena Bar find. But when you examine the money, you realize that dropping out of the air isn’t sufficient. It requires the money to be in the water.
My explanation accounts for all aspects of the case without resorting to dramatic departures from the known facts of the case.
-
More actual FP evolution history, on when and by whom, and how the original flight path search maps were generated. Hominid even found the unit at McChord that did the computer work with radar tapes to generate the first search map! This work was passed on to the FBI by McChord and NWA, both. We know that!
This history is well known! What is difficult now today is to go back and put it all back together on a moment's notice after R99 saying "NOBODY KNOWS IT COULD HAVE BEEN ANYBODY!" which is total bs = subterfuge on R99's part.
-
Robert99 and others,
What physical, contemporaneous evidence is there that indicates a western flight path? So far all I’ve heard is anecdotal evidence decades after the fact.
Also, I’m not familiar with everyone’s pet theories, but some of you seem to suggest it involves government conspiracies and cover ups. That strikes me as a convenient “deus ex machine” when the evidence trail runs out.
Chaucer, if all you have heard is "anecdotal evidence" then you must have missed the posts above, and elsewhere, by EU, Bruce Smith, and others including myself. In fact, I think you and I have been through this at least one or more times already.
Your acceptance at face value of the so-called "FBI Map" needs to be reconsidered. First, I believe it was FBI agent Larry Carr who posted that map on DropZone and asked if anyone knew where it came from. There is no proof that the FBI generated that map or that it came from the USAF.
The radar facility at McChord AFB was probably a joint operation between the DOD and the FAA. It was probably manned by military personnel, civilian employees of DOD, and civilian employees of the FAA.
There is information online somewhere, and probably in 302s as well, that describes McChord AFB military personnel giving radar data and maps to what were apparently FBI agents. There is also information online stating that apparently the same information was sent to the NWA headquarters in Minneapolis.
Consequently, the so-called "FBI map" could be the work of DOD personnel, FBI agents, NWA personnel, all of the above, none of the above, little green men from Mars, or maybe some lunatic in a nut house. Who knows? But one thing is certain. No airliner would fly a route like that under those circumstances.
To point out a very simple and easy to see problem with the "FBI Map", at one time the airliner had a constant ground speed of approximately 180 Knots (Nautical Miles Per Hour) and the map indicates it flew 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and 6 Nautical miles in the very next minute. Would you care to attempt an explanation as to how that could have happened? Other such oddities exist.
Lastly, the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test. It simply does not make sense.
But one thing is certain. No airliner would fly a route like that under those circumstances.
Why? And weren’t you the one who told me to be careful of talking in absolutes?
Lastly, the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test. It simply does not make sense
Why not? Again, gut feelings and “smell tests” aren’t evidence.
My point is that the only reason you and others push for a western flight path is to explain the Tena Bar find. But when you examine the money, you realize that dropping out of the air isn’t sufficient. It requires the money to be in the water.
My explanation accounts for all aspects of the case without resorting to dramatic departures from the known facts of the case.
My point is that the only reason you and others push for a western flight path is to explain the Tena Bar find. But when you examine the money, you realize that dropping out of the air isn’t sufficient. It requires the money to be in the water.
Correct. R99's west path has always been motivated by an attempt to supply a "Direct causal" connection between the money and a flight path! But if it didn't happen that way factually, the whole project is subterfuge.
I have said a million times that if lab tests had been run to determine "when" the money was buried at Tina Bar or under water somewhere (ie. removed from radioactive exposure in the atmosphere) ... we wouldn't even be talking about a west path.
No plane flew over Tina Bar and dropped Cooper money on to Tina Bar! As per R99.
* BTW none of this is personal. This is merely an attempt to get to the truth.
-
Agreed, georger.
Again, the question is not the path of the plane, but where the plane was when DBC jumped. I believe it was closer to the Columbia than believed, and the fact that over the years the drop zone has consistently moved south underscores that.
-
Agreed, georger.
Again, the question is not the path of the plane, but where the plane was when DBC jumped. I believe it was closer to the Columbia than believed, and the fact that over the years the drop zone has consistently moved south underscores that.
That is exactly what Carr and Sluggo thought - drop zone has consistently moved south underscores that. Dont forget that Himmelsbach was forced to move it south also. In fact he called a press conference in '75 and said 'we estimate the new jump time moves Cooper's jump to about ten miles north of Portland', but true to form nobody bothered to specify where on an east-west line!
Here's some new information. At the time I interviewed Ammerman I was also working with a retired USAF pilot Lt Col BD, who found and interviewed several survivors of the old TAG team that had conducted the 305 test flight and analysis ... After I passed my first interview of Ammerman to BD, BD wrote back and said:
"The flight path coordinates were calculated from data tape recorded at the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (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. It was all in a day's work for them.
The detachment is still there. They might still have the source data or a listing of coordinates for intermediate times, or they may have transferred it to their headquarters (at Hill AFB if I remember right). The FAA should have a copy. If a copy was ever given to the FBI then they have a copy. "
BD goes on to say:
"R99 misses something extremely important regarding the FBI flight path plot because he is oblivious to how it came about. The data was hand plotted, probably by the same people who computed the coordinates. That group did this kind of thing probably once a week, sometimes for incidents but mostly for system QA and change evaluations. Their usual method was to calculate coordinates using taped data from a system that tracked probably hundreds of flights per day just in the Washington-Oregon area alone. They tracked every commercial flight. Every flight with a transponder. Basically everything except small private planes at low altitudes. Plus, every radar involved in this tracking was also constantly tracking its own calibration target.
The flightpath was produced by experts. Within the limits of its precision, it is right. Unfortunately, the precision is only one minute of latitude and longitude. And, the times associated with the plotted points may be off by a minute. AND, it appears we don't know accurately WHEN Coop jumped due to the pilot not calling it in, except that the NWA and USAF people who did the '72 search zone map thought (with benefit of the "pressure bump" signature on the flight data recorder) that he jumped at about 19 seconds before 8:11. That could off off by a minute or two and everyone realized that.
PS: Your interviews with Cliff are good. I think he did a commendable job given everything going on at the time. He's a funny guy and I like him very much. I believe his notation about 305 staying within V23 is entirely accurate. I am sure the people with an agenda will try to get some concession from him.
The T33 intercept north of the river is crucial in two aspects. Cliff confirms 305 did not leave V23 in the period he was talking to our T33. It also confirms the angle of descent of 305 from BTG. Those two facts alone confirm Cliff was keeping 305 within V23. There is no chance 305 passed over the Fazio property where the money was found. The timeline and when the oscillations and bump were actually called in and to whom, is key.
____________________ Lt Col USAF retired. "
-
Where would Cooper need to jump for him to splash down at terminal velocity in the Columbia? My calculations indicate about a quarter mile north of the river bank.
What about for a successful chute deployment, but he landed in the river?
-
Where would Cooper need to jump for him to splash down at terminal velocity in the Columbia? My calculations indicate about a quarter mile north of the river bank.
What about for a successful chute deployment, but he landed in the river?
I love it!
Maybe you and Tom should talk? Tom keeps saying the money was 'buried at Tina Bar' in 1971 - I cant even image how. I think Smith's reprise of Tom's story being shown FBI data is quite good and hopefully true. Maybe you and Tom need go compare notes/ideas ?
Maybe Tom can help move the DZ south by recalling data he has actually seen or has? It's worth a conversation with Tom. That's my thought...
Thanks.
-
OK, I'll play Chaucer's game:
Facts:
1) We know where the money was found.
2) We know where the placard was found.
3) We know where the fiberglass skirt was found.
4) We know the altitude of the jet.
5) We know the direction of the wind at various altitudes.
6) We know the speed of the wind at various altitudes.
7) We know that nothing has ever been found in the FBI search area after nearly 50 years.
Considering the above facts--and the significant amount of analysis that has been executed--I can say with absolute certainty that someone, somewhere, somehow, F'd up at some point. Moreover, when you factor in testimony from Ammerman and Scott concerning the flight path, this too tends to support the notion that something is off with the FBI Flight Path.
Now, let me turn the table: What evidence do you--or anyone else for that matter--have concerning the validity of the FBI Flight Path?
Let me save you some time answering the above question...
What you have is a map that was cobbled together with partial data apparently from the Air Force, NWA, and the flight data recorder. Yet the map has changed over time. Additionally, the FBI search area has changed over time. Moreover, no one knows who put the map together and how. It was simply handed to the FBI, that's it.
As I've said many times before, at first blush, when the Air Force hands over a map it reasonable to take them at their word that the flight path depicted is accurate. However, as time goes by, and the map changes, and nothing is ever found where one would expect, and the items that end up being found are strangely many miles from where one would expect, it becomes a matter of due diligence and just plain common sense to go back to the origins of the FBI Flight Path map and ask someone: So, how exactly did you come up with this map?
I have never suggested a conspiracy. What I have suggested is a mistake. Believe it or not, human beings are not infallible.
-
Robert99 and others,
What physical, contemporaneous evidence is there that indicates a western flight path? So far all I’ve heard is anecdotal evidence decades after the fact.
Also, I’m not familiar with everyone’s pet theories, but some of you seem to suggest it involves government conspiracies and cover ups. That strikes me as a convenient “deus ex machine” when the evidence trail runs out.
Chaucer, if all you have heard is "anecdotal evidence" then you must have missed the posts above, and elsewhere, by EU, Bruce Smith, and others including myself. In fact, I think you and I have been through this at least one or more times already.
Your acceptance at face value of the so-called "FBI Map" needs to be reconsidered. First, I believe it was FBI agent Larry Carr who posted that map on DropZone and asked if anyone knew where it came from. There is no proof that the FBI generated that map or that it came from the USAF.
The radar facility at McChord AFB was probably a joint operation between the DOD and the FAA. It was probably manned by military personnel, civilian employees of DOD, and civilian employees of the FAA.
There is information online somewhere, and probably in 302s as well, that describes McChord AFB military personnel giving radar data and maps to what were apparently FBI agents. There is also information online stating that apparently the same information was sent to the NWA headquarters in Minneapolis.
Consequently, the so-called "FBI map" could be the work of DOD personnel, FBI agents, NWA personnel, all of the above, none of the above, little green men from Mars, or maybe some lunatic in a nut house. Who knows? But one thing is certain. No airliner would fly a route like that under those circumstances.
To point out a very simple and easy to see problem with the "FBI Map", at one time the airliner had a constant ground speed of approximately 180 Knots (Nautical Miles Per Hour) and the map indicates it flew 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and 6 Nautical miles in the very next minute. Would you care to attempt an explanation as to how that could have happened? Other such oddities exist.
Lastly, the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test. It simply does not make sense.
This is flat-out bs.
We have the history of who and what the evolution of the socalled FBI Flight Path is. Which by the way you contributed damned near nothing to! Others did the heavy lifting. You have been nothing more than a spectator during this whole affair eventually generating your own socalled WEST PATH which Sluggo allowed you to post on his site!
See the attached! :rofl:
Georger, other than your love for posting baloney to support your own theory, whatever it may be, there are other 302s and information that discuss how the data from McChord got TO NWA Minneapolis in the first place. The 302 you posted describes information coming FROM Minneapolis. And what was the basis for the initial jump location prediction and what was the time/date it was made?
And just exactly how did the "FBI Flight Path" evolve? While the jump location has evolved, I don't remember seeing anything about the flight path evolving.
How is your book coming along?
-
When exactly did the flight path change? I know several dropzone maps were made..I see a lot of discounting and yet some you use that material?
confusing...
-
Fly, the first document you posted is the subject of the chase planes making the maneuvers and not 305..I thought the same.
-
Not playing games. Just discussing the case.
I agree that those are the facts as you state them. I see nothing there that eliminates a central flight path.
I also disagree with your assessment that “someone F’d up”. While human error is possible, when you consider the real, tangible threat of a Soviet attack and the assortment of radar and radio tracking in that area and the acuteness of that particularly skyjacking, I think the possibility of someone “Fing up” is extremely low.” Those were highly trained military radar man. Screwing up could mean the lives of millions of Americans. Those guys didn’t “screw up” on the regular.
Now. I do not know if the FBI flight path math is exactly right. It’s written in pencil lol
But in general I think the airliner followed that general direction and did not veer to the west and over Tena Bar. My guess is that a much more detailed and much more accurate route map exists.
Georger - If I thought Tom Kaye would actually correspond with me, I might try, but my guess is that his inbox is filled with DBC questions and he deletes the ones who’s names he doesn’t recognize.
-
Robert99 and others,
What physical, contemporaneous evidence is there that indicates a western flight path? So far all I’ve heard is anecdotal evidence decades after the fact.
Also, I’m not familiar with everyone’s pet theories, but some of you seem to suggest it involves government conspiracies and cover ups. That strikes me as a convenient “deus ex machine” when the evidence trail runs out.
My Dear Chaucer,
If you elect to ignore all the evidence, then all possibilities are on the table!
And if Billy Shakespeare didn't say that, then I did.
-
What I say over and over would be how easy it would be for the crew to say they flew a straight line down to Portland. they had to see the map.
-
Traffic controllers I spoke with said it was very hard to pinpoint weather in one area. we have documentation from chase planes giving ground locations, radar operators as well. lots of things get discounted bad screens, Portland wasn't part of it etc. etc. and yet you say they avoided Portland because of the bomb? why wouldn't Portland track the plane...
-
But one thing is certain. No airliner would fly a route like that under those circumstances.
Why? And weren’t you the one who told me to be careful of talking in absolutes?
Lastly, the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test. It simply does not make sense
Why not? Again, gut feelings and “smell tests” aren’t evidence.
My point is that the only reason you and others push for a western flight path is to explain the Tena Bar find. But when you examine the money, you realize that dropping out of the air isn’t sufficient. It requires the money to be in the water.
My explanation accounts for all aspects of the case without resorting to dramatic departures from the known facts of the case.
Chaucer, the whole point is to explain how the money got to Tina Bar (the sign on the gate is T-I-N-A). The Western Flight Path does NOT require that the money land in the water. I suggest you check out the discredited Washougal washdown theory and make some effort to explain how the money ended up above the nominal water line at Tina Bar.
-
Agreed, georger.
Again, the question is not the path of the plane, but where the plane was when DBC jumped. I believe it was closer to the Columbia than believed, and the fact that over the years the drop zone has consistently moved south underscores that.
Actually, the question is the flight path of the airliner. It is a safe assumption that Cooper jumped somewhere along that flight path. Cooper couldn't jump from the airliner somewhere that wasn't on its flight path. If all else fails, try some logical assumptions.
-
The Ammerman story is getting somewhat twisted. Here is what he conveyed to me on multiple occasions, including when I met with him in-person:
1) 305 appeared to stay within V-23.
2) Given the location of the radar source (Salem) and the size of the depicted target on his screen, 305 could be located anywhere on the target display which involves several miles from one side to the other. Therefore, even though a portion of the target may be within V-23, in reality the jet could be on the left side of the target and therefore a handful of miles outside of V-23 proper.
3) The trailing T-33 was given one heading as it followed 305, thereby indicating that it did not need to make the erratic turns that the FBI Flight Path depicts...which suggests that 305 flew a straight line and not all over the place as if GEORGER were behind the wheel.
4) That said, if 305 did turn left, then right, then left again as shown on the FBI Flight Path map, he (Ammerman) wouldn't necessarily notice such activity on his screen---the resolution was not of a necessary high quality.
OK - #1 seems secure and agrees with what A told me several years before your interview.
#2 EU has previously posted: "Ammerman stated that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 NNW of PDX. Therefore, 305 was never north or east of PDX."
The previous Ammerman testimony is that he brought the T33 and 305 together south of Portland near Lake Oswego. This was shared with the whole Cooper community along with graphics and people discussed it. I seem to recall the T33 pilot was also interviewed ?
Keep in mind the T33 launched from the Natl Guard base at PDX then flew north and turned south .... and was brought in behind 305 near Lake Oswego by Ammerman personally, according to Ammerman's prior testimony. ? In order to achieve this intersection Ammerman had to talk to the T33 pilot on a military frequency (a separate radio) and that was the period, according to Ammerman, when he turned away from his screen briefly during which time 305 had made his turn to the south 'just' on the west side of Portland ... Ammerman looked back at his screen to get 305's current position and THAT is when Ammerman gave the T33 instructions for a rendezvous with 305, which happened near Lake Oswego south of Portland. This sequence of events has been posted and talk about for years, based on Ammerman's own description of events . Now this all changes with your interview for some reason! This is a wholesale revision of the facts previously given by Ammerman, according to you, EU.
It's my understanding the T33 was launched from PDX. It was not already in the air waiting when 305 was approaching PDX. Ammerman was very specific! Ammerman had to set up a rendezvous between T33 and 305 and that could only happen after 305 turned south. 305 was never north in the T33's intercept sector to make an intercept NORTH of Portland happen! By the time Ammerman wads done talking to the T33 pilot and looked back at his screen to set up a rendevois, 305 had turned south ... which now made an intercept of 305 by the T33 possible. 305 was never NNW of Portland to have a rendezvous with, as Mr. Ulis describes it!
Georger, the T-33 took off from PIA and headed WEST on a training mission. It was headed to a practice area (the location of which is never stated) or maybe to the Pacific Ocean.
The Malay Intersecton on V-23 is North Northwest (NNW) of Portland and that means the airliner was NNW of Portland as it approached Portland. Nothing supports the idea that the airliner was east of Portland.
It appears that everything Ammerman told EU and Bruce Smith supports the Western Flight Path.
The T33 training mission was cancelled! The T33 was never near Malay. Malay has nothing to do with this. The T33 Instructor-Pilot Norman Battaglia was interviewed and a synopsis of his mission intercepting 305 was published - as you very well know! More fun and games from R99 I see.
The T33 most certainly did not intercept 305 anywhere near Malay, if that is what you are trying to claim!
More later.
Thank G, do you know if the interview is anywhere online?
Im told Galen Cook has a copy of Tosaw's interview of Battaglia. Tosaw covers Battaglia in his book referenced by Snowmman in 2009 ... see:
https://www.dropzone.com/search/?q=T33&quick=1 or
https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56036-db-cooper/page/156/?tab=comments#comment-3083293
Ammerman's report to me matches Tosaw's Battaglia report including turning Battaglia toward Lake Oswego for an intercept with 305 near Lake Oswego ... SOUTH of Portland not NNW of Portland as per R99 and EU.
Snow posts in 2008:
" snowmman
August 1, 2008
we're correct on all the previous F-106 detail. that's as stated on Sluggo's site. (377: I mentioned before how apparently the F-106 were pretty bad at downward radar in a cluttered terrain scenario. Do you know any more about that? And no doppler radar? I took that all to mean that any F-106 painting of 305 was pretty poor)
The F-102's were additionally dispatched from Idaho Air National Guard, from Boise. But they didn't make contact.
The T33 trainer jet was diverted to follow.
Details from the T33. Note that Lake Oswego is south of Portland, so all their info doesn't help, since it was after the jump.
Norman Battaglia was going to Portland Air Base for a night training mission, about 5:30 pm. He and pilot Dick Perry went thru their pre-flight, took off around 7:50. Battaglia was Air National Guard officer, in back seat as instructor-pilot.
Shortly after they were airborne, they were told to switch radio to Seattle Center, and Seattle told them to trail 305....
They turned toward Lake Oswego, putting them about 3 miles behind 305. They made radar contact and noted 305 was changing course 45 degrees every 30 seconds. He had to throttle back to 135 knots and fly with landing gear and flaps down to maintain contact.
Near Eugene they were told to break contact, go to Kingsley Field in Klamath Falls.
They say they never saw the 727. At one point they were about 3/4 mile away.
Quote
Snow and others also posted about Battaglia in the 2008/2009 period. But again, when I interviewed Ammerman about the T33/305 intercept Ammerman's account was the same as Battaglia's account, to the letter.
I would suggest that DB and others read post #3108 above.
-
But one thing is certain. No airliner would fly a route like that under those circumstances.
Why? And weren’t you the one who told me to be careful of talking in absolutes?
Lastly, the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test. It simply does not make sense
Why not? Again, gut feelings and “smell tests” aren’t evidence.
My point is that the only reason you and others push for a western flight path is to explain the Tena Bar find. But when you examine the money, you realize that dropping out of the air isn’t sufficient. It requires the money to be in the water.
My explanation accounts for all aspects of the case without resorting to dramatic departures from the known facts of the case.
The "smell test" reveals that the FBI flight path is so weird that it indicates the airliner would not fly something like that in the first place. I would just love to see your explanation of the time problems mentioned above.
-
Robert99 and others,
What physical, contemporaneous evidence is there that indicates a western flight path? So far all I’ve heard is anecdotal evidence decades after the fact.
Also, I’m not familiar with everyone’s pet theories, but some of you seem to suggest it involves government conspiracies and cover ups. That strikes me as a convenient “deus ex machine” when the evidence trail runs out.
My Dear Chaucer,
If you elect to ignore all the evidence, then all possibilities are on the table!
I can’t ignore evidence that hasn’t been presented! :rofl:
-
Not playing games. Just discussing the case.
I agree that those are the facts as you state them. I see nothing there that eliminates a central flight path.
I also disagree with your assessment that “someone F’d up”. While human error is possible, when you consider the real, tangible threat of a Soviet attack and the assortment of radar and radio tracking in that area and the acuteness of that particularly skyjacking, I think the possibility of someone “Fing up” is extremely low.” Those were highly trained military radar man. Screwing up could mean the lives of millions of Americans. Those guys didn’t “screw up” on the regular.
Now. I do not know if the FBI flight path math is exactly right. It’s written in pencil lol
But in general I think the airliner followed that general direction and did not veer to the west and over Tena Bar. My guess is that a much more detailed and much more accurate route map exists.
Georger - If I thought Tom Kaye would actually correspond with me, I might try, but my guess is that his inbox is filled with DBC questions and he deletes the ones who’s names he doesn’t recognize.
So let's debate:
You stated, "I agree that those are the facts as you state them. I see nothing there that eliminates a central flight path."
To the contrary, the placard find and the fiberglass skirt find absolutely prove that the FBI map is incorrect at those points. That said, if they're off at these two points how can you assume they're not off at some other critical points?
Also, if you consider where the money was discovered and the conditions under which it was discovered you begin to realize that the FBI search area derived from the FBI Flight Path map simply doesn't make sense.
One other thing, I have heard the "SAGE looks for Soviet threats, therefore, tracking 305 would be easy" line several times. This is grossly misleading. Here's how:
1) How do you know that SAGE was even used to track the airliner? Is it because in an FBI file an agent who wrote a 302 said so?
2) The map was crafted from data collected after the fact (2-days). That is not the same thing as following a threat in real time.
3) If SAGE was the be-all-end-all in this case, why then did the map also require data from NWO flight ops in Minneapolis, and flight data recorder info from the airliner? Are we to assume that SAGE would require similar data from the Soviets to track an encroachment into US territory from them?
4) We know for a fact that the SAGE component related to directing the F-106s to 305 was not working that night--this was quite common.
-
Robert99 and others,
What physical, contemporaneous evidence is there that indicates a western flight path? So far all I’ve heard is anecdotal evidence decades after the fact.
Also, I’m not familiar with everyone’s pet theories, but some of you seem to suggest it involves government conspiracies and cover ups. That strikes me as a convenient “deus ex machine” when the evidence trail runs out.
My Dear Chaucer,
If you elect to ignore all the evidence, then all possibilities are on the table!
I can’t ignore evidence that hasn’t been presented! :rofl:
While I do appreciate your efforts at humor, honestly I do, you are saying that you haven't read anything that has been posted here or on DropZone for the past 10 years. Happy are those fellows who chose to remain clueless, but it is their choice.
-
I find it interesting, similar to suspects discrediting evidence. by the time the excuses are done it's amazing planes stayed in the sky and not crashing into one another. fuzzy or unclear screens,useless FDR's, radar operator's not paying attention in Portland.
1) Documentation surrounding area's close the the map made by the Air Force
2) Documents surround wind were also in the files..
3) Ground locations given by radar operator's..
4) Documents show the SAGE was used..they had both radar's.
5) Chase plane documentation..
6) The SAGE was used 24/7. every commercial airliner/private had to be tagged 24/7. the SAGE had to run constantly as protection. probably was a good exercise/drill for them. they had to know what was in the sky 24/7...
7) Weather changes also documented, wind changes..
We have a lot of people involved in the path. it's a lot harder to discredit many vs discrediting one person making the whole thing. I get a little confused when someone says there is nothing to support the path? regardless to the multiple answers the crew has given. not one spoke of flying a straight line....no radar reports it, the FDR doesn't support it..chase planes don't mention a straight line etc...?
If he did get away clean. what would be found in the path. not a lot of evidence to cover to begin with?
-
I'll just throw this out there:
I am willing to debate anyone--I mean anyone--concerning the validity of the FBI Flight Path versus the Western Flight Path on The Cooper Vortex.
I believe Darren would welcome this type of back-and-forth on his show. Moreover, it's very difficult to get much substantive across--and to counter-argue a point--in a web forum setting. On the other hand, a podcast affords both sides the opportunity to make points and counter-points in real-time and in a conversational manner.
So, again, as an advocate of the Western Flight Path, I welcome the opportunity to debate this matter on Darren's podcast (assuming he's willing to grant us the time) in a respectful and substantive manner so that others can listen and decide for themselves what sounds plausible and likely.
-
Is he set up for multiple calls or how many at one time without constant talk overs..
-
I'll just throw this out there:
I am willing to debate anyone--I mean anyone--concerning the validity of the FBI Flight Path versus the Western Flight Path on The Cooper Vortex.
I believe Darren would welcome this type of back-and-forth on his show. Moreover, it's very difficult to get much substantive across--and to counter-argue a point--in a web forum setting. On the other hand, a podcast affords both sides the opportunity to make points and counter-points in real-time and in a conversational manner.
So, again, as an advocate of the Western Flight Path, I welcome the opportunity to debate this matter on Darren's podcast (assuming he's willing to grant us the time) in a respectful and substantive manner so that others can listen and decide for themselves what sounds plausible and likely.
That sounds FANTASTIC.
-
Is he set up for multiple calls or how many at one time without constant talk overs..
Darren and his engineer do a decent job of minimizing those issues.
-
How many can be on at a time?
-
I, for one, would love to hear that. Unless, that is, it becomes a shouting match with everyone talking over each other, or a passive-aggressive insult session.
But if all parties acted like respectful adults and stuck to the facts with Darren as an impartial moderator, I think it would be great.
That said, EU, you keep referring to the placard as evidence for a western flight path. It’s just the opposite. It was literally right along the central flight path - in fact is was about 2 or 3 miles west of the flight path which coincides with the wind direction and time adrift.
Finally, I’d be curious to hear your opinion on Tom Kaye’s research into the money and it indicating that it was in the water for an extended period of time, particularly as you favor the idea that Cooper landed and immediately buried it. How did it get wet?
-
I'm not worried about any insults. it becomes an issue with a certain amount of people on one line..nothing that can't be controlled..
-
That said, EU, you keep referring to the placard as evidence for a western flight path. It’s just the opposite. It was literally right along the central flight path - in fact is was about 2 or 3 miles west of the flight path which coincides with the wind direction and time adrift.
The placard was found approximately one mile WEST of the FBI Flight Path. This is a major problem for the FBI Flight Path.
Why?
Because the winds were blowing to the NORTHEAST that night at close to 30 knots when the placard separated from the jet. R99's analysis showed that the placard would drift approximately 8 miles to the NORTHEAST before landing in the forest.
The problems this poses for the FBI Flight Path should be self-evident by now.
-
I believe Flyjack found a more accurate reading of winds in the area and then we have this document..
-
I, for one, would love to hear that. Unless, that is, it becomes a shouting match with everyone talking over each other, or a passive-aggressive insult session.
But if all parties acted like respectful adults and stuck to the facts with Darren as an impartial moderator, I think it would be great.
That said, EU, you keep referring to the placard as evidence for a western flight path. It’s just the opposite. It was literally right along the central flight path - in fact is was about 2 or 3 miles west of the flight path which coincides with the wind direction and time adrift.
Finally, I’d be curious to hear your opinion on Tom Kaye’s research into the money and it indicating that it was in the water for an extended period of time, particularly as you favor the idea that Cooper landed and immediately buried it. How did it get wet?
Oh God I just die for more lab work - but that's me. These issues always come down to something that could be resolved (or clarified) by more and better lab work. Lab work eliminates guessing and conjecture.
-
One factor with Fly's numbers is being ground speeds...winds aloft can differ..
-
The placard was found approximately two and a half miles EAST of the center line of V 23.
-
Robert99 and others,
What physical, contemporaneous evidence is there that indicates a western flight path? So far all I’ve heard is anecdotal evidence decades after the fact.
Also, I’m not familiar with everyone’s pet theories, but some of you seem to suggest it involves government conspiracies and cover ups. That strikes me as a convenient “deus ex machine” when the evidence trail runs out.
Chaucer, if all you have heard is "anecdotal evidence" then you must have missed the posts above, and elsewhere, by EU, Bruce Smith, and others including myself. In fact, I think you and I have been through this at least one or more times already.
Your acceptance at face value of the so-called "FBI Map" needs to be reconsidered. First, I believe it was FBI agent Larry Carr who posted that map on DropZone and asked if anyone knew where it came from. There is no proof that the FBI generated that map or that it came from the USAF.
The radar facility at McChord AFB was probably a joint operation between the DOD and the FAA. It was probably manned by military personnel, civilian employees of DOD, and civilian employees of the FAA.
There is information online somewhere, and probably in 302s as well, that describes McChord AFB military personnel giving radar data and maps to what were apparently FBI agents. There is also information online stating that apparently the same information was sent to the NWA headquarters in Minneapolis.
Consequently, the so-called "FBI map" could be the work of DOD personnel, FBI agents, NWA personnel, all of the above, none of the above, little green men from Mars, or maybe some lunatic in a nut house. Who knows? But one thing is certain. No airliner would fly a route like that under those circumstances.
To point out a very simple and easy to see problem with the "FBI Map", at one time the airliner had a constant ground speed of approximately 180 Knots (Nautical Miles Per Hour) and the map indicates it flew 3 Nautical Miles in one minute and 6 Nautical miles in the very next minute. Would you care to attempt an explanation as to how that could have happened? Other such oddities exist.
Lastly, the FBI flight path doesn't pass the smell test. It simply does not make sense.
This is flat-out bs.
We have the history of who and what the evolution of the socalled FBI Flight Path is. Which by the way you contributed damned near nothing to! Others did the heavy lifting. You have been nothing more than a spectator during this whole affair eventually generating your own socalled WEST PATH which Sluggo allowed you to post on his site!
See the attached! :rofl:
Georger, other than your love for posting baloney to support your own theory, whatever it may be, there are other 302s and information that discuss how the data from McChord got TO NWA Minneapolis in the first place. The 302 you posted describes information coming FROM Minneapolis. And what was the basis for the initial jump location prediction and what was the time/date it was made?
And just exactly how did the "FBI Flight Path" evolve? While the jump location has evolved, I don't remember seeing anything about the flight path evolving.
How is your book coming along?
Since your post covers at least 5 topics which do you want a reply to?
How is your book coming along? ::)
-
I believe Flyjack found a more accurate reading of winds in the area and then we have this document..
The most accurate measurement of the winds aloft was done by the NOAA (I think it was). Tom Kaye obtained those measurements, which were made by weather balloons, and posted them on this site a number of months ago.
Basically, the winds aloft from about 1000 feet above sea level (out of the ground influences) to 10,000 feet above sea level were from the Southwest (245 degrees true) and around 30 Knots in speed with the winds at 10,000 feet being slightly more than 30 Knots.
-
The placard was found approximately two and a half miles EAST of the center line of V 23.
The placard find in relation to the V23 centerline is meaningless. The only thing that matters is the relation of the placard find to where the FBI said the jet itself was flying. Therefore, to discover the placard to the WEST of the FBI Flight Path is very problematic considering the winds were heading toward the northeast. Simply put, the FBI's identified location of the jet cannot be accurate. It had to have been several miles WEST.
-
Basically you would say the plane was 8 miles west of the placard..the problems I see with this is the amount of time on the ground with something that weighs next to nothing..pinpointing weather the plane and placard is a nightmare in itself IMO..
-
What next?
It has been obvious for years that R99 and EU are going to stick to their west path agenda, no matter what anyone says. I think that's 100% accurate. This isn't about evidence and discussion. It's a one sided debate! That prediction has a higher accuracy rate based on time and energy spent alone, than any prediction associated with ANY FLIGHT PATH or ANY MONEY FIND THEORY. Personality and mission defines methodology in this case. Las Vegas could give odds on that happening!
At some point either 99 or EU could simply say: 'well I see you have run out of debating points - everyone has spoken and you still havent proved your case. Therefore the west path stands - proven by attrition if nothing else!' The last man standing principle. Them vs Us. The last man standing wins.
I see no point in discussing anything else because there can be no real discussion. That's my sense of where this is at.
-
The placard was found approximately two and a half miles EAST of the center line of V 23.
The placard find in relation to the V23 centerline is meaningless. The only thing that matters is the relation of the placard find to where the FBI said the jet itself was flying. Therefore, to discover the placard to the WEST of the FBI Flight Path is very problematic considering the winds were heading toward the northeast. Simply put, the FBI's identified location of the jet cannot be accurate. It had to have been several miles WEST.
So, you’ll use the FBI flight path when it’s convenient and dismiss it when it’s not?
Look, you’re ignoring a third possibility. That the flight was tow or three miles west of the the V23 centerline it not so far west as to put it to the west of I-5.
-
So, you’ll use the FBI flight path when it’s convenient and dismiss it when it’s not?
I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. I think you need to re-read what I've been writing about this all along.
-
I’m not arguing that the FBI flight as presented in the penciled map is perfectly accurate. I think there’s a margin of error. But I don’t think that margin extends all the way west to Centralia and Woodland. If the path was a two or three miles west of the V23 centerline it would still be in the V23 and it would account for the placard location. It’s not magical.
-
My understanding from Ammerman is that the western edge of V-23 is at Woodland and the I-5. From there it extends 9.2 statute miles eastwards. Battleground is approximately 8 miles east of the I-5. So everything kinda fits.
In addition, Heisson and Amboy are in the 12-14-mile-east range of Woodland.
-
Skyvector indicates I-5 being around 3 NM to Battleground Vortac. the range to the Columbia will differ since they don't run parallel to each other. Columbia river is approx. 7 NM from Battleground Vortac and around 6 NM from T bar to V-23 (center)
-
My understanding from Ammerman is that the western edge of V-23 is at Woodland and the I-5. From there it extends 9.2 statute miles eastwards. Battleground is approximately 8 miles east of the I-5. So everything kinda fits.
In addition, Heisson and Amboy are in the 12-14-mile-east range of Woodland.
Follow your own reporting/interviews. Focus on that! It's worth noting that the AF had a tactical (Defense Mission) interest in knowing where 305 was. This is all happening on 11/24 in real time. This was a real time defense mission with lawful options open and available. This was NOT some bunch of Cooper aficionados speculating about some hijacking going on with who-what-where and would there be a Cooper Con this year? I am relatively certain Scott/Rataczak/Anderson were aware of the military tactical options now on the table should their hijacked plane come to pose an actual risk to the public or National Defense, based on events unfolding. The F-106's had an actual tactical mission. This was no game.
As a result a review of the matter was conducted - routine: "The flight path coordinates were calculated from data tape recorded at the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (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. It was all in a day's work for them.
The flightpath was produced by experts. Within the limits of its precision, it is right. Unfortunately, the precision is only one minute of latitude and longitude. And, the times associated with the plotted points may be off by a minute. AND, it appears we don't know accurately WHEN Coop jumped due to the pilot not calling it in, except that the NWA and USAF people who did the '72 search zone map thought (with benefit of the "pressure bump" signature on the flight data recorder) that he jumped at about 19 seconds before 8:11. That could off off by a minute or two and everyone realized that."
Very like the FAA was given a report.
-
My understanding from Ammerman is that the western edge of V-23 is at Woodland and the I-5. From there it extends 9.2 statute miles eastwards. Battleground is approximately 8 miles east of the I-5. So everything kinda fits.
In addition, Heisson and Amboy are in the 12-14-mile-east range of Woodland.
Follow your own reporting/interviews. Focus on that! It's worth noting that the AF had a tactical (Defense Mission) interest in knowing where 305 was. This is all happening on 11/24 in real time. This was a real time defense mission with lawful options open and available. This was NOT some bunch of Cooper aficionados speculating about some hijacking going on with who-what-where and would there be a Cooper Con this year? I am relatively certain Scott/Rataczak/Anderson were aware of the military tactical options now on the table should their hijacked plane come to pose an actual risk to the public or National Defense, based on events unfolding. The F-106's had an actual tactical mission. This was no game.
As a result a review of the matter was conducted - routine: "The flight path coordinates were calculated from data tape recorded at the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (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. It was all in a day's work for them.
The flightpath was produced by experts. Within the limits of its precision, it is right. Unfortunately, the precision is only one minute of latitude and longitude. And, the times associated with the plotted points may be off by a minute. AND, it appears we don't know accurately WHEN Coop jumped due to the pilot not calling it in, except that the NWA and USAF people who did the '72 search zone map thought (with benefit of the "pressure bump" signature on the flight data recorder) that he jumped at about 19 seconds before 8:11. That could off off by a minute or two and everyone realized that."
Very like the FAA was given a report.
Georger, you continue to ignore the very simple fact that the 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC transcripts were intended to remove any possibility of determining the exact location of the airliner in the Portland area. And those transcripts are actually in the public domain.
-
the 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC transcripts were intended to remove any possibility of determining the exact location of the airliner in the Portland area.
Basically, you are saying the exact locations are known by the FBI but they went ahead and looked in the wrong location?
-
The "redaction" starts 12 seconds into the flight. what could they be covering up? some places have seconds to have something "redacted" between known transmissions..that would be two communications in seconds..one has a 5 second break between..then it goes past the point of the jump. all the way to 9:38.
Was the transcripts redacted when Paul S. was making the plots for the LZ..wouldn't he be able to simple lay it out vs tweaking the LZ with multiple maps? at what point did the Air Force, Paul and the FBI decide to redact or was it just the FBI's doing? or is it similar to what Ammerman claimed of other transmissions not related to the hijacking removed..It's a little confusing and screams conspiracy. not that that can't happen but that's what it implies...
-
Skyvector indicates I-5 being around 3 NM to Battleground Vortac. the range to the Columbia will differ since they don't run parallel to each other. Columbia river is approx. 7 NM from Battleground Vortac and around 6 NM from T bar to V-23 (center)
I was estimating distances from the Starbucks in Woodland to the Starbucks in Battleground. I should have been more specific. ( smile...)
-
Skyvector indicates I-5 being around 3 NM to Battleground Vortac. the range to the Columbia will differ since they don't run parallel to each other. Columbia river is approx. 7 NM from Battleground Vortac and around 6 NM from T bar to V-23 (center)
I was estimating distances from the Starbucks in Woodland to the Starbucks in Battleground. I should have been more specific. ( smile...)
It’s a well known fact that Cooper couldn’t resist a warm caramel macchiato with whipped cream. :rofl:
-
Who can?
-
the 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC transcripts were intended to remove any possibility of determining the exact location of the airliner in the Portland area.
Basically, you are saying the exact locations are known by the FBI but they went ahead and looked in the wrong location?
No. But I am sure that the Seattle ATC transcripts, with the embedded GMT times, could pinpoint the jump location much better than anything else.
As I have said before, I think the FBI was ill served by whoever the "experts" (with the FBI it always has to be an "expert") were that worked on this with them. Maybe the FBI agents just flipped a coin and said we are going with this/that scenario.
And frankly, I don't see any particular reason for the Flight Data Recorder being of any great use in determining the flight path. It should be remembered that the FBI apparently didn't talk to the flight crew members after their interviews in Reno. Maybe if they had, Captain Scott would not have found it necessary to claim that the FBI flight path was wrong as I understand he did.
-
Who would do this and make Paul and the Air Force come to false conclusions? how would the Air Force skip over the obvious, or Paul saying "something is wrong here" ? who got the transcripts first and what would the FBI even know about them if they got them first?
-
Did George Harrison redact his notes?
-
The "redaction" starts 12 seconds into the flight. what could they be covering up? some places have seconds to have something "redacted" between known transmissions..that would be two communications in seconds..one has a 5 second break between..then it goes past the point of the jump. all the way to 9:38.
Was the transcripts redacted when Paul S. was making the plots for the LZ..wouldn't he be able to simple lay it out vs tweaking the LZ with multiple maps? at what point did the Air Force, Paul and the FBI decide to redact or was it just the FBI's doing? or is it similar to what Ammerman claimed of other transmissions not related to the hijacking removed..It's a little confusing and screams conspiracy. not that that can't happen but that's what it implies...
As I have pointed out repeatedly, if you want to know what the Seattle ATC transcripts should look like just take a look at the Oakland ATC and Reno transcripts. They don't have a single redaction. They are textbook ATC communications for the 1971 era.
-
They could of cleared the air by that time? The FDR was examined "minutely" with altitude and heading would be a very useful tool?
-
Who would do this and make Paul and the Air Force come to false conclusions? how would the Air Force skip over the obvious, or Paul saying "something is wrong here" ? who got the transcripts first and what would the FBI even know about them if they got them first?
The FBI apparently got the Seattle ATC transcripts first and both the ATC station chiefs in Seattle and Oakland "certified" that their transcripts were "complete and true". This is not the case for Seattle ATC transcript that has been publicly released.
-
You have no reason to believe the Air Force was plotting the path prior to making the map. they have both radar's? then they allow Paul to make multiple drop maps and spend thousands of dollars, couple hundreds men, planes, helicopters looking in the wrong location for weeks on end just so only they were the only one's who knew where he jumped? kind of crazy no?
-
What would this be?
-
You have no reason to believe the Air Force was plotting the path prior to making the map. they have both radar's? then they allow Paul to make multiple drop maps and spend thousands of dollars, couple hundreds men, planes, helicopters looking in the wrong location for weeks on end just so only they were the only one's who knew where he jumped? kind of crazy no?
I have never claimed that the Air Force was plotting the path prior to making the map. The USAF and Seattle ATC controllers were probably using the information from the same radar station at McChord AFB. That raw information was without question being recorded since that was the customary practice in 1971 as well as today.
-
I didn't question whether you said that..I questioned whether or not you would believe they might of plotted the course while it was on going..Wasn't NORAD tracking as well?
It's just odd the FBI would withhold critical data to Northwest airlines who was monitoring the flight anyway, along with the Air Force. the Harrison notes don't have critical data either?
-
I didn't question whether you said that..I questioned whether or not you would believe they might of plotted the course while it was on going..Wasn't NORAD tracking as well?
It's just odd the FBI would withhold critical data to Northwest airlines who was monitoring the flight anyway, along with the Air Force. the Harrison notes don't have critical data either?
There is no reason for NORAD to be tracking this airliner even if was monitoring the hijacking and it probably was. NORAD was concerned with things a bit further away from Seattle. The alert and armed F-106 aircraft from McChord were probably under the ultimate control of NORAD but I doubt that they would have shot down the civilian airliner over the continental US without military and political authorization from the highest levels in DC.
A few years ago, a prominent golfer was on a LearJet that lost pressurization while on autopilot (but not altitude hold) which resulted in every one on board dying. The aircraft continued to fly from Florida trailed by F-16s but ran out of fuel and and eventually crashed in a remote area near the Canadian border. My understanding is that POTUS was informed of the problem and that he might have to make a decision about shooting it down if that became necessary, but fortunately it didn't.
-
Did George Harrison redact his notes?
There is no indication that Harrison redacted his notes or that he gave them to the FBI. But the ARINC teletype records were redacted according to Fred Poynter at the WSHM.
-
This is my point..it doesn't make any sense to redact anything related to the flight path unless it's going to be public knowledge. why in the world would they try to hide things from people involved while listening to the hijacking live, and taking notes. removing radio transmissions from other pilots might be considered redacting if they removed them prior to releasing the transcripts to anyone?
I could see the FBI possibly doing something like this down the road but certainly not straight out of the gate causing the FBI a lot of money knowing they were searching in the wrong location. then you would have NWO asking questions surrounding what they heard and what the map shows. the Air Force scratching there heads..who told the radar operator's to say what they did on record given possibly ground locations and correcting positions to V-23? this would be a rather large audience to try and bluff. why didn't the FBI look where only they believed he jumped? nobody reported any search parties around the Columbia, right. they just let him go?
I think we have a huge communication break down with all involved. Pilots failed to properly identify the location. didn't seem to have any real concern about Cooper still on the plane after 8:20 ish..might be on the plane, might not? reports over the years from the FBI saying "we really didn't know where he jumped" I kinda stick to my thoughts of them getting caught with there pants down..scramble mania....
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWekX0EgmLg
-
I didn't question whether you said that..I questioned whether or not you would believe they might of plotted the course while it was on going..Wasn't NORAD tracking as well?
It's just odd the FBI would withhold critical data to Northwest airlines who was monitoring the flight anyway, along with the Air Force. the Harrison notes don't have critical data either?
There is no reason for NORAD to be tracking this airliner even if was monitoring the hijacking and it probably was. NORAD was concerned with things a bit further away from Seattle. The alert and armed F-106 aircraft from McChord were probably under the ultimate control of NORAD but I doubt that they would have shot down the civilian airliner over the continental US without military and political authorization from the highest levels in DC.
A few years ago, a prominent golfer was on a LearJet that lost pressurization while on autopilot (but not altitude hold) which resulted in every one on board dying. The aircraft continued to fly from Florida trailed by F-16s but ran out of fuel and and eventually crashed in a remote area near the Canadian border. My understanding is that POTUS was informed of the problem and that he might have to make a decision about shooting it down if that became necessary, but fortunately it didn't.
Agree. No way 305 would have been shot down without the Highest authorisation. However, if Cooper had killed the crew and taken control of the plane and was diving on Portland .... all bets are off. I doubt the F106's could have intervened in time?
-
Did George Harrison redact his notes?
There is no indication that Harrison redacted his notes or that he gave them to the FBI. But the ARINC teletype records were redacted according to Fred Poynter at the WSHM.
Didnt Fred Poynter base that on several people looking at the transcripts ? Is Fred Poynter qualified to make such a judgement on his own?
-
This is my point..it doesn't make any sense to redact anything related to the flight path unless it's going to be public knowledge. why in the world would they try to hide things from people involved while listening to the hijacking live, and taking notes. removing radio transmissions from other pilots might be considered redacting if they removed them prior to releasing the transcripts to anyone?
I could see the FBI possibly doing something like this down the road but certainly not straight out of the gate causing the FBI a lot of money knowing they were searching in the wrong location. then you would have NWO asking questions surrounding what they heard and what the map shows. the Air Force scratching there heads..who told the radar operator's to say what they did on record given possibly ground locations and correcting positions to V-23? this would be a rather large audience to try and bluff. why didn't the FBI look where only they believed he jumped? nobody reported any search parties around the Columbia, right. they just let him go?
I think we have a huge communication break down with all involved. Pilots failed to properly identify the location. didn't seem to have any real concern about Cooper still on the plane after 8:20 ish..might be on the plane, might not? reports over the years from the FBI saying "we really didn't know where he jumped" I kinda stick to my thoughts of them getting caught with there pants down..scramble mania....
I think we have a huge communication break down with all involved. Pilots failed to properly identify the location. didn't seem to have any real concern about Cooper still on the plane after 8:20 ish..might be on the plane, might not? reports over the years from the FBI saying "we really didn't know where he jumped" I kinda stick to my thoughts of them getting caught with there pants down..scramble mania....
TAG team members who were interviewed said the Air Force analysis group was aware the 305 crew dropped the ball, especially in waiting to call in the oscillation/pressure spike ... thus BD's statement:
"AND, it appears we don't know accurately when Cooper jumped due to the pilot not calling it in, except that the NWA and USAF people who did the '72 search zone map thought (with benefit of the "pressure bump" signature on the flight data recorder) that he jumped at about 19 seconds before 8:11. That could off off by a minute or two and everyone realized that."
These uncertainties are why the NWA Search map is a probability map with zones/lines of certainty vs uncertainty. Otherwise their map would have a small box on it saying - this when and where DB jumped and landed!
-
This is my point..it doesn't make any sense to redact anything related to the flight path unless it's going to be public knowledge. why in the world would they try to hide things from people involved while listening to the hijacking live, and taking notes. removing radio transmissions from other pilots might be considered redacting if they removed them prior to releasing the transcripts to anyone?
I could see the FBI possibly doing something like this down the road but certainly not straight out of the gate causing the FBI a lot of money knowing they were searching in the wrong location. then you would have NWO asking questions surrounding what they heard and what the map shows. the Air Force scratching there heads..who told the radar operator's to say what they did on record given possibly ground locations and correcting positions to V-23? this would be a rather large audience to try and bluff. why didn't the FBI look where only they believed he jumped? nobody reported any search parties around the Columbia, right. they just let him go?
I think we have a huge communication break down with all involved. Pilots failed to properly identify the location. didn't seem to have any real concern about Cooper still on the plane after 8:20 ish..might be on the plane, might not? reports over the years from the FBI saying "we really didn't know where he jumped" I kinda stick to my thoughts of them getting caught with there pants down..scramble mania....
Shutter, let me remind you that there were two lines of communications between the airliner and the people on the ground.
First, there were standard air traffic control communications between the airliner and Seattle ATC. It is these communications that have 19 redactions and which the FBI refuses to release. These communications were strictly for air traffic control purposes only.
Second, there were voice communications between the airliner through a radio link over the ARINC network that connected the Seattle NWA station and NWA Minneapolis to the airliner. These voice communications were also transmitted over the ARINC teletype system to NWA Seattle and NWA Minneapolis. These communications did not involve air traffic control.
Thanks to the George Harrison family, Fred Poynter's group had access to the NWA ARINC teletype print outs. Poynter's group made a study of those print outs and determined that several were missing. That means that some teletype print outs had been removed/redacted.
With the so-called FBI flight path, it is easy to understand why the FBI couldn't figure out where Cooper jumped.
All of this has been discussed to death several times over the years.
-
This is my point..it doesn't make any sense to redact anything related to the flight path unless it's going to be public knowledge. why in the world would they try to hide things from people involved while listening to the hijacking live, and taking notes. removing radio transmissions from other pilots might be considered redacting if they removed them prior to releasing the transcripts to anyone?
I could see the FBI possibly doing something like this down the road but certainly not straight out of the gate causing the FBI a lot of money knowing they were searching in the wrong location. then you would have NWO asking questions surrounding what they heard and what the map shows. the Air Force scratching there heads..who told the radar operator's to say what they did on record given possibly ground locations and correcting positions to V-23? this would be a rather large audience to try and bluff. why didn't the FBI look where only they believed he jumped? nobody reported any search parties around the Columbia, right. they just let him go?
I think we have a huge communication break down with all involved. Pilots failed to properly identify the location. didn't seem to have any real concern about Cooper still on the plane after 8:20 ish..might be on the plane, might not? reports over the years from the FBI saying "we really didn't know where he jumped" I kinda stick to my thoughts of them getting caught with there pants down..scramble mania....
Shutter, let me remind you that there were two lines of communications between the airliner and the people on the ground.
First, there were standard air traffic control communications between the airliner and Seattle ATC. It is these communications that have 19 redactions and which the FBI refuses to release. These communications were strictly for air traffic control purposes only.
Second, there were voice communications between the airliner through a radio link over the ARINC network that connected the Seattle NWA station and NWA Minneapolis to the airliner. These voice communications were also transmitted over the ARINC teletype system to NWA Seattle and NWA Minneapolis. These communications did not involve air traffic control.
Thanks to the George Harrison family, Fred Poynter's group had access to the NWA ARINC teletype print outs. Poynter's group made a study of those print outs and determined that several were missing. That means that some teletype print outs had been removed/redacted.
With the so-called FBI flight path, it is easy to understand why the FBI couldn't figure out where Cooper jumped.
All of this has been discussed to death several times over the years.
All of this has been discussed to death several thousand times by you over the years. Time after time after time! Obsession. Anything new?
-
The refusal to release is standard practice with the FBI and all law enforcement with open cases..this is something I repeat to Blevins in reference to the Amboy chute. regardless of it's outcome it's still part of the case and they will not release anything surrounding it..
I have serious doubt anything was disturbed during the periods they needed the info..if in fact something is missing now it's understandable since the FBI wishes parts to be left out of the public eye which is there choice. not the best but they are running the show. they redact numbers and addresses that are no longer used..what's the purpose..some of it's ridiculous that they redact.
-
Thanks to the George Harrison family, Fred Poynter's group had access to the NWA ARINC teletype print outs. Poynter's group made a study of those print outs and determined that several were missing.
This was how many years after the fact? If sections were removed vs using dots does it automatically imply it was done in 1971 or prior to releasing them. that was the continuous roll shown in a photo, correct?
-
The refusal to release is standard practice with the FBI and all law enforcement with open cases..this is something I repeat to Blevins in reference to the Amboy chute. regardless of it's outcome it's still part of the case and they will not release anything surrounding it..
I have serious doubt anything was disturbed during the periods they needed the info..if in fact something is missing now it's understandable since the FBI wishes parts to be left out of the public eye which is there choice. not the best but they are running the show. they redact numbers and addresses that are no longer used..what's the purpose..some of it's ridiculous that they redact.
As has been previously discussed, the FBI did not redact a single thing in the Oakland ATC and Reno transcripts or the other transcripts. However, 19 redactions were made to the Seattle ATC transcripts with the result that the airliner's location cannot be pinpointed during its time in the Portland/Vancouver area. It is obvious that the 19 redactions were deliberately done to prevent that flight path being known.
-
The refusal to release is standard practice with the FBI and all law enforcement with open cases..this is something I repeat to Blevins in reference to the Amboy chute. regardless of it's outcome it's still part of the case and they will not release anything surrounding it..
I have serious doubt anything was disturbed during the periods they needed the info..if in fact something is missing now it's understandable since the FBI wishes parts to be left out of the public eye which is there choice. not the best but they are running the show. they redact numbers and addresses that are no longer used..what's the purpose..some of it's ridiculous that they redact.
As has been previously discussed, the FBI did not redact a single thing in the Oakland ATC and Reno transcripts or the other transcripts. However, 19 redactions were made to the Seattle ATC transcripts with the result that the airliner's location cannot be pinpointed during its time in the Portland/Vancouver area. It is obvious that the 19 redactions were deliberately done to prevent that flight path being known.
How do you know it was the FBI that performed socalled "redactions" ?
Tell us the history of the Transcript! Who wrote it and passed it on to others including the FBI? Who was in charge of compiling this Transcript from beginning to end? Who in that chain of people or agencies made the redactions, socalled? Why didn't Poynter tell us?
19 Redactions.
Carr shared a copy of the Transcript with Sluggo who published it. The Seattle PI published it some time earlier than that.
-
The refusal to release is standard practice with the FBI and all law enforcement with open cases..this is something I repeat to Blevins in reference to the Amboy chute. regardless of it's outcome it's still part of the case and they will not release anything surrounding it..
I have serious doubt anything was disturbed during the periods they needed the info..if in fact something is missing now it's understandable since the FBI wishes parts to be left out of the public eye which is there choice. not the best but they are running the show. they redact numbers and addresses that are no longer used..what's the purpose..some of it's ridiculous that they redact.
As has been previously discussed, the FBI did not redact a single thing in the Oakland ATC and Reno transcripts or the other transcripts. However, 19 redactions were made to the Seattle ATC transcripts with the result that the airliner's location cannot be pinpointed during its time in the Portland/Vancouver area. It is obvious that the 19 redactions were deliberately done to prevent that flight path being known.
How do you know it was the FBI that performed socalled "redactions" ?
Tell us the history of the Transcript! Who wrote it and passed it on to others including the FBI? Who was in charge of compiling this Transcript from beginning to end? Who in that chain of people or agencies made the redactions, socalled? Why didn't Poynter tell us?
19 Redactions.
Carr shared a copy of the Transcript with Sluggo who published it. The Seattle PI published it some time earlier than that.
Georger,
Get your head out of wherever it is! Where is it anyway? You obviously haven't been paying attention here for the last 10 years.
-
Wouldn't the transcripts fall under jurisdiction of the FAA? could the FBI just take what they want...
-
Wouldn't the transcripts fall under jurisdiction of the FAA? could the FBI just take what they want...
The FAA is responsible for the transcripts and the Seattle ATC Chief and the Oakland ATC Chief did prepare transcripts of their agencies communication with the airliner and both chiefs swore that their transcripts were "complete and true". The FAA is mandated to keep all records of aircraft accidents and incidents for just about forever. So those radio transcripts still exist and are in the FAA files and the FBI has copies. Neither the FAA nor the FBI has denied that those transcripts exist, only that they are not being released for some unspecified reason.
At the start of my efforts to get an unredacted copy of the Seattle ATC transcripts, I filed an FOIA request with the FAA Office in Redmond, WA (I think it was). They replied with a full page of contact information for the FBI FOIA Office in Winchester, VA. I got the run around from that office and DOJ. I got my US Congressional Representative involved and two more FOIA request to the FBI and one to the FAA, all through the FBI and FAA Congressional Liaison Offices, resulted in two pieces of paper and both of them are posted here on Shutter's site.
-
The refusal to release is standard practice with the FBI and all law enforcement with open cases..this is something I repeat to Blevins in reference to the Amboy chute. regardless of it's outcome it's still part of the case and they will not release anything surrounding it..
I have serious doubt anything was disturbed during the periods they needed the info..if in fact something is missing now it's understandable since the FBI wishes parts to be left out of the public eye which is there choice. not the best but they are running the show. they redact numbers and addresses that are no longer used..what's the purpose..some of it's ridiculous that they redact.
As has been previously discussed, the FBI did not redact a single thing in the Oakland ATC and Reno transcripts or the other transcripts. However, 19 redactions were made to the Seattle ATC transcripts with the result that the airliner's location cannot be pinpointed during its time in the Portland/Vancouver area. It is obvious that the 19 redactions were deliberately done to prevent that flight path being known.
How do you know it was the FBI that performed socalled "redactions" ?
Tell us the history of the Transcript! Who wrote it and passed it on to others including the FBI? Who was in charge of compiling this Transcript from beginning to end? Who in that chain of people or agencies made the redactions, socalled? Why didn't Poynter tell us?
19 Redactions.
Carr shared a copy of the Transcript with Sluggo who published it. The Seattle PI published it some time earlier than that.
Georger,
Get your head out of wherever it is! Where is it anyway? You obviously haven't been paying attention here for the last 10 years.
Personal attack - complaint filed but the button did not work. Oh well par for the course!
-
Wouldn't the transcripts fall under jurisdiction of the FAA? could the FBI just take what they want...
We have been over this before many times to no avail - nothing can change. The whole matter is in an internet black hole. It will never change. :nono:
-
From FJ today:
Well, Georger is correct and Eric is wrong...
The T-33 went West on a training mission then intercepted 305 at Lake Oswego and turned South, not NNW of Portland.
Also.
F-106's did not have visual but had contact on radar.
T-33 noticed 305 flying in a course change.. Control confirmed 45 degree change every 30 seconds. This may explain the slightly erratic FBI map, since it is plotted points the 30 second course changes would show.
T-33 pilots. Tosaw's book.
-
From FJ today:
Well, Georger is correct and Eric is wrong...
The T-33 went West on a training mission then intercepted 305 at Lake Oswego and turned South, not NNW of Portland.
Also.
F-106's did not have visual but had contact on radar.
T-33 noticed 305 flying in a course change.. Control confirmed 45 degree change every 30 seconds. This may explain the slightly erratic FBI map, since it is plotted points the 30 second course changes would show.
T-33 pilots. Tosaw's book.
If I understand this post correctly, TrollJack is using Tosaw's book to disprove some of my comments?
If that is correct it's an embarrassment and ought to be an immediate disqualifier for anyone who calls themselves a serious DBC researcher. I have Tosaw's book, have read it from end to end, and it is full of falsehoods...think of the Tina Mucklow packing card story for one.
I have talked with Cliff Ammerman about all of this many times, not only on the phone but also in person. Ammerman's description of what transpired--remember he controlled 305, the F-106's and the T-33--completely refutes what Tosaw says and TrollJack apparently considers gospel.
To top it off, we now have GEORGER interjecting--and apparently endorsing--this horseshit from another site, on behalf of a person who is no longer a member of this site...to what end?
-
From FJ today:
Well, Georger is correct and Eric is wrong...
The T-33 went West on a training mission then intercepted 305 at Lake Oswego and turned South, not NNW of Portland.
Also.
F-106's did not have visual but had contact on radar.
T-33 noticed 305 flying in a course change.. Control confirmed 45 degree change every 30 seconds. This may explain the slightly erratic FBI map, since it is plotted points the 30 second course changes would show.
T-33 pilots. Tosaw's book.
If I understand this post correctly, TrollJack is using Tosaw's book to disprove some of my comments?
If that is correct it's an embarrassment and ought to be an immediate disqualifier for anyone who calls themselves a serious DBC researcher. I have Tosaw's book, have read it from end to end, and it is full of falsehoods...think of the Tina Mucklow packing card story for one.
I have talked with Cliff Ammerman about all of this many times, not only on the phone but also in person. Ammerman's description of what transpired--remember he controlled 305, the F-106's and the T-33--completely refutes what Tosaw says and TrollJack apparently considers gospel.
To top it off, we now have GEORGER interjecting--and apparently endorsing--this horseshit from another site, on behalf of a person who is no longer a member of this site...to what end?
Norjak the Investigation of D B Cooper by Ralph P Himmelsbach ........ D. B. Cooper: Dead or Alive? [Tosaw, Richard T.
Eric: There is hardly one person doing the Cooper research who hasnt quoted from these two books at one time or another, including YOU, R99, Smith etal . . . ! In fact several people well known here have quoted from these books so many times it has become a ritual. These books are a major Cooper resource! People are going to use them and quote from them whether you like it or not! If your interviews of whomever begin to become the gold standard for Cooper research replacing the conventional repertoire, that will take time to establish. There is nothing you can do to change that.
When Ammerman writes his own book and speaks for himself maybe HIS book will become standard repertoire. In the meantime people are free to believe whomever they want! Cooperland is not a dictatorship being managed by anyone, for some managed result they hope to obtain !
-
Norjak the Investigation of D B Cooper by Ralph P Himmelsbach ........ D. B. Cooper: Dead or Alive? [Tosaw, Richard T.
Eric: There is hardly one person doing the Cooper research who hasnt quoted from these two books at one time or another, including YOU, R99, Smith etal . . . ! In fact several people well known here have quoted from these books so many times it has become a ritual. These books are a major Cooper resource! People are going to use them and quote from them whether you like it or not! If your interviews of whomever begin to become the gold standard for Cooper research replacing the conventional repertoire, that will take time to establish. There is nothing you can do to change that.
When Ammerman writes his own book and speaks for himself maybe HIS book will become standard repertoire. In the meantime people are free to believe whomever they want! Cooperland is not a dictatorship being managed by anyone, for some managed result they hope to obtain !
GEORGER, I'm quite certain you recognize the difference between people discussing comments from various authors, versus declaring someone "wrong" based exclusively upon the writings of an author from a book that is seriously flawed. It's completely intellectually bankrupt.
This is precisely how bad information gets injected into the investigation. Not to mention, who gives a damn what agents of smear and trolls from another site have to say about anything? Let them throw sand in their own sand box. Why bring it here?
-
Norjak the Investigation of D B Cooper by Ralph P Himmelsbach ........ D. B. Cooper: Dead or Alive? [Tosaw, Richard T.
Eric: There is hardly one person doing the Cooper research who hasnt quoted from these two books at one time or another, including YOU, R99, Smith etal . . . ! In fact several people well known here have quoted from these books so many times it has become a ritual. These books are a major Cooper resource! People are going to use them and quote from them whether you like it or not! If your interviews of whomever begin to become the gold standard for Cooper research replacing the conventional repertoire, that will take time to establish. There is nothing you can do to change that.
When Ammerman writes his own book and speaks for himself maybe HIS book will become standard repertoire. In the meantime people are free to believe whomever they want! Cooperland is not a dictatorship being managed by anyone, for some managed result they hope to obtain !
GEORGER, I'm quite certain you recognize the difference between people discussing comments from various authors, versus declaring someone "wrong" based exclusively upon the writings of an author from a book that is seriously flawed. It's completely intellectually bankrupt.
This is precisely how bad information gets injected into the investigation. Not to mention, who gives a damn what agents of smear and trolls from another site have to say about anything? Let them throw sand in their own sand box. Why bring it here?
Cooper forums have no formal rules of procedure! There is very little in Cooperland that has followed strict rules of procedure, even in FBI 302's.
It used to drive me nuts at Dropzone when people shifted topics all the time. One thread would get started then somebody would interject a brand new topic - it was chaos at times and impossible to get people to stay on a particular topic. Shutter's forum has done slightly better partly because Shutter set up categories of topics and people for the most part post within those boundaries.
In the case of Ammerman, Ammerman should write his own book! That might be helpful. Otherwise you will wind up with a smorgasbord of people claiming Ammerman said that vs this etc. But again Eric, this is an informal affair. IT TAKES TIME TO ESTABLISH LEGITIMACY! You know that. There isnt anything anyone can do about that. If you have been at this for the ten years you claim maybe you should have surfaced and established yourself ten years ago, so today you would be a recognised entity in the Cooper Vortex? People come to Cooperland with agendae. You know that! It takes time to separate one from the other... and trust has a lot to do with it!
-
Eric - let me interject this.
I told Ammerman years ago he should write a book! Or at least a monograph people could refer to. He said the idea had crossed his mind several times but something always came up ... and life got busy. Then people began to call him .... and quote him. Thus here we sit today ...
-
Norjak the Investigation of D B Cooper by Ralph P Himmelsbach ........ D. B. Cooper: Dead or Alive? [Tosaw, Richard T.
Eric: There is hardly one person doing the Cooper research who hasnt quoted from these two books at one time or another, including YOU, R99, Smith etal . . . ! In fact several people well known here have quoted from these books so many times it has become a ritual. These books are a major Cooper resource! People are going to use them and quote from them whether you like it or not! If your interviews of whomever begin to become the gold standard for Cooper research replacing the conventional repertoire, that will take time to establish. There is nothing you can do to change that.
When Ammerman writes his own book and speaks for himself maybe HIS book will become standard repertoire. In the meantime people are free to believe whomever they want! Cooperland is not a dictatorship being managed by anyone, for some managed result they hope to obtain !
GEORGER, I'm quite certain you recognize the difference between people discussing comments from various authors, versus declaring someone "wrong" based exclusively upon the writings of an author from a book that is seriously flawed. It's completely intellectually bankrupt.
This is precisely how bad information gets injected into the investigation. Not to mention, who gives a damn what agents of smear and trolls from another site have to say about anything? Let them throw sand in their own sand box. Why bring it here?
Cooper forums have no formal rules of procedure! There is very little in Cooperland that has followed strict rules of procedure, even in FBI 302's.
It used to drive me nuts at Dropzone when people shifted topics all the time. One thread would get started then somebody would interject a brand new topic - it was chaos at times and impossible to get people to stay on a particular topic. Shutter's forum has done slightly better partly because Shutter set up categories of topics and people for the most part post within those boundaries.
In the case of Ammerman, Ammerman should write his own book! That might be helpful. Otherwise you will wind up with a smorgasbord of people claiming Ammerman said that vs this etc. But again Eric, this is an informal affair. IT TAKES TIME TO ESTABLISH LEGITIMACY! You know that. There isnt anything anyone can do about that. If you have been at this for the ten years you claim maybe you should have surfaced and established yourself ten years ago, so today you would be a recognised entity in the Cooper Vortex? People come to Cooperland with agendae. You know that! It takes time to separate one from the other...
We did get Ammerman on film discussing some of these matters that will be part of the History Channel show when it airs which is now slated for the 4th quarter of this year.
I have seen the finished product and can say that a lot of the footage regarding his comments hit the cutting room floor. Nonetheless, he stated that the T-33 took off to the west from PDX, headed north over Sauvie Island, then was turned to the east and ultimately south in behind 305 close to the northern part of Sauvie Island (To be clear, the T-33 started its turn from over Sauvie Island).
Once behind 305--by the way, there was no visual contact--he recalls putting the T-33 on one heading alone as it trailed 305 south toward Eugene. Once they arrived at Eugene the T-33 and the F-106's were turned back around and headed home to their respective homes up north.
-
Norjak the Investigation of D B Cooper by Ralph P Himmelsbach ........ D. B. Cooper: Dead or Alive? [Tosaw, Richard T.
Eric: There is hardly one person doing the Cooper research who hasnt quoted from these two books at one time or another, including YOU, R99, Smith etal . . . ! In fact several people well known here have quoted from these books so many times it has become a ritual. These books are a major Cooper resource! People are going to use them and quote from them whether you like it or not! If your interviews of whomever begin to become the gold standard for Cooper research replacing the conventional repertoire, that will take time to establish. There is nothing you can do to change that.
When Ammerman writes his own book and speaks for himself maybe HIS book will become standard repertoire. In the meantime people are free to believe whomever they want! Cooperland is not a dictatorship being managed by anyone, for some managed result they hope to obtain !
GEORGER, I'm quite certain you recognize the difference between people discussing comments from various authors, versus declaring someone "wrong" based exclusively upon the writings of an author from a book that is seriously flawed. It's completely intellectually bankrupt.
This is precisely how bad information gets injected into the investigation. Not to mention, who gives a damn what agents of smear and trolls from another site have to say about anything? Let them throw sand in their own sand box. Why bring it here?
Cooper forums have no formal rules of procedure! There is very little in Cooperland that has followed strict rules of procedure, even in FBI 302's.
It used to drive me nuts at Dropzone when people shifted topics all the time. One thread would get started then somebody would interject a brand new topic - it was chaos at times and impossible to get people to stay on a particular topic. Shutter's forum has done slightly better partly because Shutter set up categories of topics and people for the most part post within those boundaries.
In the case of Ammerman, Ammerman should write his own book! That might be helpful. Otherwise you will wind up with a smorgasbord of people claiming Ammerman said that vs this etc. But again Eric, this is an informal affair. IT TAKES TIME TO ESTABLISH LEGITIMACY! You know that. There isnt anything anyone can do about that. If you have been at this for the ten years you claim maybe you should have surfaced and established yourself ten years ago, so today you would be a recognised entity in the Cooper Vortex? People come to Cooperland with agendae. You know that! It takes time to separate one from the other...
We did get Ammerman on film discussing some of these matters that will be part of the History Channel show when it airs which is now slated for the 4th quarter of this year.
I have seen the finished product and can say that a lot of the footage regarding his comments hit the cutting room floor. Nonetheless, he stated that the T-33 took off to the west from PDX, headed north over Sauvie Island, then was turned to the east and ultimately south in behind 305 close to the northern part of Sauvie Island (To be clear, the T-33 started its turn from over Sauvie Island).
Once behind 305--by the way, there was no visual contact--he recalls putting the T-33 on one heading alone as it trailed 305 south toward Eugene. Once they arrived at Eugene the T-33 and the F-106's were turned back around and headed home to their respective homes up north.
Then play the damned film!!! That is as good as a book etc ... ! If you have him on film then congrats. Lets hear it!
ps - having Ammmerman on film is fit stuff for a Cooper Con! I dont think Gray even tried to interview Ammerman... much less had him on film.
-
Then play the damned film!!! That is as good as a book etc ... ! If you have him on film then congrats. Lets hear it!
ps - having Ammmerman on film is fit stuff for a Cooper Con! I dont think Gray even tried to interview Ammerman... much less had him on film.
Amazingly the FBI didn't even interview Ammerman.
I don't own the footage of Ammerman--this is owned by History Channel--but can certainly discuss the idea of his attending CooperCon and telling his story while at the same time filming his remarks. That said, we may be waiting for the 2021 version of CooperCon for this to happen depending upon the Covid situation.
-
Wouldn't Portland ground control handle the T-33 flight? I assume they would direct the flight around in and outgoing traffic. It would be the same for any direction it had taken off from. it's going to circle around to the target.
-
Wouldn't Portland ground control handle the T-33 flight? I assume they would direct the flight around in and outgoing traffic. It would be the same for any direction it had taken off from. it's going to circle around to the target.
I do not know at what time, or from whom, the T-33 was handed to Ammerman. Nonetheless, it was handed to Ammerman very quickly and it was he who directed it behind 305.
At the same time Ammerman was directing the T-33 in behind 305, he also directed the F-106's a handful of miles to the east of 305 so that they could do a constant series of fly-bys then turn-arounds because of the speed differential. It is for this reason that I have theorized that perhaps when the Air Force cobbled together the data that went into making what we commonly refer to as the "FBI Flight Path" map, that they erroneously were working with radar data from the F-106's to the east and not 305. This would also explain the erratic movements in the flight path.
-
Portland is going to direct the flight to pattern..I'm not sure any ground location would be relevant prior to engaging 305..ground handles up to 50 miles but could of handed off the Ammerman..
-
Portland is going to direct the flight to pattern..I'm not sure any ground location would be relevant prior to engaging 305..ground handles up to 50 miles but could of handed off the Ammerman..
I'm just conveying what Ammerman told me. Beyond that, I do not know.
Interestingly, the T-33 pulling in behind 305, the F-106's being moved to the east, Ammerman handing 305 off to the controller handling the lower air space, and DBC jumping, all occurred within minutes of each other.
-
It appears the story changes over time..Himms book tells a different story if this is correct..never read his book but do recall the quote.
The T-33 intercepted 305 at Lake Oswego then turned S
-
Possibly both are correct..the plane has to circle around to intercept..
-
Possibly both are correct..the plane has to circle around to intercept..
Himms also stated that Cooper used "filthy" language which is simply not true. Moreover, neither he, nor any FBI agent, spoke with Ammerman. I did.
-
none the less. the plane has to circle and did takeoff going west so not sure any relevance can come of it..
-
Portland is going to direct the flight to pattern..I'm not sure any ground location would be relevant prior to engaging 305..ground handles up to 50 miles but could of handed off the Ammerman..
The airliner took off at SEATAC at 7:36 PM and was talking to controller SEA R2 at 737 PM.
At 8:13 PM, by which time the airliner was in the immediate Portland area and by which time Cooper had probably jumped, the airliner was switched to controller SEA R5.
At 8:33 PM, by which time the airliner was probably in the Canby Intersection area, the airliner was switched to controller SEA R6.
The above has previously been described in greater detail in posts on this site.
-
The above has nothing to do with the discussion..it surrounds the T-33 and Portland..
-
The T-33 pulling in behind 305 in the Woodland/Ridgefield area then trailing it basically due south would bring the airliner very close to Tena Bar, down along the west of downtown Portland, and ultimately right over the top of Lake Oswego.
-
The T-33 pulling in behind 305 in the Woodland/Ridgefield area then trailing it basically due south would bring the airliner very close to Tena Bar, down along the west of downtown Portland, and ultimately right over the top of Lake Oswego.
What was Ammermann's controller number? And was he and the rest of the SEA controllers south of Seattle all physically located in the Seattle area?
-
The T-33 pulling in behind 305 in the Woodland/Ridgefield area then trailing it basically due south would bring the airliner very close to Tena Bar, down along the west of downtown Portland, and ultimately right over the top of Lake Oswego.
What was Ammermann's controller number? And was he and the rest of the SEA controllers south of Seattle all physically located in the Seattle area?
He was R4.
He took over from R2 just north of the Maylay Intersection. He ended up handing 305 over to R5 (I believe) at about the time everything was happening--meaning the T-33 was pulling in behind 305, the F-106's were being directed further east, and coincidentally DBC jumped. Ammerman told me he made the transfer of his own choice because it was too difficult for him to communicate with everyone while being careful to toggle the switch so as to guarantee that his communication with the military jets wasn't being transmitted to the 305 cockpit because, as Ammerman stated, he didn't know if DBC was in the cockpit.
-
At what point do we accept the radar returns or the operator's? for years R99 went against the Air Force map claiming bad returns and distance. "the red dots" now, we appear to be taking the word of the radar operator and the radar? Ammerman even stated the map looked correct? I think he would of stated the same back then...
I think the FBI failed to speak with the operator's since they had a map and other statements from operator's in Portland which get shot down very quick, like the map..Portland was more involved for many reasons IMO..
-
The T-33 pulling in behind 305 in the Woodland/Ridgefield area then trailing it basically due south would bring the airliner very close to Tena Bar, down along the west of downtown Portland, and ultimately right over the top of Lake Oswego.
What was Ammermann's controller number? And was he and the rest of the SEA controllers south of Seattle all physically located in the Seattle area?
He was R4.
He took over from R2 just north of the Maylay Intersection. He ended up handing 305 over to R5 (I believe) at about the time everything was happening--meaning the T-33 was pulling in behind 305, the F-106's were being directed further east, and coincidentally DBC jumped. Ammerman told me he made the transfer of his own choice because it was too difficult for him to communicate with everyone while being careful to toggle the switch so as to guarantee that his communication with the military jets wasn't being transmitted to the 305 cockpit because, as Ammerman stated, he didn't know if DBC was in the cockpit.
The Seattle ATC radio transcripts do not list a controller SEA R4.
The transcripts list a SEA R2, SEA R5, SEA R6, and SEA R10.
-
At what point do we accept the radar returns or the operator's? for years R99 went against the Air Force map claiming bad returns and distance. "the red dots" now, we appear to be taking the word of the radar operator and the radar? Ammerman even stated the map looked correct? I think he would of stated the same back then...
I think the FBI failed to speak with the operator's since they had a map and other statements from operator's in Portland which get shot down very quick, like the map..Portland was more involved for many reasons IMO..
There is no evidence that the Portland International Airport controllers had anything to do with the hijacked airliner.
-
At what point do we accept the radar returns or the operator's? for years R99 went against the Air Force map claiming bad returns and distance. "the red dots" now, we appear to be taking the word of the radar operator and the radar? Ammerman even stated the map looked correct? I think he would of stated the same back then...
I think the FBI failed to speak with the operator's since they had a map and other statements from operator's in Portland which get shot down very quick, like the map..Portland was more involved for many reasons IMO..
This is where we have to be very careful and precise with what people are saying and why.
Ammerman saying he would not, or could not, dispute the FBI Flight Path map is because it is within the range of possibilities. Meaning, his display showed a line that the jet was on. This line could be several miles in length. Therefore, he does not know with absolute certainty precisely where 305 is at any given moment--rather he has a general idea. This is also why he cannot be certain that 305 didn't stray outside of V-23 by a few miles to the west because this too is part of that range of possible locations for the jet.
Additionally, I specifically asked Ammerman about the turns around Vancouver, PDX and downtown Portland--which strike me as some dude leaving an all night kegger rather than a pilot concerned about a bomb falling off the seat in the back and accidentally detonating or a tense skyjacker interpreting such flight movements as "funny stuff."
Ammerman said that such turns were too small for him to really notice them on his radar screen. Therefore, he cannot say that they didn't happen. This is materially different than suggesting that Ammerman said it did happen.
As to the Portland controller and what he apparently saw, it is definitely an interesting thing to consider. Specifically, I would be interested to know how he is certain that among the four planes in close proximity that night that he was sure he was observing the airliner and not one of the other jets? Also, I would be interested to know how it is that he can attest with such accuracy where the jet flew at this particular point, days after the fact?
Remember, no one knew that Cooper was going to jump in this area, thereby causing everyone to pay close attention as the jet approached Vancouver. Rather, it was only later that they determined Cooper jumped in that area, and now you apparently have a controller saying, "Oh yes, I recall exactly where the aircraft flew at that exact point" days later. How?
I'm not saying it's impossible. I am saying it would be remarkable.
-
The T-33 pulling in behind 305 in the Woodland/Ridgefield area then trailing it basically due south would bring the airliner very close to Tena Bar, down along the west of downtown Portland, and ultimately right over the top of Lake Oswego.
What was Ammermann's controller number? And was he and the rest of the SEA controllers south of Seattle all physically located in the Seattle area?
He was R4.
He took over from R2 just north of the Maylay Intersection. He ended up handing 305 over to R5 (I believe) at about the time everything was happening--meaning the T-33 was pulling in behind 305, the F-106's were being directed further east, and coincidentally DBC jumped. Ammerman told me he made the transfer of his own choice because it was too difficult for him to communicate with everyone while being careful to toggle the switch so as to guarantee that his communication with the military jets wasn't being transmitted to the 305 cockpit because, as Ammerman stated, he didn't know if DBC was in the cockpit.
The Seattle ATC radio transcripts do not list a controller SEA R4.
The transcripts list a SEA R2, SEA R5, SEA R6, and SEA R10.
Perhaps I'm wrong about that--I'd have to check my notes. Maybe he was R5. All I know is that he received his handoff from R2. He then handed 305 off to another controller I want to say about 15 minutes later.
-
There is no evidence that the Portland International Airport controllers had anything to do with the hijacked airliner.
They really don't have to be involved to be involved..a hijacked plane went through there airspace. of course they will watch it..involvement means many things..the crime originated from Portland..interceptor's flew out of Portland. the jump is in there area. key things occurred in there area..
-
Several are saying ' the FBI didn't talk to Ammerman' ... as if they should have? A did talk to people in his department ... but evidently nobody outside of his Dept. Why should the FBI interview A? A isn;t making a flight path search map. The FBI isn;t making a flight path search map. The Air Force had their own people - likewise NWA. Maybe somebody should have interviewed A just to cover bases but I dont see the FBI not interviewing A as somehow crucial ? MacDonalds didn't interview A either!
-
The T-33 pulling in behind 305 in the Woodland/Ridgefield area then trailing it basically due south would bring the airliner very close to Tena Bar, down along the west of downtown Portland, and ultimately right over the top of Lake Oswego.
What was Ammermann's controller number? And was he and the rest of the SEA controllers south of Seattle all physically located in the Seattle area?
He was R4.
He took over from R2 just north of the Maylay Intersection. He ended up handing 305 over to R5 (I believe) at about the time everything was happening--meaning the T-33 was pulling in behind 305, the F-106's were being directed further east, and coincidentally DBC jumped. Ammerman told me he made the transfer of his own choice because it was too difficult for him to communicate with everyone while being careful to toggle the switch so as to guarantee that his communication with the military jets wasn't being transmitted to the 305 cockpit because, as Ammerman stated, he didn't know if DBC was in the cockpit.
The Seattle ATC radio transcripts do not list a controller SEA R4.
The transcripts list a SEA R2, SEA R5, SEA R6, and SEA R10.
Perhaps I'm wrong about that--I'd have to check my notes. Maybe he was R5. All I know is that he received his handoff from R2. He then handed 305 off to another controller I want to say about 15 minutes later.
I thot Ammerman was R2. The controller at Eugene R4. ?
-
Here is what happened.
If you look over the radio transcripts in The Forum Vault you'll note that R2 handed 305 over to Seattle ATC at 7:59PM. You will then note that the transcripts provide no information until R5 takes over at 8:13PM. Therefore, there is a 14 minute gap in the transcripts with nothing at all.
Ammerman told me that what happened here is that R2 handed 305 over to him(R4) at 7:59PM. He then managed 305, the F-106's and the T-33 during this time. Then, at 8:13 he opted to hand 305 off to R5 because it was too difficult for him to manage everything, specifically, trying to communicate with the military jets while being certain to toggle the switch at ATC to make sure that this communication wasn't also being communicated to 305 because he didn't know if Cooper was in the cockpit or not.
Now, the reason that the transcripts do not show any communication with Ammerman (R4) is because the person handling the transcription of the radio communication days later made a mistake. Specifically, when the radio communication was transcribed, the person who handled it did not account for the fact that when 305 was handed off to Ammerman by R2 that 305 stayed at 10K feet in altitude and did not continue up to the higher altitudes as would happen during a normal flight. Therefore because 305 did not exceed 10k feet--Ammerman who was handling mid-level air traffic in Sector 4--handled the airliner as opposed to the person handling the higher level traffic in Sector 4. So, when the transcriber went to review the audio recordings after the R2 hand-off, this person mistakenly looked into the audio files for the air traffic controller handling the higher level traffic and found nothing.
All of this changed, however, when Ammerman made the hand-off to R5 at 8:13PM--coincidentally almost exactly when Cooper jumped.
This is a very good example of how easy it is for mistakes to be made in an investigation like this. Indeed, it is something along these lines that I believe ultimately explains why the FBI Flight Path map is incorrect.
-
Here is what happened.
If you look over the radio transcripts in The Forum Vault you'll note that R2 handed 305 over to Seattle ATC at 7:59PM. You will then note that the transcripts provide no information until R5 takes over at 8:13PM. Therefore, there is a 14 minute gap in the transcripts with nothing at all.
Ammerman told me that what happened here is that R2 handed 305 over to him(R4) at 7:59PM. He then managed 305, the F-106's and the T-33 during this time. Then, at 8:13 he opted to hand 305 off to R5 because it was too difficult for him to manage everything, specifically, trying to communicate with the military jets while being certain to toggle the switch at ATC to make sure that this communication wasn't also being communicated to 305 because he didn't know if Cooper was in the cockpit or not.
Now, the reason that the transcripts do not show any communication with Ammerman (R4) is because the person handling the transcription of the radio communication days later made a mistake. Specifically, when the radio communication was transcribed, the person who handled it did not account for the fact that when 305 was handed off to Ammerman by R2 that 305 stayed at 10K feet in altitude and did not continue up to the higher altitudes as would happen during a normal flight. Therefore because 305 did not exceed 10k feet--Ammerman who was handling mid-level air traffic in Sector 4--handled the airliner as opposed to the person handling the higher level traffic in Sector 4. So, when the transcriber went to review the audio recordings after the R2 hand-off, this person mistakenly looked into the audio files for the air traffic controller handling the higher level traffic and found nothing.
All of this changed, however, when Ammerman made the hand-off to R5 at 8:13PM--coincidentally almost exactly when Cooper jumped.
This is a very good example of how easy it is for mistakes to be made in an investigation like this. Indeed, it is something along these lines that I believe ultimately explains why the FBI Flight Path map is incorrect.
Eric from my interview notes with Cliff I wrote: 'Cliff was a controller at Seattle Center who handled 305 all the way to a slightly beyond PDX on 11-24-71, the evening of. After Departure control gave over 305 Cliff handled 305. Cliff was not SEAR2 in the NWA transcript. Cliff says whoever R2 was, R2 would have handed off to R4, who would have handed off to R5 etc. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centeres at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC.'
Beyond that I didnt clarify that further.
-
It appears to change hands at 8:33. I don't see how any of this could be blamed on the controllers unless they were being ignored which wasn't the case..
-
Ground control and traffic control (Tower) from takeoff and landing where at SEATAC. Ammerman was in Auburn.
-
Here is what happened.
If you look over the radio transcripts in The Forum Vault you'll note that R2 handed 305 over to Seattle ATC at 7:59PM. You will then note that the transcripts provide no information until R5 takes over at 8:13PM. Therefore, there is a 14 minute gap in the transcripts with nothing at all.
Ammerman told me that what happened here is that R2 handed 305 over to him(R4) at 7:59PM. He then managed 305, the F-106's and the T-33 during this time. Then, at 8:13 he opted to hand 305 off to R5 because it was too difficult for him to manage everything, specifically, trying to communicate with the military jets while being certain to toggle the switch at ATC to make sure that this communication wasn't also being communicated to 305 because he didn't know if Cooper was in the cockpit or not.
Now, the reason that the transcripts do not show any communication with Ammerman (R4) is because the person handling the transcription of the radio communication days later made a mistake. Specifically, when the radio communication was transcribed, the person who handled it did not account for the fact that when 305 was handed off to Ammerman by R2 that 305 stayed at 10K feet in altitude and did not continue up to the higher altitudes as would happen during a normal flight. Therefore because 305 did not exceed 10k feet--Ammerman who was handling mid-level air traffic in Sector 4--handled the airliner as opposed to the person handling the higher level traffic in Sector 4. So, when the transcriber went to review the audio recordings after the R2 hand-off, this person mistakenly looked into the audio files for the air traffic controller handling the higher level traffic and found nothing.
All of this changed, however, when Ammerman made the hand-off to R5 at 8:13PM--coincidentally almost exactly when Cooper jumped.
This is a very good example of how easy it is for mistakes to be made in an investigation like this. Indeed, it is something along these lines that I believe ultimately explains why the FBI Flight Path map is incorrect.
Eric from my interview notes with Cliff I wrote: 'Cliff was a controller at Seattle Center who handled 305 all the way to a slightly beyond PDX on 11-24-71, the evening of. After Departure control gave over 305 Cliff handled 305. Cliff was not SEAR2 in the NWA transcript. Cliff says whoever R2 was, R2 would have handed off to R4, who would have handed off to R5 etc. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centeres at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC.'
Beyond that I didnt clarify that further.
Yes, that is basically correct--the lone exception being that he handled 305 until about the Woodland area.
More to the point, Cliff handled both Sector 4 and Sector 5 that night. However, he was responsible for the lower level air traffic--up to 10K feet in altitude--and someone else handled traffic over 10K feet. Therefore, when R2 attempted to hand 305 off at the beginning of Sector 4 there was a very brief problem because the frequency given to 305, or something of that nature, directed 305 to the controller handling the traffic at the higher altitude--remember, 305 was not at that altitude and stayed around 10k feet. This problem was quickly realized and 305 made contact with Ammerman soon thereafter. However, the person who later transcribed the radio communication made the same mistake but didn't think to look into communication with Ammerman. Again, normally an airliner departing Seattle and heading south would head to an altitude of 33,000 feet.
-
Here is what happened.
If you look over the radio transcripts in The Forum Vault you'll note that R2 handed 305 over to Seattle ATC at 7:59PM. You will then note that the transcripts provide no information until R5 takes over at 8:13PM. Therefore, there is a 14 minute gap in the transcripts with nothing at all.
Ammerman told me that what happened here is that R2 handed 305 over to him(R4) at 7:59PM. He then managed 305, the F-106's and the T-33 during this time. Then, at 8:13 he opted to hand 305 off to R5 because it was too difficult for him to manage everything, specifically, trying to communicate with the military jets while being certain to toggle the switch at ATC to make sure that this communication wasn't also being communicated to 305 because he didn't know if Cooper was in the cockpit or not.
Now, the reason that the transcripts do not show any communication with Ammerman (R4) is because the person handling the transcription of the radio communication days later made a mistake. Specifically, when the radio communication was transcribed, the person who handled it did not account for the fact that when 305 was handed off to Ammerman by R2 that 305 stayed at 10K feet in altitude and did not continue up to the higher altitudes as would happen during a normal flight. Therefore because 305 did not exceed 10k feet--Ammerman who was handling mid-level air traffic in Sector 4--handled the airliner as opposed to the person handling the higher level traffic in Sector 4. So, when the transcriber went to review the audio recordings after the R2 hand-off, this person mistakenly looked into the audio files for the air traffic controller handling the higher level traffic and found nothing.
All of this changed, however, when Ammerman made the hand-off to R5 at 8:13PM--coincidentally almost exactly when Cooper jumped.
This is a very good example of how easy it is for mistakes to be made in an investigation like this. Indeed, it is something along these lines that I believe ultimately explains why the FBI Flight Path map is incorrect.
Eric from my interview notes with Cliff I wrote: 'Cliff was a controller at Seattle Center who handled 305 all the way to a slightly beyond PDX on 11-24-71, the evening of. After Departure control gave over 305 Cliff handled 305. Cliff was not SEAR2 in the NWA transcript. Cliff says whoever R2 was, R2 would have handed off to R4, who would have handed off to R5 etc. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centeres at the time in the US. Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC.'
Beyond that I didnt clarify that further.
As Shutter points out above, Seattle ATC Center was in Auburn. The people in the SEATAC Tower were not center people.
The SEATAC Tower ground controller cleared the airliner to take off and told it to switch immediately to a Seattle ATC frequency. The airliner took off at 7:36 PM and at 7:37:11 PM was talking to Seattle Center controller R2.
In taking off, the airliner bypassed the usual SEATAC tower controller and the SEATAC tower departure controller.
The Seattle ATC Center radio frequencies were routinely recorded and that recording may, or may not, still exist. If it still exists, it may be possible to get the FAA to transcribe it again. In my previous FOIA requests with the FBI and FAA, it was obvious that they had some additional information on this flight path but were just not going to release it for unknown reasons.
It should be remembered that the Seattle ATC Center's Chief signed off twice on that transcript and swore that it was true and complete. If he saw the currently released transcript, he should have been able to instantly realize that it was not complete and things were missing.
Is anyone on this site on good enough terms with the FBI and FAA to make some discreet inquires on this matter?
-
Here is what happened.
If you look over the radio transcripts in The Forum Vault you'll note that R2 handed 305 over to Seattle ATC at 7:59PM. You will then note that the transcripts provide no information until R5 takes over at 8:13PM. Therefore, there is a 14 minute gap in the transcripts with nothing at all.
Ammerman told me that what happened here is that R2 handed 305 over to him(R4) at 7:59PM. He then managed 305, the F-106's and the T-33 during this time. Then, at 8:13 he opted to hand 305 off to R5 because it was too difficult for him to manage everything, specifically, trying to communicate with the military jets while being certain to toggle the switch at ATC to make sure that this communication wasn't also being communicated to 305 because he didn't know if Cooper was in the cockpit or not.
Now, the reason that the transcripts do not show any communication with Ammerman (R4) is because the person handling the transcription of the radio communication days later made a mistake. Specifically, when the radio communication was transcribed, the person who handled it did not account for the fact that when 305 was handed off to Ammerman by R2 that 305 stayed at 10K feet in altitude and did not continue up to the higher altitudes as would happen during a normal flight. Therefore because 305 did not exceed 10k feet--Ammerman who was handling mid-level air traffic in Sector 4--handled the airliner as opposed to the person handling the higher level traffic in Sector 4. So, when the transcriber went to review the audio recordings after the R2 hand-off, this person mistakenly looked into the audio files for the air traffic controller handling the higher level traffic and found nothing.
All of this changed, however, when Ammerman made the hand-off to R5 at 8:13PM--coincidentally almost exactly when Cooper jumped.
This is a very good example of how easy it is for mistakes to be made in an investigation like this. Indeed, it is something along these lines that I believe ultimately explains why the FBI Flight Path map is incorrect.
I think there is information somewhere that indicates the Seattle ATC radio transcript was prepared on Thanksgiving Day (the day after the hijacking). Due to the errors, such as calling Victor airways Vector airways, it apparently was prepared by a very new FAA employee. But these errors should have been caught.
-
Can anyone answer these two basic and very simple questions:
1) If the Air Force utilized functioning SAGE radar data to craft the FBI Flight Path, why then did they need input from NWO Flight Operations, the pilots of the F-106's, a controller at PDX and the Flight Data Recorder?
2) Moreover, why would their flight path map, the location of 305 at certain specific times, and the FBI Search Area ever be modified?
-
I would think anytime one is trying to locate a position or a path they would utilize all available avenues or events. (confirmation) I've only seen one flight path map?
Refining the the dropzone wasn't part of the Air Force. it appears after more evidence came in the area became more defined. we don't know exactly how they made the map but to imply it was done by amateur's is ridiculous. those who believe that shouldn't be utilizing any of the data at all...
Why would Ammerman give credit to Portland radar, or agree with the map. he should be another one stating it flew straight down. very simple?
Radar:
What would cause this information to be false after several people agree the radar would be strong and accurate in the area the plane was from 8:10 to 8:30 and why would only the pilots be worried about the bomb on board and not the ground where some claim they were ignored while passing through?
The map IS NOT the exact route. it will have flaws. even GPS is off to a certain degree. this was 1971 and not like today where it would be extremely easy to figure out in most cases.
The placard is years after the fact. hard to say where it originally landed. I was just looking at winds the other day in the Toledo area over the years. 40 to over 60+ mph winds are recorded? according the Blevins it came from a Sacramento flight lol..he's good!
-
1) If the Air Force utilized functioning SAGE radar data to craft the FBI Flight Path, why then did they need input from NWO Flight Operations, the pilots of the F-106's, a controller at PDX and the Flight Data Recorder?
where did this info come from?
-
Didn't the PDX controller state that the jet was actually further east a few miles? Why would this testimony even be considered if SAGE was used to track the precise path?
Ammerman did not agree with the FBI Flight Path. Rather, he stated that he could not dispute it. There is a difference.
Didn't the F-106 pilots reference a small airport at the time 305 made a turn? How is this possible given that the F-106's were flying several miles east of 305, flying at a significantly higher altitude than 305, circling back so as not to get too far ahead of 305, never had visual contact with 305, and had little to no radar contact with 305?
Also, take a close look at the 1972 FBI Flight map (White) and compare it to the FBI Flight Path map (Yellow)...they are slightly different.
Isn't it also interesting that all of the FBI search areas factor in Cooper drifting to the northeast? Yet now we are led to believe that the weather data that Tom Kaye collected and the weather observations from that night were completely wrong. Really? Or did the placard separate from the jet in some Twilight Zone Special Weather Area?
Remember, ground conditions are not the same as conditions aloft. Additionally, the placard was found at an elevation of around 1000 feet, PDX is at an elevation of 30 feet, and Toledo is at an elevation of about 375 feet.
Finally, why is it that some think that human beings are infallible? Does anyone really think that people are incapable of making a mistake...think Dr. Leonard Palmer, think Larry Carr.
-
We have several documents from radar operators in the area where Ammerman himself claims would be accurate. the operator himself claimed that as well..two qualified operators agreeing and two that are not operators disagreeing with them?
The radar operator was contacted by NWO and he made the claims of the pin-pointing of v23 reference. had nothing to do with the SAGE..,don't you think the Air Force is well versed in the whole area surrounding McChord? that's there backyard?
my wind reference was for ground and not winds aloft..over the years after 1971 high winds have been recorded in that area..this would be logical over many years in any location? almost a decade had gone by..
Ammerman not disputing the map means he didn't believe it? If I'm not disputing diatoms were on the bills means what, I don't believe they were there?
The Air Force tracked the flight. I have no reason to believe anything was supplied to them information wise other than the fighter pilots. I have never seen any documents they were supplied the FDR. Paul S. utilized all the available information to plot the possible jump...radar, transcripts, Air Force input, radar operators input and the pilots. as more info came to light he refined the jump.
-
Finally, why is it that some think that human beings are infallible? Does anyone really think that people are incapable of making a mistake...think Dr. Leonard Palmer, think Larry Carr.
Of course mistakes happen..it's one of the reason nothing has been found..but multiple mistakes to the same event is not often in occurrence? as I have mentioned over the years...planes would be running into one another with the faults that are presented..
Valid reasons why the Portland operator's are wrong needs to be presented..everything must be ruled out to move something. I'm not 100% sold on anything..
-
Apparently, the word "dispute" was not in Ammerman's response to you?
"I sent Cliff Ammerman a copy of the yellow FBI Flight Path map and asked him to review it and let me know if it looked right to him. He called me this morning about the map and said he “would not argue with this track.” In other words, that it may well be correct."
-
Let me try again to be as clear as possible regarding what Ammerman has stated--remember I have discussed this with him several times, including on camera.
He says that he cannot disagree with, or dispute, or prove an error with FBI Flight Path map.
He did not say, "I can verify that the FBI Flight Path map is accurate."
The reasons why he can't be absolutely certain of anything regarding the FBI Flight Path map is because his monitor showed a line which indicated where 305 was as it traveled south. This "line" represented anywhere from 4 to 12 miles depending upon how far the target (305) was from the radar site (Salem).
In conclusion, while Ammerman knew that 305 did not fly to Yakima, he did not know if it flew precisely as depicted on the FBI Flight Path map, or if it flew along the Western Flight Path.
-
He pretty much answered the question himself explaining the 150 mile range vs 40 mile range and the accuracy Portland would have over his radar? we also have Portland basically stating the same?
-
He pretty much answered the question himself explaining the 150 mile range vs 40 mile range and the accuracy Portland would have over his radar? we also have Portland basically stating the same?
What exactly did the guy at PDX say?
-
The documents have been shown numerous times here and on the DZ..this should have been known and dismissed when trying to move something..one is provided below..
-
The documents have been shown numerous times here and on the DZ..this should have been known and dismissed when trying to move something..one is provided below..
I am asking you what was stated not because I don't know, rather because I'm trying to prove a point.
Once again, why is the testimony of the controller being used to move the flight path one or two miles east? Wouldn't SAGE have been able to be more precise?
Also, how can we be sure that the target that the controller is viewing is actually 305 and not one of the three military jets or something else?
Beyond that, if the dropzone is accurate, where is something that can point to Cooper having been there? How do we explain how the money ended up on Tena Bar? How do we explain where the placard was found? How do we explain where the fiberglass skirt was found? How do we explain the disparity between the white FBI map and the yellow FBI map? How do we explain the FBI Flight Path map showing 305 heading directly to Toledo from SeaTac with no indication that the airliner took off and flew due south for some distance as is typical? Are we to conclude that 305 turned immediately to Toledo upon taking off? By the way, what happened to the 20:04 missing dot on the FBI map?
-
Remember, all I have to do is prove that the FBI Flight Path map is wrong in one spot and that calls into question the integrity of the entire map.
And I'm quite certain that I've proved it in three spots:
1) Upon take-off from Seattle.
2) Approaching Maylay based upon the fiberglass skirt find.
3) North of the DZ when the placard separated from the jet.
Not to mention, the path itself may not even be flyable based upon your flight simulation as the jet apparently made a sharp turn around PDX.
-
The phone conversation is not documented, only a phone call was made...a reason was given for the "pin-pointing" obviously..
The map is going to have error's. a major one would have to be noted along with the reason the Portland operator's are wrong..pretty simple?
-
This is why I would be very interested to know exactly who put the map together and how it was done.
After all, there is a map. It came from someone, somewhere, somehow.
-
The skirting has never been confirmed, only a possibility, assumption and not fact..you couldn't locate the part number on the whole thing and yet the piece found had one? not plausible until all the facts are in place.
The turn could be the avoidance to directly flying over PDX as well as to line back up with V23. a timing issue is in the dropzone. most believe it's a timing issue vs a path issue.
Things unconfirmed that are possible...
1) Placard location on 305
2) Definitive proof the skirting was the skirting found and not something else.
-
This is why I would be very interested to know exactly who put the map together and how it was done.
After all, there is a map. It came from someone, somewhere, somehow.
I believe a name is given somewhere in regards to the map if not mistaken..perhaps a trip to McChord is something to consider..someone there surely would have some answers..
-
This is why I would be very interested to know exactly who put the map together and how it was done.
After all, there is a map. It came from someone, somewhere, somehow.
I believe a name is given somewhere in regards to the map if not mistaken..perhaps a trip to McChord is something to consider..someone there surely would have some answers..
Perhaps I should give McChord a call tomorrow and see where that leads.
-
Remember, all I have to do is prove that the FBI Flight Path map is wrong in one spot and that calls into question the integrity of the entire map.
And I'm quite certain that I've proved it in three spots:
1) Upon take-off from Seattle.
2) Approaching Maylay based upon the fiberglass skirt find.
3) North of the DZ when the placard separated from the jet.
Not to mention, the path itself may not even be flyable based upon your flight simulation as the jet apparently made a sharp turn around PDX.
He said/she said.
You are raining issues that nobody can immediately or easily answer - this can go on forever!
We need to hear from the principal person - Cliff Ammerman. When can you arrange that? I thought you said there was a film of him?
-
Remember, all I have to do is prove that the FBI Flight Path map is wrong in one spot and that calls into question the integrity of the entire map.
And I'm quite certain that I've proved it in three spots:
1) Upon take-off from Seattle.
2) Approaching Maylay based upon the fiberglass skirt find.
3) North of the DZ when the placard separated from the jet.
Not to mention, the path itself may not even be flyable based upon your flight simulation as the jet apparently made a sharp turn around PDX.
He said/she said.
You are raining issues that nobody can immediately or easily answer - this can go on forever!
We need to hear from the principal person - Cliff Ammerman. When can you arrange that? I thought you said there was a film of him?
He is in the History Channel special airing this year. Therefore, we have to wait for History Channel to air the show.
-
Hominid wrote the following....
The data coming from the radar site came in increments of .088° (1 4096th of a full circle) for azimuth and .25nm for range. If the likely errors were more than two times these values, the designers would simply have decreased the resolution of the data. There is no point in transmitting data to a precision of 1 if the data is only accurate to 8, for example. The direction center at McChord could have smoothed the data to get better accuracy.
But the coordinate data used to plot the FBI plot didn't necessarily take full advantage of the accuracy of the data the airforce had available. The data from which the plot was made was rounded to whole minutes of latitude and longitude. So the actual accuracy of the plots is ±.5 minutes of latitude and longitude. This was the source of the incorrect info about the '72 searchzone map to the effect that the accuracy was ±.5 nautical miles (should have been .5nm for N-S, but .347nm for E-W)
The positions were determined by computations, almost certainly by the airforce 84th radar evaluation squadron, using the coordinates and associated time stamps obtained from the Mt. Hebo site, plus the surveyed location of the Mt. Hebo site and the earth model of the time. The 84th had, and still has, a detachment at McChord and doing such analyses was part of their official functions and still is today. The McChord direction center just used the SAGE system in their normal function of tracking practically everything bigger than a piper or cessna. They did not analyze the system or data from it.
-
Hominid wrote the following....
The data coming from the radar site came in increments of .088° (1 4096th of a full circle) for azimuth and .25nm for range. If the likely errors were more than two times these values, the designers would simply have decreased the resolution of the data. There is no point in transmitting data to a precision of 1 if the data is only accurate to 8, for example. The direction center at McChord could have smoothed the data to get better accuracy.
But the coordinate data used to plot the FBI plot didn't necessarily take full advantage of the accuracy of the data the airforce had available. The data from which the plot was made was rounded to whole minutes of latitude and longitude. So the actual accuracy of the plots is ±.5 minutes of latitude and longitude. This was the source of the incorrect info about the '72 searchzone map to the effect that the accuracy was ±.5 nautical miles (should have been .5nm for N-S, but .347nm for E-W)
The positions were determined by computations, almost certainly by the airforce 84th radar evaluation squadron, using the coordinates and associated time stamps obtained from the Mt. Hebo site, plus the surveyed location of the Mt. Hebo site and the earth model of the time. The 84th had, and still has, a detachment at McChord and doing such analyses was part of their official functions and still is today. The McChord direction center just used the SAGE system in their normal function of tracking practically everything bigger than a piper or cessna. They did not analyze the system or data from it.
been over this a million times .... no point in even trying further.
-
Hominid wrote the following....
The data coming from the radar site came in increments of .088° (1 4096th of a full circle) for azimuth and .25nm for range. If the likely errors were more than two times these values, the designers would simply have decreased the resolution of the data. There is no point in transmitting data to a precision of 1 if the data is only accurate to 8, for example. The direction center at McChord could have smoothed the data to get better accuracy.
But the coordinate data used to plot the FBI plot didn't necessarily take full advantage of the accuracy of the data the airforce had available. The data from which the plot was made was rounded to whole minutes of latitude and longitude. So the actual accuracy of the plots is ±.5 minutes of latitude and longitude. This was the source of the incorrect info about the '72 searchzone map to the effect that the accuracy was ±.5 nautical miles (should have been .5nm for N-S, but .347nm for E-W)
The positions were determined by computations, almost certainly by the airforce 84th radar evaluation squadron, using the coordinates and associated time stamps obtained from the Mt. Hebo site, plus the surveyed location of the Mt. Hebo site and the earth model of the time. The 84th had, and still has, a detachment at McChord and doing such analyses was part of their official functions and still is today. The McChord direction center just used the SAGE system in their normal function of tracking practically everything bigger than a piper or cessna. They did not analyze the system or data from it.
Shutter, if Hominid is still around how about getting him to explain where those numbers above came from?
In the 1971 time frame, radar antennas made about 6 revolutions per minute or about one revolution about ever 10 seconds. That means the radar would paint an aircraft only about ever 10 seconds and the antenna would rotate about 60 degrees in that time frame.
In that 10 seconds, an airliner with a ground speed of about 180 knots, or 3 nautical miles per minute, would travel about one-half of a nautical mile or about 3000 feet.
The numbers presented above by Hominid are nonsense. Radar used in tracking aircraft has never been that accurate in tracking aircraft or anything to my knowledge. I believe Ammerman was recently quoted as saying that his radar display was only accurate to within several miles.
The Portland radar was not involved in the actual tracking of the airliner, that was strictly up to the Seattle ATC Controllers. The operator apparently just happened to see it on his local display and he probably could not be certain that he was looking at 305 in the first place.
The SAGE system was reportedly not on line that night in the first place. And all raw radar data used by the FAA and the USAF probably came from the same radar at McChord AFB.
-
When would out National defense system be down. it ran 24/7? the system had issues from the ground to the fighters?
Portland doesn't have to be involved directly with the hijacking..why is this so hard to understand? are all of these documents surrounding the Portland radar operators more plots for a conspiracy, why would they say what they did if they had no idea where 305 was was and how did it end up similar to the map?
Again, you made claims many times over the years about having a bomb and flying over cities, right? why in the world wouldn't the ground want to know where that plane was. especially in there own airspace? that doesn't explain away the statements made by the operators.
Ammerman explains being on 150 mile range and not very effective, correct? he also claims Portland would be on 40 miles and much more precise, right? how is it they both come to the same conclusions (Portland) while two people that are not operators or "involved in the actual tracking" were right? this is like trying to explain away witnesses seeing a subject run out of a front door and you stating they came out of the back door?
These are tough hurdles to get over in order to change the path IMHO. I'm all for it but everything needs a valid reason to dismiss..
-
How many people from PDX commented about the location of the jet on radar?
Also, let me quote precisely from the document you posted above:
"He called back subsequently and said that he had talked to the man who was working the radar at Portland which was very accurate since it was very close to the plane at the time and determined that the plane was actually one to two miles east of the center of this particular fly-way. He said for this reason, we might consider moving the center of the circle described above one or two miles due east."
Here are my questions based upon the quote above:
1) Who determined the plane was actually one to two miles east, after all the first word "He" refers to the guy from the Northwest Flight Dispatch Center, not the radar operator?
2) Am I correct in understanding that the gentleman working the radar in Portland remembered precisely where the jet was at all times while it was on his monitor even though we are talking a path of many miles, four days after the skyjacking, and even though while watching 305 in real time no one had any idea that Cooper had even jumped?
3) How does the radar operator know he was watching 305?
4) What were the radar operator's duties that night? Were they merely to watch 305 and nothing else? No other duties that would take-away from his observing 305 for an hour or so?
A careful read of the document posted earlier does not convince me in the least that the testimony of the radar operator four days after the fact regarding an event--the jump--that he didn't know had even occurred is infallible. If some want to consider it gospel, well then have at it.
As for me, there are still way too many problems with the entirety of the mystery to simply cast everything aside and announce, "Well some guy watching the radar said this is precisely what happened and where the jet was four days after the fact, so that's good enough for me."
-
This is getting ridiculous..now we put question into radar operators except Ammerman?
The information comes from the operator?
Do we start asking who Ammerman was and was he really working that night?
-
This is getting ridiculous..now we put question into radar operators except Ammerman?
The information comes from the operator?
Do we start asking who Ammerman was and was he really working that night?
It's not ridiculous, it's smart.
Come on. How many different descriptions do we have for Cooper's clothing? People are flawed.
The controller probably had no idea 305 was even being trailed, let alone by three jets. Why would he?
Again, he was asked to remember where the airliner was at one specific non-descript area of the flight path four days after the event was over.
-
When will Cooper become black and why not?
-
When did the flight path become similar to descriptions?
-
Didn't Ammerman expand his duties?
-
When would out National defense system be down. it ran 24/7? the system had issues from the ground to the fighters?
Portland doesn't have to be involved directly with the hijacking..why is this so hard to understand? are all of these documents surrounding the Portland radar operators more plots for a conspiracy, why would they say what they did if they had no idea where 305 was was and how did it end up similar to the map?
Again, you made claims many times over the years about having a bomb and flying over cities, right? why in the world wouldn't the ground want to know where that plane was. especially in there own airspace? that doesn't explain away the statements made by the operators.
Ammerman explains being on 150 mile range and not very effective, correct? he also claims Portland would be on 40 miles and much more precise, right? how is it they both come to the same conclusions (Portland) while two people that are not operators or "involved in the actual tracking" were right? this is like trying to explain away witnesses seeing a subject run out of a front door and you stating they came out of the back door?
These are tough hurdles to get over in order to change the path IMHO. I'm all for it but everything needs a valid reason to dismiss..
Basically, I don't know anything about the SAGE system or where it fit into the North American Air Defense Command's operation inside Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado Springs, Colorado. But the air defense system for the western hemisphere started at about the North Pole. Have you hear of the DEW (Distant Early Warning) radars in Northern Canada and Alaska. Also, do you remember seeing any Navy EC-121 Constellations flying around with large radar domes on the top of the fuselage. They covered the spots that the radars couldn't cover, and I happened to know some crew members who were on those 121's during 12+ hour missions.
The national air defense system did not start at McChord AFB in Seattle but thousands of miles north & east & west of there.
-
I'm no expert on the SAGE either but read a lot about it. the system was divided into sectors similar to the traffic control system. all linked together. this included "Texas towers" in the ocean for increased warning time. I'm sure just as any other system it had it flaws. they had to identify everything in the air marking friend or foe..Cooper might of fell into the foe..might of been a great exercise for them tracking the plane, I don't know.
We all have questions and concerns revolving around the flight and the jump..no question about it..lots of things have to be properly dismissed to make any adjustments to where Cooper landed. it's hard when we don't have all the evidence. I'm not 100% on any of this, never have been. still undecided whether Cooper survived..Tom Kaye has been opening new doors for years and still doesn't push any single issue or possibility.
-
Hominid wrote the following....
The data coming from the radar site came in increments of .088° (1 4096th of a full circle) for azimuth and .25nm for range. If the likely errors were more than two times these values, the designers would simply have decreased the resolution of the data. There is no point in transmitting data to a precision of 1 if the data is only accurate to 8, for example. The direction center at McChord could have smoothed the data to get better accuracy.
But the coordinate data used to plot the FBI plot didn't necessarily take full advantage of the accuracy of the data the airforce had available. The data from which the plot was made was rounded to whole minutes of latitude and longitude. So the actual accuracy of the plots is ±.5 minutes of latitude and longitude. This was the source of the incorrect info about the '72 searchzone map to the effect that the accuracy was ±.5 nautical miles (should have been .5nm for N-S, but .347nm for E-W)
The positions were determined by computations, almost certainly by the airforce 84th radar evaluation squadron, using the coordinates and associated time stamps obtained from the Mt. Hebo site, plus the surveyed location of the Mt. Hebo site and the earth model of the time. The 84th had, and still has, a detachment at McChord and doing such analyses was part of their official functions and still is today. The McChord direction center just used the SAGE system in their normal function of tracking practically everything bigger than a piper or cessna. They did not analyze the system or data from it.
Shutter, if Hominid is still around how about getting him to explain where those numbers above came from?
In the 1971 time frame, radar antennas made about 6 revolutions per minute or about one revolution about ever 10 seconds. That means the radar would paint an aircraft only about ever 10 seconds and the antenna would rotate about 60 degrees in that time frame.
In that 10 seconds, an airliner with a ground speed of about 180 knots, or 3 nautical miles per minute, would travel about one-half of a nautical mile or about 3000 feet.
The numbers presented above by Hominid are nonsense. Radar used in tracking aircraft has never been that accurate in tracking aircraft or anything to my knowledge. I believe Ammerman was recently quoted as saying that his radar display was only accurate to within several miles.
The Portland radar was not involved in the actual tracking of the airliner, that was strictly up to the Seattle ATC Controllers. The operator apparently just happened to see it on his local display and he probably could not be certain that he was looking at 305 in the first place.
The SAGE system was reportedly not on line that night in the first place. And all raw radar data used by the FAA and the USAF probably came from the same radar at McChord AFB.
Hom is no longer 'around'. :congrats: May he rest in peace.
Its a :conspiracy: Some things are beyond R99's grasp. :o
-
Also, take a close look at the 1972 FBI Flight map (White) and compare it to the FBI Flight Path map (Yellow)...they are slightly different.
I've never seen the white version of the flight path. can this be posted? if you are talking about the dropzone maps, those were done by Paul S. and will not be exact to the map made by the Air Force...
-
I have never been able to upload pictures onto the Forum. Not sure why. I receive an error message even though the size of the image is not an issue.
-
Does a box appear telling you what type of formats to use, jpeg, ping etc.? even though one of those are used?
-
If this hasn't been covered before ... does anyone know the names of the F-106 pilots? Over at the F-106 facebook page, there's a post that one of them was Roy Keyt of the 318th FIS (now deceased). Another post at the F-106 forum mentions Russ Weber (or Webber) of the 84th FIS out of Hamilton AFB.
-
If this hasn't been covered before ... does anyone know the names of the F-106 pilots? Over at the F-106 facebook page, there's a post that one of them was Roy Keyt of the 318th FIS (now deceased). Another post at the F-106 forum mentions Russ Weber (or Webber) of the 84th FIS out of Hamilton AFB.
The T33 was from the Oregon ANG out of Portland Airbase. It was my unit from 62 to 68 and I was assigned to Refueling maintenance. I am in contact with several retired members of my old unit. I’ll try to see if i can find out who was flying the T 33 out of Portland.
-
If this hasn't been covered before ... does anyone know the names of the F-106 pilots? Over at the F-106 facebook page, there's a post that one of them was Roy Keyt of the 318th FIS (now deceased). Another post at the F-106 forum mentions Russ Weber (or Webber) of the 84th FIS out of Hamilton AFB.
I believe the F-106 pilots were Randy Plumb and Harve Wallace.
-
If this hasn't been covered before ... does anyone know the names of the F-106 pilots? Over at the F-106 facebook page, there's a post that one of them was Roy Keyt of the 318th FIS (now deceased). Another post at the F-106 forum mentions Russ Weber (or Webber) of the 84th FIS out of Hamilton AFB.
The T33 was from the Oregon ANG out of Portland Airbase. It was my unit from 62 to 68 and I was assigned to Refueling maintenance. I am in contact with several retired members of my old unit. I’ll try to see if i can find out who was flying the T 33 out of Portland.
The two pilots aboard the Oregon Air National Guard T-33 are identified as Norman Battaglia, Instructor Pilot in the back seat, and Dick Perry, Pilot in the front seat, on page 46 of Ralph Himmelsbach's book.
The two pilots aboard the Oregon Army National Guard helicopter are identified as Lt. Col. Gayle Goyins and Major William Gottlieb on page 40 of Ralph Himmelsbach's book.
-
If this hasn't been covered before ... does anyone know the names of the F-106 pilots? Over at the F-106 facebook page, there's a post that one of them was Roy Keyt of the 318th FIS (now deceased). Another post at the F-106 forum mentions Russ Weber (or Webber) of the 84th FIS out of Hamilton AFB.
The T33 was from the Oregon ANG out of Portland Airbase. It was my unit from 62 to 68 and I was assigned to Refueling maintenance. I am in contact with several retired members of my old unit. I’ll try to see if i can find out who was flying the T 33 out of Portland.
The two pilots aboard the Oregon Air National Guard T-33 are identified as Norman Battaglia, Instructor Pilot in the back seat, and Dick Perry, Pilot in the front seat, on page 46 of Ralph Himmelsbach's book.
The two pilots aboard the Oregon Army National Guard helicopter are identified as Lt. Col. Gayle Goyins and Major William Gottlieb on page 40 of Ralph Himmelsbach's book.
Thanks Robert !
A Classmate of mine told me the retired pilots and him meet fairly regularly for breakfast or lunch. I’ll throw those names to my friend and see if any of them are still around and if he knows them. It would be a hoot if they were still around and I could get together with them especially the T 33 pilots !
Of course it’s probably not happening right now because of the Pandemic.
-
If this hasn't been covered before ... does anyone know the names of the F-106 pilots? Over at the F-106 facebook page, there's a post that one of them was Roy Keyt of the 318th FIS (now deceased). Another post at the F-106 forum mentions Russ Weber (or Webber) of the 84th FIS out of Hamilton AFB.
The T33 was from the Oregon ANG out of Portland Airbase. It was my unit from 62 to 68 and I was assigned to Refueling maintenance. I am in contact with several retired members of my old unit. I’ll try to see if i can find out who was flying the T 33 out of Portland.
The two pilots aboard the Oregon Air National Guard T-33 are identified as Norman Battaglia, Instructor Pilot in the back seat, and Dick Perry, Pilot in the front seat, on page 46 of Ralph Himmelsbach's book.
The two pilots aboard the Oregon Army National Guard helicopter are identified as Lt. Col. Gayle Goyins and Major William Gottlieb on page 40 of Ralph Himmelsbach's book.
Major Norman Battaglia passed away in 2018 and is buried in Willamette National Cemetery close to where my Mother lies.
-
I’m going to ask a respectful, straightforward question, but one that is bound to rile everyone up.
What physical evidence (excluding personal opinions or feelings) exists that suggest a Western Flight Path?
I know that R99 will say that “this has been discussed since 2009” and/or some form of “do your own research”, so he is excused from answering. But I’d appreciate to hear some hard evidence and facts that point toward a flight path that puts the plane above Tena Bar.
I also don’t want to hear arguments why the presumed FBI flight path is wrong. That’s a different question.
I would like to hear factual evidence that indicate the Western Flight Path is accurate.
-
I’m going to ask a respectful, straightforward question, but one that is bound to rile everyone up.
What physical evidence (excluding personal opinions or feelings) exists that suggest a Western Flight Path?
I know that R99 will say that “this has been discussed since 2009” and/or some form of “do your own research”, so he is excused from answering. But I’d appreciate to hear some hard evidence and facts that point toward a flight path that puts the plane above Tena Bar.
I also don’t want to hear arguments why the presumed FBI flight path is wrong. That’s a different question.
I would like to hear factual evidence that indicate the Western Flight Path is accurate.
1) The placard find location.
2) The fiberglass skirt find location.
3) The money find location.
and along the same lines but focusing on the opposite...
4) The complete lack of a single piece of physical evidence pointing to any other flight path. None. Zilch. Nada. Zero. After 49 years.
-
Thanks, EU. I appreciate the reply.
Is that it? I don’t mean that in a glib “Is that all you got?” kind of way. I just want to make sure that you provide all the evidence that you have, and not leave anything out no matter how trivial.
I know you have spoken with an ATC operator, for example...
-
Thanks, EU. I appreciate the reply.
Is that it? I don’t mean that in a glib “Is that all you got?” kind of way. I just want to make sure that you provide all the evidence that you have, and not leave anything out no matter how trivial.
I know you have spoken with an ATC operator, for example...
I was focusing exclusively on physical evidence because physical evidence doesn't have an agenda and cannot be wrong. There is testimony and thoughts from the air traffic controller, Captain Scott, Major Dawson and other evidence too. But that is quite numerous and doesn't definitively prove the Western Flight Path.
-
That’s fair. Thanks again.
Perhaps you can clarify something that’s confusing me.
My understanding is that the coordinates for the staircase panel find are 46°36'19.0"N 122°32'20.0"W (got these from Shutter).
If I am reading the map correctly, that would put the find to the EAST of the FBI flight path. With a wind blowing to the northeast how would the Cinebar find be used for a western flight path if it is east of the FBI pencil line on the yellow map?
To be clear, I’m not being argumentative. It’s late here, and I’m honestly confused and hope you can clarify. Thanks.
-
That’s fair. Thanks again.
Perhaps you can clarify something that’s confusing me.
My understanding is that the coordinates for the staircase panel find are 46°36'19.0"N 122°32'20.0"W (got these from Shutter).
If I am reading the map correctly, that would put the find to the EAST of the FBI flight path. With a wind blowing to the northeast how would the Cinebar find be used for a western flight path if it is east of the FBI pencil line on the yellow map?
To be clear, I’m not being argumentative. It’s late here, and I’m honestly confused and hope you can clarify. Thanks.
The coordinates I have for the placard find are 46.243157 N, 122.683612 W. I'm not sure how that translates to the other coordinate system.
Regardless, this puts the placard find slightly southwest of the FBI Flight Path--about 1/2 mile. In any case, the placard drift analysis conducted by R99 shows that the placard would have drifted about 7-8 miles to the northeast once it separated from the jet. Therefore, it can be deduced that the location of the airliner was about 7-8 miles to the southwest of where the placard was found at the time it separated.
The exact location of the fiberglass skirt find is not known. However, we know it was found on public hunting lands in the Cinebar area. With that in mind, and working from the very western edge of the hunting lands and applying a drift analysis for the fiberglass skirt indicates that the airliner was no more than a couple of miles from the western edge of the hunting lands at best. This means that the airliner was actually several miles east of the FBI Flight Path at that point. I have long suspected this because I have flown out of SeaTac probably hundreds of times and know that jets fly due south for a period of time before heading in a different direction--the FBI Flight Path indicates an immediate turn toward Maylay from SeaTac which again I have always suspected is wrong.
What all of this means is that the FBI Flight Path appears to be wrong in at least two spots. If I'm right about this then it calls into question the integrity of the entire map. And considering that the money was found no where near the FBI search area I think further supports a more direct, and western, flight path.
-
I still find it hard to believe evidence laying on the ground almost weightless was in the same location for 8 years. how did it get torn up. it's pretty strong material. with the rips how exactly would it drift without testing. then reports of wind changes and nobody knows the exact winds at that given moment. lots of variables to consider prior to basing anything as fact.
-
How quick can we shoot this down? other than them not watching the plane and only the pilots were concerned about the bomb..
-
Then we can destroy this...and the report from Scott shortly after and not decades later believing he landed in Merwin..
-
This is very easy to dispute. After all, we're dealing with a controller who is being asked to note precisely where the jet was at a specific moment in time that was not notable for any particular reason--remember, nobody knew that Cooper had jumped--two days after the fact. Also, there were four jets in the air that night. How did he know who was who?
As I've stated before, it also makes sense if you consider that what is being referenced here was not 305 but the F-106s.
The problem that people who don't subscribe to the Western Flight Path are going to have is explaining away the actual physical evidence along the Western Flight Path and the complete lack of physical evidence along the FBI Flight Path.
As I stated above, the physical evidence does not have an agenda. It cannot be wrong. It cannot make a mistake.
-
What do you mean nobody knew until two days later?
-
You don't really believe they look at blips not knowing who is who? ever heard of mid air collisions? you don't have any proven evidence.
-
You don't really believe they look at blips not knowing who is who? ever heard of mid air collisions? you don't have any proven evidence.
This guy was a spectator. Why and how would he know that there were F-106 chase planes? How does he have any idea what's going on, after all he's merely a spectator?
-
What do you mean nobody knew until two days later?
He was asked days later to recollect where the jet was at a specific point that had no meaning or significance. It's not like Cooper jumped and a light went off and everyone took note of the spot of the jet on a black radar monitor.
-
You see how bias you are..two days later is a problem with a professional... and yet you want me to believe the placard remained in place 8 years later? perhaps if it weighed a couple pounds.
-
I ask this over and over..how hard would it have been to draw a basic straight line on a sectional chart for the them to see? why did they agree to the map. "why do you have us over here?" were they asleep like portland?
-
EU,
The coordinates for the Cinebar find were from Shutter. I don’t know where he got them from. The community of Cinebar sits nearly 10 miles EAST of the FBI flight path. I think you inadvertently provided the coords for the placard find.
I am not mathematician, but an 8 miles drift from 10,000 feet seems like an excessive lateral movement. Are R99’s calculations publicly available?
-
I don't recall giving those coords, sure it was me?
-
Cinbar cords should be 46°36'19.0"N 122°32'20.0"W
From p. 192 of this thread.
I only know this because I have spend the better part of two weeks reading the entire Flight Path thread - all 200+ pages.
-
Yes, I gave coords to Cinebar but not the piece found..the location is unknown other than the area.
-
Ah, gotcha. So do we have any indication of where the staircase panel would have been found? It can’t be too far from Cinebar I would imagine.
-
EU,
The coordinates for the Cinebar find were from Shutter. I don’t know where he got them from. The community of Cinebar sits nearly 10 miles EAST of the FBI flight path. I think you inadvertently provided the coords for the placard find.
I am not mathematician, but an 8 miles drift from 10,000 feet seems like an excessive lateral movement. Are R99’s calculations publicly available?
The coords are for the placard. We do not know the specific location of the fiberglass skirt find near Cinebar.
-
I don't have the document in front of me but I believe it was found near Cinebar. not sure where the document is right now..as you claimed earlier..it's getting late. I'm way past me time. perhaps Eric can post it.
-
He was asked days later to recollect where the jet was at a specific point that had no meaning or significance. It's not like Cooper jumped and a light went off and everyone took note of the spot of the jet on a black radar monitor.
This was a major event. downplaying it doesn't make sense when you use the diversion of Portland because a bomb is on board. they just assumed it would not fly over Portland, which could also mean PDX and could explain the sharp turn.. these guys can multi-task with ease. it's there job. I would guess memory wouldn't be an issue either. I don't believe they were ignored. I doubt they were half as busy as today.
-
EU,
The coordinates for the Cinebar find were from Shutter. I don’t know where he got them from. The community of Cinebar sits nearly 10 miles EAST of the FBI flight path. I think you inadvertently provided the coords for the placard find.
I am not mathematician, but an 8 miles drift from 10,000 feet seems like an excessive lateral movement. Are R99’s calculations publicly available?
FOR ERIC ULIS,
If you have my calculations feel free to send them to Chaucer. You also did the calculations and we were in excellent agreement.
You and I discussed this matter extensively when Tom Kaye came up with the MEASURED winds aloft values that were made on the evening of the hijacking. Those MEASURED winds aloft values were a bit higher than the FAA ESTIMATED winds aloft values for the evening of the hijacking that were provided to pilots that evening and that were used in the earlier calculations.
As I pointed out to Tom Kaye a number of years ago when I did the initial drift estimate for him, I made it a point to be extremely conservative since there were a number of assumptions that had to be made. When Tom came up with the MEASURED wind aloft values, the number of assumptions could be drastically reduced and that produced a drift distance that was quite a bit larger than the initial estimate made several years ago.
-
He was asked days later to recollect where the jet was at a specific point that had no meaning or significance. It's not like Cooper jumped and a light went off and everyone took note of the spot of the jet on a black radar monitor.
This was a major event. downplaying it doesn't make sense when you use the diversion of Portland because a bomb is on board. they just assumed it would not fly over Portland, which could also mean PDX and could explain the sharp turn.. these guys can multi-task with ease. it's there job. I would guess memory wouldn't be an issue either. I don't believe they were ignored. I doubt they were half as busy as today.
Shutter,
With all due respect, it is unlikely that any FAA people in Portland were involved in the airliner's flight to Reno. The flight was totally controlled from the Seattle Center until it was handed off to the Oakland Center in Northern California.
There is nothing to indicate that anyone in Portland even knew which transponder code the airliner was squawking and that would be the only way for them to accurately identify the aircraft. When the airliner was handed off from one controller to another, the new controller would tell it to "ident" (squawk its transponder) and to state its altitude. Both the old and new controllers would be watching their radar displays, and coordinating the transfer by land line telephones, to insure that they were looking at the same aircraft.
For the record, the airliner squawked transponder code 3100 all the way from Seattle to Reno.
-
8 years on the ground uncovered in the woods and didn't budge. was it on the ground, in brush. was the area open or full of foliage?
Doesn't this area have a lot of pine tree's that would be hard to penetrate. sticking right out in the open? just seems odd. they also put the appearance into question.
What would the placard do torn up vs a perfect placard floating around?
The wind data can be pretty accurate but can also shift. air traffic controllers told me it would be difficult to pinpoint wind direct in a small area. these are guys who deal with this stuff on a daily basis. calculations are known to be wrong. we argue that with the path.
How did the Air Force come up with data similar to Portland or what NWO calculated. I seriously doubt they called anyone. it's a totality of things matching. the placard was found near the known path and not an unknown path. the Air Force did there own thing and appears NWO did but with help from the FBI and Portland. all of them wrong? I'm not on board 100% with anything until all the facts are in.
-
Your saying they couldn't of been listening in or tracking. again, the "bomb" but ignored it and only the pilots were concerned?
-
I’m going to ask a respectful, straightforward question, but one that is bound to rile everyone up.
What physical evidence (excluding personal opinions or feelings) exists that suggest a Western Flight Path?
I know that R99 will say that “this has been discussed since 2009” and/or some form of “do your own research”, so he is excused from answering. But I’d appreciate to hear some hard evidence and facts that point toward a flight path that puts the plane above Tena Bar.
I also don’t want to hear arguments why the presumed FBI flight path is wrong. That’s a different question.
I would like to hear factual evidence that indicate the Western Flight Path is accurate.
1) The placard find location.
2) The fiberglass skirt find location.
3) The money find location.
and along the same lines but focusing on the opposite...
4) The complete lack of a single piece of physical evidence pointing to any other flight path. None. Zilch. Nada. Zero. After 49 years.
Your argument is circular. A fallacy. No to mention its all according to you!
Frankly, you and R99 have a lot of gall claiming that your work is superior to that of the Air Force who had the radar tapes in hand.
Circular reasoning is when you attempt to make an argument by beginning with the assumption(s) that what you are trying and needing to prove, is already true. You are assuming that each of your points above are true, only if your flight path is true! And therefore your flight path must be true! :rofl:
-
I’m going to ask a respectful, straightforward question, but one that is bound to rile everyone up.
What physical evidence (excluding personal opinions or feelings) exists that suggest a Western Flight Path?
I know that R99 will say that “this has been discussed since 2009” and/or some form of “do your own research”, so he is excused from answering. But I’d appreciate to hear some hard evidence and facts that point toward a flight path that puts the plane above Tena Bar.
I also don’t want to hear arguments why the presumed FBI flight path is wrong. That’s a different question.
I would like to hear factual evidence that indicate the Western Flight Path is accurate.
1) The placard find location.
2) The fiberglass skirt find location.
3) The money find location.
and along the same lines but focusing on the opposite...
4) The complete lack of a single piece of physical evidence pointing to any other flight path. None. Zilch. Nada. Zero. After 49 years.
Your argument is circular. A fallacy. No to mention its all according to you!
Frankly, you and R99 have a lot of gall claiming that your work is superior to that of the Air Force who had the radar tapes in hand.
Circular reasoning is when you attempt to make an argument by beginning with the assumption(s) that what you are trying and needing to prove, is already true. You are assuming that each of your points above are true, only if your flight path is true! And therefore your flight path must be true! :rofl:
Georger,
Based on your last paragraph above, you wouldn't know what circular reasoning is if it bit you in the butt. The facts that EU has repeated above is what led to the conclusion that the so-called Western Flight Path was the correct one for the airliner. And that is not circular reasoning.
To repeat for the record, I joined DropZone in early 2009 after Sluggo told me about it and how to find the Cooper thread. I then spent more than a year researching the hijacking and the flight path, obtaining information from the National Archives and other sources, and doing my own calculations. Based on my training and experience as a professional Aeronautical Engineer, a pilot since the age of 15, and a very limited amount of parachuting, I concluded that there was no way the so-called FBI flight path could be correct. And I discussed the flight path problems in my very first post on DropZone in the summer or 2010.
There was a knee jerk reaction to that post from some of the entrenched Cooper true believers, including yourself if I remember correctly. But none of the true believers have been able to come up with a single valid point to disprove the so-called Western Flight Path. It is not a faith-based creation.
And again for the record, I stand by everything that I have done on the Western Flight Path since 2009.
-
I’m going to ask a respectful, straightforward question, but one that is bound to rile everyone up.
What physical evidence (excluding personal opinions or feelings) exists that suggest a Western Flight Path?
I know that R99 will say that “this has been discussed since 2009” and/or some form of “do your own research”, so he is excused from answering. But I’d appreciate to hear some hard evidence and facts that point toward a flight path that puts the plane above Tena Bar.
I also don’t want to hear arguments why the presumed FBI flight path is wrong. That’s a different question.
I would like to hear factual evidence that indicate the Western Flight Path is accurate.
1) The placard find location.
2) The fiberglass skirt find location.
3) The money find location.
and along the same lines but focusing on the opposite...
4) The complete lack of a single piece of physical evidence pointing to any other flight path. None. Zilch. Nada. Zero. After 49 years.
Your argument is circular. A fallacy. No to mention its all according to you!
Frankly, you and R99 have a lot of gall claiming that your work is superior to that of the Air Force who had the radar tapes in hand.
Circular reasoning is when you attempt to make an argument by beginning with the assumption(s) that what you are trying and needing to prove, is already true. You are assuming that each of your points above are true, only if your flight path is true! And therefore your flight path must be true! :rofl:
Georger,
Based on your last paragraph above, you wouldn't know what circular reasoning is if it bit you in the butt. The facts that EU has repeated above is what led to the conclusion that the so-called Western Flight Path was the correct one for the airliner. And that is not circular reasoning.
To repeat for the record, I joined DropZone in early 2009 after Sluggo told me about it and how to find the Cooper thread. I then spent more than a year researching the hijacking and the flight path, obtaining information from the National Archives and other sources, and doing my own calculations. Based on my training and experience as a professional Aeronautical Engineer, a pilot since the age of 15, and a very limited amount of parachuting, I concluded that there was no way the so-called FBI flight path could be correct. And I discussed the flight path problems in my very first post on DropZone in the summer or 2010.
There was a knee jerk reaction to that post from some of the entrenched Cooper true believers, including yourself if I remember correctly. But none of the true believers have been able to come up with a single valid point to disprove the so-called Western Flight Path. It is not a faith-based creation.
And again for the record, I stand by everything that I have done on the Western Flight Path since 2009.
The facts that EU has repeated above ? The money find is a fact of the flight path? Since when? Since you and EU said so, thats when! To cite just one example.
You are going in circles making assumptions you are not entitled to make. Circles you have no independent proof for.
We all know this is hopeless with you. You cant use the money find as a FACT that proves any flight path. The two are completely independent. Ergo - circularity.
Look for deer scat that proves your west path? :o
When you and Ulis get radar tapes be sure to tell the world. No reverse engineering by cult leaders allowed!
Oh and BTW: water flows down hill in case you forgot.
-
As I have said, I have read all 200+ pages of this thread and looked at all the accompanying files. It seems that you WFP dudes have a problem with the yellow map rather than the flight path itself. Or more accurately, you have a problem with the flight path as it’s presented on the yellow map.
I think it’s logical to assume that the yellow map wasn’t the end all and be all of the flight path plotting. I mean it’s basically connect the dots in pencil on a paper map. My guess is that the Hoover FBI would have far more detailed and sophisticated maps available to them to direct the investigation. What Carr allowed us to see was probably a rough draft rather than the final product.
So, I can understand why you would have issues with the way the flight path is plotted on the yellow map. I mean you don’t have to be a pilot to know that planes don’t fly from one point to another and then turn on a dime toward the next one. Also, as I mentioned, it is scrawled in pencil with notes scrawled on. It’s certainly not professionally done.
However, I think it provides the best guess of the FBI based on the information at the time, and that far more thorough and detailed maps were created using all manner of data including the SAGE radar, civilian radar, the ATC, FDR, and air and ground witnesses. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that they used satellite data as well.
My point is, yes the yellow map isn’t perfect and you can pick apart certain details, but on the whole I think it provides a generally accurate path that 305 took that night.
-
Let me provide some background on my involvement with the Western Flight Path.
At first I saw the FBI Flight Path and didn't question it. Why would I? However, it didn't take long before I realized that there were some major problems that I could not reasonably explain away. Specifically, the fact that nothing had been found in the FBI search along the FBI Flight Path, and the fact that the money was found at Tena Bar.
Later I came upon R99's analysis of the placard drift that was posted on Tom Kaye's site--I believe the conclusion was that it drifted 2.7 miles to the northeast. This wasn't a shocking thing in my mind but notable.
However, I still had a hard time explaining why 305 was flying so erratically according to the FBI Flight Path especially considering the pilots were afraid that there was a live bomb in back that could easily detonate if it fell off a chair, and because the pilots appeared to be extra sensitive about DBC's "No funny stuff" comment." Indeed, they didn't even squawk 7700 because they were afraid DBC would interpret that as "funny stuff."
Then I read R99's theory about the jet flying directly from Maylay to Canby--I don't believe he referred to this as the Western Flight Path per se because I think I came up with that term--but it made a lot of sense considering some of the problems that I identified with the FBI Flight Path.
Later I got my hands on an actual placard which enabled me to provide R99 with some updated size and weight numbers for the placard that he could use to reevaluate the placard's drift. Also, Tom Kaye provided updated and more accurate weather data. In the end, R99's new placard drift analysis showed a much longer drift for the placard which I immediately realized created a very big problem for the FBI Flight Path and also lined up perfectly with the Western Flight Path.
Next, there was the discovery of the FBI file that told the story of the fiberglass skirt find. This too immediately suggested a problem with the FBI Flight Path and pointed to a path out of Seattle that I suspected all along--in other words, a due south departure and heading for the first several miles as the plane gained speed and altitude with gear down, flaps down, and airstairs ajar.
Ultimately all of this convinced me that some version of the Western Flight Path was the true path and it got me thinking about where the FBI Flight Path came from. This caused me to eventually theorize that the FBI Flight Path was probably crafted using radar data from their own F-106's, albeit accidentally. In other words, the circuitous FBI Flight Path was actually the path of the F-106's and not 305.
I closing, I realize that R99 and I carry a unique burden in that we are obligated to prove that the Western Flight Path is right and that the FBI Flight Path is wrong. I say this because we are the ones challenging conventional wisdom which places the burden on us to convince you that we're right, and not necessarily the other way around.
Nonetheless, I think a thorough assessment of the facts as we know them tend to support the Western Flight Path and disprove the FBI Flight Path. Of course, I realize others are going to disagree.
-
I appreciate that response, EU, and I hope that I can return the same respectfulness and well-intentioned exchange of ideas, facts, and opinions.
For the record, I have no suspect to peddle. I have no pet theory I need to support. I have no dog in this fight. I have based my opinions on the evidence I have seen. That said, I am prepared to be wrong. I am prepared to change my mind if the evidence demands it. So far, I do not believe it has.
EU, if you will indulge me, I have a question for you regarding the Cinebar panel find. In the FBI memo you found, it states:
"[The panel] fit directly above the rear stairs door."
However, in the photographs taken at the Reno airport that purport to show damage to the aft stairs, it seems to show "damage" to the paneling beneath the railing. How do you explain this discrepancy? Did the panel come from 305's aft stair railing as suggested in the photos? Or above the rear stairs door as stated in the memo?
-
EU, if you will indulge me, I have a question for you regarding the Cinebar panel find. In the FBI memo you found, it states:
"[The panel] fit directly above the rear stairs door."
However, in the photographs taken at the Reno airport that purport to show damage to the aft stairs, it seems to show "damage" to the paneling beneath the railing. How do you explain this discrepancy? Did the panel come from 305's aft stair railing as suggested in the photos? Or above the rear stairs door as stated in the memo?
The confusion comes from the fact that the airstairs literally is a door. The airstairs are affixed to the back/top of the door. When the door is closed, and you walk into the back section of the jet you see that the stairs are on top of the door as are the fiberglass panels.
-
Thanks, EU. I had kind of surmised that, but wanted your input.
You mentioned in an earlier post that the panel was found on "public hunting grounds" near Cinebar, but the memo only states "while hunting in the Cinebar, Washington area". Is there other documentation about this location outside of the memo? Something that would point to "public hunting grounds"? Knowing a more specific location is really key IMO.
-
Let me provide some background on my involvement with the Western Flight Path.
At first I saw the FBI Flight Path and didn't question it. Why would I? However, it didn't take long before I realized that there were some major problems that I could not reasonably explain away. Specifically, the fact that nothing had been found in the FBI search along the FBI Flight Path, and the fact that the money was found at Tena Bar.
Later I came upon R99's analysis of the placard drift that was posted on Tom Kaye's site--I believe the conclusion was that it drifted 2.7 miles to the northeast. This wasn't a shocking thing in my mind but notable.
However, I still had a hard time explaining why 305 was flying so erratically according to the FBI Flight Path especially considering the pilots were afraid that there was a live bomb in back that could easily detonate if it fell off a chair, and because the pilots appeared to be extra sensitive about DBC's "No funny stuff" comment." Indeed, they didn't even squawk 7700 because they were afraid DBC would interpret that as "funny stuff."
Then I read R99's theory about the jet flying directly from Maylay to Canby--I don't believe he referred to this as the Western Flight Path per se because I think I came up with that term--but it made a lot of sense considering some of the problems that I identified with the FBI Flight Path.
Later I got my hands on an actual placard which enabled me to provide R99 with some updated size and weight numbers for the placard that he could use to reevaluate the placard's drift. Also, Tom Kaye provided updated and more accurate weather data. In the end, R99's new placard drift analysis showed a much longer drift for the placard which I immediately realized created a very big problem for the FBI Flight Path and also lined up perfectly with the Western Flight Path.
Next, there was the discovery of the FBI file that told the story of the fiberglass skirt find. This too immediately suggested a problem with the FBI Flight Path and pointed to a path out of Seattle that I suspected all along--in other words, a due south departure and heading for the first several miles as the plane gained speed and altitude with gear down, flaps down, and airstairs ajar.
Ultimately all of this convinced me that some version of the Western Flight Path was the true path and it got me thinking about where the FBI Flight Path came from. This caused me to eventually theorize that the FBI Flight Path was probably crafted using radar data from their own F-106's, albeit accidentally. In other words, the circuitous FBI Flight Path was actually the path of the F-106's and not 305.
I closing, I realize that R99 and I carry a unique burden in that we are obligated to prove that the Western Flight Path is right and that the FBI Flight Path is wrong. I say this because we are the ones challenging conventional wisdom which places the burden on us to convince you that we're right, and not necessarily the other way around.
Nonetheless, I think a thorough assessment of the facts as we know them tend to support the Western Flight Path and disprove the FBI Flight Path. Of course, I realize others are going to disagree.
Ultimately all of this convinced me that some version of the Western Flight Path was the true path and it got me thinking about where the FBI Flight Path came from. This caused me to eventually theorize that the FBI Flight Path was probably crafted using radar data from their own F-106's, albeit accidentally. In other words, the circuitous FBI Flight Path was actually the path of the F-106's and not 305.
Why would you think the above? Based on what evidence vs. just dreaming something up?
You are saying everyone who worked on the history of the flight path back in the 2000s including all principle players interviewed - were all WRONG AND LYING? Is this what you are saying?
You are saying the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (DC) and the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) didn't know what they were doing - and were all incompetent and wrong! You are saying the margin of error these folks were operating in was so large, that 305 was actually anywhere on a north-south line between Seattle and Portland! No wonder some people say Cooper bailed over Mt St Helens, or just outside Reno ! 8)
That's one helluva a claim. What it is is complete historical ignorance on your part. But that's fine. Some people still insist the world is flat. Yours is a Conspiracy Theory that dismisses all historical facts! What your theory has exposed is that there does not exist on any DB Cooper Forum an accurate comprehensive historical account of how the socalled FBI Flight Path was put together and by whom. An account that everyone can accept because it is true. That only proves that Reality shows on forums and are not Reality!
There is some profound gap in people's educations at Forums that wont even allow them to use the words: McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (DC) and the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) ! ;D
-
Can anyone attest to the validity of the photo I attached below? It is purportedly from Geoffrey Gray's book and was taken at the airport in Reno at some undetermined amount of time after the plane landed.
If this is true, it clearly shows that their was no damage to the aft stairs paneling.
So, again, can anyone verify?
-
Thanks, EU. I had kind of surmised that, but wanted your input.
You mentioned in an earlier post that the panel was found on "public hunting grounds" near Cinebar, but the memo only states "while hunting in the Cinebar, Washington area". Is there other documentation about this location outside of the memo? Something that would point to "public hunting grounds"? Knowing a more specific location is really key IMO.
I made an assumption that it was public hunting land because there is a large hunting region just east of Cinebar that is controlled by the state. Yes, the word "public" is my word.
-
Can anyone attest to the validity of the photo I attached below? It is purportedly from Geoffrey Gray's book and was taken at the airport in Reno at some undetermined amount of time after the plane landed.
If this is true, it clearly shows that their was no damage to the aft stairs paneling.
So, again, can anyone verify?
I think this photo was taken in Seattle after the test flight over the Pacific Ocean. The fiberglass skirt had already been repaired. Not sure what to make of the port side panel being gone and the appearance of bent metal.
-
Let me provide some background on my involvement with the Western Flight Path.
At first I saw the FBI Flight Path and didn't question it. Why would I? However, it didn't take long before I realized that there were some major problems that I could not reasonably explain away. Specifically, the fact that nothing had been found in the FBI search along the FBI Flight Path, and the fact that the money was found at Tena Bar.
Later I came upon R99's analysis of the placard drift that was posted on Tom Kaye's site--I believe the conclusion was that it drifted 2.7 miles to the northeast. This wasn't a shocking thing in my mind but notable.
However, I still had a hard time explaining why 305 was flying so erratically according to the FBI Flight Path especially considering the pilots were afraid that there was a live bomb in back that could easily detonate if it fell off a chair, and because the pilots appeared to be extra sensitive about DBC's "No funny stuff" comment." Indeed, they didn't even squawk 7700 because they were afraid DBC would interpret that as "funny stuff."
Then I read R99's theory about the jet flying directly from Maylay to Canby--I don't believe he referred to this as the Western Flight Path per se because I think I came up with that term--but it made a lot of sense considering some of the problems that I identified with the FBI Flight Path.
Later I got my hands on an actual placard which enabled me to provide R99 with some updated size and weight numbers for the placard that he could use to reevaluate the placard's drift. Also, Tom Kaye provided updated and more accurate weather data. In the end, R99's new placard drift analysis showed a much longer drift for the placard which I immediately realized created a very big problem for the FBI Flight Path and also lined up perfectly with the Western Flight Path.
Next, there was the discovery of the FBI file that told the story of the fiberglass skirt find. This too immediately suggested a problem with the FBI Flight Path and pointed to a path out of Seattle that I suspected all along--in other words, a due south departure and heading for the first several miles as the plane gained speed and altitude with gear down, flaps down, and airstairs ajar.
Ultimately all of this convinced me that some version of the Western Flight Path was the true path and it got me thinking about where the FBI Flight Path came from. This caused me to eventually theorize that the FBI Flight Path was probably crafted using radar data from their own F-106's, albeit accidentally. In other words, the circuitous FBI Flight Path was actually the path of the F-106's and not 305.
I closing, I realize that R99 and I carry a unique burden in that we are obligated to prove that the Western Flight Path is right and that the FBI Flight Path is wrong. I say this because we are the ones challenging conventional wisdom which places the burden on us to convince you that we're right, and not necessarily the other way around.
Nonetheless, I think a thorough assessment of the facts as we know them tend to support the Western Flight Path and disprove the FBI Flight Path. Of course, I realize others are going to disagree.
Ultimately all of this convinced me that some version of the Western Flight Path was the true path and it got me thinking about where the FBI Flight Path came from. This caused me to eventually theorize that the FBI Flight Path was probably crafted using radar data from their own F-106's, albeit accidentally. In other words, the circuitous FBI Flight Path was actually the path of the F-106's and not 305.
Why would you think the above? Based on what evidence vs. just dreaming something up?
You are saying everyone who worked on the history of the flight path back in the 2000s including all principle players interviewed - were all WRONG AND LYING? Is this what you are saying?
You are saying the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (DC) and the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) didn't know what they were doing - and were all incompetent and wrong! You are saying the margin of error these folks were operating in was so large, that 305 was actually anywhere on a north-south line between Seattle and Portland! No wonder some people say Cooper bailed over Mt St Helens, or just outside Reno ! 8)
That's one helluva a claim. What it is is complete historical ignorance on your part. But that's fine. Some people still insist the world is flat. Yours is a Conspiracy Theory that dismisses all historical facts! What your theory has exposed is that there does not exist on any DB Cooper Forum an accurate comprehensive historical account of how the socalled FBI Flight Path was put together and by whom. An account that everyone can accept because it is true. That only proves that Reality shows on forums and are not Reality!
There is some profound gap in people's educations at Forums that wont even allow them to use the words: McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (DC) and the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) ! ;D
GEORGER there are times when you have your head up your ass and this is one of them. I am not accusing anyone of lying. Where do I ever accuse anyone of lying?
Also, I'm not accusing anyone of being involved in a conspiracy. Look up the definition of conspiracy. Conspiracy implies malice. Where do I ever accuse anyone of a conspiracy.
How do you respond to Major Dawson's comments? Apparently the FBI Flight Path was not unanimous at McChord.
What I am saying is that people make mistakes. Now if you want to debate that point I think the argument is over before it even begins.
-
Can anyone attest to the validity of the photo I attached below? It is purportedly from Geoffrey Gray's book and was taken at the airport in Reno at some undetermined amount of time after the plane landed.
If this is true, it clearly shows that their was no damage to the aft stairs paneling.
So, again, can anyone verify?
I think this photo was taken in Seattle after the test flight over the Pacific Ocean. The fiberglass skirt had already been repaired. Not sure what to make of the port side panel being gone and the appearance of bent metal.
So there is documentation of damage and subsequent repair to the 305?
I wonder where Gray got this photo and attributed it to Reno?
-
These are taken in Reno. The damage and missing panels are circled.
-
Yes, I've seen those photos before. They're compelling. But I was under the impression that the FBI believed that there was no damage to the airliner. How do you know if and when it was repaired?
-
Yes, I've seen those photos before. They're compelling. But I was under the impression that the FBI believed that there was no damage to the airliner. How do you know if and when it was repaired?
There was clearly damage to the airstairs. It's quite visible on the news footage. Bill Kurtis even mentions the airstairs being "in shreds" from Reno on the famous Walter Cronkite news footage.
-
So, you're assuming that since it was damaged in the hijacking, it was quickly repaired to put it back into service?
-
I believe the same jet flew the crew back to Seattle the next day--Thanksgiving. Then at some point shortly thereafter the jet was put back into service. It was obviously repaired before it re-entered service.
I don't know where the jet was repaired. I suspect that what was left of the fiberglass skirts was removed in Reno but perhaps not replaced with new skirts until Seattle or Minneapolis.
-
Let me provide some background on my involvement with the Western Flight Path.
At first I saw the FBI Flight Path and didn't question it. Why would I? However, it didn't take long before I realized that there were some major problems that I could not reasonably explain away. Specifically, the fact that nothing had been found in the FBI search along the FBI Flight Path, and the fact that the money was found at Tena Bar.
Later I came upon R99's analysis of the placard drift that was posted on Tom Kaye's site--I believe the conclusion was that it drifted 2.7 miles to the northeast. This wasn't a shocking thing in my mind but notable.
However, I still had a hard time explaining why 305 was flying so erratically according to the FBI Flight Path especially considering the pilots were afraid that there was a live bomb in back that could easily detonate if it fell off a chair, and because the pilots appeared to be extra sensitive about DBC's "No funny stuff" comment." Indeed, they didn't even squawk 7700 because they were afraid DBC would interpret that as "funny stuff."
Then I read R99's theory about the jet flying directly from Maylay to Canby--I don't believe he referred to this as the Western Flight Path per se because I think I came up with that term--but it made a lot of sense considering some of the problems that I identified with the FBI Flight Path.
Later I got my hands on an actual placard which enabled me to provide R99 with some updated size and weight numbers for the placard that he could use to reevaluate the placard's drift. Also, Tom Kaye provided updated and more accurate weather data. In the end, R99's new placard drift analysis showed a much longer drift for the placard which I immediately realized created a very big problem for the FBI Flight Path and also lined up perfectly with the Western Flight Path.
Next, there was the discovery of the FBI file that told the story of the fiberglass skirt find. This too immediately suggested a problem with the FBI Flight Path and pointed to a path out of Seattle that I suspected all along--in other words, a due south departure and heading for the first several miles as the plane gained speed and altitude with gear down, flaps down, and airstairs ajar.
Ultimately all of this convinced me that some version of the Western Flight Path was the true path and it got me thinking about where the FBI Flight Path came from. This caused me to eventually theorize that the FBI Flight Path was probably crafted using radar data from their own F-106's, albeit accidentally. In other words, the circuitous FBI Flight Path was actually the path of the F-106's and not 305.
I closing, I realize that R99 and I carry a unique burden in that we are obligated to prove that the Western Flight Path is right and that the FBI Flight Path is wrong. I say this because we are the ones challenging conventional wisdom which places the burden on us to convince you that we're right, and not necessarily the other way around.
Nonetheless, I think a thorough assessment of the facts as we know them tend to support the Western Flight Path and disprove the FBI Flight Path. Of course, I realize others are going to disagree.
Ultimately all of this convinced me that some version of the Western Flight Path was the true path and it got me thinking about where the FBI Flight Path came from. This caused me to eventually theorize that the FBI Flight Path was probably crafted using radar data from their own F-106's, albeit accidentally. In other words, the circuitous FBI Flight Path was actually the path of the F-106's and not 305.
Why would you think the above? Based on what evidence vs. just dreaming something up?
You are saying everyone who worked on the history of the flight path back in the 2000s including all principle players interviewed - were all WRONG AND LYING? Is this what you are saying?
You are saying the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (DC) and the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) didn't know what they were doing - and were all incompetent and wrong! You are saying the margin of error these folks were operating in was so large, that 305 was actually anywhere on a north-south line between Seattle and Portland! No wonder some people say Cooper bailed over Mt St Helens, or just outside Reno ! 8)
That's one helluva a claim. What it is is complete historical ignorance on your part. But that's fine. Some people still insist the world is flat. Yours is a Conspiracy Theory that dismisses all historical facts! What your theory has exposed is that there does not exist on any DB Cooper Forum an accurate comprehensive historical account of how the socalled FBI Flight Path was put together and by whom. An account that everyone can accept because it is true. That only proves that Reality shows on forums and are not Reality!
There is some profound gap in people's educations at Forums that wont even allow them to use the words: McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (DC) and the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) ! ;D
GEORGER there are times when you have your head up your ass and this is one of them. I am not accusing anyone of lying. Where do I ever accuse anyone of lying?
Also, I'm not accusing anyone of being involved in a conspiracy. Look up the definition of conspiracy. Conspiracy implies malice. Where do I ever accuse anyone of a conspiracy.
How do you respond to Major Dawson's comments? Apparently the FBI Flight Path was not unanimous at McChord.
What I am saying is that people make mistakes. Now if you want to debate that point I think the argument is over before it even begins.
So, I have my head up my ass because: McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (DC) and the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) developed the flight path.
Amazing.
I must also have my head up my ass because the Hydrogen alpha line sits at 6563 angstroms! And 'water flows down hill'.
Is there anything else you can accuse me of in order to achieve your goal of changing DB Cooper history ? Five years from today which will historians be discussing? Your theory OR what the McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (DC) and the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) did? :-\
Which matters most? Your theories or the records of McChord Air Defense Command Direction Center (DC) and the McChord detachment of the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron (RADES) ? Who has whose head up whose ass ? Is stopping Georger key to your agenda? I suggest history has the greater force vs anything Georger says or does! Your whole focus is wrong. 8)
-
Can anyone attest to the validity of the photo I attached below? It is purportedly from Geoffrey Gray's book and was taken at the airport in Reno at some undetermined amount of time after the plane landed.
If this is true, it clearly shows that their was no damage to the aft stairs paneling.
So, again, can anyone verify?
I think this photograph was made at SEATAC after the airliner returned to Seattle on Thanksgiving afternoon (November 25th). The airliner was checked out by the FBI in Seattle, repaired, and back in line service by November 27 or so according to information in the George Harrison papers.
The photographs from the FBI drop tests in January used the very same aircraft that was hijacked. Photos of those drops are somewhere on this site and you can check them to see if the "modesty panels" on the stairs were removed for the tests in order to facilitate the photography.
The modesty panel on the left side may have been removed by the FBI as evidence.
-
I believe the same jet flew the crew back to Seattle the next day--Thanksgiving. Then at some point shortly thereafter the jet was put back into service. It was obviously repaired before it re-entered service.
I don't know where the jet was repaired. I suspect that what was left of the fiberglass skirts was removed in Reno but perhaps not replaced with new skirts until Seattle or Minneapolis.
I didn't see this before my last post so let me add a bit more information. The airliner was repaired in Seattle. I believe the seats that Cooper used were removed at that time and that is when the tie was found. With Boeing also located in Seattle, it would be very simple to obtain the necessary replacement parts and to get any experts from Boeing to help out if needed.
The skin damage to the stairs from dragging on the runway at Reno was apparently very minor. The tower people said the stairs did not touch the runway until the airliner had slowed and was turning off the runway. Since the skin on the bottom of the stairs was not a structural load bearing item, it could probably be repaired with a minor skin patch and a few rivets if necessary.
-
Whoa. The tie was found in Seattle? Post-Nov. 24? Never heard that before. Where'd you get that?
-
Whoa. The tie was found in Seattle? Post-Nov. 24? Never heard that before. Where'd you get that?
Somewhere in the Cooper literature is a statement to the effect that the FBI in Seattle (or maybe even Portland) had the tie by the Monday following the hijacking.
-
Interesting info regarding the stairs not incurring much damage during landing. I had suspected that the damage to the staircase panels might have happy during landing - especially since most indications are that their was very little wind entered the cabin with the aft stairs down. I wonder what mechanisms would act on the stairs with such force as to break the fiberglass panels?
-
Interesting info regarding the stairs not incurring much damage during landing. I had suspected that the damage to the staircase panels might have happy during landing - especially since most indications are that their was very little wind entered the cabin with the aft stairs down. I wonder what mechanisms would act on the stairs with such force as to break the fiberglass panels?
The answer to your question is the wind. The damaged and missing panels would be exposed to high velocity wind as Cooper went down the stairs and the stairs descended well below the aircraft fuselage.
-
That’s probably true, but was Cooper out on the stairs preparing to jump while the plane was passing by Cinebar? Weren’t the oscillations and the bump much farther south?
ETA: Cinebar is approximately 17 miles northeast of the turn at Toledo. It is approximately 25 miles north-northeast of the 8:05 mark where it seems the oscillations began and the crew started to suspect he was messing with the stairs. Appears that the plane would have been passing by Cinebar at approximately 7:56. If this is accurate, then Cooper must have fully deployed the stairs sometime between 7:56 and 8:05 for the wind to damage the paneling. Either way, that paneling must have traveled between 15 to 25 miles EAST just to reach the town of Cinebar.
Not 100% sure on the time, so please factcheck me.
-
8:05 was where Cooper made his last communication with the cockpit. the oscillations occurred near the Lewis river 8:10. no record of oscillations at 8:05 or prior.
-
Interesting info regarding the stairs not incurring much damage during landing. I had suspected that the damage to the staircase panels might have happy during landing - especially since most indications are that their was very little wind entered the cabin with the aft stairs down. I wonder what mechanisms would act on the stairs with such force as to break the fiberglass panels?
The answer to your question is the wind. The damaged and missing panels would be exposed to high velocity wind as Cooper went down the stairs and the stairs descended well below the aircraft fuselage.
The stairs were partially open. would that be enough to start tearing the panel?
-
Interesting info regarding the stairs not incurring much damage during landing. I had suspected that the damage to the staircase panels might have happy during landing - especially since most indications are that their was very little wind entered the cabin with the aft stairs down. I wonder what mechanisms would act on the stairs with such force as to break the fiberglass panels?
The answer to your question is the wind. The damaged and missing panels would be exposed to high velocity wind as Cooper went down the stairs and the stairs descended well below the aircraft fuselage.
The stairs were partially open. would that be enough to start tearing the panel?
Yes. Note that the missing panels are at the bottom of the stairs and would be the most exposed to the air stream.
-
disregard my post...thought you said no..distracted doing something else at the moment.
-
Here is something for you Chaucer...
-
Thanks, Shutter.
This has always confused me. I was under the impression that the oscillations continued for a few minutes before ending with a pressure change or bump. I thought the oscillations began earlier than 8:11 and that 8:11 was the time of the bump. Seems that based on what you shared that perhaps the bump/jump occurred well after the assume 8:11 time.
-
Depends on where you read the times. lots of things in this case seem to have several conclusions. the common was the crew stated the oscillation happened 5-10 minutes after the last contact with Cooper. then apparently Rataczak told Carr it was between 10-15 minutes?
-
So, to avoid getting sidetracked...would this information suggest that the aft stairs would not have been opened by Cooper until 8:05?
If 8:05 is the first time Cooper deployed the aft stairs in flight, then that would be the earliest that the fiberglass paneling could have come off. That would mean that it would have to travel approximately 30 miles north-northwest to Cinebar - and that is based on the FBI flight path. The distance traveled would be even farther, the more west you make the path.
That doesn't seem plausible.
-
Have you read the radio transcripts?
-
Cooper got the stairs dropped very early into the flight..
-
I have read the transcripts a few times, but there is so much info that it is hard to keep track of everything.
So, Cooper opened the aft stairs early in the flight, but only started down them around 8:05? And then jumped anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes after that?
-
I have read the transcripts a few times, but there is so much info that it is hard to keep track of everything.
So, Cooper opened the aft stairs early in the flight, but only started down them around 8:05? And then jumped anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes after that?
No, the last transmission from Cooper was at 8:05 that's why they use that as a reference. the oscillation occurs at around 8:10/11 that's during the crossing of the Lewis river. read the timing I post earlier..the 8:05 obviously shows him still on the plane.
-
The FBI memo regarding the Cinebar paneling find is dated 2/14/1975. Does anyone know what the hunting seasons are in Washington? If we know what he might be hunting, we might know popular areas around Cinebar for that type of game. That could help us narrow down where the paneling was found. If I'm not mistaken, February is usually for big game: elk, black bear, bobcat, coyote.
It's a stretch, but maybe worth it?
-
The FBI memo regarding the Cinebar paneling find is dated 2/14/1975. Does anyone know what the hunting seasons are in Washington? If we know what he might be hunting, we might know popular areas around Cinebar for that type of game. That could help us narrow down where the paneling was found. If I'm not mistaken, February is usually for big game: elk, black bear, bobcat, coyote.
It's a stretch, but maybe worth it?
Kermit can probably provide information on the hunting seasons.
-
The plane experienced turbulence which precipitated the cockpit trying to reach Cooper for a couple of minutes before he finally responded at 8:05. Not sure if this played into the missing panels.
-
What might make sense for 'oscillations'...
When Cooper opens the door, they drop somewhat but are being held up (partially closed) by the air pressure of the relative wind. When he ventures out on them to jump, his weight causes them to lower somewhat, which would affect the pitch (tail up/nose down). When he jumps, the stairs recoil back up, past their 'static' position. (In fact, they apparently almost closed, which caused the 'pressure bump'.) Then they would fall back down again, again pushing on the air. They would bounce up and down on the air a number of times before settling back to the 'static' position. each time giving a bit of pitch influence.
-
I have read the transcripts a few times, but there is so much info that it is hard to keep track of everything.
So, Cooper opened the aft stairs early in the flight, but only started down them around 8:05? And then jumped anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes after that?
Get the timeline Sluggo wrote. That helps put these complex things into context. These timelines may be a minute or two off.
At 8:05 Cooper and the cockpit talk.
8:12 - 305 advises we are getting oscillations in the cabin - Cooper must be doing something with the stairs.
8:15 - Important! - SEA CNTR advises Portland altimeter is 30.03 inches of Hg. (This is important because it indicates that at 20:15:56 305 was very near Portland).
The 8:15 transmission offers temporal and positional context to everything above according to pilots: Sluggo, Hominid, Farflung, Anderson, and others.
-
It is interesting to consider what precipitated the fiberglass skirts breaking away from the jet, as well as the placard.
The skirts would have to have experienced a very robust side wind to break away which suggests it happened at the time Cooper was preparing to jump or actually jumped. That said, the skirt was found well north of that area. Perhaps DBC was doing some stuff with the stairs which created the turbulence that was felt (seems unlikely) or perhaps it was turbulence that caused the airstairs to bounce which provided enough force to pop the skirts.
The placard is another matter entirely because it was actually ripped. Also, it was not riveted to the inside of the jet, rather it was affixed to the jet with an adhesive on its backside. It almost appears that DBC deliberately tore the piece off the wall. That said, perhaps a gust of wind ripped it off. Very odd.
-
It is interesting to consider what precipitated the fiberglass skirts breaking away from the jet, as well as the placard.
The skirts would have to have experienced a very robust side wind to break away which suggests it happened at the time Cooper was preparing to jump or actually jumped. That said, the skirt was found well north of that area. Perhaps DBC was doing some stuff with the stairs which created the turbulence that was felt (seems unlikely) or perhaps it was turbulence that caused the airstairs to bounce which provided enough force to pop the skirts.
The placard is another matter entirely because it was actually ripped. Also, it was not riveted to the inside of the jet, rather it was affixed to the jet with an adhesive on its backside. It almost appears that DBC deliberately tore the piece off the wall. That said, perhaps a gust of wind ripped it off. Very odd.
FJ says you are inventing all of this - its not even real. Has nothing to do with "anything"!
Why should voters believe you ?
-
It is interesting to consider what precipitated the fiberglass skirts breaking away from the jet, as well as the placard.
The skirts would have to have experienced a very robust side wind to break away which suggests it happened at the time Cooper was preparing to jump or actually jumped. That said, the skirt was found well north of that area. Perhaps DBC was doing some stuff with the stairs which created the turbulence that was felt (seems unlikely) or perhaps it was turbulence that caused the airstairs to bounce which provided enough force to pop the skirts.
The placard is another matter entirely because it was actually ripped. Also, it was not riveted to the inside of the jet, rather it was affixed to the jet with an adhesive on its backside. It almost appears that DBC deliberately tore the piece off the wall. That said, perhaps a gust of wind ripped it off. Very odd.
FJ says you are inventing all of this - its not even real. Has nothing to do with "anything"!
Why should voters believe you ?
Let's just say that I'm not going to engage or be lectured to by internet trolls.
On the other hand, if someone wants to have a comprehensive debate concerning the facts and the case in real time via Darren's podcast, I am down with that...
...(crickets chirping)...oh well.
-
It is interesting to consider what precipitated the fiberglass skirts breaking away from the jet, as well as the placard.
The skirts would have to have experienced a very robust side wind to break away which suggests it happened at the time Cooper was preparing to jump or actually jumped. That said, the skirt was found well north of that area. Perhaps DBC was doing some stuff with the stairs which created the turbulence that was felt (seems unlikely) or perhaps it was turbulence that caused the airstairs to bounce which provided enough force to pop the skirts.
The placard is another matter entirely because it was actually ripped. Also, it was not riveted to the inside of the jet, rather it was affixed to the jet with an adhesive on its backside. It almost appears that DBC deliberately tore the piece off the wall. That said, perhaps a gust of wind ripped it off. Very odd.
FJ says you are inventing all of this - its not even real. Has nothing to do with "anything"!
Why should voters believe you ?
Georger, why should anyone believe you or FJ? That is the question you and FJ need to answer.
-
Regarding the Cinebar panel find:
I have attached a map that demonstrates the distance from Cinebar to the assumed FBI flight path. I measured the distance to various points along the FBI flight path as shown on the "yellow map". I used the center of town as a reference since we do not know the exact location of the find; therefore, I would allow for a 2 miles radius around Cinebar as a margin of error.
I'm certain it is not perfectly exact, so please allow for a reasonable margin of error.
As you can see, the distance from the FBI flight path to Cinebar ranges from 9.7 to 26.5 miles. Using EU and R99's own calculations, this would seem to put the panel find within the range of the FBI flight path as 305 passed by Cinebar to the west.
Based on this, I think this calls into serious question the panel find as evidence of a western flight path (the distance for the panel to travel seems too far). Actually, it seems more in line with the conventional FBI flight path.
However, I encourage all of you to factcheck me, correct any errors, and draw your own conclusions. I'm prepared to be wrong about this!
-
Regarding the Cinebar panel find:
I have attached a map that demonstrates the distance from Cinebar to the assumed FBI flight path. I measured the distance to various points along the FBI flight path as shown on the "yellow map". I used the center of town as a reference since we do not know the exact location of the find; therefore, I would allow for a 2 miles radius around Cinebar as a margin of error.
I'm certain it is not perfectly exact, so please allow for a reasonable margin of error.
As you can see, the distance from the FBI flight path to Cinebar ranges from 9.7 to 26.5 miles. Using EU and R99's own calculations, this would seem to put the panel find within the range of the FBI flight path as 305 passed by Cinebar to the west.
Based on this, I think this calls into serious question the panel find as evidence of a western flight path (the distance for the panel to travel seems too far). Actually, it seems more in line with the conventional FBI flight path.
However, I encourage all of you to factcheck me, correct any errors, and draw your own conclusions. I'm prepared to be wrong about this!
You're actually validating my point and the Western Flight Path. Here's how:
1) The panel was from 305, unless 727s make a habit of flying around with their airstairs deployed.
2) The hunting lands begin just east of Cinebar, meaning that the distances you've measures are actually a little further from the FBI Flight Path.
3) A rough estimate by me has the panel drifting 1-2 miles to the northeast before hitting the forest floor.
Therefore, one can only deduce that the jet was not traveling along the FBI Flight Path but several miles east of the FBI Flight Path at that point. Meaning that the physical evidence does not support the FBI Flight Path, but rather a different flight path.
-
One other point.
The FBI Flight Path arguably depicts 305 making all kinds of turns in and around Portland/Vancouver. However, an FBI file in Part 12, Page 181 quite clearly asserts that the airliner was on autopilot during this phase.
Does the FBI Flight Path in any way resemble an airliner on autopilot? Does the Western Flight Path resemble an airliner on autopilot?
-
EU,
1. I never said the panel wasn’t from the 305. I think it likely was.
2. You keep referring to these “hunting grounds”. You yourself have said that the hunting grounds was an assumption on your part. There is no reference to hunting grounds in the FBI memo.
3. Before you said the calculations you made indicated a drift of 7 or 8 miles and that was a conservative estimate. Now you are saying it indicates a more easterly path?
4. What 305 was doing around Portland has nothing to do with the panel at Cinebar.
-
One other point.
The FBI Flight Path arguably depicts 305 making all kinds of turns in and around Portland/Vancouver. However, an FBI file in Part 12, Page 181 quite clearly asserts that the airliner was on autopilot during this phase.
Does the FBI Flight Path in any way resemble an airliner on autopilot? Does the Western Flight Path resemble an airliner on autopilot?
No, it doesn't. it makes a comment that the auto pilot was used in Washington. I'll have to look up the document for the exact terms used. does not say it was used from start to finish. also, you can fly with the auto pilot and make turns while maintaining altitude and speed. the auto pilot can be set up multiple ways. the straight lines seen can be noted as using auto pilot with drifting.
-
There is another document that states different. from Toledo down past the Lewis river is not a lot of turns. the other documents states it was used in certain time frames. I will have to find it. the document you refer to also show the FDR had the ability to have time stamps since it was examined minutely showing the FDR was valuable.
The auto pilot was good to use. I used it as well. it keeps the altitude and speed which was two things they agreed with in the demands. you can set it to VOR's as well. it's a very good auto pilot.
-
EU,
1. I never said the panel wasn’t from the 305. I think it likely was.
2. You keep referring to these “hunting grounds”. You yourself have said that the hunting grounds was an assumption on your part. There is no reference to hunting grounds in the FBI memo.
3. Before you said the calculations you made indicated a drift of 7 or 8 miles and that was a conservative estimate. Now you are saying it indicates a more easterly path?
4. What 305 was doing around Portland has nothing to do with the panel at Cinebar.
I'm not saying that you said it didn't come from 305, I'm merely crafting an orderly argument starting with "the panel is from 305."
Hunting lands are not an assumption, they exist and are located east of Cinebar. I used the word "public" in a previous description. I suppose one could argue that this hunter was on private land somewhere else even though that seems unlikely given the large public hunting region right there.
Also, the 7-8 mile drift analysis was for the placard, not the fiberglass skirt. The fiberglass, which is much larger than the placard, would drift 1-2 miles according to my estimations.
Finally, the comment about the autopilot is separate and doesn't relate specifically to the skirt.
-
One other point.
The FBI Flight Path arguably depicts 305 making all kinds of turns in and around Portland/Vancouver. However, an FBI file in Part 12, Page 181 quite clearly asserts that the airliner was on autopilot during this phase.
Does the FBI Flight Path in any way resemble an airliner on autopilot? Does the Western Flight Path resemble an airliner on autopilot?
No, it doesn't. it makes a comment that the auto pilot was used in Washington. I'll have to look up the document for the exact terms used. does not say it was used from start to finish. also, you can fly with the auto pilot and make turns while maintaining altitude and speed. the auto pilot can be set up multiple ways. the straight lines seen can be noted as using auto pilot with drifting.
The document I referenced is very specific in that it says that the pilots could have felt a change in the pitch of the aircraft when DBC jumped had it not been that it was flying on autopilot. The inference clearly being that the jet was flying on autopilot when DBC jumped.
-
Yes, that's just passing the Lewis river...also, I pointed out that you can use the control knob to maneuver the plane. the autopilot would keep the altitude so they wouldn't have to worry about losing or gaining altitude. it really doesn't imply anything. the flight doesn't look like the map. I've always thought they were trying to shake him up. it's not like they were zig zagging like like race car drivers heating up the tires..2 + 5 = 4 doesn't make sense...only the crew can tell you why they did what they did or make sense of it. since they believed Cooper jumped prior to those turns who would question it in 1971? just because it's odd or doesn't make sense shouldn't disqualify the whole thing.
-
The jet was on autopilot at the time DBC jumped. At a minimum this proves he didn't jump and land in the Columbia River near PDX--unless someone wants to argue that the FBI Flight Path depicted at that point denotes an airliner on autopilot.
Moreover, why would the airliner be on autopilot out of Seattle, then go off autopilot near Portland, then go back on autopilot south of Portland? Nothing in the files say that the pilots did this.
-
The jet was on autopilot at the time DBC jumped. At a minimum this proves he didn't jump and land in the Columbia River near PDX--unless someone wants to argue that the FBI Flight Path depicted at that point denotes an airliner on autopilot.
Nope, nothing has been proven where he actually jumped.
I'm not sure what autopilot has to do with anything. you can turn the plane with the yoke and that implies nothing but the ability to turn?
-
The FDR is going to show a similar pattern. they examined it several times an Paul S. wasn't a rookie. he had a lot on the line so I'm sure he used everything he knew to try and find Cooper.
-
On a funny side. you and Robert share a lot with the FBI. you have a theory with multiple conclusions. if you both made 302's they would differ like we often read..
-
Regarding the Cinebar panel find:
I have attached a map that demonstrates the distance from Cinebar to the assumed FBI flight path. I measured the distance to various points along the FBI flight path as shown on the "yellow map". I used the center of town as a reference since we do not know the exact location of the find; therefore, I would allow for a 2 miles radius around Cinebar as a margin of error.
I'm certain it is not perfectly exact, so please allow for a reasonable margin of error.
As you can see, the distance from the FBI flight path to Cinebar ranges from 9.7 to 26.5 miles. Using EU and R99's own calculations, this would seem to put the panel find within the range of the FBI flight path as 305 passed by Cinebar to the west.
Based on this, I think this calls into serious question the panel find as evidence of a western flight path (the distance for the panel to travel seems too far). Actually, it seems more in line with the conventional FBI flight path.
However, I encourage all of you to factcheck me, correct any errors, and draw your own conclusions. I'm prepared to be wrong about this!
Chaucer,
You have just flunked Map Reading 101.
I cannot find Cinebar on an aeronautical chart but can find Mossyrock. Mossyrock is 11 statute miles EAST of the centerline of V-23.
Your depiction of the FBI flight path is several miles WEST of the centerline of V-23. You have Onalaska plotted well EAST of the FBI flight path while in fact it is about 1 statute mile WEST of the centerline of V-23.
You have the FBI flight path passing several miles south of Toutle while in fact the centerline of V-23 passes directly overhead of Toutle.
All indications, including two position reports, indicates that the airlines was tracking down the centerline of V-23 from SEATAC to the Malay Intersection. The airliner was within a thousand feet of the centerline of V-23 the instant it left the ground at SEATAC (and for that matter the entire time that it was on the ground at SEATAC).
The so-called Western Flight Path describes what the airliner probably did immediately after passing the Malay Intersection. And that is it continued straight south with respect to the grid lines until it was in the vicinity of the
Canby Intersection. At no time would the airliner be more than about five statute miles from the western edge of V-23.
There is apparently no information available as to exactly where the fiberglass skirt was found in the Cinebar area. So no definite conclusions can be drawn as to how far it drifted in the wind. But the aerodynamics of this fiberglass skirt are going to be completely different from the aerodynamics of the placard.
Chaucer, in lieu of detention, you are directed (not asked or suggested!) to go to the FAA's web page and download their free publication on aircraft navigation. Then read the damn thing! Material in that publication will be on the absolute final on this matter.
-
Actually, there is a conflict. the crew did report the nose dipping which implies the AP was off. the document didn't appear to have spoke with the crew. He was curious if it was on or not. the other document states the crew said it was on for a better part of washington or to that affect. it's normal procedure for reasons explained. the person in the document appears to be the one who examined the FDR looking for the bump. one was found at 8:09 in another document.
-
But the aerodynamics of this fiberglass skirt are going to be completely different from the aerodynamics of the placard.
I'm sure the same goes for the placard being square and normal vs torn in sections.
-
I’m going to assume that you have never been hunting. I have. Many times. People don’t hunt in specific “hunting grounds”. I know I never have nor have I ever used the phrase “hunting ground”. People hunt in the woods not on specific areas. The idea that the panel was found on any specific area for hunting is nothing more than an assumption on your part - particularly as there is nothing about it in any official documentation. The best we can say is it was found “near Cinebar”.
Also, I cannot make sense of you using the Cinebar find as an example of evidence for the Western flight path while simultaneously saying that it shows the FBI flight path was off to the East.
-
One other point.
The FBI Flight Path arguably depicts 305 making all kinds of turns in and around Portland/Vancouver. However, an FBI file in Part 12, Page 181 quite clearly asserts that the airliner was on autopilot during this phase.
Does the FBI Flight Path in any way resemble an airliner on autopilot? Does the Western Flight Path resemble an airliner on autopilot?
The FBI flight path does not resemble anything that would be on autopilot, on probably not even under human control.
If the airliner was on autopilot it would be tracking down the Seattle VORTAC radial that determined the centerline of V-23 until it reached the Malay Intersection. When the Western Flight Path kicks in at the Malay Intersection, the autopilot would be set to track a heading as provided by the Seattle ATC Center.
If the airliner was on autopilot when Cooper jumped, the pilots might not even notice it. Even in 1971, autopilots could fly the airliner better than the pilots and would immediately retrim the aircraft without pilot intervention and maybe even without their knowledge.
ADDENDUM: Changes were made to the first paragraph above since I obviously misread the original post.
-
EU,
1. I never said the panel wasn’t from the 305. I think it likely was.
2. You keep referring to these “hunting grounds”. You yourself have said that the hunting grounds was an assumption on your part. There is no reference to hunting grounds in the FBI memo.
3. Before you said the calculations you made indicated a drift of 7 or 8 miles and that was a conservative estimate. Now you are saying it indicates a more easterly path?
4. What 305 was doing around Portland has nothing to do with the panel at Cinebar.
I'm not saying that you said it didn't come from 305, I'm merely crafting an orderly argument starting with "the panel is from 305."
Hunting lands are not an assumption, they exist and are located east of Cinebar. I used the word "public" in a previous description. I suppose one could argue that this hunter was on private land somewhere else even though that seems unlikely given the large public hunting region right there.
Also, the 7-8 mile drift analysis was for the placard, not the fiberglass skirt. The fiberglass, which is much larger than the placard, would drift 1-2 miles according to my estimations.
Finally, the comment about the autopilot is separate and doesn't relate specifically to the skirt.
Depending on the weight and size of the fiberglass skirt, it possibly could have drifted as far or further than the placard. Does anyone have information on how much one square foot of the fiberglass material weighs?
-
A call to what's his name in Washington northwest historical. can't remember his name. he told me it wasn't fiberglass, it was something else. Bruce Kitt
-
Actually, there is a conflict. the crew did report the nose dipping which implies the AP was off. the document didn't appear to have spoke with the crew. He was curious if it was on or not. the other document states the crew said it was on for a better part of washington or to that affect. it's normal procedure for reasons explained. the person in the document appears to be the one who examined the FDR looking for the bump. one was found at 8:09 in another document.
That little "bob" may have been caused by the stairs slamming into the rear fuselage. And that slamming could probably be felt as well as heard by the crew. In fact, since the crew was expecting a "boom" at any moment, they may have created the "bob" by jumping a bit in their seats.
-
Correct...that time was marked by the FDR..
-
Actually, there is a conflict. the crew did report the nose dipping which implies the AP was off. the document didn't appear to have spoke with the crew. He was curious if it was on or not. the other document states the crew said it was on for a better part of washington or to that affect. it's normal procedure for reasons explained. the person in the document appears to be the one who examined the FDR looking for the bump. one was found at 8:09 in another document.
Where does this document say the crew felt a dip? It says there was a small dip noted on the FDR.
Regardless, it seems unanimous that the airliner was on autopilot when DBC jumped.
-
A call to what's his name in Washington northwest historical. can't remember his name. he told me it wasn't fiberglass, it was something else. Bruce Kitt
The skirt is fiberglass. I spoke with the guy in Portland who owns the 727 house, visited the 727 at the air museum in Tucson, and you can see that it was shattered after it landed in Reno.
-
Regarding the Cinebar panel find:
I have attached a map that demonstrates the distance from Cinebar to the assumed FBI flight path. I measured the distance to various points along the FBI flight path as shown on the "yellow map". I used the center of town as a reference since we do not know the exact location of the find; therefore, I would allow for a 2 miles radius around Cinebar as a margin of error.
I'm certain it is not perfectly exact, so please allow for a reasonable margin of error.
As you can see, the distance from the FBI flight path to Cinebar ranges from 9.7 to 26.5 miles. Using EU and R99's own calculations, this would seem to put the panel find within the range of the FBI flight path as 305 passed by Cinebar to the west.
Based on this, I think this calls into serious question the panel find as evidence of a western flight path (the distance for the panel to travel seems too far). Actually, it seems more in line with the conventional FBI flight path.
However, I encourage all of you to factcheck me, correct any errors, and draw your own conclusions. I'm prepared to be wrong about this!
Chaucer,
You have just flunked Map Reading 101.
I cannot find Cinebar on an aeronautical chart but can find Mossyrock. Mossyrock is 11 statute miles EAST of the centerline of V-23.
Your depiction of the FBI flight path is several miles WEST of the centerline of V-23. You have Onalaska plotted well EAST of the FBI flight path while in fact it is about 1 statute mile WEST of the centerline of V-23.
You have the FBI flight path passing several miles south of Toutle while in fact the centerline of V-23 passes directly overhead of Toutle.
All indications, including two position reports, indicates that the airlines was tracking down the centerline of V-23 from SEATAC to the Malay Intersection. The airliner was within a thousand feet of the centerline of V-23 the instant it left the ground at SEATAC (and for that matter the entire time that it was on the ground at SEATAC).
The so-called Western Flight Path describes what the airliner probably did immediately after passing the Malay Intersection. And that is it continued straight south with respect to the grid lines until it was in the vicinity of the
Canby Intersection. At no time would the airliner be more than about five statute miles from the western edge of V-23.
There is apparently no information available as to exactly where the fiberglass skirt was found in the Cinebar area. So no definite conclusions can be drawn as to how far it drifted in the wind. But the aerodynamics of this fiberglass skirt are going to be completely different from the aerodynamics of the placard.
Chaucer, in lieu of detention, you are directed (not asked or suggested!) to go to the FAA's web page and download their free publication on aircraft navigation. Then read the damn thing! Material in that publication will be on the absolute final on this matter.
And you, Robert, have flunked Reading Comprehension 101.
Nowhere in my original post did I use the phrase “V23”. I specifically said that I used the FBI flight path as shown on the “yellow map”. For some reason you choose to use “V23” and “FBI flight path” interchangeably.
Moreover, I also specifically said that my depiction wasn’t perfect and there would be a reasonable margin of error.
Lastly, nothing you posted changes what the map shows: that the panel find at Cinebar adds more credence to a central flight path than a western one.
I suggest you go to your local library, check out some Dr. Seuss books and have a trusted relative read the damn thing to you.
-
The crew was quoted multiple times in newspapers of having to adjust the trim due to believing Cooper bailed? might be in the 302's as well..the autopilot can be used multiple ways vs one option. if they adjusted the trim the auto was off. if it was on the auto does it. the document I post states it was on most of the time in WA. and further south..I still don't know what this proves..
-
The crew was quoted multiple times in newspapers of having to adjust the trim due to believing Cooper bailed? might be in the 302's as well..the autopilot can be used multiple ways vs one option. if they adjusted the trim the auto was off. if it was on the auto does it. the document I post states it was on most of the time in WA. and further south..I still don't know what this proves..
Any change in the trim would be small regardless if it was done by the pilots or the autopilot. Cooper, the money, the parachutes, and anything else he had attached to him would weigh about 225 pounds while the airliner probably weighed something on the order of 150,000 pounds.
-
Regarding the Cinebar panel find:
I have attached a map that demonstrates the distance from Cinebar to the assumed FBI flight path. I measured the distance to various points along the FBI flight path as shown on the "yellow map". I used the center of town as a reference since we do not know the exact location of the find; therefore, I would allow for a 2 miles radius around Cinebar as a margin of error.
I'm certain it is not perfectly exact, so please allow for a reasonable margin of error.
As you can see, the distance from the FBI flight path to Cinebar ranges from 9.7 to 26.5 miles. Using EU and R99's own calculations, this would seem to put the panel find within the range of the FBI flight path as 305 passed by Cinebar to the west.
Based on this, I think this calls into serious question the panel find as evidence of a western flight path (the distance for the panel to travel seems too far). Actually, it seems more in line with the conventional FBI flight path.
However, I encourage all of you to factcheck me, correct any errors, and draw your own conclusions. I'm prepared to be wrong about this!
Chaucer,
You have just flunked Map Reading 101.
I cannot find Cinebar on an aeronautical chart but can find Mossyrock. Mossyrock is 11 statute miles EAST of the centerline of V-23.
Your depiction of the FBI flight path is several miles WEST of the centerline of V-23. You have Onalaska plotted well EAST of the FBI flight path while in fact it is about 1 statute mile WEST of the centerline of V-23.
You have the FBI flight path passing several miles south of Toutle while in fact the centerline of V-23 passes directly overhead of Toutle.
All indications, including two position reports, indicates that the airlines was tracking down the centerline of V-23 from SEATAC to the Malay Intersection. The airliner was within a thousand feet of the centerline of V-23 the instant it left the ground at SEATAC (and for that matter the entire time that it was on the ground at SEATAC).
The so-called Western Flight Path describes what the airliner probably did immediately after passing the Malay Intersection. And that is it continued straight south with respect to the grid lines until it was in the vicinity of the
Canby Intersection. At no time would the airliner be more than about five statute miles from the western edge of V-23.
There is apparently no information available as to exactly where the fiberglass skirt was found in the Cinebar area. So no definite conclusions can be drawn as to how far it drifted in the wind. But the aerodynamics of this fiberglass skirt are going to be completely different from the aerodynamics of the placard.
Chaucer, in lieu of detention, you are directed (not asked or suggested!) to go to the FAA's web page and download their free publication on aircraft navigation. Then read the damn thing! Material in that publication will be on the absolute final on this matter.
And you, Robert, have flunked Reading Comprehension 101.
Nowhere in my original post did I use the phrase “V23”. I specifically said that I used the FBI flight path as shown on the “yellow map”. For some reason you choose to use “V23” and “FBI flight path” interchangeably.
Moreover, I also specifically said that my depiction wasn’t perfect and there would be a reasonable margin of error.
Lastly, nothing you posted changes what the map shows: that the panel find at Cinebar adds more credence to a central flight path than a western one.
I suggest you go to your local library, check out some Dr. Seuss books and have a trusted relative read the damn thing to you.
Chaucer,
Get someone to explain what I wrote above. You obviously do not understand it.
-
The crew was quoted multiple times in newspapers of having to adjust the trim due to believing Cooper bailed? might be in the 302's as well..the autopilot can be used multiple ways vs one option. if they adjusted the trim the auto was off. if it was on the auto does it. the document I post states it was on most of the time in WA. and further south..I still don't know what this proves..
Any change in the trim would be small regardless if it was done by the pilots or the autopilot. Cooper, the money, the parachutes, and anything else he had attached to him would weigh about 225 pounds while the airliner probably weighed something on the order of 150,000 pounds.
Yes, the auto will make changes you don't feel. I'm going by what they said. as for the plane. pilots even feel jumpers going out the back of the DC-9. the plane was empty and wouldn't take much to shift it. they have to be careful while it's on the ground empty with people walking around inside or it tips. I'm not sure if the pilots in McCoy's or McNally's shared that. I recall the McCoy hijacking the pilots reported a howling in the cabin.
-
Robert,
Since you have demonstrated a deficiency with your reading comprehension, I have provided some visual aids for you!
As I have stated twice before, the original image with the measurements from Cinebar is based on the FBI flight path as depicted in the yellow map. I have tried to be as close to the penciled flight path as possible within a reasonable margin of error.
Again, I am not talking about V23. You continue to bring that up, and the only reason that I can think of why is so you can muddle the discussion to hide your errors. Also, I'm not discussing any other aspects of the FBI flight path outside of the Cinebar panel find, so please stop bring up extraneous aspects outside of that.
Please see the attachments below which obviously discredit your statements about my map making skills.
Cheers!
-
Robert,
Since you have demonstrated a deficiency with your reading comprehension, I have provided some visual aids for you!
As I have stated twice before, the original image with the measurements from Cinebar is based on the FBI flight path as depicted in the yellow map. I have tried to be as close to the penciled flight path as possible within a reasonable margin of error.
Again, I am not talking about V23. You continue to bring that up, and the only reason that I can think of why is so you can muddle the discussion to hide your errors. Also, I'm not discussing any other aspects of the FBI flight path outside of the Cinebar panel find, so please stop bring up extraneous aspects outside of that.
Please see the attachments below which obviously discredit your statements about my map making skills.
Cheers!
Chaucer,
Please pay careful attention to what I am describing here for at least the second time.
Upon departing SEATAC, the airliner flew south on the centerline of V-23 to the Malay Intersection. It gave at least two position reports along V-23. There is no reason for the airliner to be WEST of the centerline of V-23. And there is no evidence whatsoever that the airliner was ever WEST of the centerline of V-23.
If you don't know where V-23 is in relation to the FBI flight path, the tip of the "Onalaska" arrow is on the centerline of V-23 in your attached yellow map. The airliner did not report having any problems maintaining directional control and it is mandated to be on the centerline of V-23 unless otherwise approved by ATC and there is no record of such approval.
Upon reaching the Malay Intersection, the Western Flight Path starts and the airliner flies straight south with respect to the grid lines until it reaches the Canby Intersection and then resumes flight on the centerline of V-23. This segment would be approved and flown on a heading as directed by ATC. At one point, the airliner would be about 4 miles WEST of the western edge of the V-23 airway for a short distance. And it would pass almost directly overhead of Tina Bar. There is no reason whatsoever for the airliner to be WEST of the Western Flight Path.
There is no way on God's Green Earth that the FBI flight path describes the airliner's flight path. It may in fact describe the flight path of one of the chase aircraft.
Himmelsbach's book places the airliner over the western and southwestern side of Portland. There are other factors supporting the Western Flight Path. But there is nothing to support the FBI flight path.
-
Robert,
Please pay careful attention to what I am describing here for at least the second time.
I am only focusing on the Cinebar panel find. EU highlighted it as one of the pieces of physical evidence that confirms a Western Flight Path. I think I have demonstrated otherwise.
You are making this about the FBI flight path as a whole. I am not. This is one aspect, not the big picture.
For the record, I know where V23 is. I know where the FBI flight path is. I know what your theory is. I know what Malay and Canby are. Your condescension does you no favors.
So, if you want to contribute to my topic (the Cinebar find), please do so. Otherwise, you are excused. Thanks.
-
Robert,
Please pay careful attention to what I am describing here for at least the second time.
I am only focusing on the Cinebar panel find. EU highlighted it as one of the pieces of physical evidence that confirms a Western Flight Path. I think I have demonstrated otherwise.
You are making this about the FBI flight path as a whole. I am not. This is one aspect, not the big picture.
For the record, I know where V23 is. I know where the FBI flight path is. I know what your theory is. I know what Malay and Canby are. Your condescension does you no favors.
So, if you want to contribute to my topic (the Cinebar find), please do so. Otherwise, you are excused. Thanks.
Chaucer,
You apparently don't understand what I have been pointing out.
The Cinebar find, wherever its actual location may be, is several miles closer to the V-23 airliner flight path than to the FBI flight path. That means that it supports the Western Flight Path rather than the FBI flight path.
My contribution to your Cinebar topic is that it is a myth, it is without merit, it is nonsense.
Do you have any other problems that I can help you with?
-
The Cinebar find, wherever its actual location may be, is several miles closer to the V-23 airliner flight path than to the FBI flight path. That means that it supports the Western Flight Path rather than the FBI flight path.
So, the Cinebar find is indicative of an easterly V23 flight path, but supports a Western Flight Path?
Holy crap, do I want some of what you're drinking! :rofl:
In all seriousness, as I have stated before, you seem to be very, very hung up on the accuracy of the penciled flight path on the yellow map. I don't think that map was in any way intended to be the definitive guide to where 305 was. In fact, other maps have been posted on here by georger that demonstrate much greater accuracy and care. The yellow map is a rough draft by the FBI, not a final copy. That's important to keep in mind as you parse people's words about this topic.
Sometimes you use a scalpel. Sometimes you use an axe. The trick is to know the difference.
-
Robert,
Please pay careful attention to what I am describing here for at least the second time.
I am only focusing on the Cinebar panel find. EU highlighted it as one of the pieces of physical evidence that confirms a Western Flight Path. I think I have demonstrated otherwise.
You are making this about the FBI flight path as a whole. I am not. This is one aspect, not the big picture.
For the record, I know where V23 is. I know where the FBI flight path is. I know what your theory is. I know what Malay and Canby are. Your condescension does you no favors.
So, if you want to contribute to my topic (the Cinebar find), please do so. Otherwise, you are excused. Thanks.
Chaucer,
You apparently don't understand what I have been pointing out.
The Cinebar find, wherever its actual location may be, is several miles closer to the V-23 airliner flight path than to the FBI flight path. That means that it supports the Western Flight Path rather than the FBI flight path.
My contribution to your Cinebar topic is that it is a myth, it is without merit, it is nonsense.
Do you have any other problems that I can help you with?
The Cinebar find, wherever its actual location may be ?
is several miles closer to the V-23 airliner flight path than to the FBI flight path ? Which-ever is what-ever.
That means that it supports the Western Flight Path rather than the FBI flight path wherever the actual location of the the Cinebar Find may be ?
If the Cinebar Find has anything to do Flight 305!
:chr2: :good post: :congrats: :bravo:
Im all in! Sounds OK to me! 8)
-
The Cinebar find, wherever its actual location may be, is several miles closer to the V-23 airliner flight path than to the FBI flight path. That means that it supports the Western Flight Path rather than the FBI flight path.
So, the Cinebar find is indicative of an easterly V23 flight path, but supports a Western Flight Path?
Holy crap, do I want some of what you're drinking! :rofl:
In all seriousness, as I have stated before, you seem to be very, very hung up on the accuracy of the penciled flight path on the yellow map. I don't think that map was in any way intended to be the definitive guide to where 305 was. In fact, other maps have been posted on here by georger that demonstrate much greater accuracy and care. The yellow map is a rough draft by the FBI, not a final copy. That's important to keep in mind as you parse people's words about this topic.
Sometimes you use a scalpel. Sometimes you use an axe. The trick is to know the difference.
Chaucer,
So you have now come out of the closet and are claiming that the FBI flight path depicted on the yellow chart is not necessarily the actual FBI flight path?
And you are also claiming that Georger has posted a more accurate version of the FBI flight path? Do you or Georger happen to have a copy of this more accurate FBI flight path or know where it came from?
You and Georger seem to be living proof that the less you know about a subject the more qualified you are to make claims without supporting evidence.
-
The Cinebar find, wherever its actual location may be, is several miles closer to the V-23 airliner flight path than to the FBI flight path. That means that it supports the Western Flight Path rather than the FBI flight path.
So, the Cinebar find is indicative of an easterly V23 flight path, but supports a Western Flight Path?
Holy crap, do I want some of what you're drinking! :rofl:
In all seriousness, as I have stated before, you seem to be very, very hung up on the accuracy of the penciled flight path on the yellow map. I don't think that map was in any way intended to be the definitive guide to where 305 was. In fact, other maps have been posted on here by georger that demonstrate much greater accuracy and care. The yellow map is a rough draft by the FBI, not a final copy. That's important to keep in mind as you parse people's words about this topic.
Sometimes you use a scalpel. Sometimes you use an axe. The trick is to know the difference.
Chaucer,
So you have now come out of the closet and are claiming that the FBI flight path depicted on the yellow chart is not necessarily the actual FBI flight path?
And you are also claiming that Georger has posted a more accurate version of the FBI flight path? Do you or Georger happen to have a copy of this more accurate FBI flight path or know where it came from?
You and Georger seem to be living proof that the less you know about a subject the more qualified you are to make claims without supporting evidence.
As usual nobody has any idea what in hell you are yammering about! More accurate flight path? Flight path to Where? Flight path to Ninny Nanny Noo Noo Land?
Rest well R99. :offtopicman:
-
This is not rocket science.
The file clearly states the guy was hunting near Cinebar, WA. It stands to reason that he was hunting where hunting is allowed, that is, at the state controlled hunting lands just east of Cinebar. Where else would he have been hunting? Certainly not in the town itself.
And yes, the fiberglass skirt suggests that the jet was east of the FBI Flight Path at that point. Which is important because it suggests that the FBI Flight Path (the yellow map which is official) is incorrect. As does the placard find. And the money find.
Not sure what else to say.
-
The Cinebar find, wherever its actual location may be, is several miles closer to the V-23 airliner flight path than to the FBI flight path. That means that it supports the Western Flight Path rather than the FBI flight path.
So, the Cinebar find is indicative of an easterly V23 flight path, but supports a Western Flight Path?
Holy crap, do I want some of what you're drinking! :rofl:
In all seriousness, as I have stated before, you seem to be very, very hung up on the accuracy of the penciled flight path on the yellow map. I don't think that map was in any way intended to be the definitive guide to where 305 was. In fact, other maps have been posted on here by georger that demonstrate much greater accuracy and care. The yellow map is a rough draft by the FBI, not a final copy. That's important to keep in mind as you parse people's words about this topic.
Sometimes you use a scalpel. Sometimes you use an axe. The trick is to know the difference.
Chaucer,
So you have now come out of the closet and are claiming that the FBI flight path depicted on the yellow chart is not necessarily the actual FBI flight path?
And you are also claiming that Georger has posted a more accurate version of the FBI flight path? Do you or Georger happen to have a copy of this more accurate FBI flight path or know where it came from?
You and Georger seem to be living proof that the less you know about a subject the more qualified you are to make claims without supporting evidence.
As usual nobody has any idea what in hell you are yammering about! More accurate flight path? Flight path to Where? Flight path to Ninny Nanny Noo Noo Land?
Rest well R99. :offtopicman:
Just grab another drink and leave the enigma to the experts.
Cheers!
-
The yellow map is a rough draft by the FBI, not a final copy.
The FBI didn't have anything to do with any of the maps made. the Air Force made the map. NWO made the maps surrounding the the LZ. NWO examined the FDR. this is probably why the FBI doesn't have much actual physical evidence about the path itself. the conclusions were given to them. I wonder if a file is sitting somewhere with all of Paul Solderlind's work along with George Harrison. they would have the foil from the FDR. it would be a gold mine.
-
So you have now come out of the closet and are claiming that the FBI flight path depicted on the yellow chart is not necessarily the actual FBI flight path?
I have no need to "come out of the closet", but I can only speak for myself here.
Do I think a set of dots, hastily connected with pencil, is the exact flight path that 305 took that night? No. Do I think it generally represents the fact that 305 stayed along the 8 mile wide V23 for the vast majority of its journey above Washington? Yes.
You would have to be a fool to think that the yellow map is some perfectly accurate assessment or to think that 305 had to flight straight down the centerline of V23. The fact that you become unhinged at the idea that the FBI flight path and V23 don't perfectly align is silly, frankly. And the fact that you spend so much energy trying to dunk on this penciled route in order to bolster your own claims is equally silly. I mean the centerline of V23 shown on the yellow map doesn't even match V23 today. Yet, you hold the FBI yellow map to a much higher standard than you do your own route. You require it to be perfect. It's not, but it fairly accurate indicates a flight down the V23 airway. Ask my fellow South Floridian Shutter to explain a hurricane's "cone of uncertainty" to you. Maybe then you'll understand.
Stop getting your panties in a twist about every little discrepancy with the penciled-in map and just accept that the plane was somewhere along V23 that night.
And you are also claiming that Georger has posted a more accurate version of the FBI flight path? Do you or Georger happen to have a copy of this more accurate FBI flight path or know where it came from?
I have attached the map that geoger, EU, and others have posted here in the past. It clearly shows a more professional attention to detail than the yellow map which I have said before is more like a rough draft from which you can only draw general conclusions and not use to pinpoint exact locations. I'm sure the FBI possesses other accurate maps like this one. In fact, there is documentation from the FBI stating that the Air Force provided maps with a more "precise flight path". Shutter's referenced this in the past. It's not magical, dude.
You and Georger seem to be living proof that the less you know about a subject the more qualified you are to make claims without supporting evidence.
Ah, the old "appeal to false authority" fallacy. An oldie and a goodie. My first year students often make this mistake, but they have usually cleaned it up by the time their second year begins. Shame an educated man like yourself hasn't yet.
As far as "supporting evidence", I have provided more evidence here than you have as it relates to the Cinebar find, which you have merely called a "myth", "without merit" and "nonsense". In fact, your entire theory rests on the notion of a massive FBI cover up involving redacted Seattle ATC transcript and your own "gut feeling" that the pilots wouldn't have flown a very well-known airway during "that type of situation" as if you yourself have been in skyjacking situations similar to this one. Sorry, the your "feelings" and the "deus ex machina" of a conspiracy by the FBI for reasons unknown aren't "supporting evidence".
I'll finish by stating that the notion that evidence of a more easterly path by 305 confirms a western flight path is a myth, without merit, and nonsense.
-
And yes, the fiberglass skirt suggests that the jet was east of the FBI Flight Path at that point. Which is important because it suggests that the FBI Flight Path (the yellow map which is official) is incorrect. As does the placard find. And the money find.
About the only conclusion based on one 302 surround the piece found is that it could possibly from 305. the placard find wasn't really close to Toutle. it's about 6 miles south and east of the town. Headquarters was closer?
How did the stairs lock on the ground if Cooper used the emergency system. that function would be damaged? the small panel with the two holes also has instructions. would there be enough vacuum to remove the placard at 10,000. how did it get torn up if it never moved on the ground. if he tore it off the wall was the missing parts still on the interior wall if so how did they miss it? a noticeable hole in the wall with a cord and handle hanging would of surely been noted when describing the interior or the operations of the stairs. Cooper would of certainly seen it even if Tina didn't tell him.
-
The maps indicating where Cooper jumped were made by Northwest airlines, Paul S. they will differ slightly to the yellow map.
-
The western path can hold merit but all the evidence they show is not really evidence since nothing has been proven. we don't know where the piece found was located. we don't know how the money got on the banks and we don't know the placard is in it's original location. to go way out on the wild side one could say Hicks played a trick on everyone? two people on the same path. one says the money was buried while the other says Cooper was a no pull and came from surrounding area's. two different drop zones with two different conclusions to his fate.
Then all the evidence suggesting the map is accurate to a certain degree.
Radar plots.
Radar operators.
The FDR.
Pilots.
-
The thing to remember is that the Western Flight Path doesn't necessitate evidence. Rather, it's the evidence that points to the Western Flight Path.
Apparently few people look at the things that have been pointed out...
1) Fiberglass Skirt
2) Placard
3) Money Find
4) Ancillary Items
...and see what I see and R99 see. Well, so be it.
For reference, the following link brings you to a map that displays my version of the Western Flight Path which is slightly different than R99's because I think the jet turned near the Maylay Intersection proper and not necessarily around the Toledo airport itself.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1g4iUZzYYsBS9Js5PyhVp_Tnluh1e9Ky1&ll=46.60986204773947%2C-122.8110627265625&z=8
-
What I know about the fiberglass skirt and the placard is that they both came from within a buttoned up 727. Again, unless someone can explain why we have 727s flying around with their airstairs down, I'm going to stick with "the shit came from 305" narrative.
-
For reference, the following link brings you to a map that displays my version of the Western Flight Path which is slightly different than R99's because I think the jet turned near the Maylay Intersection proper and not necessarily around the Toledo airport itself.
I think it went between the two,....what does that prove if I actually said that? 99 is going by aviation assumptions based on logic which tends to give more merit than just tossing out a location or assumption.
-
What I know about the fiberglass skirt and the placard is that they both came from within a buttoned up 727. Again, unless someone can explain why we have 727s flying around with their airstairs down, I'm going to stick with "the shit came from 305" narrative.
But we are not certain of the "shit" that came from 305. 8 years passed with that shit on the ground. I would tend to believe the shit found in Cinebar would be in it's original location. heavy shit.. :rofl:
-
For reference, the following link brings you to a map that displays my version of the Western Flight Path which is slightly different than R99's because I think the jet turned near the Maylay Intersection proper and not necessarily around the Toledo airport itself.
I think it went between the two,....what does that prove if I actually said that? 99 is going by aviation assumptions based on logic which tends to give more merit than just tossing out a location or assumption.
I didn't just pull the assumption out of thin air for the hell of it. What I did is consider where the jet would have to be to "drop" the fiberglass skirt on the Cinebar hunting lands, the placard where Hicks' found it, and DB Cooper himself within plausible access to Tena Bar.
Additionally, I considered that the jet likely departed Seattle and flew due south for a distance while it lumbered slowly into the air and lugged along with landing gear down, flaps down, and airstairs down. I just can't see the pilots immediately turning toward Toledo after departing SeaTac (as is depicted on the FBI Flight Map).
Again, the evidence as I see it drew my version of the Western Flight Path for me. Not the other way around.
-
What I know about the fiberglass skirt and the placard is that they both came from within a buttoned up 727. Again, unless someone can explain why we have 727s flying around with their airstairs down, I'm going to stick with "the shit came from 305" narrative.
But we are not certain of the "shit" that came from 305. 8 years passed with that shit on the ground. I would tend to believe the shit found in Cinebar would be in it's original location. heavy shit.. :rofl:
Once the placard is in the woods, it ain't goin' nowhere. The woods are very dense with thickets and all kinds of debris. it's definitely not migrating 2 or 3 miles or probably even 100 feet.
-
Pictures?
-
Pictures?
We know where the placard was found...it was in the middle of the forest.
-
every forest is the same full of brush..if it was on the ground how did it not get covered in this overpowering thick foliage after 8 years? 8 years is a long time to not get covered..
The main question is the damage. have you tried to see how easy they would tear. I don't want to ruin mine? I doubt the exit would do it. and if untouched on the ground it could only have happened prior to leaving the aircraft.
-
The main question is the damage. have you tried to see how easy they would tear. I don't want to ruin mine? I doubt the exit would do it. and if untouched on the ground it could only have happened prior to leaving the aircraft.
What's the point here? After all, the placard got torn somehow. That much is certain. As to how it got torn, I don't know exactly. But it obviously happened.
-
Determining factors?
-
The thing to remember is that the Western Flight Path doesn't necessitate evidence. Rather, it's the evidence that points to the Western Flight Path.
Apparently few people look at the things that have been pointed out...
1) Fiberglass Skirt
2) Placard
3) Money Find
4) Ancillary Items
...and see what I see and R99 see. Well, so be it.
For reference, the following link brings you to a map that displays my version of the Western Flight Path which is slightly different than R99's because I think the jet turned near the Maylay Intersection proper and not necessarily around the Toledo airport itself.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1g4iUZzYYsBS9Js5PyhVp_Tnluh1e9Ky1&ll=46.60986204773947%2C-122.8110627265625&z=8
EU,
Please explain this to me like I am a fifth grader:
How does the Cinebar Panel find, which was found well EAST of both the yellow map pencil path and V23 and well NORTH of the supposed diversion at Malay, support a westerly flight path?
-
If it's ripped up it isn't going to float very well. it will start to spiral downward. lots of variables before any conclusions can be based. did the adhesive still exist and why wouldn't it fuse together in the violent exit? it had a tear all the way to the center.
I just find it odd that it was clearly visible in dense foliage for 8 years. I'm attacking the data...
-
The thing to remember is that the Western Flight Path doesn't necessitate evidence. Rather, it's the evidence that points to the Western Flight Path.
Apparently few people look at the things that have been pointed out...
1) Fiberglass Skirt
2) Placard
3) Money Find
4) Ancillary Items
...and see what I see and R99 see. Well, so be it.
For reference, the following link brings you to a map that displays my version of the Western Flight Path which is slightly different than R99's because I think the jet turned near the Maylay Intersection proper and not necessarily around the Toledo airport itself.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1g4iUZzYYsBS9Js5PyhVp_Tnluh1e9Ky1&ll=46.60986204773947%2C-122.8110627265625&z=8
EU,
Please explain this to me like I am a fifth grader:
How does the Cinebar Panel find, which was found well EAST of both the yellow map pencil path and V23 and well NORTH of the supposed diversion at Malay, support a westerly flight path?
I will do my best.
My first point is that the skirt was found in the Cinebar hunting lands, and while we do not yet know precisely where, we know enough to determine that the location of the airliner when the skirt snapped off was several miles east of the FBI Flight Path line. This alone proves that the FBI Flight Path is wrong at a least this point. And, if the FBI Flight Path is wrong at this point, what's to say it's not wrong somewhere else?
My second point is that the Western Flight Path is simply the name for the theorized flight path that puts the airliner well west of where the FBI thought it was at the time DBC jumped. It does not mean that the airliner had to remain west of the FBI Flight Path the entire route from SeaTac to Reno.
-
If it's ripped up it isn't going to float very well. it will start to spiral downward. lots of variables before any conclusions can be based. did the adhesive still exist and why wouldn't it fuse together in the violent exit? it had a tear all the way to the center.
I just find it odd that it was clearly visible in dense foliage for 8 years. I'm attacking the data...
When I was in the area we found some junk like candy bar wrappers and such. There is no way that this junk migrated much because there was virtually no breeze at all in the woods, and there was a lot of debris on the forest floor to snag such stuff.
-
So you have now come out of the closet and are claiming that the FBI flight path depicted on the yellow chart is not necessarily the actual FBI flight path?
I have no need to "come out of the closet", but I can only speak for myself here.
Do I think a set of dots, hastily connected with pencil, is the exact flight path that 305 took that night? No. Do I think it generally represents the fact that 305 stayed along the 8 mile wide V23 for the vast majority of its journey above Washington? Yes.
You would have to be a fool to think that the yellow map is some perfectly accurate assessment or to think that 305 had to flight straight down the centerline of V23. The fact that you become unhinged at the idea that the FBI flight path and V23 don't perfectly align is silly, frankly. And the fact that you spend so much energy trying to dunk on this penciled route in order to bolster your own claims is equally silly. I mean the centerline of V23 shown on the yellow map doesn't even match V23 today. Yet, you hold the FBI yellow map to a much higher standard than you do your own route. You require it to be perfect. It's not, but it fairly accurate indicates a flight down the V23 airway. Ask my fellow South Floridian Shutter to explain a hurricane's "cone of uncertainty" to you. Maybe then you'll understand.
Stop getting your panties in a twist about every little discrepancy with the penciled-in map and just accept that the plane was somewhere along V23 that night.
And you are also claiming that Georger has posted a more accurate version of the FBI flight path? Do you or Georger happen to have a copy of this more accurate FBI flight path or know where it came from?
I have attached the map that geoger, EU, and others have posted here in the past. It clearly shows a more professional attention to detail than the yellow map which I have said before is more like a rough draft from which you can only draw general conclusions and not use to pinpoint exact locations. I'm sure the FBI possesses other accurate maps like this one. In fact, there is documentation from the FBI stating that the Air Force provided maps with a more "precise flight path". Shutter's referenced this in the past. It's not magical, dude.
You and Georger seem to be living proof that the less you know about a subject the more qualified you are to make claims without supporting evidence.
Ah, the old "appeal to false authority" fallacy. An oldie and a goodie. My first year students often make this mistake, but they have usually cleaned it up by the time their second year begins. Shame an educated man like yourself hasn't yet.
As far as "supporting evidence", I have provided more evidence here than you have as it relates to the Cinebar find, which you have merely called a "myth", "without merit" and "nonsense". In fact, your entire theory rests on the notion of a massive FBI cover up involving redacted Seattle ATC transcript and your own "gut feeling" that the pilots wouldn't have flown a very well-known airway during "that type of situation" as if you yourself have been in skyjacking situations similar to this one. Sorry, the your "feelings" and the "deus ex machina" of a conspiracy by the FBI for reasons unknown aren't "supporting evidence".
I'll finish by stating that the notion that evidence of a more easterly path by 305 confirms a western flight path is a myth, without merit, and nonsense.
Chaucer,
The false statements and other nonsense you post above leads me to believe that you would have a great career in politics, assuming you are not already involved in politics.
-
Dodge.
-
If it's ripped up it isn't going to float very well. it will start to spiral downward. lots of variables before any conclusions can be based. did the adhesive still exist and why wouldn't it fuse together in the violent exit? it had a tear all the way to the center.
I just find it odd that it was clearly visible in dense foliage for 8 years. I'm attacking the data...
When I was in the area we found some junk like candy bar wrappers and such. There is no way that this junk migrated much because there was virtually no breeze at all in the woods, and there was a lot of debris on the forest floor to snag such stuff.
WHO0 CAREZ! >:D Everything you say is irrelevant to the Cooper case - just made up bullshit and promotion to get you on TV next to Ancient Aliens, Monsters in Rivers, Who Gooed Madolyn Fipps . Take your crap to the National Inquirer and late night Ghost to Ghost. Cult crap that feeds off your endless circularity. This stuff isnt even interesting to a third grader!
Where are the adults in the room? This is 50 levels beyond ridiculous.
PS* JT said 305 came in over the Troutdale Airport! And now we have this degenerate FRANTIC! nonsense!
-
I was asked a question about the Western Flight Path and provided an answer. I feel as if I’ve been very clear and respectful concerning this discussion. I even mentioned that it is myself along with R99 who carry a special burden to disprove conventional wisdom. I also said that I understand that others are going to disagree.
In return I’m compared to a flat-earther, a climate change denier, a Covid hoaxer, and a sell-out interested in nothing more than a TV show.
With that in mind, why should I continue to engage at all? What’s the upside?
-
Another piece of aircraft supposedly found - decision it is of no value .... not even to flight path determination ........ so Ulis can add this piece to his "pile of crap that proves a flight path"!
comments removed..
-
Some comments were removed. guys, attack the data and not the person. we get nowhere doing this..
-
Using the Hick's placard as evidence for a western flightpath is self serving garbage. see 302s etc at end of Page : https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56036-db-cooper/page/2506/
Its a very good analysis based on FBI docs vs Personal agenda for a tv program on the Aliens Mystery channel No.947 or whatever!
Garbage found on the ground 'in the State of Washington' not even attributable to Flight 305 does not prove a flight path.
-
Using the Hick's placard as evidence for a western flightpath is self serving garbage. see 302s etc at end of Page : https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56036-db-cooper/page/2506/
Its a very good analysis based on FBI docs vs Personal agenda for a tv program on the Aliens Mystery channel No.947 or whatever!
Garbage found on the ground 'in the State of Washington' not even attributable to Flight 305 does not prove a flight path.
Brilliant strategy GEORGER, don’t use evidence as evidence.
BTW, I assume you realize that the last two pages you posted relate to a different decal from a different jet and not 305? That placard was found in Skamania County.
-
If it's ripped up it isn't going to float very well. it will start to spiral downward. lots of variables before any conclusions can be based. did the adhesive still exist and why wouldn't it fuse together in the violent exit? it had a tear all the way to the center.
I just find it odd that it was clearly visible in dense foliage for 8 years. I'm attacking the data...
When I was in the area we found some junk like candy bar wrappers and such. There is no way that this junk migrated much because there was virtually no breeze at all in the woods, and there was a lot of debris on the forest floor to snag such stuff.
WHO0 CAREZ! >:D Everything you say is irrelevant to the Cooper case - just made up bullshit and promotion to get you on TV next to Ancient Aliens, Monsters in Rivers, Who Gooed Madolyn Fipps . Take your crap to the National Inquirer and late night Ghost to Ghost. Cult crap that feeds off your endless circularity. This stuff isnt even interesting to a third grader!
Where are the adults in the room? This is 50 levels beyond ridiculous.
PS* JT said 305 came in over the Troutdale Airport! And now we have this degenerate FRANTIC! nonsense!
Georger,
You told me about 10 years ago that you had check with the people at Troutdale Airport and they stated that the hijacked airliner never flew over their airport or the east side of Portland.
You need to get your own cock and bull story straight.
-
Using the Hick's placard as evidence for a western flightpath is self serving garbage. see 302s etc at end of Page : https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56036-db-cooper/page/2506/
Its a very good analysis based on FBI docs vs Personal agenda for a tv program on the Aliens Mystery channel No.947 or whatever!
Garbage found on the ground 'in the State of Washington' not even attributable to Flight 305 does not prove a flight path.
Georger,
Why don't you give FJ credit for the above and the attachments since you just reposted something he posted on DropZone earlier today? I'm sure you would be going bananas if he did the same thing to you.
-
Past the bulkhead door is the outside of the plane. the placard is not on the exterior of the plane or what you would consider the fuselage. no change in pressure would be involved with any decal on the fuselage..they are talking about the bulkhead door.
-
The second placard would be more than 20 miles away from the path? more like 24 miles..
-
They are 99 percent sure of the second placard/decal but not the Hicks? drift calculations seem to be a question..
Actually, they are sure it came from inside on the Hicks placard. NWO states it probably came off when the stairs were lowered which changed the pressure. this omits being outside or on the fuselage..
-
Part found near Cinebar...
The part was approx. 8" x 40" .... he worked for Boeing so why wouldn't he say it was part of a larger piece. he appears to be speaking like it's a whole part. he took the time to look it up and should of noted it was a partial piece to the railing on the stairs. how did it tear off with perfect dimensions? the photo's we see show it shredded or torn. how would he not know it was partial?
-
Part found near Cinebar...
The part was approx. 8" x 40" .... he worked for Boeing so why wouldn't he say it was part of a larger piece. he appears to be speaking like it's a whole part. he took the time to look it up and should of noted it was a partial piece to the railing on the stairs. how did it tear off with perfect dimensions? the photo's we see show it shredded or torn. how would he not know it was partial?
Part not part of the stairs or apron but an inside part above the opening, say FJ. https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56036-db-cooper/page/2506/
He also posts relevant 302s. No guarantee the part was even part of 305.
Its just one more piece of made up nonsense by Eric Ulis.
' no part that large was missing from the NORJAK 727'
-
Yes, it's possible to be from that area. it says above the stairs. I was shot down when I mentioned above the complete stairs and railing. my post surrounds the dimensions and didn't feel the need to post the document for the 20th time.
I strongly feel since he worked for Boeing at the time he would of noted it was not a whole piece and only a partial part. the possibility of it coming from 305 are dropping.
-
Which placard came off of 305?
The Cinebar is looking bad so we need to work more around the fact of two items that can really only come down to one or none at all? (placards/decal)
-
I literally cannot believe the tortured rationale I’m reading here. He did not say it was piece of part? He suggested it was the entire part? The dimensions were clean cut and precise? Really?
The document speaks for itself. Not only is it the right size, it came from INSIDE the back cone area above the door. How much more precise can you get? This is from INSIDE the airliner. Like the Placard. The INSIDE. Meaning the airstairs door had to be OPEN in flight.
You guys really think there are airliners flying around with their airstairs deployed shedding parts that size for the hell of it?
Come on now. This is silly.
-
I literally cannot believe the tortured rationale I’m reading here. He did not say it was piece of part? He suggested it was the entire part? The dimensions were clean cut and precise? Really?
Correct, he said a large part from a 727 was found. the entire skirt would be a part, no? each side is not 8" x 40" so why wouldn't he say it a small piece of a larger piece or part? that would be a very small percentage of the actual part. he goes further to look the part up and fails to say it's part of the material that goes on the railing of the stairs. he only says it's directly above the stairs. the Boeing employee didn't appear to share your thoughts of being 100% from 305? I don't see anything suggesting "tortured rationale"
The FBI would of agreed 100% if it was noted as a piece from the skirting?
If I took the time to look up the part number and find it's only a piece of a larger part I would of noted it that way?
-
I literally cannot believe the tortured rationale I’m reading here. He did not say it was piece of part? He suggested it was the entire part? The dimensions were clean cut and precise? Really?
Correct, he said a large part from a 727 was found. the entire skirt would be a part, no? each side is not 8" x 40" so why wouldn't he say it a small piece of a larger piece or part? that would be a very small percentage of the actual part. he goes further to look the part up and fails to say it's part of the material that goes on the railing of the stairs. he only says it's directly above the stairs. the Boeing employee didn't appear to share your thoughts of being 100% from 305? I don't see anything suggesting "tortured rationale"
The FBI would of agreed 100% if it was noted as a piece from the skirting?
If I took the time to look up the part number and find it's only a piece of a larger part I would of noted it that way?
This is all pure speculation that is loose at best. Again, this is an FBI agent recounting what the guy informed them of. It was verified as a large size part from a 727. Why does it literally have to be the entire part? Where does the guy who found it say he doesn’t think it is related to DB Cooper or 305?
That said, what about the obvious? How the hell does a piece of an airliner from the INSIDE end up in the woods?
It is obvious what piece is being discussed here. Look at the footage of the jet in Reno, it even measures close to the stated dimensions. Plus it was identified as coming from above the door. That is precisely where the panel was located...the airstairs are a door.
Listen, if some want to ignore this actual physical piece of evidence then so be it. I suppose it’s time to move on from this subject then.
-
It's logical speculation based on what has been said and mentioned. you don't come forward without all the facts to present. he mentions a part, not a piece of one. that's extremely important while trying to explain or prove something. looking up the part and failing to mention it's partial would be damaging to the find. simply stating it was found near the location of the path without even knowing where gives permission to rule out any given path? I don't believe he went out of his way to look the part number up and fail to say it was part of a larger piece or part. that would of pegged it off the chart. nothing verifies what it is. didn't you fail to find the part number on the material. how did a small piece have one?
The placard terminology states the placard location was near the read door. the Cinebar find states a similar terminology of it being above the rear door. which is right or wrong? two placards now have to come from 305 using this logic. one is 99 percent sure it came from the hijacked plane and it's not the Hicks placard.
-
I don't make it a habit to post things as fact. I suggest things or show reasons to believe they are not factual or I would post my findings on the website as such. I don't try to push it onto people. I try to explain my reasoning and never turn assumptions into facts or make them appear that way.
-
The document speaks for itself.
A piece of a Boeing 727 from INSIDE was found in the woods. The size and location of the piece line-up perfectly with the missing skirts. Yeah that’s pretty convincing.
Kind of like, the money that was found at Tena Bar that didn’t have the full serial numbers—only a partial—but nonetheless matches a portion of the serial number of one of Cooper’s bills can safely be assumed that it was a Cooper bill. To say, “well the entire serial number is not visible, therefore we can’t prove 100% that it’s a Cooper bill” is nuts.
-
That's not even close in comparison. money is money and full serial numbers were noted. the condition was explained as well.
It does not say ANYWHERE a piece was found. it specifically states a part was found.
-
The document speaks for itself.
A piece of a Boeing 727 from INSIDE was found in the woods. The size and location of the piece line-up perfectly with the missing skirts. Yeah that’s pretty convincing.
Kind of like, the money that was found at Tena Bar that didn’t have the full serial numbers—only a partial—but nonetheless matches a portion of the serial number of one of Cooper’s bills can safely be assumed that it was a Cooper bill. To say, “well the entire serial number is not visible, therefore we can’t prove 100% that it’s a Cooper bill” is nuts.
Strike 3043! You're OUT!
-
I don't make it a habit to post things as fact. I suggest things or show reasons to believe they are not factual or I would post my findings on the website as such. I don't try to push it onto people. I try to explain my reasoning and never turn assumptions into facts or make them appear that way.
I agree 100 % and I’m always open to opinions but having an opinion doesn’t make it a fact ! A perfect example is shown by the Memorandum posted by Shutter regarding the Cinabar find ! The hunter states that the part MIGHT be related to the D B Cooper hijacking. However it’s also contradicted by the statement that no part that large is missing from the Norjack plane ! I apply similar reasoning to the tie particles being very interesting but do those particles prove where Cooper worked ? I can go on and on talking about great opinions and great theories! I have a few of my own. However facts aren’t exactly outnumbering Theories in this case !
-
I am still waiting for someone to explain how an 8" X 40" part from INSIDE the airstairs area of a 727 airliner ends up in the woods if it wasn't from 305?
Now if you want to continue to ignore this inconvenient FACT and hang your hat on "the Boeing employee would have said it was
a piece of a part" well OK then. There's really nothing more I can add.
The part--or piece thereof--was from 305.
-
It doesn’t matter if it was from 305 or not. It’s location doesn’t support a western flight path, and in fact places 305 farther east. Full stop.
I don’t see the purpose of parsing this.
-
It doesn’t matter if it was from 305 or not. It’s location doesn’t support a western flight path, and in fact places 305 farther east. Full stop.
I don’t see the purpose of parsing this.
Of course it matters if it's from 305. It's only the third piece of evidence found outside of the jet.
And yes, it would place 305 further east of the FBI Flight Path. That is important. Right?
-
It doesn’t matter if it was from 305 or not. It’s location doesn’t support a western flight path, and in fact places 305 farther east. Full stop.
I don’t see the purpose of parsing this.
Of course it matters if it's from 305. It's only the third piece of evidence found outside of the jet.
And yes, it would place 305 further east of the FBI Flight Path. That is important. Right?
It does indeed matter and it places 305 on the V-23 centerline, exactly where it should be at that point, while the FBI Flight Path in that area is several miles further west of the V-23 centerline.
There is absolutely nothing to suggest that any 727 flew with it aft stairs down, except the hijacked airliner, in that geographical area. The FBI tests were done over the Pacific Ocean west of Seattle. And in all probability, the original Boeing tests with the aft stairs down were done at Moses Lake, Washington east of the Cascade Mountains in Central Washington where Boeing had a test base.
-
And yes, it would place 305 further east of the FBI Flight Path. That is important. Right?
It’s location suggests a V23 flight path. That tracks with all the other evidence.
If this is all about debunking a flight path that someone did using a ruler and a Dixon Ticonderoga #2, then you’re missing point.
-
And yes, it would place 305 further east of the FBI Flight Path. That is important. Right?
It’s location suggests a V23 flight path. That tracks with all the other evidence.
If this is all about debunking a flight path that someone did using a ruler and a Dixon Ticonderoga #2, then you’re missing point.
Chaucer,
You seem to have missed the point. As I have posted above, it does not track with the FBI flight path.
You have stated previously that you are a college professor. What is your subject area? I'm just asking this in an effort to understand where you are coming from. Don't be like Georger who prefers to hide in the weeds.
-
And you continue to conflate the penciled flight path on the yellow map with V23.
And I know you like to post about how your an engineer, a pilot, a skydiver, etc. Great! But that doesn’t mean you’re right about this. Also, I am an adult with no need to participate in dick measuring contests.
-
And you continue to conflate the penciled flight path on the yellow map with V23.
And I know you like to post about how your an engineer, a pilot, a skydiver, etc. Great! But that doesn’t mean you’re right about this. Also, I am an adult with no need to participate in dick measuring contests.
Are you serious about being an adult?
-
Yes, I’m an adult.
And your wrong. One needs only to go back and read your interactions with Homind to see why.
But like I said, there are still people who think the Earth is flat too.
-
Yes, I’m an adult.
And your wrong. One needs only to go back and read your interactions with Homind to see why.
But like I said, there are still people who think the Earth is flat too.
So you think the earth is flat? What is your basis for that? Why don't you prepare a peer reviewed technical paper on the subject for one of the AIAA publications?
What interactions with Homind are you referring to?
-
Yes, I’m an adult.
And your wrong. One needs only to go back and read your interactions with Homind to see why.
But like I said, there are still people who think the Earth is flat too.
It is a shame Shutter wont stop R99's personal attacks. Its a stain on this whole forum! A serious problem.
Hominid had a commercial/military/aviation background. He posted some of his work at DZ years ago. He and I and others conducted interviews with Anderson and others personally involved in the original test flight including military personnel involved in the Air Force generation of a flight path for 305. The FBI was simply a recipient of the flight path and dz work done by others. The FBI had no hand whatever in what R99 keeps referring to as the "FBI flight path".
It's interesting that R99 keeps bringing up credentials in his attempt to undermine anyone objecting to his socalled west path. None of the credentialed people who have looked at R99's work on the flight is willing to certify his work - most criticize his work. See prior posts by Hominid and others at DZ regarding R99's socalled west path. Likewise, when it comes to "credentials" EU's credentials in this whole matter dont even register on the scale of credentials!
Likewise, R99's continued personal attacks Shutter allows in this forum actually undermine R99's "credibility" further.
The actual history of the Cooper case and the "flight path" revealed in FOIA documents, shows that by the 1976 SF Conference (or "seminar") the central unresolved issue was not the flight path but where on the timeline Cooper actually bailed. In other words the exact time of the poorly reported "oscillations and bump". Globe Insurance was pressing hard to get its money back! Scott and others were still insisting Cooper had jumped and landed in Lake Merwin! Flight engineer Anderson wasn't so sure. Globe Insurance was willing to offer a reward for a return of its money! Globe was willing to finance a thorough search of the bottom of Lake Merwin and individuals and several companies offered their services! Contrary to EU's narrow version, Scott continued to recite the Lake Merwin drop zone scenario right up to his last interview. Globe Insurance financed people searching Lake Merwin and the FBI participated! The FOIA documents detail this whole part of the flight path and drop zone history in the Cooper case.
After the San Francisco Conference in 1976 Himmelsbach reported to newspapers that ' we now believe Cooper bailed 12 miles north of Portland'. Globe Insurance backed off its support for searching Lake Merwin and its reward was cancelled. By the time of the Ingram find in 1980 all rewards had been cancelled...
** Sluggo and others note that at 20:15 a communication with Seattle CNTR advises: "Portland altimeter is 30.03 inches" of Hg. Sluggo and others point out this communication is important because: "it shows that at 20:15.56 305 was very near Portland". This places 305 very near Portland and the Columbia at 20:15 on the timeline, plus or minus one minute, independent of oscillations and bump or anything else?
-
Georger, you are the last person to start screaming unjust issue's. do you realize how many emails and PM's I've got over the years surrounding your behavior and personal attacks? then the list of those who left because of your insults and questioning of there status or education?
Shutter
-
Yes, I’m an adult.
And your wrong. One needs only to go back and read your interactions with Homind to see why.
But like I said, there are still people who think the Earth is flat too.
It is a shame Shutter wont stop R99's personal attacks. Its a stain on this whole forum! A serious problem.
Hominid had a commercial/military/aviation background. He posted some of his work at DZ years ago. He and I and others conducted interviews with Anderson and others personally involved in the original test flight including military personnel involved in the Air Force generation of a flight path for 305. The FBI was simply a recipient of the flight path and dz work done by others. The FBI had no hand whatever in what R99 keeps referring to as the "FBI flight path".
It's interesting that R99 keeps bringing up credentials in his attempt to undermine anyone objecting to his socalled west path. None of the credentialed people who have looked at R99's work on the flight is willing to certify his work - most criticize his work. See prior posts by Hominid and others at DZ regarding R99's socalled west path. Likewise, when it comes to "credentials" EU's credentials in this whole matter dont even register on the scale of credentials!
Likewise, R99's continued personal attacks Shutter allows in this forum actually undermine R99's "credibility" further.
The actual history of the Cooper case and the "flight path" revealed in FOIA documents, shows that by the 1976 SF Conference (or "seminar") the central unresolved issue was not the flight path but where on the timeline Cooper actually bailed. In other words the exact time of the poorly reported "oscillations and bump". Globe Insurance was pressing hard to get its money back! Scott and others were still insisting Cooper had jumped and landed in Lake Merwin! Flight engineer Anderson wasn't so sure. Globe Insurance was willing to offer a reward for a return of its money! Globe was willing to finance a thorough search of the bottom of Lake Merwin and individuals and several companies offered their services! Contrary to EU's narrow version, Scott continued to recite the Lake Merwin drop zone scenario right up to his last interview. Globe Insurance financed people searching Lake Merwin and the FBI participated! The FOIA documents detail this whole part of the flight path and drop zone history in the Cooper case.
After the San Francisco Conference in 1976 Himmelsbach reported to newspapers that ' we now believe Cooper bailed 12 miles north of Portland'. Globe Insurance backed off its support for searching Lake Merwin and its reward was cancelled. By the time of the Ingram find in 1980 all rewards had been cancelled...
** Sluggo and others note that at 20:15 a communication with Seattle CNTR advises: "Portland altimeter is 30.03 inches" of Hg. Sluggo and others point out this communication is important because: "it shows that at 20:15.56 305 was very near Portland". This places 305 very near Portland and the Columbia at 20:15 on the timeline, plus or minus one minute, independent of oscillations and bump or anything else?
Georger's post doesn't really merit a response. Nevertheless, I will point out again that Georger is well known for his personal attacks as can be seen on DZ, this forum, and in personal e-mails to various people including myself.
It is my understanding that the so-called "FBI Flight Path" map was posted on DZ by Carr (perhaps previously to Sluggo) and that he was asking if anyone knew where it came from or who did it.
Who knows what the 1976 FBI conference did other than issue a "John Doe" indictment. The transcripts of the messages on the ARINC radio hookup and teletype system clearly indicate that the FBI thought the 8:11 PM time for the jump was the best estimate. This was only days after the 1971 hijacking.
The money find at Tina Bar in February 1980 did not change the estimated time of the jump but did result in questions about the flight path. Incidentally, that 8:11 PM time for the jump agrees remarkably well with the time that the airliner would be over Tina Bar according to the Western Flight Path. My estimate is that it would be over Tina Bar no later than 8:12 PM.
The Portland altimeter setting is routinely given to aircraft that can be 30 or more miles away from Portland. But at about 8:15 PM, if the airliner was on the Western Flight Path it would be about 10 miles southwest of Portland International Airport and a few minutes earlier it would have been slightly closer.
Do the "credentialed" people you refer to have actual names? Are they willing to stand by their work? Or do they just wish to shoot from the brush as some posters love to do?
-
Just about everyone has commented so lets not flame the fires and just move on with the topic at hand...
-
What’s everyone’s best guess on when Cooper jumped?
-
My guess is 8:13 pm, since that is what Rataczak told me.
-
What’s everyone’s best guess on when Cooper jumped?
8:13 pm - 8:16 window. Its interesting that 99 never posts any 302s to defend his position. I think he's out of date. Could anyone posting here or anywhere else pass 99's credential requirement - NO! Just 99. In my life Ive found that credentials sometimes have meaning and sometimes not, and sometimes are a curse to getting at working solutions and the truth! Common sense and Basic Research carries weight with me.
I think as time goes on the FBI FOIA releases are going to begin to have a larger impact on all Cooper discussion as more people begin to read and absorb them. My God! Im 77 years old and here I am having spent months reading and absorbing these files, to put things in order and try to get a better perspective on the Cooper case. I think actual historical knowledge about this case actually matters.
For example: 302s document that after the Ingram find and Tosaw hiring Blake Payne to dredge and recover artifacts from the Columbia near Hayden Island in 1982, it was Portland's Dorwin Schreuder who first saw and examined some of these artifacts. Dorwin was interviewed by local reporters and rendered his judgement as best he could. These artifacts were then passed to Seattle and on to Labs for analysis and further judgment. Socalled parachute cord, a bone, etc. Its an interesting historical fact. And its me, Georger, releasing this information for the first time; not Shutter, EU, Blevins, R99, 377, FJ, Smith, etc . . . that's the kind of basic research Im talking about. I will post the 302s as time rolls on. BTW the reason Tosaw had Payne searching around Hayden Island is because at the time Tosaw had been told (by one official) that 305 crossed the Columbia over the tip of Hayden Island - a tip that turned out to be flawed! ;)
I have always found that "credentials are as credentials DO" ............... whether its digging a ditch or working on the COVID virus. The Cooper case is somewhere in between these extremes and nobody needs anyone else's permission to do it!
A poll recently taken of retired FBI Agents seems to indicate that the Cooper case may never pass outside the FBI for solution - eg. to the Smithsonian! I was surprised to find out how strongly agents polled feel about this subject. Im not sure what reaction to have ... :rofl: It is what it is!
-
What’s everyone’s best guess on when Cooper jumped?
8:13 pm - 8:16 window. Its interesting that 99 never posts any 302s to defend his position. I think he's out of date. Could anyone posting here or anywhere else pass 99's credential requirement - NO! Just 99. In my life Ive found that credentials sometimes have meaning and sometimes not, and sometimes are a curse to getting at working solutions and the truth! Common sense carries weight with me.
I think as time goes on the FBI FOIA releases are going to begin to have a larger impact on all Cooper discussion as more people begin to read and absorb them. My God! Im 77 years old and here I am having spent months reading and absorbing these files, to put things in order and try to get a better perspective on the Cooper case. I think actual historical knowledge about this case actually matters.
For example: 302s document that after the Ingram find and Tosaw hiring Blake Payne to dredge and recover artifacts from the Columbia near Hayden Island in 1982, it was Portland's Dorwin Schreuder who first saw and examined some of these artifacts. Dorwin was interviewed by local reporters and rendered his judgement as best he could. These artifacts were then passed to Seattle and on to Labs for analysis and further judgment. Socalled parachute cord, a bone, etc. Its an interesting historical fact. And its me, Georger, releasing this information for the first time; not Shutter, EU, Blevins, R99, 377, FJ, Smith, etc . . . I will post the 302s as time rolls on. BTW the reason Tosaw had Payne searching around Hayden Island is because Tosaw had been told (by one official) that 305 crossed the Columbia over the tip of Hayden Island - a tip that turned out to be flawed! ;)
I have always found that "credentials are as credentials DO" ............... whether its digging a ditch or working on the COVID virus. The Cooper case is somewhere in between these extremes and nobody needs anyone else's permission to do it!
So credentials are meaningless? The problem both here and in our current political nightmare is that we have people who probably don't know what the term "credentials" means, or even how to spell it, trying to claim they know more about a given subject than the people who do know the subject.
FYI, I have had a copy of Tosaw's 1985 book for about the last 10 years or so.
-
Are you calling this board illiterate?
-
Are you calling this board illiterate?
No.
-
The problem both here and in our current political nightmare is that we have people who probably don't know what the term "credentials" means, or even how to spell it, trying to claim they know more about a given subject than the people who do know the subject.
-
What’s everyone’s best guess on when Cooper jumped?
8:13 pm - 8:16 window. Its interesting that 99 never posts any 302s to defend his position. I think he's out of date. Could anyone posting here or anywhere else pass 99's credential requirement - NO! Just 99. In my life Ive found that credentials sometimes have meaning and sometimes not, and sometimes are a curse to getting at working solutions and the truth! Common sense carries weight with me.
I think as time goes on the FBI FOIA releases are going to begin to have a larger impact on all Cooper discussion as more people begin to read and absorb them. My God! Im 77 years old and here I am having spent months reading and absorbing these files, to put things in order and try to get a better perspective on the Cooper case. I think actual historical knowledge about this case actually matters.
For example: 302s document that after the Ingram find and Tosaw hiring Blake Payne to dredge and recover artifacts from the Columbia near Hayden Island in 1982, it was Portland's Dorwin Schreuder who first saw and examined some of these artifacts. Dorwin was interviewed by local reporters and rendered his judgement as best he could. These artifacts were then passed to Seattle and on to Labs for analysis and further judgment. Socalled parachute cord, a bone, etc. Its an interesting historical fact. And its me, Georger, releasing this information for the first time; not Shutter, EU, Blevins, R99, 377, FJ, Smith, etc . . . I will post the 302s as time rolls on. BTW the reason Tosaw had Payne searching around Hayden Island is because Tosaw had been told (by one official) that 305 crossed the Columbia over the tip of Hayden Island - a tip that turned out to be flawed! ;)
I have always found that "credentials are as credentials DO" ............... whether its digging a ditch or working on the COVID virus. The Cooper case is somewhere in between these extremes and nobody needs anyone else's permission to do it!
So credentials are meaningless? The problem both here and in our current political nightmare is that we have people who probably don't know what the term "credentials" means, or even how to spell it, trying to claim they know more about a given subject than the people who do know the subject.
FYI, I have had a copy of Tosaw's 1985 book for about the last 10 years or so.
I didnt say that at all! Stop putting words in people's mouths.
-
Are you calling this board illiterate?
Imho this board is far from illiterate. Many people read it and have opinions and never say a word. Sometimes less is more. Good night.
-
I take strong offense to that statement. I'm just a high school educated southern boy. folks like to take pokes at me at every corner. especially in politics.
-
What's that old quote, something about people being 'educated sufficiently so as to reason incorrectly'...
-
I prefer the company of peasants because they have not been educated sufficiently to reason incorrectly.
Michel de Montaigne
-
I take strong offense to that statement. I'm just a high school educated southern boy. folks like to take pokes at me at every corner. especially in politics.
Sometimes less is more. I've met plenty of people over the years that were way more educated than me, who to put it simply, were eat up with dumbass. This isn't directed to anyone here, just a general statement. There are certainly people in the Cooper world that would fit that description, but none of those reside here.
-
So at the end of all of this we're right where it all began in that R99 and I subscribe to the Western Flight Path and everyone else subscribes to the FBI Flight Path.
Additionally, I am convinced that the placard and skirt are very important, overlooked, pieces of evidence from 305, and some others don't. As well, I consider the location and condition of the Tena Bar money find as critical pieces of the story that support the theory that DBC himself buried, and later retrieved, the money minus $5,800.
I've planted my flag in the ground and made my claim. We'll see who's right in the end.
-
I don't care if you plant 10 flags. that's your right. it's based on inconclusive evidence turned into fact. my limited edumacation tells me this. I have to use "edumacate" vs educate given the facts of my background. I'll just dummy myself down..
My limited edumacation also tells me one should always question a theory presented as fact. the higher edumacated folks are questioning the theory/proof presented by the uneducated FBI, Air Force, radar operators etc. so why not more limited edumacated people to cross examine. you should encourage this to make oneself look even better vs insulting there backgrounds? i might even consider removing members with no collage degrees. turn it into a wannabe mensa board? perhaps get that know it all from Seattle in here to counter those gifted and level the field? my limited edumacation once again tells me you are wrong starting right from the first sentence in your post.
Edumacate; An uneducated way people, including Redneck's, Hill-Billy's and Feral people use in place of the word Education to sound smarter than they may be.
-
FWIW, I work in academics. I am surrounded by people with far fewer "credentials" than me that know more than I do about my subject area. I am also surrounded by people with four office walls filled with "Credentials" (diplomas, certifications, trainings, etc.) who don't know diddly.
I find that the people touting their "credentials" are usually the ones most insecure about their actual knowledge base.
-
I don't care if you plant 10 flags. that's your right. it's based on inconclusive evidence turned into fact.
Are you suggesting evidence should not be considered to draw conclusions? What would Sherlock Holmes think?
I'll ask yet again because not one single person has taken a stab at it...How the F can anyone explain how the skirt and placard--both of which came from INSIDE, yes INSIDE, once again INSIDE--of a 727 end up in the woods if the back airstairs door is not open in-flight?
That fact alone proves beyond a REASONABLE doubt that they both came from 305...unless, of course, commercial airliners make a habit of flying around Washington State--and apparently only Washington State--with their airstairs deployed.
-
Again...
Whether it came from 305 or not is irrelevant: both pieces were found too far east for a western flight path.
-
Again...
Whether it came from 305 or not is irrelevant: both pieces were found too far east for a western flight path.
That is simply not true. The wind was blowing toward the northeast. At 10,000 feet the winds were around 35-40 mph as I recall. Therefore, both items had no choice but to end up east of the actual flight path.
That said, both locations disprove the FBI Flight Path unless something very bizarre happened like someone found the placard and walked it several miles to the west before depositing it again.
-
Again...
Whether it came from 305 or not is irrelevant: both pieces were found too far east for a western flight path.
To reply to several of Chaucer's and Georger's posts, I would like to point out that it was Georger who started this discussion to discredit credentials.
A question for Chaucer. When you need a brain surgeon, do you seek out a trained medical doctor with a number of degrees and other such items on his office wall, or do you ask the near illiterate illegal immigrant who mows your lawn to do the job.
-
Again...
Whether it came from 305 or not is irrelevant: both pieces were found too far east for a western flight path.
To reply to several of Chaucer's and Georger's posts, I would like to point out that it was Georger who started this discussion to discredit credentials.
A question for Chaucer. When you need a brain surgeon, do you seek out a trained medical doctor with a number of degrees and other such items on his office wall, or do you ask the near illiterate illegal immigrant who mows your lawn to do the job.
You are an incredibly miserable, arrogant, toxic person, and I am done interacting with you on here.
-
So at the end of all of this we're right where it all began in that R99 and I subscribe to the Western Flight Path and everyone else subscribes to the FBI Flight Path.
Additionally, I am convinced that the placard and skirt are very important, overlooked, pieces of evidence from 305, and some others don't. As well, I consider the location and condition of the Tena Bar money find as critical pieces of the story that support the theory that DBC himself buried, and later retrieved, the money minus $5,800.
I've planted my flag in the ground and made my claim. We'll see who's right in the end.
Well you are wrong again! "Subscribe". People "subscribe" to LIFE and Readers Digest - they dont "subscribe" to flight paths necessarily. You can "subscribe" to Zooizm if you want. People who "subscribe" a lot make me nervous. They are very likely to miss or reject their vaccinations!
You can subscribe if you want. I will just investigate and keep my mind open.
-
Again...
Whether it came from 305 or not is irrelevant: both pieces were found too far east for a western flight path.
That is simply not true. The wind was blowing toward the northeast. At 10,000 feet the winds were around 35-40 mph as I recall. Therefore, both items had no choice but to end up east of the actual flight path.
That said, both locations disprove the FBI Flight Path unless something very bizarre happened like someone found the placard and walked it several miles to the west before depositing it again.
No. It's a fact. Both items were east of both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23. That supports a traditional flight path and discounts a western one.
I'm not understanding what is so difficult to understand about that.
-
Again...
Whether it came from 305 or not is irrelevant: both pieces were found too far east for a western flight path.
To reply to several of Chaucer's and Georger's posts, I would like to point out that it was Georger who started this discussion to discredit credentials.
A question for Chaucer. When you need a brain surgeon, do you seek out a trained medical doctor with a number of degrees and other such items on his office wall, or do you ask the near illiterate illegal immigrant who mows your lawn to do the job.
Huh!? Off topic again? Robert what is 2+2 and what star are you on now? Earth to Robert Nicholson! Listening . . . .
-
So at the end of all of this we're right where it all began in that R99 and I subscribe to the Western Flight Path and everyone else subscribes to the FBI Flight Path.
Additionally, I am convinced that the placard and skirt are very important, overlooked, pieces of evidence from 305, and some others don't. As well, I consider the location and condition of the Tena Bar money find as critical pieces of the story that support the theory that DBC himself buried, and later retrieved, the money minus $5,800.
I've planted my flag in the ground and made my claim. We'll see who's right in the end.
Well you are wrong again! "Subscribe". People "subscribe" to LIFE and Readers Digest - they dont "subscribe" to flight paths necessarily. You can "subscribe" to Zooizm if you want. People who "subscribe" a lot make me nervous. They are very likely to miss or reject their vaccinations!
You can subscribe if you want. I will just investigate and keep my mind open.
OK GEORGER, prove that I'm wrong.
I made two assertions:
1) R99 and I subscribe to the Western Flight Path and everyone else subscribes to the FBI Flight Path.
2) The next paragraph has two sentences, one which states "I'm convinced," the other which states "I consider." By definition these are my thoughts, so I'll be interested how you can prove that these are not actually my thoughts.
3) The final paragraph states that I've made my claims--in other words, given my opinions. Again, GEORGER, feel free to prove this statement is wrong.
You see GEORGER, you constantly engage in debates with me that you simply cannot win because you're just plain wrong.
Finally, GEORGER--credential man--after you're done proving your former comments perhaps you can take a stab at how the skirt and placard ended up in the woods. The question no one has yet to answer.
-
Again...
Whether it came from 305 or not is irrelevant: both pieces were found too far east for a western flight path.
That is simply not true. The wind was blowing toward the northeast. At 10,000 feet the winds were around 35-40 mph as I recall. Therefore, both items had no choice but to end up east of the actual flight path.
That said, both locations disprove the FBI Flight Path unless something very bizarre happened like someone found the placard and walked it several miles to the west before depositing it again.
No. It's a fact. Both items were east of both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23. That supports a traditional flight path and discounts a western one.
I'm not understanding what is so difficult to understand about that.
My dear Dr. Chaucer, this has been discussed at great length here recently. You just need to read the damn posts!
-
Who here has Law Enforcement "credentials" ......... can a illegal immigrant solve a case or a housewife?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ky-housewife-solves-murder/
-
So at the end of all of this we're right where it all began in that R99 and I subscribe to the Western Flight Path and everyone else subscribes to the FBI Flight Path.
Additionally, I am convinced that the placard and skirt are very important, overlooked, pieces of evidence from 305, and some others don't. As well, I consider the location and condition of the Tena Bar money find as critical pieces of the story that support the theory that DBC himself buried, and later retrieved, the money minus $5,800.
I've planted my flag in the ground and made my claim. We'll see who's right in the end.
Well you are wrong again! "Subscribe". People "subscribe" to LIFE and Readers Digest - they dont "subscribe" to flight paths necessarily. You can "subscribe" to Zooizm if you want. People who "subscribe" a lot make me nervous. They are very likely to miss or reject their vaccinations!
You can subscribe if you want. I will just investigate and keep my mind open.
OK GEORGER, prove that I'm wrong.
I made two assertions:
1) R99 and I subscribe to the Western Flight Path and everyone else subscribes to the FBI Flight Path.
2) The next paragraph has two sentences, one which states "I'm convinced," the other which states "I consider." By definition these are my thoughts, so I'll be interested how you can prove that these are not actually my thoughts.
3) The final paragraph states that I've made my claims--in other words, given my opinions. Again, GEORGER, feel free to prove this statement is wrong.
You see GEORGER, you constantly engage in debates with me that you simply cannot win because you're just plain wrong.
Finally, GEORGER--credential man--after you're done proving your former comments perhaps you can take a stab at how the skirt and placard ended up in the woods. The question no one has yet to answer.
HUH>? Earth to whoever - are you trying to communicate .... NASA will get back to you after trabslators work on your transmission! Give psychologists five years to figure it out!
-
Who here has Law Enforcement "credentials" ......... can a illegal immigrant solve a case or a housewife?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ky-housewife-solves-murder/
Im lost. Is this now Emigration? I thought this was a DB Cooper forum!?
-
No. It's a fact. Both items were east of both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23. That supports a traditional flight path and discounts a western one.
I'm not understanding what is so difficult to understand about that.
The placard was found WEST of the FBI Flight Path.
The skirt was found at least 10 miles east of the FBI Flight Path. I do not believe that the skirt could drift anywhere close to 10 miles, therefore, the jet would have been several miles EAST of the FBI Flight Path at that point.
I simply cannot make it any clearer than that.
You understand that this suggests that the FBI Flight Path is WRONG at those two spots?
That is a very big deal.
-
So at the end of all of this we're right where it all began in that R99 and I subscribe to the Western Flight Path and everyone else subscribes to the FBI Flight Path.
Additionally, I am convinced that the placard and skirt are very important, overlooked, pieces of evidence from 305, and some others don't. As well, I consider the location and condition of the Tena Bar money find as critical pieces of the story that support the theory that DBC himself buried, and later retrieved, the money minus $5,800.
I've planted my flag in the ground and made my claim. We'll see who's right in the end.
Well you are wrong again! "Subscribe". People "subscribe" to LIFE and Readers Digest - they dont "subscribe" to flight paths necessarily. You can "subscribe" to Zooizm if you want. People who "subscribe" a lot make me nervous. They are very likely to miss or reject their vaccinations!
You can subscribe if you want. I will just investigate and keep my mind open.
OK GEORGER, prove that I'm wrong.
I made two assertions:
1) R99 and I subscribe to the Western Flight Path and everyone else subscribes to the FBI Flight Path.
2) The next paragraph has two sentences, one which states "I'm convinced," the other which states "I consider." By definition these are my thoughts, so I'll be interested how you can prove that these are not actually my thoughts.
3) The final paragraph states that I've made my claims--in other words, given my opinions. Again, GEORGER, feel free to prove this statement is wrong.
You see GEORGER, you constantly engage in debates with me that you simply cannot win because you're just plain wrong.
Finally, GEORGER--credential man--after you're done proving your former comments perhaps you can take a stab at how the skirt and placard ended up in the woods. The question no one has yet to answer.
HUH>? Earth to whoever - are you trying to communicate .... NASA will get back to you after trabslators work on your transmission! Give psychologists five years to figure it out!
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, EU rests his case.
-
No. It's a fact. Both items were east of both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23. That supports a traditional flight path and discounts a western one.
I'm not understanding what is so difficult to understand about that.
The placard was found WEST of the FBI Flight Path.
The skirt was found at least 10 miles east of the FBI Flight Path. I do not believe that the skirt could drift anywhere close to 10 miles, therefore, the jet would have been several miles EAST of the FBI Flight Path at that point.
I simply cannot make it any clearer than that.
You understand that this suggests that the FBI Flight Path is WRONG at those two spots?
That is a very big deal.
OK! Understood! So now you are back to the flight path. Two specifics. No immediate answer available. Thats what my board says. Have you got enough oxygen to survive for two hours? Will take some time to get back to you ... Doppler formula 1+z = sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))
-
West of the flight path?
-
West of the flight path?
The placard find location?
-
How is it west of the path?
-
How is it west of the path?
I have it being found about 8/10ths of a mile SW of the FBI Flight Path. That said, even if it was found right under the FBI Flight Path or two miles east of the FBI Flight Path, it is a problem for the FBI Flight Path. Remember, according to R99's placard drift analysis, the placard drifted approximately 8 miles before it landed on the forest floor. How can this be reasonably explained?
Also, again, how do the skirt and placard end up on the forest floor considering they both came from the INSIDE of a 727?
-
can you show that on a map..I've never seen the placard that close to the known path..
-
To clarify....
The FBI spoke with the guy who found the part near Cinebar on the telephone. this obviously means more of a conversation took place than written. he also appears to be from Pife Wa. that's a hundred miles away and tells me he's a serious hunter. looking at the grounds and hunting regions appears to be just about everywhere, including getting a permit for private property.
Now, the 302 is not conclusive enough to give the exact location or the exact part being partial or whole. was it east, west, northeast or southeast of Cinebar. how can any conclusion to a path be made? I never once claimed it was not from 305. I said it was dropping in verification. why wouldn't he explain on the telephone it was only a piece of a part. that's very concerning when describing something you can't see. if he would of told him, which we don't know that it was part of the railing on the side of the stairs the agent would of probably said, where is it? just as they did with the placard.
Two placards were found. the Hicks has multiple conclusions in totality. they appear to believe it came off when the stairs were lowered and the pressure changed. they were open for miles, no? it was found what is now being reported as a very dense area but somehow was visible for almost 8 years without being overgrown in the dense area? a second placard found not long after the Hicks find and it's made out as 99% coming from the hijacked plane but is over 24 miles away?
The Hicks placard was damaged and had a large tear in it and suggests it would not float or drift as well as a undamaged piece would. testing required.. the Cinebar part...unless you know the exact spot or weight it's not conclusive to anything? what if it was 6 miles east of Cinebar? move the path again that was proof before?
My whole point here is not to claim anything other than how the items were found and the dates or locations that don't exist that put a lot of questions into things prior to calling them evidence to anything. nothing conclusive in all 3 items found for different reasons. how can that possibly be stupid?
-
Take a look at the items coming out of McNally's plane...300 knots I believe..
Money traveled about 4.5 miles..
Gun traveled a little over 5 miles drifting west.
The pants traveled about 11 miles drifting further west.
appears the winds were southwest..
-
The following link brings you to a Google Map I made that shows a number of things including the FBI Flight Path, my version of the Western Flight Path, the Cinebar Hunting Lands, the Hicks' placard find location, the Tena Bar money find location, and some other stuff.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1T3fXxH7rZuW67LBVA7lpGXSx7KyseFem&ll=46.21499798099602%2C-122.75937160000001&z=7
-
a second placard found not long after the Hicks find and it's made out as 99% coming from the hijacked plane but is over 24 miles away?
I believe the 99% claim means that it came from a 727--as 305 was a 727--but not the hijacked jet itself.
-
need access
-
a second placard found not long after the Hicks find and it's made out as 99% coming from the hijacked plane but is over 24 miles away?
I believe the 99% claim means that it came from a 727--as 305 was a 727--but not the hijacked jet itself.
Exactly....part/partial?
-
need access
Let me know if this link works
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1T3fXxH7rZuW67LBVA7lpGXSx7KyseFem&usp=sharing
-
Who here has Law Enforcement "credentials" ......... can a illegal immigrant solve a case or a housewife?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ky-housewife-solves-murder/
Im lost. Is this now Emigration? I thought this was a DB Cooper forum!?
it's a reference showing unqualified people solving crimes...(housewife/peasant)
-
need access
Let me know if this link works
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1T3fXxH7rZuW67LBVA7lpGXSx7KyseFem&usp=sharing
Nope, I believe I've seen it. the known flight path is not that close to the placard find..3 miles east or so if I recall..
-
Here is the relevant link to Tom's site:
https://citizensleuths.com/flightpath.html
"The placard was recovered at the location shown in Figure 2 which is near Toutle, and 20 miles north of the Ariel Washington jump zone. This location is almost directly under the FBI flight path. Giving the placard a free fall time of nine minutes and a south west cross wind of 18 knots, then the plane would have to been 2.68 miles from where the placard was recovered and 2.6 miles west of V23 [6]. This distance is well within the official 8 mile width for the Victor airway and is 4 miles east of the theoretical Tena Bar flight path. This data places a constraint on the planes position approximately six minutes before the jump and suggests flight #305 was on the original FBI flight path."
-
it's not correct...or he is showing where the plane is to the placard...I forgot but it's misleading..you should know that?
-
Here is the relevant link to Tom's site:
https://citizensleuths.com/flightpath.html
"The placard was recovered at the location shown in Figure 2 which is near Toutle, and 20 miles north of the Ariel Washington jump zone. This location is almost directly under the FBI flight path. Giving the placard a free fall time of nine minutes and a south west cross wind of 18 knots, then the plane would have to been 2.68 miles from where the placard was recovered and 2.6 miles west of V23 [6]. This distance is well within the official 8 mile width for the Victor airway and is 4 miles east of the theoretical Tena Bar flight path. This data places a constraint on the planes position approximately six minutes before the jump and suggests flight #305 was on the original FBI flight path."
NOTE: The 2.68 miles was derived from R99's original placard drift analysis. However, the data he used for the size and weight of the placard was incorrect, plus the wind speed data was also incorrect.
Later, I bought an actual placard and refined the size and weight specs and provided them to R99 for an updated placard drift analysis. Additionally, Tom Kaye got weather data from NOAA through a colleague, as I recall, which R99 also factored into the updated analysis.
This updated analysis put the placard drift at approximately 8 miles to the northeast. This is a very big problem for the FBI Flight Path.
-
It's pretty simple to get the coords from the path and you can get a close range of where they show the plane in that area. it's not west of the path. my concerns have always been a placard on the ground for almost 8 years. the other problem is the damage to it. this had to have been prior to exit since you claim it didn't move or get grown over in dense foliage. it's inconclusive. that's all I'm saying. it's not a gotcha theory nor do I believe it can prove anything. it will also drift much different.
-
It's pretty simple to get the coords from the path and you can get a close range of where they show the plane in that area. it's not west of the path. my concerns have always been a placard on the ground for almost 8 years. the other problem is the damage to it. this had to have been prior to exit since you claim it didn't move or get grown over in dense foliage. it's inconclusive. that's all I'm saying. it's not a gotcha theory nor do I believe it can prove anything. it will also drift much different.
I really don't know how or when the placard got ripped...but it did get ripped...that had to require some force.
I just cannot imagine how the placard migrates much on the forest floor. I searched in the woods this last year and it's not only dense, it's also quite calm. Plus there weren't any floods happening near the placard find.
I look at the placard and ask, "What can this tell me?" That's just how I approach it. Same thing with the skirt.
I do not believe it gets us anywhere by simply resolving that we don't know exactly every last detail about the placard and its journey, therefore we should ignore it. In fact, it can tell us a lot. It provides clues.
-
These are the coordinates that I have for the Hicks placard find. I believe I got these from Bruce:
46°14’38.4″N 122°41’01.3″W
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that puts it to the west of the both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23.
Another thing that we cannot calculate for are things like updrafts, downdrafts, rain, etc. Not to mention any mechanisms on the ground that could have affected it's final location such as wind, water, animals, human intervention, etc.
-
These are the coordinates that I have for the Hicks placard find. I believe I got these from Bruce:
46°14’38.4″N 122°41’01.3″W
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that puts it to the west of the both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23.
The location is correct.
However, it is WEST of the FBI Flight Path, but EAST of centerline V23.
-
It's pretty simple to get the coords from the path and you can get a close range of where they show the plane in that area. it's not west of the path. my concerns have always been a placard on the ground for almost 8 years. the other problem is the damage to it. this had to have been prior to exit since you claim it didn't move or get grown over in dense foliage. it's inconclusive. that's all I'm saying. it's not a gotcha theory nor do I believe it can prove anything. it will also drift much different.
I really don't know how or when the placard got ripped...but it did get ripped...that had to require some force.
I just cannot imagine how the placard migrates much on the forest floor. I searched in the woods this last year and it's not only dense, it's also quite calm. Plus there weren't any floods happening near the placard find.
I look at the placard and ask, "What can this tell me?" That's just how I approach it. Same thing with the skirt.
I do not believe it gets us anywhere by simply resolving that we don't know exactly every last detail about the placard and its journey, therefore we should ignore it. In fact, it can tell us a lot. It provides clues.
FJ keeps saying you have no proof the placard even came from 305! Likewise the socalled skirt with part number ? Part number does not match the skirt and was dismissed by the FBI !
-
It's on the east side of V23...pretty simple.
-
FJ keeps saying you have no proof the placard even came from 305! Likewise the socalled skirt with part number ? Part number does not match the skirt and was dismissed by the FBI
The documents prior to the newspaper report support it coming from 305. they explain it possibly came out after the stairs were opened and pressure pulled it off the wall. they wouldn't explain that if the drawings showed the placard on the fuselage.
Cinebar was not dismissed by part number..
-
It's pretty simple to get the coords from the path and you can get a close range of where they show the plane in that area. it's not west of the path. my concerns have always been a placard on the ground for almost 8 years. the other problem is the damage to it. this had to have been prior to exit since you claim it didn't move or get grown over in dense foliage. it's inconclusive. that's all I'm saying. it's not a gotcha theory nor do I believe it can prove anything. it will also drift much different.
I really don't know how or when the placard got ripped...but it did get ripped...that had to require some force.
I just cannot imagine how the placard migrates much on the forest floor. I searched in the woods this last year and it's not only dense, it's also quite calm. Plus there weren't any floods happening near the placard find.
I look at the placard and ask, "What can this tell me?" That's just how I approach it. Same thing with the skirt.
I do not believe it gets us anywhere by simply resolving that we don't know exactly every last detail about the placard and its journey, therefore we should ignore it. In fact, it can tell us a lot. It provides clues.
FJ keeps saying you have no proof the placard even came from 305! Likewise the socalled skirt with part number ? Part number does not match the skirt and was dismissed by the FBI !
Oh really. Well I'm curious to know the part number he has for the skirt (I'm taking your word that he implies he has the skirt part number found). Moreover, I'm curious for him to explain how the placard, which came from INSIDE a 727, found its way into the woods. And yes, the placard did come from INSIDE the jet, as you may recall I verified this with Boeing at the time we finally got the part number.
The truth hurts. Them facts be stubborn for some fellas.
-
Again...
The documents prior to the newspaper report support it coming from 305. they explain it possibly came out after the stairs were opened and pressure pulled it off the wall. they wouldn't explain that if the drawings showed the placard on the fuselage.
Cinebar was not dismissed by part number..
-
Again...
The documents prior to the newspaper report support it coming from 305. they explain it possibly came out after the stairs were opened and pressure pulled it off the wall. they wouldn't explain that if the drawings showed the placard on the fuselage.
Cinebar was not dismissed by part number..
And you are saying TK's analysis of the placard was wrong ??
-
What do you mean? my comment has nothing to do with any findings with TK. the document surrounds the placard itself.
-
These are the coordinates that I have for the Hicks placard find. I believe I got these from Bruce:
46°14’38.4″N 122°41’01.3″W
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that puts it to the west of the both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23.
The location is correct.
However, it is WEST of the FBI Flight Path, but EAST of centerline V23.
Sorry, yes. I messed that up. It is east of both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23.
-
Here is how I view the two main documents surrounding the placard..
The placard was shown to NWO. it states it was located on the outside of the aircraft near the rear door. that is in reference to the bulkhead door. anything past that is outside. on the same page two prints were supplied showing exactly where the placard goes..
The second page NWO concludes that it probably came off when the stairs were lowered and a change in pressure. they claim it came off again during testing. why would they be looking outside and even bother to describe things missing? it doesn't make sense. and why would they say opening the stairs would cause it to come off if it was outside on the fuselage?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CJkNMpeiSfFFcfSnxxkZYUmxXjtorjyn/view
-
These are the coordinates that I have for the Hicks placard find. I believe I got these from Bruce:
46°14’38.4″N 122°41’01.3″W
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that puts it to the west of the both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23.
The location is correct.
However, it is WEST of the FBI Flight Path, but EAST of centerline V23.
Sorry, yes. I messed that up. It is east of both the FBI flight path and the centerline of V23.
It's in between the two.
-
The next problem that FJ will post is whether or not 305 even had the emergency panel. it's separate from the main panel. it's not described in a 302. it would of been hanging down a couple feet on the wall with a T handle. according to Hominid the stairs will no longer lock and yet they were locked at Reno?
Only the 100's had them and not all were installed at manufacture and some were installed after manufacture..
-
What’s everyone’s best guess on when Cooper jumped?
8:13 pm - 8:16 window. Its interesting that 99 never posts any 302s to defend his position. I think he's out of date. Could anyone posting here or anywhere else pass 99's credential requirement - NO! Just 99. In my life Ive found that credentials sometimes have meaning and sometimes not, and sometimes are a curse to getting at working solutions and the truth! Common sense and Basic Research carries weight with me.
I think as time goes on the FBI FOIA releases are going to begin to have a larger impact on all Cooper discussion as more people begin to read and absorb them. My God! Im 77 years old and here I am having spent months reading and absorbing these files, to put things in order and try to get a better perspective on the Cooper case. I think actual historical knowledge about this case actually matters.
For example: 302s document that after the Ingram find and Tosaw hiring Blake Payne to dredge and recover artifacts from the Columbia near Hayden Island in 1982, it was Portland's Dorwin Schreuder who first saw and examined some of these artifacts. Dorwin was interviewed by local reporters and rendered his judgement as best he could. These artifacts were then passed to Seattle and on to Labs for analysis and further judgment. Socalled parachute cord, a bone, etc. Its an interesting historical fact. And its me, Georger, releasing this information for the first time; not Shutter, EU, Blevins, R99, 377, FJ, Smith, etc . . . that's the kind of basic research Im talking about. I will post the 302s as time rolls on. BTW the reason Tosaw had Payne searching around Hayden Island is because at the time Tosaw had been told (by one official) that 305 crossed the Columbia over the tip of Hayden Island - a tip that turned out to be flawed! ;)
I have always found that "credentials are as credentials DO" ............... whether its digging a ditch or working on the COVID virus. The Cooper case is somewhere in between these extremes and nobody needs anyone else's permission to do it!
A poll recently taken of retired FBI Agents seems to indicate that the Cooper case may never pass outside the FBI for solution - eg. to the Smithsonian! I was surprised to find out how strongly agents polled feel about this subject. Im not sure what reaction to have ... :rofl: It is what it is!
I agree completely, G, that as more people read and absorb the 302s our discussions will change.
Already the 302s are re-shaping how I think - and write - my 3rd Edition. It's as if the 302s are demanding an entire re-write and re-thinking of the case. Just in the past few weeks the issue of fingerprints has come up via the 302s, and that is generating a whole new, separate chapter on the fingerprint analysis and the question of why there is so much uncertainty about what the FBI has and when they got it.
Along those lines, I am indebted to the many readers here who have read tons of 302s and have sent me relevant or intriguing docs to add to the book. The cataloguing that you're doing G is invaluable.
-
Again...
The documents prior to the newspaper report support it coming from 305. they explain it possibly came out after the stairs were opened and pressure pulled it off the wall. they wouldn't explain that if the drawings showed the placard on the fuselage.
Cinebar was not dismissed by part number..
And you are saying TK's analysis of the placard was wrong ??
Georger, as you well know the analysis I made for TK was extremely conservative and intended to be so. This was so stated from the very beginning.
After TK came up with the actual measured winds aloft for the evening of the hijacking, EU provided me with better information on the size and weight of the actual placard. The measured winds aloft were found to be higher than the winds aloft predicted by the weather service and provided to the pilots that evening. The actual placard was lighter and I think a bit larger than the values I had originally used for the TK analysis.
The end result was that the predicted drift distance was about three times further than the values I came up with for the TK analysis. Using the new drift distance estimate and TK's GPS coordinates for the placard find location, the placard would have separated from the airliner several miles west of the center line of V-23. And the FBI flight path is well east of of the V-23 center line in that area.
FYI, if the airliner was planning to stay on V-23, it would have stayed on the center line of V-23 after turning toward Portland at the Malay Intersection. IFR air traffic normally is required to be on the center line of airways unless otherwise cleared. Since the airliner was well west of the center line of V-23, it is obvious that it was deliberately not following V-23 but was bypassing Portland on the west side. The flight path it was following is what is now referred to as the Western Flight Path.
All of the above has been discussed any number of times both here and on DropZone. I have repeatedly referred you and others to FAA publications that describe aeronautical navigation, air traffic control, aeronautical maps, and other such things. But it is obvious that you have not made any effort to learn how things are actually done in the real world.
So neither you (Georger), Chaucer, or anyone else has a valid complaint on the flight path. Who knows where you are coming from?
-
IFR air traffic normally is required to be on the center line of airways unless otherwise cleared.
They were cleared to go where ever they wanted..that's in the transcripts. rules and regs don't mean shit in this case..
Unless authorized by ATC, to operate an aircraft within controlled airspace under IFR, pilots must either fly along the centerline when on a Federal airway or, on routes other than Federal airways.
NOT directly on centerline...
-
FJ, careful with wind data. ground winds mean nothing here..winds can change aloft and can differ with ground winds.
-
IFR air traffic normally is required to be on the center line of airways unless otherwise cleared.
They were cleared to go where ever they wanted..that's in the transcripts. rules and regs don't mean shit in this case..
Unless authorized by ATC, to operate an aircraft within controlled airspace under IFR, pilots must either fly along the centerline when on a Federal airway or, on routes other than Federal airways.
NOT directly on centerline...
When the airliner took off from SEATAC, it was already on the centerline of V-23. The Seattle VORTAC, which defines V-23, was/is located between the two parallel runways at SEATAC. The airliner took off to the south which was also the exact radial that determined V-23.
Both position reports that the airliner gave immediately after takeoff indicated it was on the centerline of V-23 even though the pilot's didn't use that term. And there was no reason for it to deviate from the centerline of V-23 until it got to the Malay Intersection.
After passing Portland, the airliner reported (according to the ARINC transcripts) that it was at "23 DME miles south of Portland". The word "Portland" used here refers to the Portland VORTAC which is now known as the Battleground VORTAC. This position would be on the Western Flight Path and on V-23 but slightly west of the V-23 centerline.
All indications are that the airliner remained on the V-23 centerline during the remainder of its flight south until it reached the point in Northern California where it turned east toward Reno.
The flight crew did have authorization to deviate any way they needed to during the flight to Reno. But the only place they apparently deviated from V-23 was on the Western Flight Path between the Malay Intersection and the Canby Intersections. And I am absolutely certain they coordinated this with the Seattle ATC Center. And I am also absolutely certain that the unredacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts will show this if they will ever be released by the FAA/FBI.
-
I mentioned this earlier, but I’d like to bring it up again. I noticed a discrepancy in the V23 centerline. On the FBI yellow map, V23 passes approximately 2 miles to the west of Toutle. On Skyvector, V23 is shown going directly over the top of Toutle.
Is there an explanation for this difference?
-
From the Battleground VORTEC to the Columbia via flight path is roughly 11 nautical miles. then from the north side of the Columbia to 23 miles DME is is roughly 14 miles. for a total of 25 nautical miles.
The asterisk mark is a problem with timing if not mistaken? that's beside the 8:22 mark for 23 miles DME.. the next entry is 8:52 claiming no contact with the hijacker in 55 minutes. that gives a time issue as well.
The map has error's in it and is not a carbon copy of the path. but it appears to be about a 2 nautical mile error from mapping it out rather quickly (hour)
Is this enough to move the whole path?
-
I mentioned this earlier, but I’d like to bring it up again. I noticed a discrepancy in the V23 centerline. On the FBI yellow map, V23 passes approximately 2 miles to the west of Toutle. On Skyvector, V23 is shown going directly over the top of Toutle.
Is there an explanation for this difference?
You bet there is. There was an extended discussion of this difference a number of years ago on DropZone. Snowmann eventually made some maps to illustrate this. To make a long story short, Toutle was simply plotted at a different location on more recent maps. That is all there is to it.
-
Why does the path have to be moved at all? What if the path we see is that of the F-106s?
Isn't it interesting that the FBI Flight Path--which shows its first plot east of Centralia at 19:54--draws a straight line directly to McChord AFB which is where the F-106s launched?
Not to mention the crazy flight path in and around Vancouver and Portland.
-
I mentioned this earlier, but I’d like to bring it up again. I noticed a discrepancy in the V23 centerline. On the FBI yellow map, V23 passes approximately 2 miles to the west of Toutle. On Skyvector, V23 is shown going directly over the top of Toutle.
Is there an explanation for this difference?
You bet there is. There was an extended discussion of this difference a number of years ago on DropZone. Snowmann eventually made some maps to illustrate this. To make a long story short, Toutle was simply plotted at a different location on more recent maps. That is all there is to it.
Silver lake seems to line up...
-
Isn't it interesting that the FBI Flight Path--which shows its first plot east of Centralia at 19:54--draws a straight line directly to McChord AFB which is where the F-106s launched?
Are we aiming from the ground prior to takeoff? it's not that crazy around Portland...just a sharp turn. you need to speak with those involved.
-
From the Battleground VORTEC to the Columbia via flight path is roughly 11 nautical miles. then from the north side of the Columbia to 23 miles DME is is roughly 14 miles. for a total of 25 nautical miles.
The asterisk mark is a problem with timing if not mistaken? that's beside the 8:22 mark for 23 miles DME.. the next entry is 8:52 claiming no contact with the hijacker in 55 minutes. that gives a time issue as well.
The map has error's in it and is not a carbon copy of the path. but it appears to be about a 2 nautical mile error from mapping it out rather quickly (hour)
Is this enough to move the whole path?
Nope. The problem is the redactions to the Seattle ATC radio transcripts. These redactions were made to prevent people from being able to determine where the airliner was at specific times.
As I have pointed out numerous times, if you want to see what the Seattle ATC radio transcripts should look like, just take a look at the Oakland ATC and Reno Tower radio transcripts. And note that the only redactions in the radio transcripts are in the Seattle transcripts.
-
That has nothing to do with 8:22 unless you want to claim it was just put there? redaction or not the time is 8:22 that you and everyone else seems to focus on with solving the case.
-
The dots also have two stories..a radar operator says one thing and you say another.
-
That has nothing to do with 8:22 unless you want to claim it was just put there? redaction or not the time is 8:22 that you and everyone else seems to focus on with solving the case.
Isn't the 8:22 PM time given in the "FBI Notes" as the time that the airliner passed the word through the ARINC system (not the Seattle ATC system) that it was 23 DME miles south of the Portland VORTAC?
-
I mentioned this earlier, but I’d like to bring it up again. I noticed a discrepancy in the V23 centerline. On the FBI yellow map, V23 passes approximately 2 miles to the west of Toutle. On Skyvector, V23 is shown going directly over the top of Toutle.
Is there an explanation for this difference?
You bet there is. There was an extended discussion of this difference a number of years ago on DropZone. Snowmann eventually made some maps to illustrate this. To make a long story short, Toutle was simply plotted at a different location on more recent maps. That is all there is to it.
Silver lake seems to line up...
Portland VORTAC (now known as the Battleground VORTAC) and the Mayfield Intersection (now known as the Malay Intersection) are at the same geographical positions today that they were at in 1971. It is simply the town of Toutle that got replotted at a different location.
-
Yes, isn't that a clue where the plane was? I'm just saying you keep screaming they covered up where the plane actually was. who did that.
-
I mentioned this earlier, but I’d like to bring it up again. I noticed a discrepancy in the V23 centerline. On the FBI yellow map, V23 passes approximately 2 miles to the west of Toutle. On Skyvector, V23 is shown going directly over the top of Toutle.
Is there an explanation for this difference?
You bet there is. There was an extended discussion of this difference a number of years ago on DropZone. Snowmann eventually made some maps to illustrate this. To make a long story short, Toutle was simply plotted at a different location on more recent maps. That is all there is to it.
Silver lake seems to line up...
Portland VORTAC (now known as the Battleground VORTAC) and the Mayfield Intersection (now known as the Malay Intersection) are at the same geographical positions today that they were at in 1971. It is simply the town of Toutle that got replotted at a different location.
I realize this Robert. I mentioned that prior to reading. had no idea what you were going to come up with..I just mentioned it was the same...
-
I have also mentioned that this is a conspiracy. you know that as well, right? a huge one..
-
I have also mentioned that this is a conspiracy. you know that as well, right? a huge one..
There is definitely a conspiracy to prevent the unredacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts from being released.
-
If the FBI knew 305 flew west over Tena Bar and then redacted that information to cover it up, then why did they spend thousands, perhaps millions, of dollars and hundreds of man hours searching a dropzone 20 miles to the east?
-
If the FBI knew 305 flew west over Tena Bar and then redacted that information to cover it up, then why did they spend thousands, perhaps millions, of dollars and hundreds of man hours searching a dropzone 20 miles to the east?
Why don't you ask the FBI that question? Those of us that have asked the FBI/FAA basically that question got the run-around. Maybe they will come clean with you.
-
You didn't get the run around. you got the basic standard open clause. that still exists today because it's not really closed. only with investigations.
-
You didn't get the run around. you got the basic standard open clause. that still exists today because it's not really closed. only with investigations.
Also, it's a ridiculous notion with no basis in fact. My guess is the special agents still laugh about that while making coffee in the morning.
The Nixon administration couldn't even cover up a two bit burglary. I doubt highly they could cover up something like this.
-
We know the FBI is not completely honest. they will typically hide documents from view. this would be a pretty elaborate cover up. a lot matches that would take a lot of time to construct and make it appear legit. even if they decided after the search. it's not just the FBI that would be behind this. the crew most certainly would know whether they flew a straight line or not. it just seems pretty simple to point out in minutes without notes? NWO would have to be in on it as well. toss in a few false radar reports to boot. then the Air Force would also have to be involved since they made the phony map? all the signatures on the transcripts. lots of people involved in a cover up. I doubt they had any intentions of making anything public. it's a little confusing to try and claim a cover up when it's not really known when they could even do it based on what took place months after the crime..
Take away the conspiracy and you will claim everything is just wrong which once again brings a shit load of people in that made massive mistakes. I think it's possible....I said possible that it's a timing issue for starters..
-
You didn't get the run around. you got the basic standard open clause. that still exists today because it's not really closed. only with investigations.
Also, it's a ridiculous notion with no basis in fact. My guess is the special agents still laugh about that while making coffee in the morning.
The Nixon administration couldn't even cover up a two bit burglary. I doubt highly they could cover up something like this.
Robert's conspiracy theory is Laughable! Too many witnesses to everything going on ......... principles plus families plus helpers/workers, etc etc etc etc etc. Air Force, NWA, FBI, Law Enforcement, DNR, FAA, ................... yepper they all agreed to conspire in an Edumacation Conspirathy! Marilyn Monroe was part of it too! YEEEEEEEHAW! Managers at airports and grounded pilots were listening to most of this live! Its a part of the conspira-see.
Obviously R99 hasnt read too many 302s! Its easy to form a conspiracy theory from a cave.
-
I don't think anything is laughable to be honest. I'm simply pointing out what I think and it causes problems. I thought that's what we are here for. I thought for a while the dredge might be involved but never tried to push it because of uncertainty. I'm not discounting the path but I have a whole lot of questions.
-
I don't think anything is laughable to be honest. I'm simply pointing out what I think and it causes problems. I thought that's what we are here for. I thought for a while the dredge might be involved but never tried to push it because of uncertainty. I'm not discounting the path but I have a whole lot of questions.
Consider the odds of it being a conspiracy! A conspiracy by ......... whom!? How many conspiring? How arranged between disparate agencies, individuals, etc ?
When what may be involved is convenants not to discuss some people adopted.
If you want to shut people up start just talking conspiracy! Like Bruce does. There may be an agreement to stay away from wackoes who cause trouble. That is real! But not even that is a conspiracy - its self preservation based on experience spread by word of mouth short of going to Court for an injunction!
-
That's what I wrote in a post a minute ago. a lot would be involved. I'm not saying that's a fact either. it's a possibility given what has been said. obviously, something is wrong somewhere..NOTHING is conclusive that I can see.
-
That's what I wrote in a post a minute ago. a lot would be involved. I'm not saying that's a fact either. it's a possibility given what has been said. obviously, something is wrong somewhere..NOTHING is conclusive that I can see.
pretty much agree except 302s detail an actual history and specific discussions and events based on discussions ans actions executed ....
What R99 proposes is impossible practically speaking. A higher probability that Cooper flew home in a Yellow Cab waiting at 10,000ft at the ladder!
-
It's not really that far off base. it does make sense to a point. I've said this many times. it makes EVERYTHING wrong and not just one point but everything...
-
The issue is the lack of any evidence to support a conspiracy. There’s the redacted ATC transcripts and a belief 305 flew over Tena Bar. Where’s the evidence? It’s just a convenient “deus ex machina” used to connect two totally unrelated things.
-
Plenty to support a conspiracy if you look. the map for one if they knew it was over the Tbar area. the radar operators from Portland giving specific details that would be false. huge waste of time and money showing an army of men in the wrong area. cost of airplanes, helicopters to search. hush money to the crew and NWO and the Air Force involved..just for starters..if it wasn't a conspiracy who convinced them they were wrong and changed things?
-
I'm not sold that the FBI cares enough to cover up the actual location of the plane. Cooper isn't any type of public figure politically connected or even known to warrant a cover up? I'm wondering if we would have double the trouble if McCoy wasn't caught. how many would swear they were one and the same more than the few today?
-
If you want the real truth...look up Bob Knoss on the DZ..he knows and speaks to McCoy often. him and Duane Weber did the Cooper jump. Rataczak was in on it too :rofl: he called me the badger..
-
It's not really that far off base. it does make sense to a point. I've said this many times. it makes EVERYTHING wrong and not just one point but everything...
A better theory could be developed around 'bureaucratic SNAFU' vs. conspiracy. They weren't even sure he had left the plane at Reno! Then others back up after examining evidence later and say he bailed over Lake Merwin. If that's a conspiracy it's the sloppiest conspiracy ever constructed!
-
We know the FBI doesn't like anyone getting in there business. they don't appear to care what we say or think in some cases. he jumped somewhere and once again nobody can agree on that either. he's dead, no he made it..he lost the money, no he didn't..it's endless..
-
The issue is the lack of any evidence to support a conspiracy. There’s the redacted ATC transcripts and a belief 305 flew over Tena Bar. Where’s the evidence? It’s just a convenient “deus ex machina” used to connect two totally unrelated things.
Chaucer, you need to read the posts. You would definitely learn something. Then if you wanted to participate in the coverup I am sure that Georger would be willing to show you how to do it.
You need to check out the history of FOIA requests on the Cooper hijacking. You obviously haven't done this.
-
All this talk of mass conspiracies. Could this explain why Tina Mucklow ran off to a convent, or wherever it was? Deeply religious, doesn't want to lie, but caught up in something bigger than herself, afraid for herself and her family?
Yeah, that was a joke. Or was it?...
-
All this talk of mass conspiracies. Could this explain why Tina Mucklow ran off to a convent, or wherever it was? Deeply religious, doesn't want to lie, but caught up in something bigger than herself, afraid for herself and her family?
Yeah, that was a joke. Or was it?...
I doubt if Tina was involved in any conspiracy. I believe that she continued to work at NWA for another 5 or 10 years as a flight attendant, went through a marriage and divorce, and maybe had some other turmoil in her life before she entered the convent.
If there is an actual conspiracy, it involves FBI bureaucrats in Washington, DC and not the field agents.
-
All this talk of mass conspiracies. Could this explain why Tina Mucklow ran off to a convent, or wherever it was? Deeply religious, doesn't want to lie, but caught up in something bigger than herself, afraid for herself and her family?
Yeah, that was a joke. Or was it?...
I doubt if Tina was involved in any conspiracy. I believe that she continued to work at NWA for another 5 or 10 years as a flight attendant, went through a marriage and divorce, and maybe had some other turmoil in her life before she entered the convent.
If there is an actual conspiracy, it involves FBI bureaucrats in Washington, DC and not the field agents.
I think 302s document Tina looking at suspect photos until at least 1976. Of course the Cooper conference was held that year.
-
If someone claims the map is a joke, altered or made so we don't know exactly where the plane was, including altering transcripts does suggest a conspiracy or cover up?
Conspiracy: a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
It has all the ingredients it's harmful, secretive and unlawful since sworn documents were signed. if you don't want to use conspiracy then a cover up is about the samething.
The problem is the waste of money and time if they knew the map was wrong, altered or made to hide where the plane actually was?
The escape from Alcatraz was a little different since they just buried proof vs altering it. the documents found by the US Marshal's contradict statements of no crimes committed the following day of the escape. I think a lot of this had to do with a lot of egg on the face with the federals in general claiming an escape proof prison.
-
The hijacking was one of the most highly publicized events in modern history - the FBI disseminated information to every conceivable element of human society in order to get feedback and help. That's the very opposite of a conspiracy! Even technical information was shared!
-
Just going by what others claim. the transcripts are an issue but to believe it's mainly to hide where the plane was is certainly questionable. I like to question a lot of things but it causes a lot of flak in doing so..
-
Flyjack found another document surrounding Cinebar. this was is dated 5/19/73. this time it does say a portion of the stairs. he goes on to describe the part being from the rear door step assembly which still doesn't sound like the skirting. he also gives them technical information about the 727. no mention of railing in the description.
Is it two different parts found by Boeing employee's or the same guy from the 1975 document?
Nice find FJ
-
Flyjack found another document surrounding Cinebar. this was is dated 5/19/73. this time it does say a portion of the stairs. he goes on to describe the part being from the rear door step assembly which still doesn't sound like the skirting. he also gives them technical information about the 727. no mention of railing in the description.
Is it two different parts found by Boeing employee's or the same guy from the 1975 document?
Nice find FJ
1) Where does the document say anything about Cinebar?
2) The guy is from Tacoma--not Fife--and states he is aware of a part that has been found. He did not say he found the part.
3) Oh, and this document is dated 5/13/73 and the other document is dated 2/14/75--21 months later.
This has nothing to do with the Cinebar find. However, it may well be another piece from 305--in fact, it seems likely to be from 305.
-
Of note, the original Cinebar memo states that the hunter who found the piece was from Fife. This memo states that he was from Tacoma. Fife is a suburb of Tacoma. It is likely the same guy, unless Boeing employees from Tacoma frequently find airplane parts in the woods.
Secondly, as EU pointed out, this new memo never mentions Cinebar, but only describes the location as an "isolated area".
-
Of note, the original Cinebar memo states that the hunter who found the piece was from Fife. This memo states that he was from Tacoma. Fife is a suburb of Tacoma. It is likely the same guy, unless Boeing employees from Tacoma frequently find airplane parts in the woods.
Secondly, as EU pointed out, this new memo never mentions Cinebar, but only describes the location as an "isolated area".
I lived there for many years, Fife is not Tacoma. It's in the area as are a lot of other cities and towns.
The document does not say that the Boeing guy found the piece in 1973...it says he's aware of it...whatever that means.
Nonetheless, the documents are nearly two years apart, obviously it's not the same item.
This is an example of people being so blinded with trying to prove me wrong that they can't see clearly.
-
A two year gap is in the documents. at the bottom of the first one says an agent will get back with him. it's possible they never did. we have a lot of Boeing employee's out there looking and stumbling onto things. did he move or was it really another Boeing employee?
Nether document states skirting or part of the railing.
I added the fact of wondering if it was two different parts and two different people.
-
I'm not trying to prove jack shit. why can't anyone challenge someone on here without being accused of something or shitting on there background!
I'm trying to get to the bottom of things vs jumping ahead and stating things as fact.
-
I'm not accusing anyone on here and constantly get the fucking third degree. I've had enough of this and think it's time to let this go.
-
I lived there for many years, Fife is not Tacoma. It's in the area as are a lot of other cities and towns.
A 90 second Google search will bring up multiple sites that clearly identify Fife as a "suburb of Tacoma"
Also, I'm not trying to "prove anything". In fact, I pointed out that Cinebar wasn't mentioned in the memo.
I just find it peculiar that multiple Boeing employees from the Tacoma area would find 727 parts in isolated, wooded areas. Seems like a little more than coincidence, but who knows?
Either way, it's an interesting find, but disappointing that the find location is never identified.
-
Your exact words were, "Flyjack found another document surrounding Cinebar."
What follows is an attempt to challenge that the 1975 document, "he goes on to describe the part being from the rear door step assembly which still doesn't sound like the skirting." And, "no mention of railing in the description."
These finds are not the same. This has nothing to do with Cinebar.
I understand the caveat at the end in the form of a question. My complaint is more about FJ who apparently can't see straight. It was not really directed at you SHUTTER, even though the opening sentence was particularly bold.
-
I think it's disingenuous to suggest that this has NOTHING to do with the Cinebar find. There are certainly similarities between the two, and there isn't enough evidence to dismiss it as unrelated.
-
I lived there for many years, Fife is not Tacoma. It's in the area as are a lot of other cities and towns.
A 90 second Google search will bring up multiple sites that clearly identify Fife as a "suburb of Tacoma"
Also, I'm not trying to "prove anything". In fact, I pointed out that Cinebar wasn't mentioned in the memo.
I just find it peculiar that multiple Boeing employees from the Tacoma area would find 727 parts in isolated, wooded areas. Seems like a little more than coincidence, but who knows?
Either way, it's an interesting find, but disappointing that the find location is never identified.
Consider that it does not say that the Boeing employee found the item...it just says he's aware of it.
Nonetheless, I concur, this document is a very good find and worthy of acknowledgement. I too wish it specified precisely where this item was found. It could tell us an awful lot.
How the F are these things being found that come from inside of a 727 and nobody in law enforcement seems to have any idea what they're dealing with or even give a shit?
-
I think it's disingenuous to suggest that this has NOTHING to do with the Cinebar find. There are certainly similarities between the two, and there isn't enough evidence to dismiss it as unrelated.
Note, if this metal item--which presumably wouldn't drift much--was actually found near Cinebar, the FBI Flight Path has some serious explaining to do considering that according to the FBI Flight Path, 305 flew no where near Cinebar. In short, it would actually help prove my case skirt or no skirt.
-
I think it's disingenuous to suggest that this has NOTHING to do with the Cinebar find. There are certainly similarities between the two, and there isn't enough evidence to dismiss it as unrelated.
Note, if this metal item--which presumably wouldn't drift much--was actually found near Cinebar, the FBI Flight Path has some serious explaining to do considering that according to the FBI Flight Path, 305 flew no where near Cinebar. In short, it would actually help prove my case skirt or no skirt.
Again, as Shutter said, I'm not claiming this proves or disproves anything. It's an interesting find particularly considering the similarities between it and the Cinebar memo. That's it.
One thought is that the same guy came forward and the FBI never got back to him so he approached them again two year later.
Also, can anyone make out the handwritten notation at the bottom?
-
Also, can anyone make out the handwritten notation at the bottom?
It says "Tacoma lead"
-
It also says, "NOTE: No rear door assembly lost from Norjak airliner"
-
Also, can anyone make out the handwritten notation at the bottom?
It says "Tacoma lead"
Sorry, I should have been more clear. I meant the handwritten message that says NOTE
I think it says:
(NOTE: No ??? step assembly lost from NORJACK airplane)
I can't make out the word after no. I assume it says "rear" but it doesn't look like it.
ETA: I posted this as EU posted his.
-
In fairness, it does not say it came from inside the jet...it could be an exterior component. It also doesn't explicitly state it came from a Boeing 727. That said, it seems to imply as much in that he starts relaying 727 technical info to the agent.
-
The documents are from part 31 and on page 254 another document states the part is metal and was not missing from 305. so how did a metal plate from the stair assembly get in the woods? was from a 727...
-
The documents are from part 31 and on page 254 another document states the part is metal and was not missing from 305. so how did a metal plate from the stair assembly get in the woods? was from a 727...
Apparently it was an exterior piece.
-
Anything on the outside of the aircraft would be noted as parts of the fuselage. no stair assembly would be exterior. that sounds like the skeletal part of the stairs.
-
I don't know. Is it from a 727? Could it be from airstairs that deploy directly from the fuselage similar to those used on the 737 airstairs?
Otherwise, how does a piece from inside the jet end up in the woods? It either came from 305, or someone brought the piece into the woods for target practice or something, it's a hoax, or 727s are flying around with their airstairs deployed and pieces of their airstairs regularly tear away and fall to the ground.
-
He works for Boeing, describes the part being from the stair assembly and coming off during flight. three days pass from the agents looking into the part and find it wasn't missing from the plane. it sounds like he told them were the piece goes. "describes certain technical information relating to the Boeing 727. I think they would all known if it was exterior the problem would never be solved as hundreds of them flew in that area. how it got there is unknown..this is in Boeings backyard..
-
He works for Boeing, describes the part being from the stair assembly and coming off during flight. three days pass from the agents looking into the part and find it wasn't missing from the plane. it sounds like he told them were the piece goes. "describes certain technical information relating to the Boeing 727. I think they would all known if it was exterior the problem would never be solved as hundreds of them flew in that area. how it got there is unknown..this is in Boeings backyard..
Frankly, I think there's a better than not chance that the FBI F'd this up.
After all, how does the agent verify what was missing or not missing a year and a half after the flight? What documents did he review to determine what was replaced in Seattle after N467US arrived back on the 25th? They apparently completely missed the fact that the fiberglass panels went missing during the flight. What about some sort of metal clasps or something related to the panels, or stairs?
All I'm saying is that if the piece--whatever it is--came from inside the jet, it likely came from 305. In my mind the only alternatives are a hoax or someone stole a part from Boeing and dragged it into the woods for some reason and decided to leave it behind.
Unfortunately, the documents surrounding this metal piece are exceptionally thin on details per usual.
-
All I'm saying is that if the piece--whatever it is--came from inside the jet, it likely came from 305. In my mind the only alternatives are a hoax or someone stole a part from Boeing and dragged it into the woods for some reason and decided to leave it behind
Couldn't the same be said for the placard uncovered in dense woods?
-
Unfortunately, the documents surrounding this metal piece are exceptionally thin on details per usual.
Cinebar gives no actual location. doesn't describe the part. doesn't give much more detail than the others?
-
Unfortunately, the documents surrounding this metal piece are exceptionally thin on details per usual.
Cinebar gives no actual location. doesn't describe the part. doesn't give much more detail than the others?
It states that a hunter found it while hunting near Cinebar which says a lot. Also we know the size of the piece. Finally, we know it came from the airstairs door.
-
All I'm saying is that if the piece--whatever it is--came from inside the jet, it likely came from 305. In my mind the only alternatives are a hoax or someone stole a part from Boeing and dragged it into the woods for some reason and decided to leave it behind
Couldn't the same be said for the placard uncovered in dense woods?
We can assume that the placard is not a hoax because Hicks brought the piece into the authorities. Beyond that, yes it's theoretically possible someone from Boeing stole a placard and brought it into the woods and left it behind.
-
Visually having something is hardly grounds for not being a hoax if it's done right. a criminal does the samething trying to fool everyone and get away?
-
It states that a hunter found it while hunting near Cinebar which says a lot. Also we know the size of the piece. Finally, we know it came from the airstairs door.
Doesn't say if it's partial. both documents state the rear stairs. one is more specific than the other by stating rear door assembly. both appear to be dismissed based on one thing or another. what if only one document surfaced about the stair assembly? we would be arguing it HAD to of come from 305? this is why I stress the word inconclusive.
-
After all, how does the agent verify what was missing or not missing a year and a half after the flight? What documents did he review to determine what was replaced in Seattle after N467US arrived back on the 25th?.
Every mechanical 'incident' - every repair, replacement, or alteration, would be in the airplane's log books.
-
After all, how does the agent verify what was missing or not missing a year and a half after the flight? What documents did he review to determine what was replaced in Seattle after N467US arrived back on the 25th?.
Every mechanical 'incident' - every repair, replacement, or alteration, would be in the airplane's log books.
Correct, but where would the documents be from a plane that was scrapped in the 90's?
-
After all, how does the agent verify what was missing or not missing a year and a half after the flight? What documents did he review to determine what was replaced in Seattle after N467US arrived back on the 25th?.
Every mechanical 'incident' - every repair, replacement, or alteration, would be in the airplane's log books.
Correct, but where would the documents be from a plane that was scrapped in the 90's?
That I couldn't tell you. Possibly Northwest's archives? Was that plane ever sold to someone else? If the FBI was thorough they would have copies.
R99?
-
After all, how does the agent verify what was missing or not missing a year and a half after the flight? What documents did he review to determine what was replaced in Seattle after N467US arrived back on the 25th?.
Every mechanical 'incident' - every repair, replacement, or alteration, would be in the airplane's log books.
There's one minor problem though...
...in the 1975 doc the FBI stated that "no part that large was missing from the 727 involved in the Norjak hijacking."
Well, in fact there were two parts that large missing...this is plainly visible on the news footage and is actually referred to by Bill Kurtis in Reno...the missing fiberglass panels.
The FBI has simply lost credibility concerning many aspects of this case. A lot of the reports were sloppy and obviously written by someone who didn't completely understand what the hell they were writing about.
-
But where did the 'no part' info come from? (Not the document, but the info therein). Was it their (possibly mistaken) observation after it landed in Reno? I would think that the log books would be the definitive answer, but hard to say where they would have ended up.
If you go to dropzone and search the incidents thread, sometimes the pilots in there refer to a web page where you enter the N number of an aircraft and it tells you the history of it. Not sure if it would have detailed log book info, but it would certainly have incident and ownership records. The last owner would be a place to inquire about the logs.
Edit: A quick google search of 'N467US' shows that it's last owner was Key Airlines, where it was registered as N29KA.
-
The FAA has no records for mechanical work or updates on planes. imagine the size..the only place it might be found would be the Northwest airlines historical archive..other than the skirting on the stairs no other damage was reported. the last pictures of 305 are on our website..
http://website.thedbcooperforum.com/Boeing-727/
-
After all, how does the agent verify what was missing or not missing a year and a half after the flight? What documents did he review to determine what was replaced in Seattle after N467US arrived back on the 25th?.
Every mechanical 'incident' - every repair, replacement, or alteration, would be in the airplane's log books.
Correct, but where would the documents be from a plane that was scrapped in the 90's?
That I couldn't tell you. Possibly Northwest's archives? Was that plane ever sold to someone else? If the FBI was thorough they would have copies.
R99?
According to some online information, the airliner was delivered to Northwest Airlines in April 1965, delivered to Piedmont Airlines in June 1978, delivered to United Technologies (used for testing navigational instruments) in December 1982, delivered to Key Airlines in September 1984, registered to World Corp Leasing in December 1989, strd GWO in February 1993 (I don't know what that means), and broken up by 1996.
It is unlikely that any meaningful records of this aircraft exist at this point in time.
-
FJ, the transcripts clearly show the stair light on at 7:42. it will only come on once the stairs have been released. 7:45 they confirm again the light is on and someone should look in the cabin to see if he left..this is close to McChord..that would be around 19 miles DME from Seattle..
-
Basically at Toledo crossing V23 would be like a S turn and could of affected the wind in the back, I don't know?
-
The hardest part with the 302's is the sub files. that means more documents. I don't know why they do that but more documents should surface on documents that have sub files written or typed. approval is required to start a sub file.
Major cases prior to 1991 had up to 56 file numbers for the same subject and caused unnecessary duplicates,,
They changed the numbering system in 1991 to stop the overkill of copies we see in the 302's..
-
The airstair light comes on when the lever is moved from the detent position, not when the stairs actually move..
Correct, that's how they knew early in the flight. as soon as the lever is pulled they drop but only a couple feet. many believe that confused him since he thought they would go all the way down.
Notice the material from the side panels all over the steps. photo below is from FJ.
-
I noticed the interior ceiling panel is hanging down in this image.
That might have been a result of the plane search but ??
Correct, they probably pulled that panel down. it would of been listed in the 302's that it was hanging down from the ceiling. not enough wind in the stairs and the testing would of had the same problem.
Keep in mind that the lever system was different in some aircraft. not all had the push button. the light came on early and is proof the stairs dropped. they will not drop very far. two times are entered in the transcripts with the lite on. he complained of trouble with the stairs then got the lite. that could suggest a button. no entries past 7:45 surrounding the stairs until 8:10, 11 and 12 depending on which document you read. 7:48 is where they begin to climb to 10,000. the reference to slowing the plane down was when he was having trouble with the stairs.the Harrison notes have a speed of 155 I believe.
-
I wonder if the metal item found in 1973 was part of a 727 tail skid. After all, if it was actually part of the airstairs assembly I do not understand how the FBI could ignore it. Just doesn't add up, especially considering that the Boeing guy said he thought it broke free in flight.
-
I don't think it's from the tailskid. he appears to go into detail about the part causing the FBI to check. sounds like he knew what it was..the skid has to be built tough to handle the weight of the plane coming down on it.
-
Working on a drop test with the placard..I reproduced the original placard and traced out the tears in it..it's a first draft. I'm going to use one of my drones to drop them and see how they act. just a quick test shows the torn placard acting differently..
-
I don't think it's from the tailskid. he appears to go into detail about the part causing the FBI to check. sounds like he knew what it was..the skid has to be built tough to handle the weight of the plane coming down on it.
If this is from inside the airstairs compartment it has to be from 305. How can it not be?
-
Tailskid is in front of the stairs on the bottom. totally separate...why couldn't it... they checked.
-
I'm mean even this is becoming an issue...it states a piece was found and someone from Boeing contacted them giving technical information regarding the part. not the cockpit or wheel functions. he explained it was from a rear door assembly. they probably had all the information required and checked and found the piece was not missing. the damage was found to be minimal at the least. that's the skirting. you can bet mechanics looked the plane over prior to allowing it back into service. just because it's in the woods or on top of a house doesn't mean it was from 305.
-
The bigger problem is why the stairs locked on the ground if the emergency system was used...
-
The bigger problem is why the stairs locked on the ground if the emergency system was used...
Where does "the stairs locked on the ground" come from? The only remarks about the stairs on the ground in Reno was apparently that the stairs were dragging with only minor contact with the ground.
The flight crew left the aircraft by the rear stairs and the FBI apparently entered the aircraft by the rear stairs.
-
You can tell by the arms that the stairs are locked in place or it would be off the ground by several feet.
-
I think we are all aware that the emergency system is next to the main box inside the stairs for lowering. if Cooper utilized that function the cord and handle would be hanging on the wall. if it's pulled it breaks the pins that lock the rollers. a small panel would also be missing and either laying on the stairs or tossed out. a visible hole would be in the wall. even a 302 doesn't mention the emergency function when describing the stairs.
This function was not on all 727's...
-
I'm mean even this is becoming an issue...it states a piece was found and someone from Boeing contacted them giving technical information regarding the part. not the cockpit or wheel functions. he explained it was from a rear door assembly. they probably had all the information required and checked and found the piece was not missing. the damage was found to be minimal at the least. that's the skirting. you can bet mechanics looked the plane over prior to allowing it back into service. just because it's in the woods or on top of a house doesn't mean it was from 305.
It simply doesn't add up.
1) A part from a 727 located inside the airstairs area was found in the woods and the individual from Boeing stated that he believes it fell from a 727 jet in-flight. By definition it has to have been a 727 flying with the airstairs down.
2) Nearly two years after the skyjacking someone at the FBI is tasked with determining whether this part came from 305 and states that this particular part wasn't missing from 305. OK, how exactly was this info verified?
Damn right I'm questioning this. I am well beyond giving the FBI a pass simply because they're the FBI. After all, I can point to at least 100 factual errors in the FBI documents. Plus, it just doesn't add up.
-
It's also possible the damage to the rollers only occur from the locked position and not the down and locked position..
-
5/19/1973 someone called from Tacoma in reference to a part that was found in the woods. he thought it would be of importance to the case. this means somehow multiple people are involved possibly from Boeing. he gives technical information about the 727. he was told an agent would contact him...
5/29/1973 he was contacted and told it was discussed in Seattle and was told the metal plate he described was intact on 305. it sounds like the part was never moved.
when you look at the first file it indicates two sub files. we simply don't have the whole story but appears to be dismissed.
What if it wasn't even in the flight path...no location given..
-
By the time we are done only the landing gear showed up in Reno :rofl:
-
Nothing can really be done..
No location where the metal part was/is. if it came from the nose of the plane or inside what can be done where we stand? it's a dead end until further details come along to prove something different than what is already known.
-
You can tell by the arms that the stairs are locked in place or it would be off the ground by several feet.
You are referring to when the airplane was parked and people were going up and down those stairs.
The stairs were not locked down when they were dragging on the pavement.
Remember that Cooper and Rataczak had an argument just before taking off from SEATAC. Cooper stated that he knew that the aircraft could take off with the stairs down (and unlocked). Rataczak apparently did know that and assumed that the stairs only had locked down or locked up positions.
-
I will try to make this as clear as I can which I have done in the past with this. the video (Cronkite) showing the plane on the ground (Reno) after the hijacking has the stairs down and locked.
When the plane was landing and going down the taxi they were not locked nor were they locked the entire flight. I guess it's like taking off the safety. it breaks the locking mechanism. I believe another photo shows them up and locked after the hijacking..
Now, if you look at what FJ posted it backs up what I've been saying here. using the emergency system will cause extensive damage to the stairs. more than I recalled. another document states the damage was local to the side panels only ruling out any damage to the stair functions.
-
The emergency panel is to the right of the main stair release. it's much smaller but does have writing on it along with two holes to pull the panel off the wall. If the door from the main panel is open it will cover this function since the door swings out to the right. a while back I was hoping a photo would show this option on 305 but the door is open covering that area to get any confirmation.
I don't think pressure would of pulled the placard off the wall since it wasn't pressurized and I doubt the exit would of done the damage. if Cooper seen it and tore it off in frustration then why didn't he use the system?
Mr. Blevins appears to be about 10 years behind. it's well known the lights are on the FE panel for the stairs and other doors. it's called a annunciator.
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5y1u64iNmoY&ab_channel=AlfredoRamirez
-
Frankly what would be very helpful are the photographs. There have got to be hundreds of photographs taken by the FBI covering all areas of the jet...including Tena Bar and perhaps even the money...that should be part of the files.
That said, I've been working on gaining direct access to the evidence in Washington, DC for a little while...Covid isn't helping. Looking at the evidence through a modern lens and knowing what to look for could be very enlightening.
We'll see.
-
It would be really nice if they allowed a team to put the files online. this case has no real victims to protect or any real reason to keep it from the public. we only get the fat off the meat. I still wonder what happened to all the files from NWO. that's separate from the FBI. where is the money the insurance company split with Brian?
-
It would be really nice if they allowed a team to put the files online. this case has no real victims to protect or any real reason to keep it from the public. we only get the fat off the meat. I still wonder what happened to all the files from NWO. that's separate from the FBI. where is the money the insurance company split with Brian?
That's another thing I'd like to know...where the insurance company's portion of the bills are located. Also, where are all 14 of the FBI's bills...I've identified only 10 bills.
-
I doubt the bills are going to be like gold. the value will go up but it will level off or perhaps lose value. they are probably sitting in a safe deposit box somewhere..
It's possible some bills went to Washington while Seattle kept the rest.
-
Fly.....
The green light on the annunciator tells them they are locked down. the amber light tells them when they are unlocked. nothing in between. at 7:42 he calls stating trouble with the stairs. this is also the time they reach 7,000 and slow down. 7:43 they indicate a warning light (amber) stairs partially extended. it doesn't have a light for anything other than locked down or unlocked and partially open or in the process of opening or closing in normal functions. she apparently is off with her timing.
Look at the video. you will see the annunciator. the items lit are the one's down. tailskid and wheels. the stairs light up green when the stairs are down and locked. the only light they will see is the amber which you see while it's going down or up.. I put the wheels up the lights go out along with the light for the tailskid. I was on the ground so those stay on. once the stairs go up, the amber light goes off and nothing is shown. everything in the simulator functions as a real plane.
It starts with the stairs up. no light shown. then the stairs are lowered and it turns amber showing they are unlocked then turns green indicating they are down and locked. I raise them and it turns amber and then goes off.
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdHhJbXyHSo&ab_channel=TheDBCooperforum
-
I purchased a remote payload drop for one of my drones. I can use this to release the placards for testing. I could of used a servo but I have to tap into the drones power and put a switch on the ground controller (station). hopefully I can do some testing at the beginning of November.
-
I purchased a remote payload drop for one of my drones. I can use this to release the placards for testing. I could of used a servo but I have to tap into the drones power and put a switch on the ground controller (station). hopefully I can do some testing at the beginning of November.
Here are the things you need to measure during your drone drops:
1. The size of the placard, specifically the height and width. Presumably, the thickness can be ignored.
2. The weight of the placard in ounces. You may need to visit a post office and use their scales assuming they have some with sufficient accuracy. You may ideally need to be able to measure fractions of an ounce and less than one ounce.
3. The height of the drone when the placard is released and the time until it hits the ground measured in seconds. A stop watch is ideal for this timing.
4. Ideally the wind should be calm. But the horizontal distance that the placard travels is not particularly important in these drop tests.
5. After the tests, call or check online with your local weather bureau to get the atmospheric pressure (preferably in inches of mercury) corrected to sea level.
6. Video tape the drops if possible so that the placards behavior can be observed.
Then please post the information here.
-
I made placards out of paper. simply using a copy machine from the actual placard. not sure of the actual weight since thick backing is on the original one makes the weight heavier than actual. if I use decal paper the odds of it sticking together in flight are high. I'm making two placards. one will be undamaged and the other will be as it was found. the one that was found has a tear in it from the bottom where it say's handle to the upper right where the lettering is larger or all caps for the word HANDLE. right under the E.
The drone has a camera on it so I will try to follow it down. if this fails I will have to teach my helper how to fly. at most I will have him control the one that isn't moving. or a camera from the ground will have to be used.
Altitude. typically you can test by terminal but what height would be good for testing this. 50 feet, one hundred feet?
The placard measures approx. 6 x 6 or 5" 15/16 I have access to a micrometer and can peel back some of the protective covering for actual thickness which is close to the thickness of paper. I think Eric knows the weight.
-
I still have to make some sort of a box or sleeve to put the placards in. the drop device only has a pin that slides to allow a release of a eyehook. nothing is really designed for what we need. they are typically for dropping objects. the tracking shows it arriving on October 31..
The drone is very stationary and usually has 12 to 18 satellites on it at one time..it will hold altitude very well.
-
The winds pick up this time of year. it's been windy everyday for a while. later in the day/evening the winds die down. a lot of rain in the last two weeks is another problem. perhaps the placards need to be red or a color that will stand out better during filming. a time counter can be applied to the video or even clocked while watching as a backup. I don't have any zoom on the camera from the drone so it will need to be relatively close to it. a camcorder could be used on the ground set up on a tripod.
The winds are currently 14 mph out of the SE. that's pretty windy and typical of this period.
-
I made placards out of paper. simply using a copy machine from the actual placard. not sure of the actual weight since thick backing is on the original one makes the weight heavier than actual. if I use decal paper the odds of it sticking together in flight are high. I'm making two placards. one will be undamaged and the other will be as it was found. the one that was found has a tear in it from the bottom where it say's handle to the upper right where the lettering is larger or all caps for the word HANDLE. right under the E.
The drone has a camera on it so I will try to follow it down. if this fails I will have to teach my helper how to fly. at most I will have him control the one that isn't moving. or a camera from the ground will have to be used.
Altitude. typically you can test by terminal but what height would be good for testing this. 50 feet, one hundred feet?
The placard measures approx. 6 x 6 or 5" 15/16 I have access to a micrometer and can peel back some of the protective covering for actual thickness which is close to the thickness of paper. I think Eric knows the weight.
The higher the better and different heights would be great. Can you do the drops at 100 feet, 200 feet, or even higher?
-
My drone has been seen at altitudes of over 3200 feet. I would never take it that high. even a thousand feet would be an issue with tracking and time. I have approx. 15-18 minutes of flight time. the higher you go the harder the motors work and eats battery time. it takes time to get to that altitude safely then more time coming down. I would need a battery with more amp hours and they cost a lot.
With minimal winds, single digits.at 100 feet would be a good first test. the higher you go the more it's going to drift. a thousand feet would require me to contact the control tower for permission. then you need to tell them why you are going so high. I only get away with the 400 feet max. if you need to get above the structure you are documenting.
Typically, the limit for recreation flying is a max of 400 feet. with a license you can go higher. if I am documenting or inspecting a radio tower 500 feet high I get clearance for 900 feet. I see a lot of small aircraft and helicopters flying low all the time and they will notify any UAV's breaching altitude limits or they will be notified of them in the area when done right.
I would rather make a ceiling of 400 feet so a flight plan and phone call is not needed..
-
I think my first dry run will be at 50 feet since I haven't a clue with chasing it down with the drone will be like. a camera on the ground will be pretty easy but chasing it, I don't know since I've never done something like that. I'm sure the first day will be full of does and don'ts.
I need a minimum of 3 people. me on the drone. one as a spotter and one on a ground camera. I'm thinking of going out to the edge of the Everglades where it's nice and flat with no obstructions (buildings, tree's) I can make a bunch of placards that can be lost with no worries of ending the testing..
-
I purchased a remote payload drop for one of my drones. I can use this to release the placards for testing. I could of used a servo but I have to tap into the drones power and put a switch on the ground controller (station). hopefully I can do some testing at the beginning of November.
Here are the things you need to measure during your drone drops:
8)
1. The size of the placard, specifically the height and width. Presumably, the thickness can be ignored.
2. The weight of the placard in ounces. You may need to visit a post office and use their scales assuming they have some with sufficient accuracy. You may ideally need to be able to measure fractions of an ounce and less than one ounce.
3. The height of the drone when the placard is released and the time until it hits the ground measured in seconds. A stop watch is ideal for this timing.
4. Ideally the wind should be calm. But the horizontal distance that the placard travels is not particularly important in these drop tests.
5. After the tests, call or check online with your local weather bureau to get the atmospheric pressure (preferably in inches of mercury) corrected to sea level.
6. Video tape the drops if possible so that the placards behavior can be observed.
Then please post the information here.
Here! https://www.nist.gov/
All tinfoil must be grounded.
This takes obsessive-compulsive to a whole new level. Congrats!
-
Here! https://www.nist.gov/
All tinfoil must be grounded.
The point?
-
I think my first dry run will be at 50 feet since I haven't a clue with chasing it down with the drone will be like. a camera on the ground will be pretty easy but chasing it, I don't know since I've never done something like that. I'm sure the first day will be full of does and don'ts.
I need a minimum of 3 people. me on the drone. one as a spotter and one on a ground camera. I'm thinking of going out to the edge of the Everglades where it's nice and flat with no obstructions (buildings, tree's) I can make a bunch of placards that can be lost with no worries of ending the testing..
400 feet and below will be fine. And if you go to the Everglades, be on the lookout for pythons. An 18 foot python was captured there recently by professional hunters and it set a new record for length. Indiana Jones and I have something in common in that we don't want to meet something like that anywhere or anytime.
-
They are over the place. even inland. this will be on the extreme edge off of US 27. actually, not far from flight 401 and the Valuejet crashes. we will be geared for them as well as the wild pigs..
-
I'm going to make a metal pocket. two pieces of thin aluminum .090 and it will hinge so when one side is released it will dump the placards. should be simple to make. three sides closed with a small space between the two pieces..similar to a CD or DVD case. just a little bigger in size.
-
Thickness would be a factor as to it's rigidity - how well it holds it's 'flatness' vs. how much it bends and flops. I think a placard would reach it's terminal very quickly, like almost instantaneously, so I don't think you'd need a lot of altitude.
-
I will find out exactly how thick it is..Eric might have that as well. it's not very thick at all. even if I use decal paper the damaged one would probably stick together since it's torn towards the center..
-
With the protective backing on the placard it's almost the same thickness of poster board.the backing is thick and heavy..actually, it is the same thickness running my finger over the two..
-
I'm not sure how to measure the thickness. Perhaps the thing to do is test out your drone drop system and I'll buy another real placard that we can use for a drop if your system works.
-
The problem will be the adhesive behind it..even placing it into a holder. the damaged one will surely flip and stick together unless you have an idea to remove the adhesive or at least 90% of it? a micrometer will tell the thickness which I can find out tomorrow..
-
I'm absolutely certain I can neutralize the adhesive on the back.
-
what do you use?
-
goof off..adhesive remover?
-
I'm aware of a product that works wonders for removing the adhesive. My ex-girlfriend uses it regularly with her work and it should work perfectly.
-
should be able to test on a sticker or a bumper sticker of sort?
-
I'll buy a few more placards this week and give it a shot.
-
Ok, the drop system will be like taking a dvd case. lay down and you would open one side, not the front or back. this will make a pocket. one side gets secured to the landing gear with string while the other side has the string to the release. once you hit the remote it drops causing the contents to come out. it should work..
-
ITS ALREADY BEEN DONE!
Sandia Labs Report. by Bustamonte 1968
Free-Fall Rotation and Aerodynamic Motion of Rectangular ...
apps.dtic.mil › dtic › fulltext
PDF
It is believed that a rectangular plate will continuously autorotate about an axis which is free in flight. This behavior may be compared to the motion of a strip of paper of aspect ratio two or more. .... When dropped in still air, the strip rotates and descends along an inclined path. When dropped in other conditions ...
by AC Bustamante · 1968 ·
This is the report that Hominid and others used when evaluating the placard analysis of Robt Nicholson, esq. years ago!
Any drone drops of sheets and other paraphernalia will have "no" validity whatever to the DB Cooper placard analysis etc.
https://www.google.com/search?ei=7D-XX92HKJK1tAbZtYf4Aw&q=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&oq=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzoHCAAQRxCwAzoOCAAQ6gIQtAIQmgEQ5QI6AggAOggILhDHARCjAjoCCC46DgguEMcBEKMCEMkDEJMCOggILhDHARCvAToLCC4QxwEQowIQkwI6BQgAEMkDOggILhDJAxCTAjoOCC4QxwEQrwEQyQMQkwJQpZYVWMP6GGDj_xhoBHAAeAKAAZgBiAGWMpIBBDg2LjOYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6sAEGyAEIwAEB&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjdraOZmtPsAhWSGs0KHdnaAT8Q4dUDCAw&uact=5
-
It's been done hundreds of times with leaflets during wartime.
My point is to see what happens to a normal placard vs the damaged one. I don't see any data on this? they are not going to react the same if I'm right.
-
I look at it as we are not in law enforcement so why are we investigating the case. it's be done for 40 plus years with all kinds of data and documentation?
I fail to see how this would not help in proving something one way or the other?
-
ITS ALREADY BEEN DONE!
Sandia Labs Report. by Bustamonte 1968
Free-Fall Rotation and Aerodynamic Motion of Rectangular ...
apps.dtic.mil › dtic › fulltext
PDF
It is believed that a rectangular plate will continuously autorotate about an axis which is free in flight. This behavior may be compared to the motion of a strip of paper of aspect ratio two or more. .... When dropped in still air, the strip rotates and descends along an inclined path. When dropped in other conditions ...
by AC Bustamante · 1968 ·
This is the report that Hominid and others used when evaluating the placard analysis of Robt Nicholson, esq. years ago!
Any drone drops of sheets and other paraphernalia will have "no" validity whatever to the DB Cooper placard analysis etc.
https://www.google.com/search?ei=7D-XX92HKJK1tAbZtYf4Aw&q=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&oq=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzoHCAAQRxCwAzoOCAAQ6gIQtAIQmgEQ5QI6AggAOggILhDHARCjAjoCCC46DgguEMcBEKMCEMkDEJMCOggILhDHARCvAToLCC4QxwEQowIQkwI6BQgAEMkDOggILhDJAxCTAjoOCC4QxwEQrwEQyQMQkwJQpZYVWMP6GGDj_xhoBHAAeAKAAZgBiAGWMpIBBDg2LjOYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6sAEGyAEIwAEB&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjdraOZmtPsAhWSGs0KHdnaAT8Q4dUDCAw&uact=5
Georger,
I just happen to be the one who found that reference about 10 years ago and used it in the initial free fall analysis for TK as well as all subsequent analyses. That reference was the best information available at that time on such free fall tests.
Test drops of the actual placard will be of much greater value.
Georger's claim that the tests proposed by Shutter will not be valid is just more of his nonsense.
-
I’m actually a certified python hunter in the state of Florida!
I’m confused. How can dropping a placard from 400 feet demonstrate what happens to a placard at 10,000 feet? Wouldn’t winds be much different?
-
I'm basically trying to find out what happens to the placard if it's damaged or undamaged. how the two may differ in distance or how they act falling. one has a considerable tear in it that I'm guessing would float and drift different than a placard almost square. auto rotations, spins etc. the damaged one would appear to have more drag on it like having a streamer affect causing it to spiral vs roll or rotate. I'm also guessing terminal is different here unlike a solid object you calculate to find it's terminal..
Little or no wind is what R99 is looking for and I guess he will add wind data to it, I don't know..
-
I don't know what will happen but it should be fun to find out. we have no idea if the placard folded during the higher winds or what it really did or even the speed. we use to test hurricane shutters. a 2 x 4 six feet long will only travel 32 mph in 150 mph winds. that's what is shot at the hurricane products in testing. then a positive and negative load is put on them.
I think it's worth a shot..what can it hurt?
-
ITS ALREADY BEEN DONE!
Sandia Labs Report. by Bustamonte 1968
Free-Fall Rotation and Aerodynamic Motion of Rectangular ...
apps.dtic.mil › dtic › fulltext
PDF
It is believed that a rectangular plate will continuously autorotate about an axis which is free in flight. This behavior may be compared to the motion of a strip of paper of aspect ratio two or more. .... When dropped in still air, the strip rotates and descends along an inclined path. When dropped in other conditions ...
by AC Bustamante · 1968 ·
This is the report that Hominid and others used when evaluating the placard analysis of Robt Nicholson, esq. years ago!
Any drone drops of sheets and other paraphernalia will have "no" validity whatever to the DB Cooper placard analysis etc.
https://www.google.com/search?ei=7D-XX92HKJK1tAbZtYf4Aw&q=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&oq=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzoHCAAQRxCwAzoOCAAQ6gIQtAIQmgEQ5QI6AggAOggILhDHARCjAjoCCC46DgguEMcBEKMCEMkDEJMCOggILhDHARCvAToLCC4QxwEQowIQkwI6BQgAEMkDOggILhDJAxCTAjoOCC4QxwEQrwEQyQMQkwJQpZYVWMP6GGDj_xhoBHAAeAKAAZgBiAGWMpIBBDg2LjOYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6sAEGyAEIwAEB&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjdraOZmtPsAhWSGs0KHdnaAT8Q4dUDCAw&uact=5
Georger,
I just happen to be the one who found that reference about 10 years ago and used it in the initial free fall analysis for TK as well as all subsequent analyses. That reference was the best information available at that time on such free fall tests.
Test drops of the actual placard will be of much greater value.
Georger's claim that the tests proposed by Shutter will not be valid is just more of his nonsense.
Sandia Labs Report. by Bustamonte 1968
Free-Fall Rotation and Aerodynamic Motion of Rectangular ...
apps.dtic.mil › dtic › fulltext
PDF
It is believed that a rectangular plate will continuously autorotate about an axis which is free in flight. This behavior may be compared to the motion of a strip of paper of aspect ratio two or more. .... When dropped in still air, the strip rotates and descends along an inclined path. When dropped in other conditions ...
by AC Bustamante · 1968 ·
This is the report that Hominid and others used when evaluating the placard analysis of Robt Nicholson, esq. years ago!
Any drone drops of sheets and other paraphernalia will have "no" validity whatever to the DB Cooper placard analysis etc.
https://www.google.com/search?ei=7D-XX92HKJK1tAbZtYf4Aw&q=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&oq=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzoHCAAQRxCwAzoOCAAQ6gIQtAIQmgEQ5QI6AggAOggILhDHARCjAjoCCC46DgguEMcBEKMCEMkDEJMCOggILhDHARCvAToLCC4QxwEQowIQkwI6BQgAEMkDOggILhDJAxCTAjoOCC4QxwEQrwEQyQMQkwJQpZYVWMP6GGDj_xhoBHAAeAKAAZgBiAGWMpIBBDg2LjOYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6sAEGyAEIwAEB&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjdraOZmtPsAhWSGs0KHdnaAT8Q4dUDCAw&uact=5
See Hominid's posts about this at DZ. R99 the 'engineer' is still in denial. ???
-
I’m actually a certified python hunter in the state of Florida!
I’m confused. How can dropping a placard from 400 feet demonstrate what happens to a placard at 10,000 feet? Wouldn’t winds be much different?
Parts removed...
Billions-trillions-uncountable leaflets have been dropped over land before from all kinds of altitudes from planes for example, during something called 'wars'.... :-X
-
See Hominid's posts about this at DZ. R99 the 'engineer' is still in denial.
Similar to the 302's you go crazy on when not enough information is provided to find the page and PDF number one can ask the same here.
Page and post number, links or portion of his work etc.? Hominid had 225 posts on the DZ. do we have to read them all?
As I mentioned several posts back prior to your last comment that I was aware of wartime leaflet drops. I should also add they were dropped by the thousands over a large area to insure of hitting the target.
My goal is to see how two of the same placards, one is missing one side with a large tear almost in the center more than half way up to see how it will float/drift compared to one that isn't damaged. what if one lands 500 feet away while the other only 100 feet 10 times in a row? if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.
-
I’m actually a certified python hunter in the state of Florida!
I’m confused. How can dropping a placard from 400 feet demonstrate what happens to a placard at 10,000 feet? Wouldn’t winds be much different?
As Shutter has pointed out in an earlier post, the winds will be added later.
The information that Shutter produces will be analyzed to determine the drag coefficient of the placard. The multiple drops from different heights will produce some scatter in the reduced drag coefficients and will require some judgment to determine the drag coefficient to be used for the analysis of the drop from 10,000 feet.
In all probability, the drag coefficient determined from Shutter's tests will be in the neighborhood of 1.0. There are several technical sources to support the value being in that neighborhood, but nothing beats test data for the actual placard. And with the actual measured winds aloft data that Tom Kaye came up with, we will have measured values for all the factors involved in the placard drift. No wild guesses or estimates needed.
Incidentally, FJ claims that the measured winds aloft data are meaningless.
-
ITS ALREADY BEEN DONE!
Sandia Labs Report. by Bustamonte 1968
Free-Fall Rotation and Aerodynamic Motion of Rectangular ...
apps.dtic.mil › dtic › fulltext
PDF
It is believed that a rectangular plate will continuously autorotate about an axis which is free in flight. This behavior may be compared to the motion of a strip of paper of aspect ratio two or more. .... When dropped in still air, the strip rotates and descends along an inclined path. When dropped in other conditions ...
by AC Bustamante · 1968 ·
This is the report that Hominid and others used when evaluating the placard analysis of Robt Nicholson, esq. years ago!
Any drone drops of sheets and other paraphernalia will have "no" validity whatever to the DB Cooper placard analysis etc.
https://www.google.com/search?ei=7D-XX92HKJK1tAbZtYf4Aw&q=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&oq=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzoHCAAQRxCwAzoOCAAQ6gIQtAIQmgEQ5QI6AggAOggILhDHARCjAjoCCC46DgguEMcBEKMCEMkDEJMCOggILhDHARCvAToLCC4QxwEQowIQkwI6BQgAEMkDOggILhDJAxCTAjoOCC4QxwEQrwEQyQMQkwJQpZYVWMP6GGDj_xhoBHAAeAKAAZgBiAGWMpIBBDg2LjOYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6sAEGyAEIwAEB&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjdraOZmtPsAhWSGs0KHdnaAT8Q4dUDCAw&uact=5
Georger,
I just happen to be the one who found that reference about 10 years ago and used it in the initial free fall analysis for TK as well as all subsequent analyses. That reference was the best information available at that time on such free fall tests.
Test drops of the actual placard will be of much greater value.
Georger's claim that the tests proposed by Shutter will not be valid is just more of his nonsense.
Sandia Labs Report. by Bustamonte 1968
Free-Fall Rotation and Aerodynamic Motion of Rectangular ...
apps.dtic.mil › dtic › fulltext
PDF
It is believed that a rectangular plate will continuously autorotate about an axis which is free in flight. This behavior may be compared to the motion of a strip of paper of aspect ratio two or more. .... When dropped in still air, the strip rotates and descends along an inclined path. When dropped in other conditions ...
by AC Bustamante · 1968 ·
This is the report that Hominid and others used when evaluating the placard analysis of Robt Nicholson, esq. years ago!
Any drone drops of sheets and other paraphernalia will have "no" validity whatever to the DB Cooper placard analysis etc.
https://www.google.com/search?ei=7D-XX92HKJK1tAbZtYf4Aw&q=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&oq=freefall+rotation+and+aeorodynamic+motion+of+rectangular+plates&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzoHCAAQRxCwAzoOCAAQ6gIQtAIQmgEQ5QI6AggAOggILhDHARCjAjoCCC46DgguEMcBEKMCEMkDEJMCOggILhDHARCvAToLCC4QxwEQowIQkwI6BQgAEMkDOggILhDJAxCTAjoOCC4QxwEQrwEQyQMQkwJQpZYVWMP6GGDj_xhoBHAAeAKAAZgBiAGWMpIBBDg2LjOYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6sAEGyAEIwAEB&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjdraOZmtPsAhWSGs0KHdnaAT8Q4dUDCAw&uact=5
See Hominid's posts about this at DZ. R99 the 'engineer' is still in denial. ???
I can't recall Hominid posting anything about the drift calculations made for TK. But if Georger can provide a viable link to such a post, I will take a look at it.
-
I don't know what will happen but it should be fun to find out. we have no idea if the placard folded during the higher winds or what it really did or even the speed. we use to test hurricane shutters. a 2 x 4 six feet long will only travel 32 mph in 150 mph winds. that's what is shot at the hurricane products in testing. then a positive and negative load is put on them.
I think it's worth a shot..what can it hurt?
I didn't mean to sound like I was asking "Why bother?". I was asking if dropping it from 400 feet would provide enough data to extrapolate out to 10,00 feet. I was thinking more of the logistics rather than the motivation.
-
I don't know what will happen but it should be fun to find out. we have no idea if the placard folded during the higher winds or what it really did or even the speed. we use to test hurricane shutters. a 2 x 4 six feet long will only travel 32 mph in 150 mph winds. that's what is shot at the hurricane products in testing. then a positive and negative load is put on them.
I think it's worth a shot..what can it hurt?
I didn't mean to sound like I was asking "Why bother?". I was asking if dropping it from 400 feet would provide enough data to extrapolate out to 10,00 feet. I was thinking more of the logistics rather than the motivation.
It's not extrapolation. It is just determining one factor that is valid for any altitude involved here.
-
Shutter,
A new poster on DropZone has made his first post and it is a picture of a 727 simulator. This brings up a question which you may be able to answer based on your home simulator experience.
Could Cooper have gained his knowledge, at least what he got correctly, about 727s from an 727 simulator? Or even a Microsoft type simulation of the 727?
-
Looking on the DZ you can see that Boeing had one. something like that would cost a lot of money for the private sector. they had the money to build them..the airlines might of sent them to Boeing...
Here is the very first one build in the 30's. looks like a submarine :rofl:
https://interestingengineering.com/the-worlds-first-commercially-built-flight-simulator-the-link-trainer-blue-box
-
DFS346 has posted an FBI message, dated June 23, 2005, on DropZone that should be of interest to people here. I recommend everyone read it. It contains quite a bit of information on several Cooper related matters but I will quote just one as follows:
"1. FLIGHT DATA FROM FAA AND OTHER SOURCES CONCERNIG FLIGHT PATH: I know of no instance in which this was provided or discussed within anyone outside of LE. Suggest referring them to public reported sources."
"LE" stands for Law Enforcement and "public reported sources" refers to the public media.
This suggests that the so-called "FBI Flight Path" did not originate within the FBI's investigation or was released by the FBI. Apparently Carr was just trying to find out who did it and where it came from.
It is a given that the FBI had access to every thing the FAA, USAF, and NWA did on this subject.
The above FBI quotes eliminates completely and totally any claims that dispute the Western Flight Path.
-
I read that way differently. It reads to me as if the author (whichever SA at the time) had yet to release the yellow map; which was true at the time (as far as I know). Carr didn't release the yellow map until 2007 or 2008 right?
-
Shutter,
A new poster on DropZone has made his first post and it is a picture of a 727 simulator. This brings up a question which you may be able to answer based on your home simulator experience.
Could Cooper have gained his knowledge, at least what he got correctly, about 727s from an 727 simulator? Or even a Microsoft type simulation of the 727?
No. ;) Very doubtful Cooper was a 727 pilot ...
-
I read that way differently. It reads to me as if the author (whichever SA at the time) had yet to release the yellow map; which was true at the time (as far as I know). Carr didn't release the yellow map until 2007 or 2008 right?
I read it saying the Martians got here before the Venusians ?
-
I read that way differently. It reads to me as if the author (whichever SA at the time) had yet to release the yellow map; which was true at the time (as far as I know). Carr didn't release the yellow map until 2007 or 2008 right?
You need to read that statement again. If the FBI had every thing that the FAA, USAF, and NWA produced on the flight path, they would have a chain of custody for those items since they were being considered evidence. The reason Carr posted the yellow map on DropZone is because the FBI agents then on the case could not determine where it came from. There was no chain of custody information.
-
How do you know Carr's motivation for releasing the map?
-
Documents have been shown over and over about the map and where it came from?
-
I read that way differently. It reads to me as if the author (whichever SA at the time) had yet to release the yellow map; which was true at the time (as far as I know). Carr didn't release the yellow map until 2007 or 2008 right?
You need to read that statement again. If the FBI had every thing that the FAA, USAF, and NWA produced on the flight path, they would have a chain of custody for those items since they were being considered evidence. The reason Carr posted the yellow map on DropZone is because the FBI agents then on the case could not determine where it came from. There was no chain of custody information.
Genealogists and record searchers recover the past! ;) Carr not knowing how the fp maps came together 40+ years after the fact, and by whom ... means nothing! Historical reality usually has to be assembled from many sources ...
-
Do you or anyone else here believe there is anything to what Bruce mentioned in his speech on YouTube, the Overview, about the pilot delibertely dropping him in the Colombia River? Or do you think they have absolute evience that he jumped farther to the East?
-
Do you or anyone else here believe there is anything to what Bruce mentioned in his speech on YouTube, the Overview, about the pilot delibertely dropping him in the Colombia River? Or do you think they have absolute evience that he jumped farther to the East?
The pilots could not see the ground due to an overcast (undercast?) and two additional cloud layers below them. However, when the airliner was bypassing Portland on the west side, it flew almost straight down the middle of the Columbia River for about 10 miles. The Columbia River runs from the south to the north in the Tina Bar area (actually it is about 2 degrees east of north).
-
Ill take that as an "I do not know?" And Bruce said the pilot kept changing his story. Another beauty to go with the Keystone cops that first investigated this mess. The FBI drops it, but they still think they will find the Anglin Bros and Frank Morris
-
Ill take that as an "I do not know?" And Bruce said the pilot kept changing his story. Another beauty to go with the Keystone cops that first investigated this mess. The FBI drops it, but they still think they will find the Anglin Bros and Frank Morris
DBfan57,
I'll take your reply as "you don't know what in hell you are talking about".
-
OK Mr Know it all, do you think he landed in the River? Based on your other post?
-
The FBI drops it, but they still think they will find the Anglin Bros and Frank Morris
As mentioned in a previous post the FBI handed over the Alcatraz case to the US Marshal's in the late 70's. one agent is pursuing the case on his own time. these old cases don't have the value they had back in the day vs what they do today.
-
OK Mr Know it all, do you think he landed in the River? Based on your other post?
Have you read up on the findings Tom Kaye made in reference to diatoms?
-
No, I just listened to the "numerical money expert". He is no authority on the Cooper case as he admits. Ill respond on the other thread
-
I post on topic! :rofl:
Recognition of Bohan Continental flight ... better late than never! 1977 . ;D
-
I post on topic! :rofl:
Recognition of Bohan Continental flight ... better late than never! 1977 . ;D
Bohan needs to get his memory fixed. There were no such winds as he claims at Portland on the the evening of the hijacking. And Bohan was probably on V-23E and not V-23. With his landing gear and flaps retracted, he would be doing at least 100 MPH faster than the hijacked airliner. And if he took off from Seattle four minutes after the airliner, he would be on the ground in Portland long before the hijacked airliner passed through that area.
On the evening of the hijacking, the measured winds aloft at 10,000 feet were about 35 knots from the southwest and the winds on the ground at the Portland International Airport were never more than 12 MPH.
-
Do you or anyone else here believe there is anything to what Bruce mentioned in his speech on YouTube, the Overview, about the pilot delibertely dropping him in the Colombia River? Or do you think they have absolute evience that he jumped farther to the East?
You really need to read the transcripts, crew testimony, and a lot of information about this case. this can all be found in our vault.
-
I totally understand what you are saying. I am a member of other forums and I know how this works. But there are many many conversations, and countless threads on numerous subjects and it can be time consuming and you also see plenty of emotion and arguments often ensue. i have been here less than a week I believe and I have already been told off. I expect it. It goes with the territory. Ill do as much research as I can. And I hope I can add some positive input.
-
Do you or anyone else here believe there is anything to what Bruce mentioned in his speech on YouTube, the Overview, about the pilot delibertely dropping him in the Colombia River? Or do you think they have absolute evience that he jumped farther to the East?
You really need to read the transcripts, crew testimony, and a lot of information about this case. this can all be found in our vault.
Thing is Bruce has stated that the living pilot keeps changing his story so he says to look at what he said in the book many years ago? I am sure Cooper made this flight in practice lets say before he did the crime? Would you agree with that speculation? Google says its a 57 minute flight today? Its about just over twice as long as from Buffalo to Rochester, in my area and that is like a 20 minute flight now. I believe I flew from Baltimore to Rochester in about 45 minutes so the speed is likely far better today than in 1971. I have watched just about every YouTube show on this case and there are many. That is a pretty good place to start to gather data, and I knew of this case long before the internet existed. So just because I am new to this particular forum does not mean I am completely in the blind. ::)
-
Just found a YouTube video posted 3 days ago where a skydiver tries to recreate Cooper's jump by hitting a target a quarter mile by a quarter mile.
-
Just found a YouTube video posted 3 days ago where a skydiver tries to recreate Cooper's jump by hitting a target a quarter mile by a quarter mile.
With a modern steerable square parachute even a relatively inexperienced skydiver shouldn't have any trouble doing that in daylight.
But doing it at night with no ground references of any consequence, in light rain, over unknown terrain, he probably wouldn't be able to even identify the target.
-
This really key:
Pick some random man off the street. Put him on a jetliner. Give him chute and tell him to jump out of the back. At night. In cold, wet weather. Over unknown terrain. Add 30 lbs of money tied to him.
Does he survive?
-
This really key:
Pick some random man off the street. Put him on a jetliner. Give him chute and tell him to jump out of the back. At night. In cold, wet weather. Over unknown terrain. Add 30 lbs of money tied to him.
Does he survive?
Yeah Martin McNally's is a prime example, as inexperienced as they come, no training, only used a reserve chute not even a main/back. He ended up going Into a spin and he still made it.
-
This really key:
Pick some random man off the street. Put him on a jetliner. Give him chute and tell him to jump out of the back. At night. In cold, wet weather. Over unknown terrain. Add 30 lbs of money tied to him.
Does he survive?
Well my answer is always going to be yes, because of NO BOMB IN A SUITCASE, NO PARACHUTES. The money being gone is not a clue as of course it would have been picked up fast. But the bomb parts, fake or real, and I lean to fake, would have been all over. So too his clothes. He made it. Unless somehow he went into the water and drowned and somehow all that stuff managed to sink and never showed up. I say no way.
-
So the show True Crime from two years ago states that the plane was ON AUTOPILOT!!! And the exact route was known? First time and only time I heard this? Is this wrong?
-
The plane wasn't on autopilot the entire flight. coming to a conclusion of V23 all the way to Reno is a known flight path.
Has everyone seen the photo posted by fj about the placard. no emergency panel is on 305. I suspected 305 didn't have the option since it was never described in 302's and never confirmed it since no photo's have been available until now. the main problem I seen was the fact of the stairs being locked after it landed in Reno. had Cooper used the emergency system the stairs wouldn't lock.
This puts the Hicks placard into question.
-
Unless someone can come up with a logical answer to the Hicks placard being from flight 305 I believe this is no longer evidence in this case?
Since I made the drop device for one of my drones I'm still going to drop both at the same time just to see how the two act in a free fall.
-
Unless someone can come up with a logical answer to the Hicks placard being from flight 305 I believe this is no longer evidence in this case?
Since I made the drop device for one of my drones I'm still going to drop both at the same time just to see how the two act in a free fall.
This is compelling stuff, Shutter. However, it does beg the question of a how a placard from a jetliner stairwell ended up in the woods under the V23. I guess what I am saying is: if it didn't come from 305, where did it come from?
-
Unless someone can come up with a logical answer to the Hicks placard being from flight 305 I believe this is no longer evidence in this case?
Since I made the drop device for one of my drones I'm still going to drop both at the same time just to see how the two act in a free fall.
This is compelling stuff, Shutter. However, it does beg the question of a how a placard from a jetliner stairwell ended up in the woods under the V23. I guess what I am saying is: if it didn't come from 305, where did it come from?
That's another hard question. kind of put Hicks under the microscope. to really put the whole thing to rest, we need the drawings showing EXACTLY where it goes. not one single photo can be found of this placard.
-
The pullout panel for the emergency system is to the right of the main control box for the stairs. it's just not there on 305. it's much smaller and has two holes in it to pull the panel out and get to the handle to release the stairs. if it was there you would see it or you would see a hole where the panel was pulled off and the handle would be hanging down the side of the wall. not all of the planes had the system. kits could be purchased but I don't recall the amount.
-
Unless someone can come up with a logical answer to the Hicks placard being from flight 305 I believe this is no longer evidence in this case?
Since I made the drop device for one of my drones I'm still going to drop both at the same time just to see how the two act in a free fall.
This is compelling stuff, Shutter. However, it does beg the question of a how a placard from a jetliner stairwell ended up in the woods under the V23. I guess what I am saying is: if it didn't come from 305, where did it come from?
That's another hard question. kind of put Hicks under the microscope. to really put the whole thing to rest, we need the drawings showing EXACTLY where it goes. not one single photo can be found of this placard.
FJ could be right - he could be wrong. He has been right sometimes, and wrong other times. My stance is to withhold judgment pending better data.
How the money was prepared for Cooper is just one example. FJ has his version - others who talked to bank officials have their version. FJ never interviewed any of those people and yet FJ "knows" it had to be "his way" based on a few accounts he has found. There are other examples where FJ speculations have misfired over the years. The placard could be another example. No single person is always right all of the time!
-
Has nothing to do with FJ if you look? the panel is not there.
-
Has nothing to do with FJ if you look? the panel is not there.
So the panel appears to not be there.
-
Has nothing to do with FJ if you look? the panel is not there.
So the panel appears to not be there.
Correct. so why would 305 have a placard for a system not on the plane..
-
Has nothing to do with FJ if you look? the panel is not there.
So the panel appears to not be there.
Correct. so why would 305 have a placard for a system not on the plane..
Thats how it appears - at one point FJ thought the placard might be on the outside ?
Somehow Cooper got the stairs released and down ...
Tina might be able to explain it even today!
-
I brought up the fact of the stairs being locked a while back. this wouldn't happen if Cooper used the emergency system. the stairs would be off the ground hanging. I just couldn't prove if 305 had the system or not. FJ had the same problem. this resolves the issue of it not having it..
-
the stairs will release with the normal function. the emergency handle is for if the stairs are stuck or jammed and won't go down..
-
the main release will lower the stairs. the wind stopped them from going all the way down. even with Cooper on them.
-
Even the drop test photo's show them on the stairs with the extra weight and the stairs are still not all the way down due to the wind. it's been thought for decades that Cooper used the emergency system to try and get them all the way down. this was because we all thought the placard was from 305. the photo is telling a different story.
-
Even the drop test photo's show them on the stairs with the extra weight and the stairs are still not all the way down due to the wind. it's been thought for decades that Cooper used the emergency system to try and get them all the way down. this was because we all thought the placard was from 305. the photo is telling a different story.
In addition to that going back years - we have always known V23 was a well traveled route. All kinds of 727 versions flew that route plus other planes (types). V23 was right at the center of noise abatement complaints ... for years! So it was a well traveled path with many aircraft types using it. People have always speculated (going back years) that the placard could have come for any 727... somehow it has been assumed it had to have come from Cooper's plane! All roads have been assumed to lead to Cooper as if the Cooper hijacking plane was the only plane to ever use V23 !
-
to put this to rest we need actual documentation showing where that placard goes. the small pullout panel has directions on it. they might of made the larger one so it could be seen better, I don't know. we can't even find a photo of one installed?
worse case would be that Hicks fooled us all..
-
to put this to rest we need actual documentation showing where that placard goes. the small pullout panel has directions on it. they might of made the larger one so it could be seen better, I don't know. we can't even find a photo of one installed?
worse case would be that Hicks fooled us all..
All Hicks and his buddy did was find a placard from some plane.
-
Wouldn't be the first time someone fools the public...crop circles, bigfoot, UFO's etc. Hicks was alone when he found it..
It's odd that it sat in the same position for almost 8 years and didn't get covered. it's documented as heavy brush or forest?
-
Wouldn't be the first time someone fools the public...crop circles, bigfoot, UFO's etc.
It's odd that it sat in the same position for almost 8 years and didn't get covered. it's documented as heavy brush or forest?
The FOIA record is 89.9% chasing false leads that go nowhere. That includes all searches ... by everyone.
Somewhere are unique tracks that are Cooper's track alone .... where and what! ?
-
False leads is all part of the game..
-
False leads is all part of the game..
If by some chance DB Cooper is still alive he must be loving this. I mean, think of how much money has been spent trying to find him? Likely several times more than what he stole? This guy that is the lead on this new show is flying all over the place.
-
If by some chance DB Cooper is still alive he must be loving this. I mean, think of how much money has been spent trying to find him? Likely several times more than what he stole?
True.
Here's my running tab so far:
1. Tom Colbert: $250,000
2. Galen Cook: 50,000
3. Richard Tosaw: 50,000
4. Me: 2,000
And who knows how much Tom Kaye has invested. Remember, besides lab fees and equipment, he paid for all the motel rooms when the Citizen Sleuths went to the Columbia River back when.
Or Eric? Or 377? They even funded all the Cooper Cons. Geoffrey Gray? I asked him how he could afford to interview all the folks in SKYJACK, and he simply said I put it all on plastic, which may be one reason GG is in Mexico these days...
Then add in the BBC, the History Channel, Nat Geo, Josh Gates, etc.
Whew.
-
It appears we have very little challenge surrounding the placard. I've emailed a few and it appears most agree the placard didn't come from 305.
The drop test wouldn't require using this option so I question the fact of them stating it was missing. no documentation of the placard missing is anywhere in the files until the Hicks placard was found. even when describing the stairs and controls in a 302 fails to note the emergency option. these are things I pointed out along with the stairs being locked down in Reno. FJ voiced out over and over as well. Hominid told me about the damage the release would cause years ago. I believe some of that info is on here. we discussed it a lot during the simulator testing. you had to be exact with terms or he would correct you quickly. I had many phone conversations with him and miss that.
-
If by some chance DB Cooper is still alive he must be loving this. I mean, think of how much money has been spent trying to find him? Likely several times more than what he stole?
True.
Here's my running tab so far:
1. Tom Colbert: $250,000
2. Galen Cook: 50,000
3. Richard Tosaw: 50,000
4. Me: 2,000
And who knows how much Tom Kaye has invested. Remember, besides lab fees and equipment, he paid for all the motel rooms when the Citizen Sleuths went to the Columbia River back when.
Or Eric? Or 377? They even funded all the Cooper Cons. Geoffrey Gray? I asked him how he could afford to interview all the folks in SKYJACK, and he simply said I put it all on plastic, which may be one reason GG is in Mexico these days...
Then add in the BBC, the History Channel, Nat Geo, Josh Gates, etc.
Whew.
Josh Gates likely made money on this like with Dorothy's Ruby slippers and many other famous cases? The FBI burned a ton of money for sure. The one that says "me" hurts the most. Your $2 grand Bruce. But look at the fun you had doing it. And your not even close to finished.
-
It's been a great investment.
-
Wouldn't be the first time someone fools the public...crop circles, bigfoot, UFO's etc.
It's odd that it sat in the same position for almost 8 years and didn't get covered. it's documented as heavy brush or forest?
The FOIA record is 89.9% chasing false leads that go nowhere. That includes all searches ... by everyone.
Somewhere are unique tracks that are Cooper's track alone .... where and what! ?
Just look at the show. How many of these wives of suspects said "I KNOW he is DB Cooper". Yeah right! Suuuuure. NONE of them including that woman are DB. It is a waster of time
-
Unless someone can come up with a logical answer to the Hicks placard being from flight 305 I believe this is no longer evidence in this case?
Since I made the drop device for one of my drones I'm still going to drop both at the same time just to see how the two act in a free fall.
Sorry but I cant find the post of whoever is working on the simulation? Is it you? So you have drones? That is fabulous. I really would like one for photography but I suppose if you mess it up it can be expensive? My question to you, if you are the one doing the simulation, you are testing the drop, I suspect at different heights to test time it would take? Are you trying to come up with the most accurate drop zone by Cooper based on using the time he left Seattle, combined with the time of the stair noise (which we know is when he jumped), and using skydivers expert advice as to when he may have pulled the ripcord to try and pinpoint it? Also using the possibility of them being on autopilot which has been reported on at least one episode? And of course using the speed he demanded also. You combine all of that, and you might have a pretty accurate hypothesis of where he landed ? If so, how close to Tena Bar? I hope you are the right guy that is doing the simulation? I just figure if someone can accurately pinpoint the DZ, just maybe a search in the area could be done with metal detectors, because just maybe the bomb device is buried there somewhere? I just cant see him keeping that briefcase and walking out of the woods with it. I believe if he simply dropped it when he jumped, it would have scattered all over the place. And some of it would have been found.
With the messed up DNA from the tie, and the lack of the cigarette butts, not much else to go on. Too many false and stupid confessions already. I just cant believe all these women saying "I KNOW he was DB Cooper". Crazy
I realize much of this has been gone over and over. Its just tough to find things among long conversations on message boards. The more the conversation continues the more motivated people are to keep the search going. Not that I see any let up here. I just cant believe how many people are willing to like about being DB Cooper. You look at Weber, Christianson, Reca and Rackstaw just to name a few of the big suspects off the top, and you know at least 3 of these are lying and I say all of them are.
-
Your post is a little confusing. Yes, I'm the one with a simulator and a drone. what kind of picture are you looking for?
The testing with the drone was going to be done for several reasons. I noticed the placard that was found in the woods was damaged and had a large tear from the bottom to almost the center of the placard. you would think it would drift different than one that is undamaged. I'm dropping the two different placards at the same time to see how they drift.
The second test is what R99 wants data for. he wants to know the drift time from release to the ground from several different altitudes.
I've been wanting to start the testing but this time of year is always windy then we had a tropical storm come through along with small cold fronts causing windy days for weeks. sometimes in the 20 mph range which is tough on drones. Robert wanted little or no wind.
Between being grounded due to wind a photo was posted that shows 305 didn't have the emergency function on the plane. this puts the placard into serious question as to where it come from.
Since I took the time to build a release mechanism for the drone I've decided to at least drop a undamaged piece along with one that is damaged and see how they drift. not sure if R99 still wants any data...
-
A simulation was done on part of the flight path. I broke it down into three legs. leg one was from Seattle to Toledo, leg tw was from Toledo to crossing the Lewis river and the third leg was from the Lewis to the Columbia. I can go into detail later.
Here is the plane I flew.
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi18ktsgkv0&ab_channel=TheDBCooperforum
-
Your post is a little confusing. Yes, I'm the one with a simulator and a drone. what kind of picture are you looking for?
The testing with the drone was going to be done for several reasons. I noticed the placard that was found in the woods was damaged and had a large tear from the bottom to almost the center of the placard. you would think it would drift different than one that is undamaged. I'm dropping the two different placards at the same time to see how they drift.
The second test is what R99 wants data for. he wants to know the drift time from release to the ground from several different altitudes.
I've been wanting to start the testing but this time of year is always windy then we had a tropical storm come through along with small cold fronts causing windy days for weeks. sometimes in the 20 mph range which is tough on drones. Robert wanted little or no wind.
Between being grounded due to wind a photo was posted that shows 305 didn't have the emergency function on the plane. this puts the placard into serious question as to where it come from.
Since I took the time to build a release mechanism for the drone I've decided to at least drop a undamaged piece along with one that is damaged and see how they drift. not sure if R99 still wants any data...
All data will be useful.
-
A simulation was done on part of the flight path. I broke it down into three legs. leg one was from Seattle to Toledo, leg tw was from Toledo to crossing the Lewis river and the third leg was from the Lewis to the Columbia. I can go into detail later.
Here is the plane I flew.
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi18ktsgkv0&ab_channel=TheDBCooperforum
So you are using flight simulator software or you are an actual pilot? How confident are you in having an idea of Coopers drop zone? Or how many different scenario's do you believe in? Don't you think looking for the brief case/bomb might be the best bet as far as finding any evidence out there now? The Parachutes of course also, but why would Cooper bury the chute? Do you think its possible he might have buried the bomb (which we all seem to agree was fake?) As for the drop zone there has been much disagreement on it
-
I'm a sim pilot only. we put the simulator through a lot of testing with speed, altitude , drag, weather etc. Hominid put me through dozens of tests. then learning how to actually fly it.
using the transcripts and Harrison papers we were able to get speeds and altitudes to try and match what was presented on the map made by the Air Force as well as following what was stated in the transcripts. I was able to match speeds of 170 knots along with a ground speed of close to 200 if not mistaken. the fule flow matched as well as the wid speeds and direction.
The first leg was tricky since the transcripts showed different speeds. I was able to reach Toledo, or Carlson field at the time frame marked on the map. then from there I crossed the Lewis river at around 8:10. from this point to the Columbia is a little longer than the map shows with timing.
If you go by this then Cooper jumped somewhere around the area they pinpointed. getting the exact spot would never be accomplished IMO. times are given from 8:10 to 8:15 where he could of possibly jumped. no coords or actual position of the plane were given by the pilot other than mark the spot which they apparently didn't do.
If the briefcase was imitation as believed its long gone by deterioration. he could of dumped the contents over an area which is nothing but forest and remains that way today. it would be very hard to find. the briefcase would be extra luggage not really needed.
-
Not sure where this story belongs.
SMSgt Wally Johnson, in his 2013 interview with the Washington State Historical Society, identified Captain Thomas Spangler as the co-pilot on the "sled test" flight of 01.06.1972. In the same interview, Johnson recalled a previous flight with Spangler, on a C-141 which had an uncommanded deployment of three thrust reversers in flight. They made an emergency landing at Baker City, Oregon. Here's the funny thing: the MAC Flyer of June 1969 has an account of that incident: Johnson was aboard but Spangler was not.
-
Has flight data involved but probably better off in clues and documents...no biggie that it's here.
-
I'm a sim pilot only. we put the simulator through a lot of testing with speed, altitude , drag, weather etc. Hominid put me through dozens of tests. then learning how to actually fly it.
using the transcripts and Harrison papers we were able to get speeds and altitudes to try and match what was presented on the map made by the Air Force as well as following what was stated in the transcripts. I was able to match speeds of 170 knots along with a ground speed of close to 200 if not mistaken. the fule flow matched as well as the wid speeds and direction.
The first leg was tricky since the transcripts showed different speeds. I was able to reach Toledo, or Carlson field at the time frame marked on the map. then from there I crossed the Lewis river at around 8:10. from this point to the Columbia is a little longer than the map shows with timing.
If you go by this then Cooper jumped somewhere around the area they pinpointed. getting the exact spot would never be accomplished IMO. times are given from 8:10 to 8:15 where he could of possibly jumped. no coords or actual position of the plane were given by the pilot other than mark the spot which they apparently didn't do.
If the briefcase was imitation as believed its long gone by deterioration. he could of dumped the contents over an area which is nothing but forest and remains that way today. it would be very hard to find. the briefcase would be extra luggage not really needed.
I saw the simulator! I can confirm it! Unfortunately, I crashed every time I tried to use it. ;D
-
I had plenty of crash and burns myself learning. here is a video of me trying to land different aircraft with not so good results :rofl:
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf0rDQZZ0yI&ab_channel=Project305
-
weather seems favorable today. I'm going to try a test with the drone. this will be a test between two samples. one undamaged and the other damaged as we seen the placard was when it was found.
-
Good luck on the test drop, Shut.
I have a question that I can’t seem to find an answer to:
Where in the official documentation (302s, radio transmissions, etc.) is the “pressure bump” mentioned? I have found documentation of the “oscillations” which were recorded at 8:1–8:12, but I cannot find anything official regarding documention of the “pressure bump” which is assumed when Cooper jump.
Can anyone point me in the right direction?
-
Thanks...
Perhaps Georger can help you. my computer went down and I have to reload windows to repair it. I'm hoping everything will still be there when I get it up and running.
-
Where in the official documentation <> is the “pressure bump” mentioned?
Here are some documents on vault.fbi.gov which include references to the "oscillation", which was the generic term used by Northwest Airlines and the FBI for a transient change in the cabin pressure gauge:
D.B. Cooper Part 08 p017-019
D.B. Cooper Part 10 p421-422
D.B. Cooper Part 11 p092-093
D.B. Cooper Part 13 p013-014
D.B. Cooper Part 17 p009
D.B. Cooper Part 17 p080
D.B. Cooper Part 18 p154
D.B. Cooper Part 41 p021,026,030-032.
-
So, where did the idea that the “pressure bump” was a moment? To me, the “oscillations” preceded the “bump”. Is this accurate or are they the same thing?
-
The oscillation would come first once the stairs were lowered. the bump would be the stairs retracting back up pushing pressure into the cabin. same happens closing doors in cars and homes. the drapes will jump or pull away from the wall.
-
The oscillation would come first once the stairs were lowered. the bump would be the stairs retracting back up pushing pressure into the cabin. same happens closing doors in cars and homes. the drapes will jump or pull away from the wall.
Yes, but in the FBI files, they conflate they two. In fact, there doesn’t appear to be any mention of a “pressure bump”. Just “oscillations”.
So, is the idea of a “pressure bump” just anecdotal?
-
The oscillation would come first once the stairs were lowered. the bump would be the stairs retracting back up pushing pressure into the cabin. same happens closing doors in cars and homes. the drapes will jump or pull away from the wall.
Yes, but in the FBI files, they conflate they two. In fact, there doesn’t appear to be any mention of a “pressure bump”. Just “oscillations”.
So, is the idea of a “pressure bump” just anecdotal?
The "bump" surfaced AFTERWARDS - during the deposing of the crew the next day. The bump was in place and being considered by everyone prior to the test flight. Everyone includes the flight crew, people at NWA, the FBI, test flight people etc. Initially the bump was included in all of the events communicated as 'oscillations' - the oscillations culminated in a pressure event at the end, termed a "bump". Bump was not anecdotal but an actual series of quickly spaced events after which oscillations ceased!
-
The oscillation would come first once the stairs were lowered. the bump would be the stairs retracting back up pushing pressure into the cabin. same happens closing doors in cars and homes. the drapes will jump or pull away from the wall.
Yes, but in the FBI files, they conflate they two. In fact, there doesn’t appear to be any mention of a “pressure bump”. Just “oscillations”.
So, is the idea of a “pressure bump” just anecdotal?
The "bump" surfaced AFTERWARDS - during the deposing of the crew the next day. The bump was in place and being considered by everyone prior to the test flight. Everyone includes the flight crew, people at NWA, the FBI, test flight people etc. Initially the bump was included in all of the events communicated as 'oscillations' - the oscillations culminated in a pressure event at the end, termed a "bump". Bump was not anecdotal but an actual series of quickly spaced events after which oscillations ceased!
Thanks, georger.
Still seems odd that the FBI files, despite the depositions, continually refer to the report of “oscillations” to be the time of Cooper’s jump. There’s no mention of a “bump” in the 302s.
This would lead to two conclusions:
1. The pressure bump occurred some point AFTER 8:12 when the oscillations were first reported.
2. The pressure bump and the oscillations were confused by the FBI as the same thing.
-
The oscillation would come first once the stairs were lowered. the bump would be the stairs retracting back up pushing pressure into the cabin. same happens closing doors in cars and homes. the drapes will jump or pull away from the wall.
Yes, but in the FBI files, they conflate they two. In fact, there doesn’t appear to be any mention of a “pressure bump”. Just “oscillations”.
So, is the idea of a “pressure bump” just anecdotal?
The "bump" surfaced AFTERWARDS - during the deposing of the crew the next day. The bump was in place and being considered by everyone prior to the test flight. Everyone includes the flight crew, people at NWA, the FBI, test flight people etc. Initially the bump was included in all of the events communicated as 'oscillations' - the oscillations culminated in a pressure event at the end, termed a "bump". Bump was not anecdotal but an actual series of quickly spaced events after which oscillations ceased!
Thanks, georger.
Still seems odd that the FBI files, despite the depositions, continually refer to the report of “oscillations” to be the time of Cooper’s jump. There’s no mention of a “bump” in the 302s.
This would lead to two conclusions:
1. The pressure bump occurred some point AFTER 8:12 when the oscillations were first reported.
2. The pressure bump and the oscillations were confused by the FBI as the same thing.
No you are not listening. Nobody confused anything. Different things were reported at different times by different people. By the time of the test flight everyone understood the full sequence of events and effects and the order in which they occurred. Try not to jump to conclusions since you dont have the correct history.
There were oscillations. This ended with a pressure event coupled with an aerodynamic curtsy of the plane later termed "the bump" - people actually felt in their ears along with a change in the rate-climb meter noted by the flight engineer on his panel ...
-
I’m not jumping to any conclusions. I’m just pointing out that the FBI files don’t mention any “bump” and instead point to the Report of “oscillations” (8:11/8:12) as being the time Cooper jumped.
My original question was where is the official documentation of the pressure bump? If there is an official timeline, I’d like to see it.
-
There is files that mention the pressure bump...one claims the oscillation and bump were very close from what I recall..
Houston, we have a problem. I took the drone up to 100 feet and the drop device failed. I changed the dropbox to cardboard and it apparently still blocks the signal. it was able to drop from about 50 feet when I could see the light on the unit under the drone. both test pieces dropped straight down. video at 100 feet is also an issue. need a good camera. I'm guessing the drop device needs a line of sight to function. it's rated at 400 feet for distance.
-
in the FBI files, they conflate they two. In fact, there doesn’t appear to be any mention of a “pressure bump”. Just “oscillations”.
This site provides a technical explanation of cabin pressurisation on the 727;
https://www.boeing-727.com/Data/systems/infopress.html
-
That's for pressurizing the plane. all planes need to be pressurized at altitudes higher than 10,000. they noticed the pressure change looking at the gauges as well. 305 was not. that's why he could open the bulkhead door and lower the stairs. if the cabin was pressurized the door wouldn't open.
-
I don’t think I’m expressing myself properly.
In most, if not all, of the the FBI files, they repeatedly use the word “oscillations” to refer to the time that Cooper exited the aircraft.
In fact, in Part 41, p. 35 it says “An analysis as to the the cause of this “oscillation”, also referred to as a “pressure bump” or “change in cabin pressure” pointed to the probability that it was caused by the hijacker leaving the aircraft.”
I tend to think of these as two different events. The “oscillations” were caused by Cooper walking down the aft stairs. The “pressure bump” was caused by him jumping.
However, in the mind of the FBI it seems, the oscillations and pressure bump were the same thing. This discrepancy in vocabulary is critical in creating an accurate timeline.
-
Agent Carr believes they only spoke about the oscillation and not the bump..
the noise started the second Cooper opened the bulkhead door. then he dropped the stairs causing more noise. I'm sure once he started down the stairs the oscillation began or were greater from that point. the trouble appears to be how long he was on the stairs prior to jumping.
-
Ratazcak explains it here...if you have watched this you can jump to 28 minutes into the video...this documentary has Bruce in it
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5uI2f0afDo&ab_channel=WhyteMajicLanternHD
-
Thanks, Shutter.
Georger also provided me with some information that he is privy to that puts the pressure bump AFTER the oscillations- perhaps several minutes after.
Bottom line is that the oscillations reported by the crew at around 8:11 ARE NOT the same event as the pressure bump which is assumed to be the time Cooper jump. Thus, one can conclude that Cooper likely jumped some time after 8:12. How long after is uncertain.
-
This is one of the problem you have with any type of simulation. it's hard to recreate something you are not sure of or get mixed data. one or two minutes off and you have a wide area to search..
-
Thanks, Shutter.
Georger also provided me with some information that he is privy to that puts the pressure bump AFTER the oscillations- perhaps several minutes after.
Bottom line is that the oscillations reported by the crew at around 8:11 ARE NOT the same event as the pressure bump which is assumed to be the time Cooper jump. Thus, one can conclude that Cooper likely jumped some time after 8:12. How long after is uncertain.
Many people have always felt that's a good estimate ...
-
I don’t think I’m expressing myself properly.
In most, if not all, of the the FBI files, they repeatedly use the word “oscillations” to refer to the time that Cooper exited the aircraft.
In fact, in Part 41, p. 35 it says “An analysis as to the the cause of this “oscillation”, also referred to as a “pressure bump” or “change in cabin pressure” pointed to the probability that it was caused by the hijacker leaving the aircraft.”
I tend to think of these as two different events. The “oscillations” were caused by Cooper walking down the aft stairs. The “pressure bump” was caused by him jumping.
However, in the mind of the FBI it seems, the oscillations and pressure bump were the same thing. This discrepancy in vocabulary is critical in creating an accurate timeline.
Chaucer, please keep in mind that there were two radio links with the airliner. And that the radio transcripts for both have been heavily redacted.
First, the Seattle ATC Center radio transcripts have 19 areas of redactions and do not contain any useful information for locating the aircraft or anything else from about five minutes after the aircraft took off from Seattle until it was handed off to the Oakland Center in Northern California. Take a look at the Oakland Center radio transcripts if you want to know what the Seattle Center transcripts should look like. The air traffic control information was transmitted over the usual control frequencies.
Second, a telephone patch was set up with the airliner through the ARINC frequency. ARINC is a private subscription aeronautical communications service. Everything other than air traffic control information would be made over this phone/radio patch. However, the transcripts of these communications have been heavily redacted as well according to a study made by Fred Poynter and his group at the WSHM.
The FBI/FAA are sitting on the information that is needed to determine the actual flight path of the airliner and the communications through the ARINC system. There is no reason to believe that they will ever be released.
As a side note, 377 has posted of his experience in jumping from a DC-9 that had the rear stairs completely removed. He said that when each jumper took a dive through that opening, there was a distinct change in sound. He could tell when someone jumped just based on the sound change. There would not be bumps or oscillations on the DC-9 jumps since the aft stairs had been removed and thus they would not change the airflow or rebound into the fuselage structure.
-
I don’t think I’m expressing myself properly.
In most, if not all, of the the FBI files, they repeatedly use the word “oscillations” to refer to the time that Cooper exited the aircraft.
In fact, in Part 41, p. 35 it says “An analysis as to the the cause of this “oscillation”, also referred to as a “pressure bump” or “change in cabin pressure” pointed to the probability that it was caused by the hijacker leaving the aircraft.”
I tend to think of these as two different events. The “oscillations” were caused by Cooper walking down the aft stairs. The “pressure bump” was caused by him jumping.
However, in the mind of the FBI it seems, the oscillations and pressure bump were the same thing. This discrepancy in vocabulary is critical in creating an accurate timeline.
You are all mixed up and confused .... from lack of reading all of the 302s available spread through several Parts spanning a whole time period from approx 11/24 to 12/16. Now Rev R99 chimes in claiming REDACTIONS again and Radios! ... which is nonsense, has nothing to do with anything!
Focus on 302s that use the later term "pressure oscillations" vs the simpler earliest term "oscillations" ..................
Believe the prophet of your choice. There are a bunch of them around each with a story to sell. All are free and all are wrong so far! The FBI did recognise oscillations vs pressure bump, a new term "pressure oscillations" was coined to cover both oscillations and bump ... but stop focusing on the FBI - the FBI did not do any of this engineering, the FBI are not engineers!, the FBI was merely a recipient of all of this work done by NWA engineers, the FAA, and Air Force people!
FBI 302s merely reflect what other people knew, developed, and were doing, and were telling the FBI - I cant stress this enough!
And forget redactions and radios! Fuck redactions and radios! Unless there are transcripts only the FAA has or ever saw, redactions is irrelevant and may not exist anyway! The existing record is enough to know the facts in any event - and Poynter, R99, and Walter Raleigh, and Richard Nixon are irrelevant. ;)
It is a fact Soderlind had to petition the FBI to get the FAA to release information to him. In addition NWA shared data only they had with the FAA! The FBI were merely bystanders trying to keep track of the whole thing so they could launch searches. The FBI tried to serve as intermediaries between diverse parties who otherwise were not even communicating with each other. The FBI needed to launch a search - they needed to know where to search. Its as simple as that!
Read this - note the date 11/25 the day after the hijacking. This is one of the very earliest estimates and they are already focused on a pressure event. By Jan 1-16 they will be using the term "pressure oscillations" ... the terms used change as the understanding changes!
There arent any redactions in the doc below! :rofl:
-
Georger,
You're responding to an older post. I have since done further research and cross-referenced that against the information that you sent me a few weeks ago.
As I have since stated, the "oscillations" were reported between 8:10 and 8:12. The "pressure bump" which is presumed to be caused by Cooper's jump, occurred AFTER 8:12. There are no indications of how much later except for flight crew statements. ("hadn't crossed the Columbia/lights of Portland were coming up/10 to 15 minutes after last contact") So, based on those alone, it seems to me that the jump occurred between 8:13 and 8:17.
I know this isn't any bombshell revelation. Many have arrived at this same conclusion. But I needed to work it out myself to be sure rather than take the word of others.
-
I don’t think I’m expressing myself properly.
In most, if not all, of the the FBI files, they repeatedly use the word “oscillations” to refer to the time that Cooper exited the aircraft.
In fact, in Part 41, p. 35 it says “An analysis as to the the cause of this “oscillation”, also referred to as a “pressure bump” or “change in cabin pressure” pointed to the probability that it was caused by the hijacker leaving the aircraft.”
I tend to think of these as two different events. The “oscillations” were caused by Cooper walking down the aft stairs. The “pressure bump” was caused by him jumping.
However, in the mind of the FBI it seems, the oscillations and pressure bump were the same thing. This discrepancy in vocabulary is critical in creating an accurate timeline.
You are all mixed up and confused .... from lack of reading all of the 302s available spread through several Parts spanning a whole time period from approx 11/24 to 12/16. Now Rev R99 chimes in claiming REDACTIONS again and Radios! ... which is nonsense, has nothing to do with anything!
Focus on 302s that use the later term "pressure oscillations" vs the simpler earliest term "oscillations" ..................
Believe the prophet of your choice. There are a bunch of them around each with a story to sell. All are free and all are wrong so far! The FBI did recognise oscillations vs pressure bump, a new term "pressure oscillations" was coined to cover both oscillations and bump ... but stop focusing on the FBI - the FBI did not do any of this engineering, the FBI are not engineers!, the FBI was merely a recipient of all of this work done by NWA engineers, the FAA, and Air Force people!
FBI 302s merely reflect what other people knew, developed, and were doing, and were telling the FBI - I cant stress this enough!
And forget redactions and radios! Fuck redactions and radios! Unless there are transcripts only the FAA has or ever saw, redactions is irrelevant and may not exist anyway! The existing record is enough to know the facts in any event - and Poynter, R99, and Walter Raleigh, and Richard Nixon are irrelevant. ;)
It is a fact Soderlind had to petition the FBI to get the FAA to release information to him. In addition NWA shared data only they had with the FAA! The FBI were merely bystanders trying to keep track of the whole thing so they could launch searches. The FBI tried to serve as intermediaries between diverse parties who otherwise were not even communicating with each other. The FBI needed to launch a search - they needed to know where to search. Its as simple as that!
Read this - note the date 11/25 the day after the hijacking. This is one of the very earliest estimates and they are already focused on a pressure event. By Jan 1-16 they will be using the term "pressure oscillations" ... the terms used change as the understanding changes!
There arent any redactions in the doc below! :rofl:
Just more nonsense from Georger that shows again his disdain for facts.
-
Thanks, Shutter.
Georger also provided me with some information that he is privy to that puts the pressure bump AFTER the oscillations- perhaps several minutes after.
Bottom line is that the oscillations reported by the crew at around 8:11 ARE NOT the same event as the pressure bump which is assumed to be the time Cooper jump. Thus, one can conclude that Cooper likely jumped some time after 8:12. How long after is uncertain.
Chaucer, regardless of what Georger has told you, the pressure bump took place in connection with the oscillations. There were probably several small oscillations if Cooper walked down the stairs a couple of steps from their pivot point to throw items such as the briefcase, bomb, etc., out of the aircraft.
But the biggest oscillation of all would occur when Cooper walked down to the bottom of the stairs and jumped. The pressure bump would then be caused by the stairs slamming shut. There is no evidence to suggest that the stairs slammed shut more than once. And Cooper jumping from the bottom of the stairs would cause them to slam shut as plainly shown in the FBI sled tests.
In the You Tube documentary that Shutter has posted above, Rataczak plainly states that when the stairs slammed shut the crew experienced a "pressure bump" (Rataczak's term) in their ears. There is nothing to suggest that there was a second pressure bump of any kind. And based on all available evidence, that pressure bump was the result of Cooper jumping.
Georger is just blow smoke and apparently does not have any knowledge or understanding of aerodynamics or flight dynamics.
-
<>11/25 the day after the hijacking. This is one of the very earliest estimates and they are already focused on a pressure event. <>
Could anyone confirm that Crawford, Washington, to which reference is made in this document, is Crawford, Venersborg CPD, Clark County (latitude 45.803, longitude -122.485)?
-
Chaucer, regardless of what Georger has told you, the pressure bump took place in connection with the oscillations. There were probably several small oscillations if Cooper walked down the stairs a couple of steps from their pivot point to throw items such as the briefcase, bomb, etc., out of the aircraft.
But the biggest oscillation of all would occur when Cooper walked down to the bottom of the stairs and jumped. The pressure bump would then be caused by the stairs slamming shut. There is no evidence to suggest that the stairs slammed shut more than once. And Cooper jumping from the bottom of the stairs would cause them to slam shut as plainly shown in the FBI sled tests.
In the You Tube documentary that Shutter has posted above, Rataczak plainly states that when the stairs slammed shut the crew experienced a "pressure bump" (Rataczak's term) in their ears. There is nothing to suggest that there was a second pressure bump of any kind. And based on all available evidence, that pressure bump was the result of Cooper jumping.
Georger is just blow smoke and apparently does not have any knowledge or understanding of aerodynamics or flight dynamics.
Robert,
I have made it a point not to respond to any of your posts because I think you are a generally toxic person. However, I want to clear a few things up. First, I’m not suggesting that the oscillations weren’t related. I’m suggesting that they aren’t the same event. The oscillations were likely Cooper walking down the stairs followed by a “bump” when Cooper jumped. The oscillations are documented as occurring between 8:10 and 8:12. The time of the bump is never documented, but one can assume it happened after 8:12 since that is the latest time the oscillations are reported. Perhaps it happened at 8:13. Perhaps later. Oscillations followed by a bump.
Second, georger doesn’t tell me anything. He and I exchange emails, messages, information and discuss the case. We don’t always agree but he has been helpful and respectful. Nothing he has said strikes me as inaccurate. You, on the other hand, have only made impertinent comments about ATC transcript redactions.
That said, I’m going to go back to generally ignoring your posts.
Happy holidays.
-
<>11/25 the day after the hijacking. This is one of the very earliest estimates and they are already focused on a pressure event. <>
Could anyone confirm that Crawford, Washington, to which reference is made in this document, is Crawford, Venersborg CPD, Clark County (latitude 45.803, longitude -122.485)?
Crawford, WA is generally thought to be Battleground, WA. Personally, I have never heard anyone utter the words, "Crawford, WA."
-
<>11/25 the day after the hijacking. This is one of the very earliest estimates and they are already focused on a pressure event. <>
Could anyone confirm that Crawford, Washington, to which reference is made in this document, is Crawford, Venersborg CPD, Clark County (latitude 45.803, longitude -122.485)?
FlyJack has just posted a map on DropZone that shows a Crawford a few miles just south of Heisson and a few miles northeast of the town of Battleground.
-
Yup. That's it. Crawford is actually where Battleground State Park is.
-
Thanks, Shutter.
Georger also provided me with some information that he is privy to that puts the pressure bump AFTER the oscillations- perhaps several minutes after.
Bottom line is that the oscillations reported by the crew at around 8:11 ARE NOT the same event as the pressure bump which is assumed to be the time Cooper jump. Thus, one can conclude that Cooper likely jumped some time after 8:12. How long after is uncertain.
Chaucer, regardless of what Georger has told you, the pressure bump took place in connection with the oscillations. There were probably several small oscillations if Cooper walked down the stairs a couple of steps from their pivot point to throw items such as the briefcase, bomb, etc., out of the aircraft.
But the biggest oscillation of all would occur when Cooper walked down to the bottom of the stairs and jumped. The pressure bump would then be caused by the stairs slamming shut. There is no evidence to suggest that the stairs slammed shut more than once. And Cooper jumping from the bottom of the stairs would cause them to slam shut as plainly shown in the FBI sled tests.
In the You Tube documentary that Shutter has posted above, Rataczak plainly states that when the stairs slammed shut the crew experienced a "pressure bump" (Rataczak's term) in their ears. There is nothing to suggest that there was a second pressure bump of any kind. And based on all available evidence, that pressure bump was the result of Cooper jumping.
Georger is just blow smoke and apparently does not have any knowledge or understanding of aerodynamics or flight dynamics.
Thank you, Robert, for your always clear responses. Nothing really mysterious about the oscillations and it doesn't change the estimate of when the pressure bump happened. One question regarding Victor 23: can we assume, as this is a route suitable for low-level flying, that this section of the PNW has considerable amounts of flat or at least less treacherous terrain? Wouldn't this also increase Cooper's chances of a safe landing, while not guaranteeing it? And wouldn't knowing this is the likely flight path mean that if Cooper were of a survivalist/orienteering ilk, he would only need to get to know that one section (however vast) of the route well, not the entire forested area between points A and B?
-
Thanks, Shutter.
Georger also provided me with some information that he is privy to that puts the pressure bump AFTER the oscillations- perhaps several minutes after.
Bottom line is that the oscillations reported by the crew at around 8:11 ARE NOT the same event as the pressure bump which is assumed to be the time Cooper jump. Thus, one can conclude that Cooper likely jumped some time after 8:12. How long after is uncertain.
Chaucer, regardless of what Georger has told you, the pressure bump took place in connection with the oscillations. There were probably several small oscillations if Cooper walked down the stairs a couple of steps from their pivot point to throw items such as the briefcase, bomb, etc., out of the aircraft.
But the biggest oscillation of all would occur when Cooper walked down to the bottom of the stairs and jumped. The pressure bump would then be caused by the stairs slamming shut. There is no evidence to suggest that the stairs slammed shut more than once. And Cooper jumping from the bottom of the stairs would cause them to slam shut as plainly shown in the FBI sled tests.
In the You Tube documentary that Shutter has posted above, Rataczak plainly states that when the stairs slammed shut the crew experienced a "pressure bump" (Rataczak's term) in their ears. There is nothing to suggest that there was a second pressure bump of any kind. And based on all available evidence, that pressure bump was the result of Cooper jumping.
Georger is just blow smoke and apparently does not have any knowledge or understanding of aerodynamics or flight dynamics.
Thank you, Robert, for your always clear responses. Nothing really mysterious about the oscillations and it doesn't change the estimate of when the pressure bump happened. One question regarding Victor 23: can we assume, as this is a route suitable for low-level flying, that this section of the PNW has considerable amounts of flat or at least less treacherous terrain? Wouldn't this also increase Cooper's chances of a safe landing, while not guaranteeing it? And wouldn't knowing this is the likely flight path mean that if Cooper were of a survivalist/orienteering ilk, he would only need to get to know that one section (however vast) of the route well, not the entire forested area between points A and B?
So you interviewed Anderson on the oscillations and bump?
-
Thanks, Shutter.
Georger also provided me with some information that he is privy to that puts the pressure bump AFTER the oscillations- perhaps several minutes after.
Bottom line is that the oscillations reported by the crew at around 8:11 ARE NOT the same event as the pressure bump which is assumed to be the time Cooper jump. Thus, one can conclude that Cooper likely jumped some time after 8:12. How long after is uncertain.
Chaucer, regardless of what Georger has told you, the pressure bump took place in connection with the oscillations. There were probably several small oscillations if Cooper walked down the stairs a couple of steps from their pivot point to throw items such as the briefcase, bomb, etc., out of the aircraft.
But the biggest oscillation of all would occur when Cooper walked down to the bottom of the stairs and jumped. The pressure bump would then be caused by the stairs slamming shut. There is no evidence to suggest that the stairs slammed shut more than once. And Cooper jumping from the bottom of the stairs would cause them to slam shut as plainly shown in the FBI sled tests.
In the You Tube documentary that Shutter has posted above, Rataczak plainly states that when the stairs slammed shut the crew experienced a "pressure bump" (Rataczak's term) in their ears. There is nothing to suggest that there was a second pressure bump of any kind. And based on all available evidence, that pressure bump was the result of Cooper jumping.
Georger is just blow smoke and apparently does not have any knowledge or understanding of aerodynamics or flight dynamics.
Thank you, Robert, for your always clear responses. Nothing really mysterious about the oscillations and it doesn't change the estimate of when the pressure bump happened. One question regarding Victor 23: can we assume, as this is a route suitable for low-level flying, that this section of the PNW has considerable amounts of flat or at least less treacherous terrain? Wouldn't this also increase Cooper's chances of a safe landing, while not guaranteeing it? And wouldn't knowing this is the likely flight path mean that if Cooper were of a survivalist/orienteering ilk, he would only need to get to know that one section (however vast) of the route well, not the entire forested area between points A and B?
While the elevation of Portland International Airport is only 30 feet above sea level, the terrain between Portland and the Malay Intersection goes up to about 3500 to 4000 feet. Judging from aviation maps, that area is quite hilly and probably heavily wooded for about the entire distance.
Even if Cooper jumped in that area, he wouldn't be able to pick out a landing spot since his parachute was not steerable and there is a good chance that he would land in a tree. If he did land in a tree, he would probably abandon the parachute since getting canopies out of trees requires a lot of time and Cooper probably didn't have time to spare. And that canopy in a tree would be highly visible to anyone flying over that area as Himmelsbach reportedly did the next day or second day.
-
Thanks, Shutter.
Georger also provided me with some information that he is privy to that puts the pressure bump AFTER the oscillations- perhaps several minutes after.
Bottom line is that the oscillations reported by the crew at around 8:11 ARE NOT the same event as the pressure bump which is assumed to be the time Cooper jump. Thus, one can conclude that Cooper likely jumped some time after 8:12. How long after is uncertain.
Chaucer, regardless of what Georger has told you, the pressure bump took place in connection with the oscillations. There were probably several small oscillations if Cooper walked down the stairs a couple of steps from their pivot point to throw items such as the briefcase, bomb, etc., out of the aircraft.
But the biggest oscillation of all would occur when Cooper walked down to the bottom of the stairs and jumped. The pressure bump would then be caused by the stairs slamming shut. There is no evidence to suggest that the stairs slammed shut more than once. And Cooper jumping from the bottom of the stairs would cause them to slam shut as plainly shown in the FBI sled tests.
In the You Tube documentary that Shutter has posted above, Rataczak plainly states that when the stairs slammed shut the crew experienced a "pressure bump" (Rataczak's term) in their ears. There is nothing to suggest that there was a second pressure bump of any kind. And based on all available evidence, that pressure bump was the result of Cooper jumping.
Georger is just blow smoke and apparently does not have any knowledge or understanding of aerodynamics or flight dynamics.
Thank you, Robert, for your always clear responses. Nothing really mysterious about the oscillations and it doesn't change the estimate of when the pressure bump happened. One question regarding Victor 23: can we assume, as this is a route suitable for low-level flying, that this section of the PNW has considerable amounts of flat or at least less treacherous terrain? Wouldn't this also increase Cooper's chances of a safe landing, while not guaranteeing it? And wouldn't knowing this is the likely flight path mean that if Cooper were of a survivalist/orienteering ilk, he would only need to get to know that one section (however vast) of the route well, not the entire forested area between points A and B?
While the elevation of Portland International Airport is only 30 feet above sea level, the terrain between Portland and the Malay Intersection goes up to about 3500 to 4000 feet. Judging from aviation maps, that area is quite hilly and probably heavily wooded for about the entire distance.
Even if Cooper jumped in that area, he wouldn't be able to pick out a landing spot since his parachute was not steerable and there is a good chance that he would land in a tree. If he did land in a tree, he would probably abandon the parachute since getting canopies out of trees requires a lot of time and Cooper probably didn't have time to spare. And that canopy in a tree would be highly visible to anyone flying over that area as Himmelsbach reportedly did the next day or second day.
Its amazing how non-steerable chutes cause blindness to anyone who puts one on. Isn't that one of Blevins' points ?
-
Not sure if this is the right sub-forum, mods please move if appropriate.
Does anyone have a better quality copy of these images taken from the chase plane of the sled test flight on 01.06.1972? (These are from the archived copy of n467us.com and appear to be the only copies in the public domain.)
-
I don't think you will find any better copy of what has been shown.
-
Nothing really mysterious about the oscillations and it doesn't change the estimate of when the pressure bump happened.
So, when did the pressure bump happen? In your estimation?
-
Nothing really mysterious about the oscillations and it doesn't change the estimate of when the pressure bump happened.
So, when did the pressure bump happen? In your estimation?
The pressure bump happened about one second or less after Cooper stepped off the bottom of the stairs and then the stairs slammed up into the fuselage.
If you are looking for an exact time for that pressure bump, then you are out of luck unless the FAA/FBI release more information. In the meantime, the 8:11 or 8:12 PM PST time estimates is as good as anything that is available.
The point is don't try to add another layer to the onion. If possible, help peel layers from the already overloaded onion.
-
If you are looking for an exact time for that pressure bump, then you are out of luck unless the FAA/FBI release more information. In the meantime, the 8:11 or 8:12 PM PST time estimates is as good as anything that is available.
That doesn't make sense when you look at the available evidence and testimony. Rataczak makes note of where they believe he jumped on transcripts and actual words. if the FBI was aware of a secret or a different location they held back on the transcripts then why would they search in the wrong spot? the totality doesn't agree with the assumption. as for the timing. that would put him several minutes behind of landing on Tbar or in the area of Tbar.
Lets say they marked the spot. now, the FBI is aware and we are not...again, they looked in the wrong spot for no reason?
-
If you are looking for an exact time for that pressure bump, then you are out of luck unless the FAA/FBI release more information. In the meantime, the 8:11 or 8:12 PM PST time estimates is as good as anything that is available.
That doesn't make sense when you look at the available evidence and testimony. Rataczak makes note of where they believe he jumped on transcripts and actual words. if the FBI was aware of a secret or a different location they held back on the transcripts then why would they search in the wrong spot? the totality doesn't agree with the assumption. as for the timing. that would put him several minutes behind of landing on Tbar or in the area of Tbar.
Lets say they marked the spot. now, the FBI is aware and we are not...again, they looked in the wrong spot for no reason?
Exactly. The last report of "oscillations" is at 8:12. Ratacsack later said that when he jumped he could "see the lights of Portland coming up" and that they hadn't crossed the Columbia yet. That would put the jump/pressure bump anywhere between 8:13 and 8:17. There is no evidence that the oscillations ENDED at 8:12.
-
If you are looking for an exact time for that pressure bump, then you are out of luck unless the FAA/FBI release more information. In the meantime, the 8:11 or 8:12 PM PST time estimates is as good as anything that is available.
That doesn't make sense when you look at the available evidence and testimony. Rataczak makes note of where they believe he jumped on transcripts and actual words. if the FBI was aware of a secret or a different location they held back on the transcripts then why would they search in the wrong spot? the totality doesn't agree with the assumption. as for the timing. that would put him several minutes behind of landing on Tbar or in the area of Tbar.
Lets say they marked the spot. now, the FBI is aware and we are not...again, they looked in the wrong spot for no reason?
The 8:11 PM PST time is in the FBI Notes and is described as being the best available estimate.
Several years ago, I posted information on the flight path, what is now called the Western Flight Path, and it put the airliner over Tina Bar at 8:12 PM. That agreement surprised me.
Presumably, the FBI had a reason for searching whatever area they searched. But that doesn't mean they were searching the area where Cooper actually jumped.
If the FBI searched the areas where Cooper jumped and didn't find him, then they need to search the areas where Cooper didn't jump and he will be there. He definitely jumped somewhere.
-
I think we would need the pilots to figure this out. the recent statement of Rat and Anderson decribe Cooper getting the stairs halfway down and complaining. he can't get them down. this was early in the flight according to the transcripts. the plane levels off at 7,000 and slows to about 155 knots. they talk about the noise from the bulkhead door being open. then Anderson states a "big bump" occurs.
all the available data needs to be in one spot surrounding the jump location. the times differ between the two transcripts because one is behind in time. then one report the oscillation and pressure bump happens one after the other. like everything else, it's confusing.
-
Several years ago, I posted information on the flight path, what is now called the Western Flight Path, and it put the airliner over Tina Bar at 8:12 PM. That agreement surprised me.
The timing is off due to speed changes from Seattle to Toledo. plus I recall you saying the takeoff time could be wrong when I approached you with the timing issue. I'll have to check my notes.
-
It's approx 43 Nm's from Malay to the Tbar area. that's around 14 minute alone in flight time. 8:02 as worse case arrival at Maylay and you have a possibility of being over Tbar at 8:16 which could still be plausible..
-
Have you ever seen the actual search grid? it's not just around the area they thought he might be..I'm sure that changed as well over time.
-
The "oscillations" are reported in various instances at 8:10, 8:11. and 8:12. 8:12 is the last known report for the oscillations. There's no indication of where the jump/bump occurred. Again, the oscillations could have continued beyond 8:12. We just don't know.
I'm not sure we can conclude that 8:12 is the time he jumped just because that's the last time oscillations were mentioned.
-
Two sets of transcripts. one is behind on time because it's typed and sent.
-
The failure of marking the location seems to be the whole problem..
-
Two sets of transcripts. one is behind on time because it's typed and sent.
Again, the reports of the oscillations are not the same as the pressure bump. We don't know when the pressure bump happened.
-
I agree, but with everything else we have confusion.
Carr thought they only responded to the oscillation. 302's contradict that statement. Rat also told him 10-15 minutes after the last contact vs 5-10 minutes. then the radar report of Scholls field which would indicate a later jump time at around 8:15. one 302 connected to the drop map indicates a search area down to the Columbia. basically, you have a search area from the Lewis river to the Columbia..
-
I agree, but with everything else we have confusion.
Carr thought they only responded to the oscillation. 302's contradict that statement. Rat also told him 10-15 minutes after the last contact vs 5-10 minutes. then the radar report of Scholls field which would indicate a later jump time at around 8:15. one 302 connected to the drop map indicates a search area down to the Columbia. basically, you have a search area from the Lewis river to the Columbia..
I agree 100%. We don't know exactly when he jumped regardless of when the oscillations. The oscillations =/= the pressure bump. For all we know, Cooper made his way down the stairs around 8:11/8:12 and spent a few minutes tossing his belongs out, then stood their bouncing on the bottom stairs trying to get his nerve to jump. I'm not saying that's what happened. My point is we don't know.
As Shutter said, he could have jumped anywhere from Lake Merwin to the Columbia.
-
This is why it makes it hard with a simulation. you can follow the map but if the timing is off or the jump time or position is not nailed down makes it hard to simulate anything surrounding where he jumped.
-
IMO, the only way to triangulate the flight path and the money find on Tena Bar is to have Cooper jump somewhere near the Columbia. I can't say what mechanics were involved, but it would make the most sense to have the money end up upstream from where it arrived in the water.
ETA: The pertinent info on the timing of the oscillations can be found in the FBI Vault Part 41, p. 31.
-
Several years ago, I posted information on the flight path, what is now called the Western Flight Path, and it put the airliner over Tina Bar at 8:12 PM. That agreement surprised me.
The timing is off due to speed changes from Seattle to Toledo. plus I recall you saying the takeoff time could be wrong when I approached you with the timing issue. I'll have to check my notes.
The airliner leveled off at 10,000 feet while still north of the Malay Intersection. A time for reaching 10,000 feet is given but not the geographical location of the aircraft.
Nevertheless, from reaching 10,000 feet until the airliner was handed off to the Oakland Center in northern California the airliner's target or bug speed was 170 Knots Indicated Airspeed. 170 KIAS is what the airspeed indicator would read and this value must be corrected for the altitude, temperature, etc. to give the True Indicated Airspeed which was about 195 Knots. The KTAS must be corrected for the winds aloft speed and direction to give the ground speed.
The time and location of the hand off to the Oakland Center is documented in both the Oakland and Seattle ATC radio transcripts. I used this time and location to work backwards to determine the time that the airliner would be over Tina Bar on the Western Flight Path. And as I have pointed out a number of times, I was surprised at the close agreement with the FBI's estimate of 8:11 PM PST.
All of the above has been discussed at length numerous times on this site and the DropZone site over the past years.
What I described above could be done by any 16 year old boy or girl who has been prepared to take the written examination for the FAA's Airplane Single Engine Land rating. There is no vodoo involved. It is just something that any power plane pilot learns to do before they get a power rating.
ADDENDUM: I need to add an additional comment to the above. In addition to the hand off time and location to the Oakland Center in northern California, a second time and location was also given in the Harrison papers and the ARINC teletype transcripts. That location was 23 DME south of what is now the Battleground VORTAC and the time was 8:18 PM PST. That location is actually on the western edge of V-23 as well as the Western Flight Path. The 8:18 PM time is the time that the location was given over the ARINC radio link but the same information was transmitted by the ARINC teletype system in a message that was clicked "send" at 8:22 PM. Some people confuse these times, but the airliner crew transmitted at 8:18 PM that they were at the DME location specified and that is the time that is to be used in these flight path calculations.
-
Lots of things have been discussed over and over here as well as Dropzone. including the placard that doesn't look good at this point.
Basically, 64 nautical miles from Seattle to Malay.. 3 mile minutes would put you there in 21 minutes at 170 knots. the plane wasn't steady at 170 knots. he slowed to 155 for a period. some indicate 160. regardless of that you arrive around the same time frame at the Malay intersection. 8:00- 8:02. then another 43 miles to the Tbar area at 170 knots gives a time frame of around 14 minutes..
7:48 they start the climb to ten thousand and complete the climb at 7:54. a typo of 15,000 is reported. even the 8:22 report of 23 miles DME has an asterisk next to it which indicates a time issue.
7:36 takeoff time to 8:11 is 35 minutes. the miles are approx. 107 nautical miles. when you divide 107 into 3 it comes out to 35.6 minutes. but this isn't the case.unless the takeoff time is incorrect or speed changes. it only works on paper.
regardless of the transcripts it's 64 nautical miles from Seattle to Malay. from there it's 43 nautical miles. you break them up and it doesn't add up vs calculating simple math of 107 nautical miles divided by 3..
The transcripts and Harrison notes have the plane taking off at 7:36. it takes approx. 23 minutes to arrive at Toledo prior to turning. I think we can agree this is plausible due to speed changes. Malay is approx. two miles south of Toledo or Carlson field. this adds almost another minute giving arrival at approx 8:00 to 8:02 as worse case. then it's approx. 43 nautical miles from Malay to the Tbar area at a constant speed of 170 knots and probably a ground speed of 196. a 3 mile minute gives a time of about 14 minutes of flight. unless a takeoff time is wrong, I can't see how this would work?
My simulator did the same with timing. 170 knots with a ground speed of 195-199 showed approx. 3 miles per minute DME.
Now, the 14 miles DME also has an asterisk on the time slot. do we know if wheels were up and a normal takeoff took place? 14 miles to 19 if not mistaken were where they slowed down and could explain the difference. SkyVector shows a distance of 61.8 miles from Seattle to Ed Carlson field with arrival of 25 minutes at 170. this area is kind of locked in, if you ask me?
SkyVector show Ed Carlson at 61.8 miles and Malay at 64.4....
-
YouTube zapped the documentary I posted a couple days ago. lasted longer than I thought it would. just watched parts of it an hour or so ago..
-
Lots of things have been discussed over and over here as well as Dropzone. including the placard that doesn't look good at this point.
Basically, 64 nautical miles from Seattle to Malay.. 3 mile minutes would put you there in 21 minutes at 170 knots. the plane wasn't steady at 170 knots. he slowed to 155 for a period. some indicate 160. regardless of that you arrive around the same time frame at the Malay intersection. 8:00- 8:02. then another 43 miles to the Tbar area at 170 knots gives a time frame of around 14 minutes..
7:48 they start the climb to ten thousand and complete the climb at 7:54. a typo of 15,000 is reported. even the 8:22 report of 23 miles DME has an asterisk next to it which indicates a time issue.
7:36 takeoff time to 8:11 is 35 minutes. the miles are approx. 107 nautical miles. when you divide 107 into 3 it comes out to 35.6 minutes. but this isn't the case.unless the takeoff time is incorrect or speed changes. it only works on paper.
regardless of the transcripts it's 64 nautical miles from Seattle to Malay. from there it's 43 nautical miles. you break them up and it doesn't add up vs calculating simple math of 107 nautical miles divided by 3..
The transcripts and Harrison notes have the plane taking off at 7:36. it takes approx. 23 minutes to arrive at Toledo prior to turning. I think we can agree this is plausible due to speed changes. Malay is approx. two miles south of Toledo or Carlson field. this adds almost another minute giving arrival at approx 8:00 to 8:02 as worse case. then it's approx. 43 nautical miles from Malay to the Tbar area at a constant speed of 170 knots and probably a ground speed of 196. a 3 mile minute gives a time of about 14 minutes of flight. unless a takeoff time is wrong, I can't see how this would work?
My simulator did the same with timing. 170 knots with a ground speed of 195-199 showed approx. 3 miles per minute DME.
Now, the 14 miles DME also has an asterisk on the time slot. do we know if wheels were up and a normal takeoff took place? 14 miles to 19 if not mistaken were where they slowed down and could explain the difference. SkyVector shows a distance of 61.8 miles from Seattle to Ed Carlson field with arrival of 25 minutes at 170. this area is kind of locked in, if you ask me?
SkyVector show Ed Carlson at 61.8 miles and Malay at 64.4....
The takeoff time was 7:36 PM PST according to Captain Scott. He sit in on the FBI interviews of each of the crew members in Reno, which were done within a few hours of their landing there. Everyone stated that the takeoff time was 7:36 PM.
The time at the 23 DME location was actually 8:18 PM PST according to George Harrison who was in on the ARINC radio patch with the airliner and not the 8:22 PM time that the ARINC teletype transcript was sent.
You cannot start in Seattle and arrive at any believable times and/or locations for the airliner using the available information. The times and locations listed on the so-called FBI map are not accurate enough for determining the actual flight path. For instance, how does the airliner fly 3 nautical miles in one minute and then in the very next minute fly 6 nautical miles while flying at a constant airspeed?
I believe Eric Ulis' book contains about 27 pages of information explaining the above. Take a look at it.
-
I realize the above. Harrison also notes the times with the DME at the start of the flight? the 14 miles DME has the asterisk beside it that means it's off. your times can't be in cue with Eric's since he has him jumping approx. 10 miles north? you claim the plane is at Tbar at 8:11 while Eric would be under the 8:00 time?
I've made no claims of starting the flight other than 7:36?
-
You don't know if it was a constant speed. this was the time frame the plane slowed down and we still haven't a clue if the plane tookoff and went with wheels up till getting to 14 miles DME and slowing down? the 19 miles DME can be reached.
One simulation test showed the 14 miles couldn't be reached at low speeds but could reach the 19 miles DME.
-
Hominid told me to disregard the 14 miles and try to reach 19 miles. that was one of the first tests we did. I think I fell short 3 or 4 miles trying to reach 14 miles DME. once we reached the 19 miles the first leg was tried and reached after doing the speed adjustments. it was always around 7:59 to 8:00 arrival time.
Harrison marks two time frames (8:22-8:18). one matches the transcripts while the other doesn't no other time changes are made? I have to read them more to try and see any difference.
-
You don't know if it was a constant speed. this was the time frame the plane slowed down and we still haven't a clue if the plane tookoff and went with wheels up till getting to 14 miles DME and slowing down? the 19 miles DME can be reached.
One simulation test showed the 14 miles couldn't be reached at low speeds but could reach the 19 miles DME.
The bug speed of 170 KIAS was determined by the performance engineers in Minneapolis to be the ideal speed for best range with the configuration specified by Cooper. When the airliner took off from Seattle no one knew if the airliner could even make it to Reno under the specified circumstances. That is why the fuel flow for each engine was repeatedly passed through the ARINC telephone patch to the performance engineers in Minneapolis. It was only when the airliner had reached the Portland area that the flight crew was informed that they could probably make it to Reno.
I am the one who said that Cooper jumped in the immediate vicinity of Tina Bar. Basically, the only thing EU and I agree on is the Western Flight Path.
There is a story in some of the paper work that Rataczak almost retracted the wheels during the take off but put them back down and they stayed down during the remainder of the flight to Reno. They were not retracted and lowered at different times in the flight.
-
Hominid told me to disregard the 14 miles and try to reach 19 miles. that was one of the first tests we did. I think I fell short 3 or 4 miles trying to reach 14 miles DME. once we reached the 19 miles the first leg was tried and reached after doing the speed adjustments. it was always around 7:59 to 8:00 arrival time.
Harrison marks two time frames (8:22-8:18). one matches the transcripts while the other doesn't no other time changes are made? I have to read them more to try and see any difference.
There are differences of about two minutes each in the times from the ATC radio transcripts and the ARINC teletype transcripts for the 14 and 19 mile points. Check the so-called FBI notes.
-
I would like to see the paperwork by Rataczak. my point was the speed during takeoff and leveling off at 7,000. the plane is slowed down so Cooper can attempt to get the stairs all the way down. this would be in the same area of time issues or the 14 miles is just wrong as the asterisk shows.
I am aware of the optimal speed calculated and discussed during the early portion of the flight. the flaps were at 30 degree's for a short period as well. that was determined to not being optimal either. none of this has anything to do with changing the path but does with timing. the speed was 160 and flaps at 30 degree's that caused concern. I believe the Harrison notes state 155 vs 160 knots. I recall the fuel flow being pretty steady at around 4500. the speeds shown on the transcripts were 160, 170 and one notation of being in the area of 170/180 knots if not mistaken.
-
Does anyone have a better quality copy of these images taken from the chase plane of the sled test flight on 01.06.1972?
Can anyone confirm that these images are from Ralph Himmelsbach's book "NORJAK"?
-
Does anyone have a better quality copy of these images taken from the chase plane of the sled test flight on 01.06.1972?
Can anyone confirm that these images are from Ralph Himmelsbach's book "NORJAK"?
There are two pictures of the sled tests in Himmelsbach's book. Page 80 has a picture of the stairs partly down. Page 81 has a picture of the "sled" dropping away, but with a rope or lanyard running back up to the aircraft, and the stairs are almost completely closed.
-
If you are looking for an exact time for that pressure bump, then you are out of luck unless the FAA/FBI release more information. In the meantime, the 8:11 or 8:12 PM PST time estimates is as good as anything that is available.
That doesn't make sense when you look at the available evidence and testimony. Rataczak makes note of where they believe he jumped on transcripts and actual words. if the FBI was aware of a secret or a different location they held back on the transcripts then why would they search in the wrong spot? the totality doesn't agree with the assumption. as for the timing. that would put him several minutes behind of landing on Tbar or in the area of Tbar.
Lets say they marked the spot. now, the FBI is aware and we are not...again, they looked in the wrong spot for no reason?
The 8:11 PM PST time is in the FBI Notes and is described as being the best available estimate.
Several years ago, I posted information on the flight path, what is now called the Western Flight Path, and it put the airliner over Tina Bar at 8:12 PM. That agreement surprised me.
Presumably, the FBI had a reason for searching whatever area they searched. But that doesn't mean they were searching the area where Cooper actually jumped.
If the FBI searched the areas where Cooper jumped and didn't find him, then they need to search the areas where Cooper didn't jump and he will be there. He definitely jumped somewhere.
Ugh, I'll get spit on for this, but if the Western path/bump time lined up that well with Tina Bar, Occam's Razor would dictate that is the most likely reason the money ended up there. No other, more convoluted way has been conclusively proven and the only thing known for sure is the money DID end up at Tina Bar. *dons raincoat*
-
<>images taken from the chase plane of the sled test flight on 01.06.1972
This film frame is from the archived copy of n467us.com. DB Cooper Part 52 of 53.pdf, page 208, indicates that the film was released to Unsolved Mysteries/History Channel, but subsequently denied to Granite Productions and all FOIA requesters. Does anyone know whether any part of the film was ever broadcast?
-
What are you hoping to find if the video is found?
-
A stuntman did the jump for a movie. the plane was traveling at a 150 knots..
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8ov77VMDy0&list=PLFSviiCWSNB9_gd79wamliMUUQBocl-5N&ab_channel=MondoDigital
-
What are you hoping to find if the video is found?
I think it would add to our understanding of the sled test flight if we could discern (more clearly than from the photos in Ralph Himmelsbach's book and on the archived copy of n467.com):
* whether there was one or more than one drop
* the flap setting at the time of the drop or drops
* whether the sled was on a static line or a free drop
* the movement of the ventral air stair before and after the drop.
-
What are you hoping to find if the video is found?
I think it would add to our understanding of the sled test flight if we could discern (more clearly than from the photos in Ralph Himmelsbach's book and on the archived copy of n467.com):
* whether there was one or more than one drop
* the flap setting at the time of the drop or drops
* whether the sled was on a static line or a free drop
* the movement of the ventral air stair before and after the drop.
If not mistaken they had 3 sleds. the first was dropped with someone on the stairs. a line was attached so they could drop it while not being on the stairs. a line can be seen in the photo's. I have pictures of multiple sleds. the configuration of the plane was exact of the evening of the hijacking.
The stairs will go up and return to a 30 degree position, I believe. I have several pics of the testing if you need to see them.
Looking over the photo's it appears only one sled can be seen but matching sand bags are in the area where Cooper's seat was that was taken out for the testing. the lanyard can also be seen.
-
Here is some pics of the flight test..
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1pkdcunmtwL7GA3eRjiXZmcpy-_xKoWV2
-
Posts of Note: Dfs346
https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56559-727-take-off-climb-performance/?tab=comments#comment-4872289
Interesting: DFS 346 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFS_346
http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/models/aircraft/DFS-346.html
-
Here is some pics of the flight test..
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1pkdcunmtwL7GA3eRjiXZmcpy-_xKoWV2
Many thanks, but could not access that folder.
-
This should work.
..
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1pkdcunmtwL7GA3eRjiXZmcpy-_xKoWV2?usp=sharing
-
R99, EU, Shutter, Georger, and anyone who has really focused on the flight path: Refresh me if you can. Do we know an exact timestamp and location at any point on the flight path, even the exact takeoff time? I thought there were a few points where we know for sure where the plane was and at an exact time, but as it got closer to the jump time of 8:12, 8:13 etc, that it got a little questionable. Didn't Shutter program a few exact spots/times in the flight simulation? R99, is this all that redacted info you've been searching for? Thanks.
-
R99, EU, Shutter, Georger, and anyone who has really focused on the flight path: Refresh me if you can. Do we know an exact timestamp and location at any point on the flight path, even the exact takeoff time? I thought there were a few points where we know for sure where the plane was and at an exact time, but as it got closer to the jump time of 8:12, 8:13 etc, that it got a little questionable. Didn't Shutter program a few exact spots/times in the flight simulation? R99, is this all that redacted info you've been searching for? Thanks.
The time stamps in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the Oakland ATC radio transcripts are Greenwich Mean Time and accurate to the second. Captain Scott said the takeoff time from SEATAC was 7:36 PM PST and the airliner was talking to the Seattle ATC Center by 7:37:11 PM PST so Scott's statement is accurate.
At 9:45 PM PST, the airliner is handed off to the Oakland ATC Center and the Seattle end of the conversation is included in the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. The Oakland ATC radio transcripts include the telephone communications between Oakland ATC and Seattle ATC controllers. The Seattle ATC controller tells the Oakland ATC controller at 9:45 PM PST that the airliner is one mile south of the Fort Jones VORTAC in Northern California. The Oakland ATC controller then locates the airliner and the handoff is made.
The above times and locations are accurate. But with a bit less accuracy, three more positions and times can be estimated for the airliner between SEATAC and just south of Portland. This involves comparing the times of transmissions over the ARINC radio patch and the time stamp of those transmissions over the ARINC teletype network.
The 19 deletions from the Seattle ATC radio transcripts would all be concerned with air traffic control matters and give such things as locations and times at those locations. The transmissions between the flight crew and the NWA offices in Seattle and Minneapolis would all be conducted over the ARINC radio patch and teletype network. Inputs from the FBI and others would be over the ARINC telephone patch.
Personnel at the WSHM had access to many of the ARINC teletype transmissions that were made from the airliner during the hijacking. They concluded that a number of these transmissions had also been deleted. So we have more deletions here also.
Those 19 deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, which are actually in the public domain, are what I tried to obtain by three FOIA request through the FBI/FAA and my US Congressman. None were successful.
-
R99, EU, Shutter, Georger, and anyone who has really focused on the flight path: Refresh me if you can. Do we know an exact timestamp and location at any point on the flight path, even the exact takeoff time? I thought there were a few points where we know for sure where the plane was and at an exact time, but as it got closer to the jump time of 8:12, 8:13 etc, that it got a little questionable. Didn't Shutter program a few exact spots/times in the flight simulation? R99, is this all that redacted info you've been searching for? Thanks.
The time stamps in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the Oakland ATC radio transcripts are Greenwich Mean Time and accurate to the second. Captain Scott said the takeoff time from SEATAC was 7:36 PM PST and the airliner was talking to the Seattle ATC Center by 7:37:11 PM PST so Scott's statement is accurate.
At 9:45 PM PST, the airliner is handed off to the Oakland ATC Center and the Seattle end of the conversation is included in the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. The Oakland ATC radio transcripts include the telephone communications between Oakland ATC and Seattle ATC controllers. The Seattle ATC controller tells the Oakland ATC controller at 9:45 PM PST that the airliner is one mile south of the Fort Jones VORTAC in Northern California. The Oakland ATC controller then locates the airliner and the handoff is made.
The above times and locations are accurate. But with a bit less accuracy, three more positions and times can be estimated for the airliner between SEATAC and just south of Portland. This involves comparing the times of transmissions over the ARINC radio patch and the time stamp of those transmissions over the ARINC teletype network.
The 19 deletions from the Seattle ATC radio transcripts would all be concerned with air traffic control matters and give such things as locations and times at those locations. The transmissions between the flight crew and the NWA offices in Seattle and Minneapolis would all be conducted over the ARINC radio patch and teletype network. Inputs from the FBI and others would be over the ARINC telephone patch.
Personnel at the WSHM had access to many of the ARINC teletype transmissions that were made from the airliner during the hijacking. They concluded that a number of these transmissions had also been deleted. So we have more deletions here also.
Those 19 deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, which are actually in the public domain, are what I tried to obtain by three FOIA request through the FBI/FAA and my US Congressman. None were successful.
Tweedledum and Tweedledee are characters in an English nursery rhyme and in Lewis Carroll's 1871 book Through the Looking-Glass.
There is no record of anyone launching a ground search for Cooper based on a mythical 'west path'. Likewise no record of anyone claiming a 'west path'. No record of a dispute about the flight path! No record of redactions. No record that implies a conspiracy to withhold information from ... who ? No record of someone somewhere conducting a managerial conspiracy to withhold info from somebody . . .
Your and Poyner's claims deny and conflict with actual history! That may be an even bigger story than any redactions!
You and Poyner should write a book! Why didn't you? Something doesn't add up! :(
Does Galen Cook support your west path? ;D
Do you and Poyner recommend a Presidential Pardon for all involved with the flight path - redactions % conspiracy! ? What's your next media strategy?
-
R99, EU, Shutter, Georger, and anyone who has really focused on the flight path: Refresh me if you can. Do we know an exact timestamp and location at any point on the flight path, even the exact takeoff time? I thought there were a few points where we know for sure where the plane was and at an exact time, but as it got closer to the jump time of 8:12, 8:13 etc, that it got a little questionable. Didn't Shutter program a few exact spots/times in the flight simulation? R99, is this all that redacted info you've been searching for? Thanks.
The time stamps in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the Oakland ATC radio transcripts are Greenwich Mean Time and accurate to the second. Captain Scott said the takeoff time from SEATAC was 7:36 PM PST and the airliner was talking to the Seattle ATC Center by 7:37:11 PM PST so Scott's statement is accurate.
At 9:45 PM PST, the airliner is handed off to the Oakland ATC Center and the Seattle end of the conversation is included in the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. The Oakland ATC radio transcripts include the telephone communications between Oakland ATC and Seattle ATC controllers. The Seattle ATC controller tells the Oakland ATC controller at 9:45 PM PST that the airliner is one mile south of the Fort Jones VORTAC in Northern California. The Oakland ATC controller then locates the airliner and the handoff is made.
The above times and locations are accurate. But with a bit less accuracy, three more positions and times can be estimated for the airliner between SEATAC and just south of Portland. This involves comparing the times of transmissions over the ARINC radio patch and the time stamp of those transmissions over the ARINC teletype network.
The 19 deletions from the Seattle ATC radio transcripts would all be concerned with air traffic control matters and give such things as locations and times at those locations. The transmissions between the flight crew and the NWA offices in Seattle and Minneapolis would all be conducted over the ARINC radio patch and teletype network. Inputs from the FBI and others would be over the ARINC telephone patch.
Personnel at the WSHM had access to many of the ARINC teletype transmissions that were made from the airliner during the hijacking. They concluded that a number of these transmissions had also been deleted. So we have more deletions here also.
Those 19 deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, which are actually in the public domain, are what I tried to obtain by three FOIA request through the FBI/FAA and my US Congressman. None were successful.
Who made the redactions you claim? When and where?
Why dont you ever reply to straight-forward questions?
-
R99, EU, Shutter, Georger, and anyone who has really focused on the flight path: Refresh me if you can. Do we know an exact timestamp and location at any point on the flight path, even the exact takeoff time? I thought there were a few points where we know for sure where the plane was and at an exact time, but as it got closer to the jump time of 8:12, 8:13 etc, that it got a little questionable. Didn't Shutter program a few exact spots/times in the flight simulation? R99, is this all that redacted info you've been searching for? Thanks.
The time stamps in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the Oakland ATC radio transcripts are Greenwich Mean Time and accurate to the second. Captain Scott said the takeoff time from SEATAC was 7:36 PM PST and the airliner was talking to the Seattle ATC Center by 7:37:11 PM PST so Scott's statement is accurate.
At 9:45 PM PST, the airliner is handed off to the Oakland ATC Center and the Seattle end of the conversation is included in the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. The Oakland ATC radio transcripts include the telephone communications between Oakland ATC and Seattle ATC controllers. The Seattle ATC controller tells the Oakland ATC controller at 9:45 PM PST that the airliner is one mile south of the Fort Jones VORTAC in Northern California. The Oakland ATC controller then locates the airliner and the handoff is made.
The above times and locations are accurate. But with a bit less accuracy, three more positions and times can be estimated for the airliner between SEATAC and just south of Portland. This involves comparing the times of transmissions over the ARINC radio patch and the time stamp of those transmissions over the ARINC teletype network.
The 19 deletions from the Seattle ATC radio transcripts would all be concerned with air traffic control matters and give such things as locations and times at those locations. The transmissions between the flight crew and the NWA offices in Seattle and Minneapolis would all be conducted over the ARINC radio patch and teletype network. Inputs from the FBI and others would be over the ARINC telephone patch.
Personnel at the WSHM had access to many of the ARINC teletype transmissions that were made from the airliner during the hijacking. They concluded that a number of these transmissions had also been deleted. So we have more deletions here also.
Those 19 deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, which are actually in the public domain, are what I tried to obtain by three FOIA request through the FBI/FAA and my US Congressman. None were successful.
Tweedledum and Tweedledee are characters in an English nursery rhyme and in Lewis Carroll's 1871 book Through the Looking-Glass.
There is no record of anyone launching a ground search for Cooper based on a mythical 'west path'. Likewise no record of anyone claiming a 'west path'. No record of a dispute about the flight path! No record of redactions. No record that implies a conspiracy to withhold information from ... who ? No record of someone somewhere conducting a managerial conspiracy to withhold info from somebody . . .
Your and Poyner's claims deny and conflict with actual history! That may be an even bigger story than any redactions!
You and Poyner should write a book! Why didn't you? Something doesn't add up! :(
Does Galen Cook support your west path? ;D
Do you and Poyner recommend a Presidential Pardon for all involved with the flight path - redactions % conspiracy! ? What's your next media strategy?
Georger, you are the one who needs a Presidential Pardon!
-
R99, EU, Shutter, Georger, and anyone who has really focused on the flight path: Refresh me if you can. Do we know an exact timestamp and location at any point on the flight path, even the exact takeoff time? I thought there were a few points where we know for sure where the plane was and at an exact time, but as it got closer to the jump time of 8:12, 8:13 etc, that it got a little questionable. Didn't Shutter program a few exact spots/times in the flight simulation? R99, is this all that redacted info you've been searching for? Thanks.
The time stamps in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the Oakland ATC radio transcripts are Greenwich Mean Time and accurate to the second. Captain Scott said the takeoff time from SEATAC was 7:36 PM PST and the airliner was talking to the Seattle ATC Center by 7:37:11 PM PST so Scott's statement is accurate.
At 9:45 PM PST, the airliner is handed off to the Oakland ATC Center and the Seattle end of the conversation is included in the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. The Oakland ATC radio transcripts include the telephone communications between Oakland ATC and Seattle ATC controllers. The Seattle ATC controller tells the Oakland ATC controller at 9:45 PM PST that the airliner is one mile south of the Fort Jones VORTAC in Northern California. The Oakland ATC controller then locates the airliner and the handoff is made.
The above times and locations are accurate. But with a bit less accuracy, three more positions and times can be estimated for the airliner between SEATAC and just south of Portland. This involves comparing the times of transmissions over the ARINC radio patch and the time stamp of those transmissions over the ARINC teletype network.
The 19 deletions from the Seattle ATC radio transcripts would all be concerned with air traffic control matters and give such things as locations and times at those locations. The transmissions between the flight crew and the NWA offices in Seattle and Minneapolis would all be conducted over the ARINC radio patch and teletype network. Inputs from the FBI and others would be over the ARINC telephone patch.
Personnel at the WSHM had access to many of the ARINC teletype transmissions that were made from the airliner during the hijacking. They concluded that a number of these transmissions had also been deleted. So we have more deletions here also.
Those 19 deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, which are actually in the public domain, are what I tried to obtain by three FOIA request through the FBI/FAA and my US Congressman. None were successful.
Who made the redactions you claim? When and where?
Why dont you ever reply to straight-forward questions?
I do reply to straight forward questions. Unfortunately, you lack of fluency in the English language apparently results in your inability to understand the answers.
-
R99, EU, Shutter, Georger, and anyone who has really focused on the flight path: Refresh me if you can. Do we know an exact timestamp and location at any point on the flight path, even the exact takeoff time? I thought there were a few points where we know for sure where the plane was and at an exact time, but as it got closer to the jump time of 8:12, 8:13 etc, that it got a little questionable. Didn't Shutter program a few exact spots/times in the flight simulation? R99, is this all that redacted info you've been searching for? Thanks.
The time stamps in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the Oakland ATC radio transcripts are Greenwich Mean Time and accurate to the second. Captain Scott said the takeoff time from SEATAC was 7:36 PM PST and the airliner was talking to the Seattle ATC Center by 7:37:11 PM PST so Scott's statement is accurate.
At 9:45 PM PST, the airliner is handed off to the Oakland ATC Center and the Seattle end of the conversation is included in the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. The Oakland ATC radio transcripts include the telephone communications between Oakland ATC and Seattle ATC controllers. The Seattle ATC controller tells the Oakland ATC controller at 9:45 PM PST that the airliner is one mile south of the Fort Jones VORTAC in Northern California. The Oakland ATC controller then locates the airliner and the handoff is made.
The above times and locations are accurate. But with a bit less accuracy, three more positions and times can be estimated for the airliner between SEATAC and just south of Portland. This involves comparing the times of transmissions over the ARINC radio patch and the time stamp of those transmissions over the ARINC teletype network.
The 19 deletions from the Seattle ATC radio transcripts would all be concerned with air traffic control matters and give such things as locations and times at those locations. The transmissions between the flight crew and the NWA offices in Seattle and Minneapolis would all be conducted over the ARINC radio patch and teletype network. Inputs from the FBI and others would be over the ARINC telephone patch.
Personnel at the WSHM had access to many of the ARINC teletype transmissions that were made from the airliner during the hijacking. They concluded that a number of these transmissions had also been deleted. So we have more deletions here also.
Those 19 deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, which are actually in the public domain, are what I tried to obtain by three FOIA request through the FBI/FAA and my US Congressman. None were successful.
Who made the redactions you claim? When and where?
Why dont you ever reply to straight-forward questions?
I do reply to straight forward questions. Unfortunately, you lack of fluency in the English language apparently results in your inability to understand the answers.
Hmmmmm. more mystery meat conspiracy bs and personal attack Innuendo!
Refuses to put meat on his conspiracy corpse because he has no facts he can cite.
You need a press agent R99 and Internet Rehab. May I suggest Dowee, Cheatem, and Howe Ltd!
How many scapegoats do you keep on The West Path Ranch? How many Pathalopes ?
-
R99, EU, Shutter, Georger, and anyone who has really focused on the flight path: Refresh me if you can. Do we know an exact timestamp and location at any point on the flight path, even the exact takeoff time? I thought there were a few points where we know for sure where the plane was and at an exact time, but as it got closer to the jump time of 8:12, 8:13 etc, that it got a little questionable. Didn't Shutter program a few exact spots/times in the flight simulation? R99, is this all that redacted info you've been searching for? Thanks.
The time stamps in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the Oakland ATC radio transcripts are Greenwich Mean Time and accurate to the second. Captain Scott said the takeoff time from SEATAC was 7:36 PM PST and the airliner was talking to the Seattle ATC Center by 7:37:11 PM PST so Scott's statement is accurate.
At 9:45 PM PST, the airliner is handed off to the Oakland ATC Center and the Seattle end of the conversation is included in the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. The Oakland ATC radio transcripts include the telephone communications between Oakland ATC and Seattle ATC controllers. The Seattle ATC controller tells the Oakland ATC controller at 9:45 PM PST that the airliner is one mile south of the Fort Jones VORTAC in Northern California. The Oakland ATC controller then locates the airliner and the handoff is made.
The above times and locations are accurate. But with a bit less accuracy, three more positions and times can be estimated for the airliner between SEATAC and just south of Portland. This involves comparing the times of transmissions over the ARINC radio patch and the time stamp of those transmissions over the ARINC teletype network.
The 19 deletions from the Seattle ATC radio transcripts would all be concerned with air traffic control matters and give such things as locations and times at those locations. The transmissions between the flight crew and the NWA offices in Seattle and Minneapolis would all be conducted over the ARINC radio patch and teletype network. Inputs from the FBI and others would be over the ARINC telephone patch.
Personnel at the WSHM had access to many of the ARINC teletype transmissions that were made from the airliner during the hijacking. They concluded that a number of these transmissions had also been deleted. So we have more deletions here also.
Those 19 deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, which are actually in the public domain, are what I tried to obtain by three FOIA request through the FBI/FAA and my US Congressman. None were successful.
Who made the redactions you claim? When and where?
Why dont you ever reply to straight-forward questions?
I do reply to straight forward questions. Unfortunately, you lack of fluency in the English language apparently results in your inability to understand the answers.
Hmmmmm. more mystery meat conspiracy bs and personal attack Innuendo!
Refuses to put meat on his conspiracy corpse because he has no facts he can cite.
You need a press agent R99 and Internet Rehab. May I suggest Dowee, Cheatem, and Howe Ltd!
How many scapegoats do you keep on The West Path Ranch? How many Pathalopes ?
Just more nonsense from Georger.
-
Both sides have responded....let it go!
-
R99, EU, Shutter, Georger, and anyone who has really focused on the flight path: Refresh me if you can. Do we know an exact timestamp and location at any point on the flight path, even the exact takeoff time? I thought there were a few points where we know for sure where the plane was and at an exact time, but as it got closer to the jump time of 8:12, 8:13 etc, that it got a little questionable. Didn't Shutter program a few exact spots/times in the flight simulation? R99, is this all that redacted info you've been searching for? Thanks.
The time stamps in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts and the Oakland ATC radio transcripts are Greenwich Mean Time and accurate to the second. Captain Scott said the takeoff time from SEATAC was 7:36 PM PST and the airliner was talking to the Seattle ATC Center by 7:37:11 PM PST so Scott's statement is accurate.
At 9:45 PM PST, the airliner is handed off to the Oakland ATC Center and the Seattle end of the conversation is included in the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. The Oakland ATC radio transcripts include the telephone communications between Oakland ATC and Seattle ATC controllers. The Seattle ATC controller tells the Oakland ATC controller at 9:45 PM PST that the airliner is one mile south of the Fort Jones VORTAC in Northern California. The Oakland ATC controller then locates the airliner and the handoff is made.
The above times and locations are accurate. But with a bit less accuracy, three more positions and times can be estimated for the airliner between SEATAC and just south of Portland. This involves comparing the times of transmissions over the ARINC radio patch and the time stamp of those transmissions over the ARINC teletype network.
The 19 deletions from the Seattle ATC radio transcripts would all be concerned with air traffic control matters and give such things as locations and times at those locations. The transmissions between the flight crew and the NWA offices in Seattle and Minneapolis would all be conducted over the ARINC radio patch and teletype network. Inputs from the FBI and others would be over the ARINC telephone patch.
Personnel at the WSHM had access to many of the ARINC teletype transmissions that were made from the airliner during the hijacking. They concluded that a number of these transmissions had also been deleted. So we have more deletions here also.
Those 19 deletions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, which are actually in the public domain, are what I tried to obtain by three FOIA request through the FBI/FAA and my US Congressman. None were successful.
Thanks Robert. Just to confirm, we have pretty much an exact time leaving Seattle, and we know times after Portland, but nothing in between? Shutter-were you able to program exact times?
-
Certain times frames couldn't be matched. a time difference is found between the Lewis river and the Columbia. this is also visible just looking at the map itself. some entries have asterisk marks indicating the times are not correct. the 14 miles DME and the 23 miles DME both have them. Harrison writes in his notes twice indicating a time of 8:22 and one comment of 8:18. Harrison has two takeoff times, if not mistaken. 7:36/7:37. Hominid always marked the time of takeoff at 7:36:30 splitting the difference.
Another point would be no actual deviation directly east or west occurred. basically, the plane can match time frames in several places since the plane flew basically southward. you could easily go several miles west or east of V23.
The 14 miles DME doesn't make any sense unless you increase the speed to reach that time frame. then you would have to slow the plane down to reach the 19 miles DME. I found ignoring the 14 and made the 19 miles DME after slowing to 155 knots. this was when Cooper was playing with the stairs. it's also passing McChord AFB. we don't have any indication of exceeding 180 knots.
Do I believe the map is accurate to a certain degree, yes. do I believe a western path. it's possible but a lot of evidence goes against it. Scotty thought Cooper went into Merwin and then says he was over Woodland. Rat states he thought he was more east of V23. if you ask me, we need Cooper to fix the problem..
-
The question isn't where the plane was. We know it was generally along Victor 23 for most of the trip south from Seattle. The question is when did Cooper jump. The flight crew reported oscillations between 8:10 and 8:12. At this point, they stated that "he must be doing something with the stairs". We have no documented record of when the pressure bump occurred. No time stamp, nothing. All we have are the statements of the pilots after the fact : "lights of the suburbs of Portland", "10 to 15 minutes after last contact".
As a result, the jump could have occurred anywhere between Orchards and the Columbia.
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia.
-
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia
This could also give credit to a western path..
-
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia
This could also give credit to a western path..
The money was found miles downstream from where the airliner would have crossed the Columbia if it stayed on the centerline of V-23 or on the FBI flight path. If the airliner was flying a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections, it would have flown almost directly overhead of Tina Bar and would have been over the Columbia for several miles since the river flows almost straight north in the Tina Bar area and the airliner would have been flying a heading of 178 degrees True (with respect to the grid lines).
There is no reason for the airliner to have been west of this straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections.
-
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia
This could also give credit to a western path..
This would require actual physical evidence of a Western flight path of which there is none.
-
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia
This could also give credit to a western path..
This would require actual physical evidence of a Western flight path of which there is none.
Lets first eliminate the fact of a river and the dredging ........ then posit the mere position of the money has something to do with the flight path ! ?
Amazes me how R99 conveniently rigs the stage without even blushing!
Next move: just eliminate the airplane! Now R99 can posit any flight path he wants for any plane - anywhere, any time. Based on the money find only. Maybe the plane involved flew over in FEBRUARY 1980! It was Cooper himself seeding Tina Bar! Tina was the co-pilot. Anderson was flying behind Cooper. BIG FBI COVER UP! The planes took off from the street in front of Tina's house. There were witnesses! Finegold for one! All redacted from the Transcripts too ...
:rofl: :congrats:
-
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia
This could also give credit to a western path..
This would require actual physical evidence of a Western flight path of which there is none.
Lets first eliminate the fact of a river and the dredging ........ then posit the mere position of the money has something to do with the flight path ! ?
Amazes me how R99 conveniently rigs the stage without even blushing!
Next move: just eliminate the airplane! Now R99 can posit any flight path he wants for any plane - anywhere, any time. Based on the money find only. Maybe the plane involved flew over in FEBRUARY 1980! It was Cooper himself seeding Tina Bar! Tina was the co-pilot. Anderson was flying behind Cooper. BIG FBI COVER UP! The planes took off from the street in front of Tina's house. There were witnesses! Finegold for one! All redacted from the Transcripts too ...
:rofl: :congrats:
Just more of the usual nonsense from Georger.
-
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia
This could also give credit to a western path..
This would require actual physical evidence of a Western flight path of which there is none.
Lets first eliminate the fact of a river and the dredging ........ then posit the mere position of the money has something to do with the flight path ! ?
Amazes me how R99 conveniently rigs the stage without even blushing!
Next move: just eliminate the airplane! Now R99 can posit any flight path he wants for any plane - anywhere, any time. Based on the money find only. Maybe the plane involved flew over in FEBRUARY 1980! It was Cooper himself seeding Tina Bar! Tina was the co-pilot. Anderson was flying behind Cooper. BIG FBI COVER UP! The planes took off from the street in front of Tina's house. There were witnesses! Finegold for one! All redacted from the Transcripts too ...
:rofl: :congrats:
Just more of the usual nonsense from Georger.
No. Its what you are doing. Your claim is that the only thing that could cause money to be at TBar is the plane flying over TBar. And just ignore the river, and dredging, etc. That is exactly what you are saying-doing. In addition you keep insisting over and over, quote: "Water flows down hill". Conveniently flow down hill to ..... Tina Bar. Where else!
You wont allow anything else to even be discussed. No river. No dredging. And if it turns out forensic evidence says the money arrived in 1973 ... you wont allow that either.
Moma Nicholson dont 'lau no music round here'! Just the tune he wants.
Its so ridiculous a third grader could see it.
-
The question isn't where the plane was. We know it was generally along Victor 23 for most of the trip south from Seattle. The question is when did Cooper jump. The flight crew reported oscillations between 8:10 and 8:12. At this point, they stated that "he must be doing something with the stairs". We have no documented record of when the pressure bump occurred. No time stamp, nothing. All we have are the statements of the pilots after the fact : "lights of the suburbs of Portland", "10 to 15 minutes after last contact".
As a result, the jump could have occurred anywhere between Orchards and the Columbia.
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia.
Chaucer: Refresh me on how you get Orchards as the northern most jump point and not Battle Ground. Also, are you saying there was no pressure bump, or that there were oscillations and a pressure bump, or that there was a pressure bump but we don't know the time?
The pressure bump conversation predates you by quite a bit, so it is not a new theory, I'm just wondering about it and figured it would be a good question.
-
The question isn't where the plane was. We know it was generally along Victor 23 for most of the trip south from Seattle. The question is when did Cooper jump. The flight crew reported oscillations between 8:10 and 8:12. At this point, they stated that "he must be doing something with the stairs". We have no documented record of when the pressure bump occurred. No time stamp, nothing. All we have are the statements of the pilots after the fact : "lights of the suburbs of Portland", "10 to 15 minutes after last contact".
As a result, the jump could have occurred anywhere between Orchards and the Columbia.
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia.
Chaucer: Refresh me on how you get Orchards as the northern most jump point and not Battle Ground. Also, are you saying there was no pressure bump, or that there were oscillations and a pressure bump, or that there was a pressure bump but we don't know the time?
The pressure bump conversation predates you by quite a bit, so it is not a new theory, I'm just wondering about it and figured it would be a good question.
I'm going by the time along the flight path.
8:05 was the last time the flight crew hear from Cooper when he responded to them on the intercom that "everything was OK"
8:10 was the first time there are any reports of "oscillations" (FBI Vault, Part 41, p. 31 & 32)
8:12 was the last time there are any reports of "oscillations".(FBI Vault, Part 41, p. 31 & 32) At this point the plane was just east of LaCenter.
There is no official report of a "pressure bump" which is generally used as the point at which Cooper jumped causing the stairs to swing back up. We don't know when that took place, but we know it took place AFTER 8:12 because the oscillations preceded the pressure bump.
So, while we don't have an exact time of the pressure bump, we do have pilot statements. Rat said initially that the pressure bump was felt 5 to 10 minutes after last contact (8:05). That would put the bump between 8:10 and 8:15. We know it can't be between 8:10 and 8:12 because that is when the oscillations are happening. So it would have to happen between 8:13 and 8:15. However, Rat later told Carr that the pressure bump occurred 10 to 15 minutes after last contact (8:05). This would give you a range between 8:15 and 8:20 for the pressure bump.
However, further statements by the crew were that the pressure bump occurred when "the lights of the suburbs of Portland were visible" but they "had not yet crossed the Columbia. The plane crossed over the Columbia at 8:17, so we can eliminate any bump happening after 8:17.
Thus, the timing of the oscillations combined with the statements of the pilot give a range between 8:13 and 8:17 for Cooper jumping and causing the pressure bump. The median of this time range is 8:15. At 8:15 the plane is over the Orchards area.
In actuality, the northernmost jump point IS just north of Battleground and the southernmost would be the northern banks of the Columbia. I used Orchards as a center between the two.
My contention is that the jump occurred in the 8:16/8:17 time frame and Cooper and/or the money came to rest very near the banks of the Columbia.
Sorry that was so wordy. I'll be happy to clarify anything.
-
The question isn't where the plane was. We know it was generally along Victor 23 for most of the trip south from Seattle. The question is when did Cooper jump. The flight crew reported oscillations between 8:10 and 8:12. At this point, they stated that "he must be doing something with the stairs". We have no documented record of when the pressure bump occurred. No time stamp, nothing. All we have are the statements of the pilots after the fact : "lights of the suburbs of Portland", "10 to 15 minutes after last contact".
As a result, the jump could have occurred anywhere between Orchards and the Columbia.
The fact that the money was found along the Columbia upstream from where the plane crossed over is in my mind a clue that he jumped near the Columbia.
Chaucer: Refresh me on how you get Orchards as the northern most jump point and not Battle Ground. Also, are you saying there was no pressure bump, or that there were oscillations and a pressure bump, or that there was a pressure bump but we don't know the time?
The pressure bump conversation predates you by quite a bit, so it is not a new theory, I'm just wondering about it and figured it would be a good question.
I'm going by the time along the flight path.
8:05 was the last time the flight crew hear from Cooper when he responded to them on the intercom that "everything was OK"
8:10 was the first time there are any reports of "oscillations" (FBI Vault, Part 41, p. 31 & 32)
8:12 was the last time there are any reports of "oscillations".(FBI Vault, Part 41, p. 31 & 32) At this point the plane was just east of LaCenter.
There is no official report of a "pressure bump" which is generally used as the point at which Cooper jumped causing the stairs to swing back up. We don't know when that took place, but we know it took place AFTER 8:12 because the oscillations preceded the pressure bump.
So, while we don't have an exact time of the pressure bump, we do have pilot statements. Rat said initially that the pressure bump was felt 5 to 10 minutes after last contact (8:05). That would put the bump between 8:10 and 8:15. We know it can't be between 8:10 and 8:12 because that is when the oscillations are happening. So it would have to happen between 8:13 and 8:15. However, Rat later told Carr that the pressure bump occurred 10 to 15 minutes after last contact (8:05). This would give you a range between 8:15 and 8:20 for the pressure bump.
However, further statements by the crew were that the pressure bump occurred when "the lights of the suburbs of Portland were visible" but they "had not yet crossed the Columbia. The plane crossed over the Columbia at 8:17, so we can eliminate any bump happening after 8:17.
Thus, the timing of the oscillations combined with the statements of the pilot give a range between 8:13 and 8:17 for Cooper jumping and causing the pressure bump. The median of this time range is 8:15. At 8:15 the plane is over the Orchards area.
In actuality, the northernmost jump point IS just north of Battleground and the southernmost would be the northern banks of the Columbia. I used Orchards as a center between the two.
My contention is that the jump occurred in the 8:16/8:17 time frame and Cooper and/or the money came to rest very near the banks of the Columbia.
Sorry that was so wordy. I'll be happy to clarify anything.
Hominid & Georger Telephone interviews with Andy Anderson: Tuesday Jan 28, 2014 –
Georger,
Thank you for entertaining my questions.
NWA documents indicate that, at approximately 8:11pm PST, an event occurred which was described by an NWA incident report as "oscillation of cabin rate of climb indicator." The event occurred just after the flight was advised of weather at Reno and "Reno looks better as time goes by" per a TTY based log. This log (that appears to be an attempt by a non-aviation person to type all he thought he was hearing) also included "Must be doing something with air stairs" immediately after the "oscillations" report.
Oscillation of the cabin climb rate gauge seems reasonable. It is conceivable that the oscillation could be just an indication that the airstair moving up and down was directly causing pressure cycles. It is more likely that the pressure cycles resulted from the plane bobbing up and down a bit ("porpoising") as a result of the airstair functioning as an elevator as it moved up and down in the airstream. It could have been that the hijacker was doing something like jumping up and down on the airstair to test its "feel" or to try to get the stair locked down.
It seems very unlikely that the "oscillation" and "doing something with air stairs" would be reference to a pressure pulse felt in ears, or the airstair-ajar enunciator light going out momentarily.
Q1: Andy, Who on the flight crew made the oscillation report?
A: Rataczak filed the report, based on my observations. But he did not report it immediately as we discussed it for some minutes then Bill (R) radioed it in to NWA.
Q2: Is it correct that the intent of the report from the crew was that the cabin climb rate guage indication had oscillated?
A: It was the "rate of descent" gauge that detected the so-called "pressure bump." Two guages are used to detect the disruptions of airflow. (1) the Differential Pressure/Cabin Altitude (which serves as a dual function guage); and (2) rate of climb, or, rate of descent guage.
If so:
Q3: Approximately how many pressure (climb rate) cycles (up-downs) occurred?
A: Do not specifically recall, but it wasn’t a one time event but a series of fluctuations which attracted our attention. I saw it first then alerted Scott and Bill, ending in a single pressure event we felt in our ears, and nothing following, not even more fluctuations. We waited to see if something more would happen but it didn’t.
Q4: Approximately what was the rate or time span per cycle? (e.g., a second per cycle)
A: I just don’t recall. I would have to think about that and estimate it.
Q5: Was there a feeling of the plane bobbing up and down? [Bill Rataczak has been quoted as saying something like: at some point there was a sudden pressure pulse felt in the ears, that the enunciator light went out momentarily, there was a "bump" of the airframe, and that he immediately told ATC that he thought the hijacker had "taken leave" of the plane. All of this seems likely. Regarding the later test flight, it has been reported that someone on the flight confirmed that the pressure pulse that was felt (when a weighted sled was released) was the same as what occurred during the hijacking.]
A: Q5. Not really and it wasn’t exactly as you describe. These were minor oscillations. We detected on the gauges only. We just presumed pretty quickly that it was Cooper fiddling with the aft stairs but we weren’t one hundred percent sure because we were already flying dirty, with throttles up and fighting icing and weather. A lot going on and it wasn’t totally smooth even before the oscillations started. What we noticed was the pattern of the oscillations was continuing and there was a very minor disruption of the slipstream. Scott said at first he wasn’t feeling anything for sure, then a little later he thought there was more drag and the nose was deviating a little. When the final bump happened and the oscillations stopped that sealed it. But even then we weren’t sure and we waited before calling anybody.
Q6: Was it you who confirmed that the pressure pulse of the test flight seemed the same as what was felt during the hijacked flight?
A: Yes, I was the only original crew member on board the re-test.
Q7: Which (if any) of the above characterizations attributed to Bill can you confirm?
A: All. [broke for a minute for Andy to get some coffee].
Q8: What can you recall about when the pressure pulse event occurred during the hijacking? Was it at the end of the "oscillations"? A few seconds after them? A minute after? [One of the airforce guys (Msgt Saiz) who went out on the stair told me that he jumped up and down on the stair at some point to test how the plane would react. Of course, he was able to experience how the stair responded, but not how the plane responded. The other two still-living airforce people have no memory of this.]
A: I monitored the gauges and reported to Captain Scott. We all agreed that the gauges were detecting a disruption of airflow, most likely caused by Cooper testing out the aft stairs. But we all felt one physically distinguishable "bump" with our ears which came abruptly after we had been monitoring the gauges. We all felt it almost in unison, surprised, "there he goes!" It was the largest bump by far, an abrupt pressure change. We all thought he had exited the aircraft at that point, because the gauges never detected any further major airflow disruptions after that ‘thud’. The re-test duplicated the oscillations and the pressure bump exactly.
Q9: Were you aware of one of the stair-walkers jumping up and down on the stair? Did you experience the plane's reaction? If so, what was it? [Among multiple sources from NWA, there are references to the "oscillations" event. But there are absolutely no references to a pressure pulse, the enunciator light going out, or "took leave of us." After the "oscillations" event was logged by teletype at 8:12 and seconds, the next teletype-logged communication (sent at 8:20 and seconds) was:
305 CALLED
MSP FLT OPNS GO TO 131.8
SEADD HE IS ALREADY ON THAT FREQ
MSP R. WE [are] ON [t]HE PHONE WND [and] WILL BE TAL[k]ING TO HIM SHORTLY
SEADD R.
This is the last TTY logged communication we have. There was an 8-minute absence of communications in the TTY log preceding it. The 131.8 frequency was set up (with ARINC?) about the time the flight was taking off from SEATAC, with a notation "after company" (frequency).]:
A: Don't recall specifically. I believe it was only registered on the pressure and descent gauges. I don’t know anything about teletype matters or who did what to keep track at NWA?
Q10: Did the flight crew report the pressure pulse immediately after it happened? If so, over what comm circuit?
A: That’s a good question because we may have reported the oscillations/pressure changes once, but we were busy and didn’t report it multiple times. We weren’t sure what was going on. When the final bump happened, which we detected with our ears, we were surprised, and we didn’t report it right away. Rataczak finally reported the bump via radio.
Q11: Why do you think a frequency was set up for use after the "company" frequency? [I've been unable to get a manual for the NWA 727s of the period, but have info from 3 other airlines. From this it seems that the procedure that was provided by Boeing to the flight crew for allowing the hijacker out via the aft airstair would have included disabling the hydraulic power to the airstair (probably by pulling the circuit breaker in the cockpit) so that the hijacker wouldn't be able to power the stair to the full-down position (and lock it there).
A: I don’t recall the specifics of this. Our cockpit was in communication with NWA and ATC. Not FBI.
Q12: Did the procedure include disabling the airstair hydraulic power?
A: We didn't want to disable the airstairs by defusing electrical power to hydraulic actuators. We wanted the bastard to get off our ship ASAP.
Q13: Did Paul Soderlind sit in the copilot seat during the test flight?
A: Yes, I believe that's correct.
Q14: Who was the NWA instrumentation man who stood behind the rest of the group in the pic?
A: Do not recall.
Q15: Who was the FBI agent standing beside you in the test group photo? (holding the manila envelope and apparently a jacket in addition to the raincoat he was wearing)
A: Do not recall.
Q16: Who was the heavier agent kneeling down in front of you two, in dark clothes?
A: Too long ago, can't recall.
Q17: Who was on the test flight other than the 12 people in the group pic?
A: Don't specifically recall. Maybe some other Air Force people. Yes, a couple I think.
Q18: Is there anything else you consider significant to the question of where the hijacker jumped?
A: It was very dark, with virtually no ground reference except when we got in the Portland area. We bounced around the clouds, with occasional breaks. The 727’s slipstream initially overcame the aft stairs hydraulic system. The stairs weren’t opening like Cooper needed. Cooper called me on the interphone while Tina was riding up front with us. Cooper had let Tina come to the front. He yelled, "slow it down!." I stated back to Cooper, "OK." And we did; we slowed the plane. The oscillations continued, as I remember, but were smoother and we hadn’t heard anything from Cooper. Bill called back to him and he finally answered. He said everything was “OK”. More time passed. And then suddenly came that “bump”. After the final "bump" which we felt with our ears, we all discussed it for awhile, waiting for another bump. It never repeated, so we assumed that was his exit. But we discussed this among ourselves before notifying NWA. The truth is, we just didn't know for sure. I just don't recall how much time lapsed between feeling the final "bump" and reporting it to NWA via radio. That’s where the uncertainty has come from.
But later we all thought that final bump was his exit.
[end of Part I interview]
-
Thanks for finally posting this, Georger. I think this is important evidence regarding the oscillations/pressure bump discussion.
-
Enough of the bickering...posts removed..
-
This is a newbie question, and one that I have searched for on here, but can't find:
When Cooper lowered the after stairs in flight, did the stairs lock into a down position? Or were they possibly bouncing around freely?
-
The stairs only drop about 20 degree's due to the wind..I'm going to ask McNally what they looked like before stepping on them. I believe he had them drop the stairs..
-
I'm going to ask McNally what they looked like before stepping on them.
May I ask who is McNally?
-
Copycat hijacker...June 23, 1972
-
Martin McNally, been in prison since 1972 and released in 2010.
-
The stairs only drop about 20 degree's due to the wind..I'm going to ask McNally what they looked like before stepping on them. I believe he had them drop the stairs..
So, I would assume that with each step, the stairs lowered by a few degrees until fully deployed with Cooper on the bottom step.
I wonder what the movement of the stairs would have been with Cooper on them. Would they be fairly stationary and stable? Or would he be holding on and trying to keep his balance as with each step?
-
Who knows..I already emailed McNally but will ask him about the stability. I'm guessing with the wind battering them it was bumpy..
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8ov77VMDy0&list=PLFSviiCWSNB9_gd79wamliMUUQBocl-5N&ab_channel=MondoDigital
-
Unless one of you knows differently for a fact, I'm not sure there would be a 'locked down' position. If they operated hydraulically in both directions, then there would be. But according to Flyjack, they drop down by gravity, and the hydraulics are just used to pull them back up. If that is the case, then in their normal usage on the ground, they would just drop either to full extension or till they come to rest on the ground. There would not need to be a 'locked' down position.
-
I don't have access to my files at the moment. the stairs work off of hydraulics and a pump can be used to raise a lower if the hydraulics fail. if the hydraulics failed, why would you need to pump fluid into the stairs to lower them? something is telling me the emergency release would get around the hydraulics allowing them into the free fall position. I recall reading once they are down you need to step on the bottom step to lock them. this could be after many years of use.
I showed a clip from the movie with the stairs not all the way down as if hydraulics were still involved and the weight couldn't pull them all the way down. the actor had to pull them down similar to what would happen when you walk down them after releasing them? the lights in the cockpit indicates when they are locked either way.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5y1u64iNmoY&ab_channel=AlfredoRamirez
-
This clip shows the stairs hanging and takes the weight of the actor to bring them down. they don't lock because you see them moving when he goes up the stairs and the struts are not in place....they don't appear to be in a free fall? sparks were seen on a taxi speed indicating the stairs were dragging with 305
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxPvp8mMYtE&feature=emb_logo
-
Who knows..I already emailed McNally but will ask him about the stability. I'm guessing with the wind battering them it was bumpy..
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8ov77VMDy0&list=PLFSviiCWSNB9_gd79wamliMUUQBocl-5N&ab_channel=MondoDigital
Can see them retract and bounce once the weight of the guy is off them ...
-
Correct, but they don't slam shut or even make it to the closed position..
As for going down the stairs in flight. the wind would be pushing from underneath probably giving a bumpy ride. I'm hoping to get some answers from McNally..
-
Correct, but they don't slam shut or even make it to the closed position..
As for going down the stairs in flight. the wind would be pushing from underneath probably giving a bumpy ride. I'm hoping to get some answers from McNally..
Yes - air under them - bumpy ride = oscillations.
-
Rat stated the noise started just opening the bulkhead door. no sound proofing past that door. once he released the stairs it must of really got there attention.
-
Rat stated the noise started just opening the bulkhead door. no sound proofing past that door. once he released the stairs it must of really got there attention.
Yes. One report is deafening engine noise when rear door is open - did Tina say that?
-
Hominid thinks they disabled the hydraulics for the stairs but I'm not sure that can be done inside. not a whole lot required getting the hydraulic running for system A or B. plus, it has a standby system. these tie into critical parts of the plane.
-
Rat stated the noise started just opening the bulkhead door. no sound proofing past that door. once he released the stairs it must of really got there attention.
Yes. One report is deafening near the rear door - did Tina say that?
She was sent up before he opened the bulkhead door according to Rat..
-
Rat stated the noise started just opening the bulkhead door. no sound proofing past that door. once he released the stairs it must of really got there attention.
Yes. One report is deafening near the rear door - did Tina say that?
She was sent up before he opened the bulkhead door according to Rat..
I know but she is attributed with the observation - not sure the context ...
-
Someone needs to try and get one more shot with the crew and ask the right questions before it's too late..the clock is ticking like a stop watch now..
-
To close the door either an electric hydraulic pump has to be turned on in the cockpit, or a hand pump beside the lower control operated while either handle is held to the close position. The door will free fall open without hydraulic pressure, but the support arms may have to be pushed to an overcenter position.
This is what I was talking about with the stairs not going all the way down and having to apply pressure to lock them.
Assuming that the air stairs were deployed, it may be that the force of the airflow passing by would have been sufficient to spare the stairs from a tailstrike. The stairs have a large surface area and moving at perhaps around 100 knots when the nosewheel touches down would still generate a considerable force to push them into the fuselage.
-
If the stairs were locked, then they wouldn’t have bounced back up after Cooper jump and there would have been no pressure bump.
-
You must be misunderstanding. I never said they locked in flight. the stairs never locked while Cooper was on them.
-
From an aviation page...
That the airstair didn't lock down when deployed indicates that it never fully extended. In normal operation the airstair is either downlocked, uplocked, or in transit; there is no way to stop it at some halfway point. It is likely that the air loads simply prevented full extension. A powered 727 obligatorily uses hydraulics to deploy the airstair (unless hydraulic system B is disabled, which there is no evidence of and would have been unacceptably risky given the other systems that depend on it). As long as the operation lever was left in the down position (and we know it wasn't up, or the stair would have retracted), the hydraulics would have continued to try to extend the stair further. However, the airstair hydraulic actuators were not designed with the strength necessary to overcome a 170-knot airstream, especially on early 727s. In fact, some later 727s did away entirely with the mechanical latches in favor of more robustly sealed actuators that could trap hydraulic fluid well enough to prevent movement. N467US did not have this capability, so the extension was limited by the airspeed and subject to fluctuations with changes in the airstream and the weight of Cooper upon the stair
-
To close the door either an electric hydraulic pump has to be turned on in the cockpit, or a hand pump beside the lower control operated while either handle is held to the close position. The door will free fall open without hydraulic pressure, but the support arms may have to be pushed to an overcenter position.
This is what I was talking about with the stairs not going all the way down and having to apply pressure to lock them.
Assuming that the air stairs were deployed, it may be that the force of the airflow passing by would have been sufficient to spare the stairs from a tailstrike. The stairs have a large surface area and moving at perhaps around 100 knots when the nosewheel touches down would still generate a considerable force to push them into the fuselage.
Shutter, the nose wheel touching down means that the aft fuselage was rising and that would not generate a force to push the stairs into the fuselage. Such an action would cause the stairs to rotate downward rather than upward.
When landing at Reno, the tower was asked to carefully watch the stairs and let the flight crew know when they struck the runway. The stairs didn't contact the runway until the aircraft was actually turning off the runway at a very low speed. The damage to the stairs was minor scrapes.
-
Shutter, the nose wheel touching down means that the aft fuselage was rising and that would not generate a force to push the stairs into the fuselage. Such an action would cause the stairs to rotate downward rather than upward.
Where did I mention anything about the nose gear? that should of been a quote..wasn't my writing..
-
23:03, NW305: SEE ANY SPARKS COMING OFF THE TAIL AT ANY TIME ON AH TOUCHDOWN
23:03, RENO: NEGATIVE NONE AT ALL THE ONLY THING THAT'S VISIBLE ON THE TAIL IS LIGHT AH APPARENTLY ON YOUR RAMP
23:03, NW305: ROGER UNDERSTAND STAIR LAMPS AH STAIR LIGHTS
23:03, RENO: I DO SEE SOME AH SPARKS NOW JUST A FEW AH TRAILING YOU AH AS YOU'RE TAXIING IN
23:03, NW305: OUR AH PASSENGER TRIED TO DISEMBARK
23:03, RENO: I STILL DON'T AH GETTING A FEW SPARKS NOT VERY MANY AT ALL
23:03, NW305: OKAY WE'LL TRY TO SLOW OUR TAXIING HERE AS MUCH AH IT PROBABLY IS DRAGGIN AH
-
Actually, should cause them to bounce? depending how hard to nose touched down.
-
Shutter, the nose wheel touching down means that the aft fuselage was rising and that would not generate a force to push the stairs into the fuselage. Such an action would cause the stairs to rotate downward rather than upward.
Where did I mention anything about the nose gear? that should of been a quote..wasn't my writing..
You mentioned it in post #3839 above which is what I quoted in its entirety.
-
Yes, I corrected my reply stating it wasn't my writing..should of been quoted.
-
Another portion from the Aviation page..
As it turns out, the stair could not be opened much if at all at 170 knots during a climb, and the captain had to "have 'er about down to a hundred and sixty knots" and level off at 7,000 feet to get the resistance low enough. It makes sense that a higher angle of attack would cause a greater air load on the door due to the increased frontal area. It also makes sense that the airflow alone would be insufficient at any speed to completely re-close the door due to the geometry of the empennage and the continued downward hydraulic pressure. Once the door was open, the crew were able to climb again to 10,000 feet and keep the airspeed "in the vicinity of one seventy, one eighty [knots]".
Although the aforementioned hydraulic actuators would have provided damping, the swirling wakes from the landing gear and flaps—not to mention the aircraft turbulence inherent when flying low and slow over mountains in a storm—undoubtedly wrenched the stairs up and down considerably. Cooper's exit has been romanticized as a high-dive into the unknown, but it was more like trying to exit a springboard during an earthquake, with his own weight just exacerbating the problem. We know as much from Richard McCoy, Jr., a copycat hijacker who survived his jump (at the same airspeed) and was later captured and interviewed:
-
Basically, once the plane was slow enough while taxing the hydraulics kicked in lowering the stairs if this is correct..
Update:
Aft Stairs System
The aft stairs are raised and lowered hydraulically as selected at either of the two interconnected control levers.
The control levers operate the mechanical uplock and hydraulic control valve. when the lowering cycle is in-itiated, the mechanical uplock is dis-engaged and the stairs will begin to free-fall. under normal conditions, system B hydraulic pressure will assists in lowering the stairs.
-
Unless one of you knows differently for a fact, I'm not sure there would be a 'locked down' position. If they operated hydraulically in both directions, then there would be. But according to Flyjack, they drop down by gravity, and the hydraulics are just used to pull them back up. If that is the case, then in their normal usage on the ground, they would just drop either to full extension or till they come to rest on the ground. There would not need to be a 'locked' down position.
Yes, there is a locked down position and yes, they are hydraulically lowered as well as free-falling (together). system A & B has 3,000 psi running through them. the only way they will not lock down is the failure of system B. the hydraulics also get the actuators/struts past center to lock. once they start to show wear (seals) they might need help getting the actuators past center by applying weight on the bottom step. pressure will remain in the system for 30 minutes after shutting down. if system B fails, you need to utilize the hand pump found under the fuselage to open and close the stairs.
We have storm shutters that act in a similar way. they crank up and down manually. while cranking down they sort of free-fall while loading the spring to assist cranking it back up due to the weight of the blades. the more popular and easier version is motorized.
-
I guess I'm more curious on what the conditions on those aft stairs were as Cooper was walking down and standing on them. I've always had it in my head that they were pretty stable and he easily walked down to the bottom and jumped.
Now, it would seem that even as Cooper made his way down to jump, those things would be pretty unstable, bouncing around in the wind. It's possible it made Cooper's decent down them a bit more treacherous and required him to go slower to avoid simply losing his balance and falling out.
-
At least Cooper didn't try to jump on the wing like this guy :rofl:
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wsOqoHbuiI&ab_channel=VASAviation-
-
I guess I'm more curious on what the conditions on those aft stairs were as Cooper was walking down and standing on them. I've always had it in my head that they were pretty stable and he easily walked down to the bottom and jumped.
Now, it would seem that even as Cooper made his way down to jump, those things would be pretty unstable, bouncing around in the wind. It's possible it made Cooper's decent down them a bit more treacherous and required him to go slower to avoid simply losing his balance and falling out.
I concur with Shutter on this ... Cooper's reaction to those stairs depends on his experience. It could have been anything from terrified to SOP. ;) We just dont know who this guy was or his background. Probably a little more stable than a rope bridge in a hurricane across a gorge ? Im guessing - O0
-
If Cooper had experience some of the fear would be less than never jumping at all. it would be loud with the engines and the wind, then you have the darkness along with the stairs moving. I would side step down vs backwards. cliff jumpers would probably do it blind folded. nothing bothers those guys.
Still waiting on McNally, he use to respond pretty quick. he has me attached to his emails he responds to. Dec. 4th he spoke at a school in Missouri, so he must be pretty busy lately. I get about 4 emails a month from him doing something.
Friday 1 p.m. I really enjoyed the 45 minutes of answering very good questions. Will keep in touch and always available to answer questions.
Martin McNally
-
Interesting stuff. To clarify, the idea of them dropping by gravity wouldn't mean that they 'free fell' down unchecked, but that they would lower slowly, dampened by the hydraulic pressure. But apparently that's not the case, they are powered by the pumps both ways. It's interesting that the pumps are not strong enough to overcome the in-flight wind resistance, I wonder if that's by design. Also interesting is that it's said that they are either all the way up, all the way down, or in transit, that there is no stopping them part way. But in that shot of the actor (the actor? that's Robert Duvall!) pulling them down, notice that they are open but not moving before he grabs them and puts his weight on them. Also, it is said that in flight, the pumps would be applying constant pressure downward against the wind resistance. The more pressure, the more stable, less 'bouncy' they would be, and would also fight against them recoiling all the way shut to create the pressure bump. It's also said that in the down, locked position they also function to support the tail and prevent it from tipping as the passengers loaded. I'm surprised that would be necessary on a plane that size.
On fear: Yeah, the more experienced he is, the easier his descent on the stairs would be. It's weird, there's a thing in skydiving called 'floating', and that is where if a number of people are going to jump together at once, then some of them climb out and hang outside the door, with one foot inside and one hand gripping the doorframe, or sometimes there's a handle out there. With a rig on, you could climb in and out of that position all day long. But the thought of doing that just once without your rig on? Ain't gonna happen. Same with base jumping - without your rig, getting near the edge of the cliff or whatever is sketchy. With your rig, you walk right up to it.
-
The plane is tail heavy since it has 3 engines on the back. the planes have tipped with just the cleaning crew inside.
System B handles other critical functions on the aircraft. inside spoilers, main cargo door, upper rudder and the stairs. it's designed to function on the ground. it also ties into system A..
Movie clip:
I'm guessing they either put the control in the center or the plane is shutdown and they released it after the pressure is gone. they should still have fluid in them to hold in place or possibly pumped a small amount into the actuators? if the system was active they would go up or down, nothing in between?
-
Something failed in the hydraulics. the stairs were down. possibly not in the locked position. they might of put the stairs down and the actuators didn't lock in place as I mentioned previously?
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akzjCHiNvOE&ab_channel=RyanBomar
-
For me it’s not a question of fear. Even if Cooper was an experienced skydiver, he’s going to want a controlled jump rather than lose his balance and tumble down the stairs.
-
The link below lets you walk around (360) the inside of a 727. they don't include the stairs in the tour :(
It also has the ability to measure inside spaces, objects..tools in lower left.
https://my.matterport.com/show/?m=rtPb7TAsPC8
-
I found that NORJAK era 727's had compass heading on the Flight Data Recorder.
Northwest 727's used the Fairchild Model 5424.. I can't confirm NORJAK had that model.
This has been known for some time now. the 727 had different one's installed. the main question over the years was if the recorder had timing on it, some recorders didn't. that was resolved with a 302 where they discuss looking at the data minute by minute. some recorders made a notch at the bottom of the foil for timing..the recorder gave magnetic headings..
It was useful in the totality of tools used to try and pinpoint a LZ. a microscope type of machine was used to read the foll if not mistaken..
-
Hominid & Georger Telephone interviews with Andy Anderson: Tuesday Jan 28, 2014 –
[Bill Rataczak has been quoted as saying something like: at some point there was a sudden pressure pulse felt in the ears, that the enunciator light went out momentarily, there was a "bump" of the airframe ...]
Is there a document in the public domain in which this reference to the annunciator light appears?
-
Sounds like a Georger question. this forum started in late February of 2014. not sure if it was here or the DZ. most likely mentioned on the DZ. I'll look on the first pages of this thread...the light remained on due to the unlocked position. Tina makes a reference of a red light blinking off and back on if not mistaken. more than likely was misken on the color since the control panle for the stairs has the red light. green and amber are on the engineers panel.
-
Hominid & Georger Telephone interviews with Andy Anderson: Tuesday Jan 28, 2014 –
[Bill Rataczak has been quoted as saying something like: at some point there was a sudden pressure pulse felt in the ears, that the enunciator light went out momentarily, there was a "bump" of the airframe ...]
Is there a document in the public domain in which this reference to the annunciator light appears?
I searched the FBI Vault for any information on the annunciator light. There's nothing there.
-
It appears to be an interview minus the FBI.
-
The transcripts radio about the stairs and the lite..
7:42... Trying to get door down. stew is with us. he can not get the stairs down...we now have an aft stair light on.
7:45...No comms with him but have an aft stair lite.
-
Fly, if you read the document you posted it matches the transcripts. two transmissions state the light came on in the cockpit. that's around 7:45 which is 20 minutes from when they heard from Cooper. this occurred "after takeoff from Seattle"
-
Hominid & Georger Telephone interviews with Andy Anderson: Tuesday Jan 28, 2014 –
[Bill Rataczak has been quoted as saying something like: at some point there was a sudden pressure pulse felt in the ears, that the enunciator light went out momentarily,
Many thanks for the replies. My question had specific reference to a statement by Bill Rataczak, which is not on the FBI Vault nor appears in any Google search. Does anyone know when and where this statement appeared?
-
I didn't read the document correctly, I see where it states a second light. that would only come on when fully extended which the document states but didn't happen. it's a troubling statement. the stairs would be damaged when they landed if they were locked. I'll check but I'm pretty sure the green light comes on once it's down and locked and not on while it's lowering.
The pilots didn't note it on the transcripts while speaking about Cooper's reply. I don't know if they could of dropped close enough to be near or close to fully extended to trigger the light if Cooper started down them at 8:05.
try not to mix up reported vs stated. Tina didn't use the radio. this would be a statement after the fact. the only reports in the transcripts are around 7:42 and 7:45. I don't recall seeing anything in reference to 8:00. the plane was around Toledo at the 8:00 point. the transcript reports about the lights would be in the area of McChord. where did you read 8:00?
-
R99, what is your take on the document Fly posted. everyone can agree the stairs were never fully extended but the document explains it that way and speaks of two different lights that came on?
Fly, you might want to consider coming back over here. this gets kind of crazy going back and forth..
-
Plane takes off at 7:36. depending on which transcripts you read they are in the same ballpark. the plane levels off at 7,000 and slows down to 155 knots and applies 30 degree flaps. this according to Rat is for Cooper to be able to get the stairs down.. at 7:42 they report an aft stair light.on. at 7:45 they report no communication from him but report the aft stair light again.
8:05 they try to get a reply and finally get one stating "everything is ok" reports over the years have always been a "no"
The document you posted might be the communications shortly after takeoff. "anything we can do for you" he answers with a no, which conflicts with the 8:05 report "everything is ok" two reports of lights on the transcripts. I can't agree with the fully extended statement. you read the document and it's written as events happened after 8:10.
The transcripts state he was having trouble with the stairs. Rat spoke with him where he says "I can't get the stairs down" we seem to be missing all the communications with Cooper. the document isn't specific enough to separate the two events from shortly after takeoff to the 8:05 contact. conflicting reports and inaccurate information. who saw that coming lol. it's a head spinner..some sound backwards with timing...let me soak this in 8)
-
R99, what is your take on the document Fly posted. everyone can agree the stairs were never fully extended but the document explains it that way and speaks of two different lights that came on?
Fly, you might want to consider coming back over here. this gets kind of crazy going back and forth..
First, let me second Shutter's suggestion that FlyJack start posting on this site again.
I am not familiar with the stair lights on the Flight Engineer's panel so I will defer to FlyJack on that point. I agree with him that the stairs were never fully extended and doubt if that actually could be under the given circumstances.
A 225 pound sled and a parajumper who probably weighed about the same did not fully extend the stairs. Cooper apparently expected the stairs to extend a considerable distance when he operated the deployment lever and the stairs only went down slightly. Cooper apparently did not understand the forces that a 200 MPH slipstream generate. This would indicate a lack of aeronautical knowledge on Cooper's part.
-
Plane takes off at 7:36. depending on which transcripts you read they are in the same ballpark. the plane levels off at 7,000 and slows down to 155 knots and applies 30 degree flaps. this according to Rat is for Cooper to be able to get the stairs down.. at 7:42 they report an aft stair light.on. at 7:45 they report no communication from him but report the aft stair light again.
8:05 they try to get a reply and finally get one stating "everything is ok" reports over the years have always been a "no"
The document you posted might be the communications shortly after takeoff. "anything we can do for you" he answers with a no, which conflicts with the 8:05 report "everything is ok" two reports of lights on the transcripts. I can't agree with the fully extended statement. you read the document and it's written as events happened after 8:10.
The transcripts state he was having trouble with the stairs. Rat spoke with him where he says "I can't get the stairs down" we seem to be missing all the communications with Cooper. the document isn't specific enough to separate the two events from shortly after takeoff to the 8:05 contact. conflicting reports and inaccurate information. who saw that coming lol. it's a head spinner..some sound backwards with timing...let me soak this in 8)
Cooper's communications with the cockpit crew would be over the interphone and not recorded. Consequently, only the flight crew's statements as to what Cooper said are available.
-
Cooper apparently expected the stairs to extend a considerable distance when he operated the deployment lever and the stairs only went down slightly. Cooper apparently did not understand the forces that a 200 MPH slipstream generate. This would indicate a lack of aeronautical knowledge on Cooper's part.
Or perhaps he overestimated (hoped?) the force of the hydraulic system to overcome it.
--------------
So they leveled off and slowed down at 7000' so Cooper could get the stairs open. After he did, did they stay there or did they resume climbing to 10000'?
--------------
(I still get the dark 'Christmas mode' when I sign in and it is harder to read. Is that going to come off?)
-
You should now see the default theme. I don't remember if I changed your setting manually or not. I put the setting back to default for everyone. if it was changed manually, it will override the default.
Sorry.
-
Rataczak has made statements of the climb being an issue and the fact of Cooper calling about the stairs..
The started the climb to 10k around 7:48 reaching altitude in around 7 minutes..
-
My reference to what Cooper said on the plane surrounds no real discussion documented on what he said. we get bits and pieces of what he stated on everything. very little of conversation to the pilots.
-
Cooper apparently expected the stairs to extend a considerable distance when he operated the deployment lever and the stairs only went down slightly. Cooper apparently did not understand the forces that a 200 MPH slipstream generate. This would indicate a lack of aeronautical knowledge on Cooper's part.
Or perhaps he overestimated (hoped?) the force of the hydraulic system to overcome it.
--------------
So they leveled off and slowed down at 7000' so Cooper could get the stairs open. After he did, did they stay there or did they resume climbing to 10000'?
--------------
(I still get the dark 'Christmas mode' when I sign in and it is harder to read. Is that going to come off?)
Well maybe that’s why he wanted to take off with the stairs fully extended because he knew it would be more of a challenge Bob the air... But why did Cooper want the stairs fully extended was it a safety concern? Once he got them open you’d think he would just want to climb down and jump... what’s the big deal about having them fully extended and locked?
-
I don't think the demand called for the stairs down and locked. I think a lot of mixed information is in the latest document with obvious error's of being fully extended and color difference in lights as well as the time.
I think we all realize the annuncaiter has two lights (amber & green)
Reports of the lights were on the transcripts twice.
The last report being around 8:00
We also possibly have separate responses from Cooper. the transcripts report "everything is ok" while other reports a response of "no" during the problems with the stairs Cooper was talking to the pilots. the 8:05 was only looking for a response.
It's bits and pieces like this that cause more confusion than good.
-
I don't think the demand called for the stairs down and locked. I think a lot of mixed information is in the latest document with obvious error's of being fully extended and color difference in lights as well as the time.
I think we all realize the annuncaiter has two lights (amber & green)
Reports of the lights were on the transcripts twice.
The last report being around 8:00
We also possibly have separate responses from Cooper. the transcripts report "everything is ok" while other reports a response of "no" during the problems with the stairs Cooper was talking to the pilots. the 8:05 was only looking for a response.
It's bits and pieces like this that cause more confusion than good.
Yeah I hear you shut guess it par for the course here In the vortex.
-
I don't think the demand called for the stairs down and locked. I think a lot of mixed information is in the latest document with obvious error's of being fully extended and color difference in lights as well as the time.
I think we all realize the annuncaiter has two lights (amber & green)
Reports of the lights were on the transcripts twice.
The last report being around 8:00
We also possibly have separate responses from Cooper. the transcripts report "everything is ok" while other reports a response of "no" during the problems with the stairs Cooper was talking to the pilots. the 8:05 was only looking for a response.
It's bits and pieces like this that cause more confusion than good.
FlyJack has just posted [post #63094] on DropZone an FBI document [DB Cooper - 22862, 12-9-1971] on the Boeing tests related to the aft stairs being deployed in flight. This document answers a lot of questions and everyone should read it.
-
I seen the document last week with the new files..keep in mind this was during testing or just after. improvements were made as time progressed. when you watch the stunt man with similar settings and a slight increase in speed the stairs are much lower than 12 inches after weight is released. he still could of pulled back bringing the stairs up and pushing down quickly when they mention the lights twice in several minutes. 7:42 and 7:45 ish...
we have comments surrounding two lights. reports on the transcripts twice and no reference to lights at 8:05 or 8:10/11/12. somewhere the pilots state the light flashed after Cooper jumped or where they believed he jumped. not sure even in testing if the lights flashed?
Tina's time frame seems skewed. the leveling off and slowing down was early in the flight. then she says 5 minutes later he called again. this could be the two reports of lights. they were level at 10k before 8:00
The second document skews in time as well. the quotations of 20 minutes is correct but she goes back to early in the flight when he spoke with the pilots having trouble with the stairs. if a flash occurred it would of been in the early part of the flight at 7,000 IMO. if this makes sense..
-
I seen the document last week with the new files..keep in mind this was during testing or just after. improvements were made as time progressed. when you watch the stunt man with similar settings and a slight increase in speed the stairs are much lower than 12 inches after weight is released. he still could of pulled back bringing the stairs up and pushing down quickly when they mention the lights twice in several minutes. 7:42 and 7:45 ish...
we have comments surrounding two lights. reports on the transcripts twice and no reference to lights at 8:05 or 8:10/11/12. somewhere the pilots state the light flashed after Cooper jumped or where they believed he jumped. not sure even in testing if the lights flashed?
Tina's time frame seems skewed. the leveling off and slowing down was early in the flight. then she says 5 minutes later he called again. this could be the two reports of lights. they were level at 10k before 8:00
The second document skews in time as well. the quotations of 20 minutes is correct but she goes back to early in the flight when he spoke with the pilots having trouble with the stairs. if a flash occurred it would of been in the early part of the flight at 7,000 IMO. if this makes sense..
Im not sure what this photo you posted is or how it applies to the problem. The actual test drop was filmed and we have frames from that film - have had those for years. See attached. Calculations previously posted at DZ years ago showed that in this frame attached, the object has dropped ~13.4ft and time since separation based on an air speed of 160mph is about 0.057 seconds .... and the stairs have already bounced back forcefully and are nearly closed. These results were taken as a positive match with the 'dump' experienced during he hijacking regardless of lights going on/off or whatever. The test was performed to try and duplicate the 'bump', not in order to test lights going on or off! ;)
-
Several points have been discussed in the last couple days. one is how far the steps dropped after releasing them. other questions surround the lights on the engineer's panel and comments found in 302's stating either a flash or second light.
It's possible when Cooper first pushed the lever and they didn't go down far he raised and lowered them again causing the light to flash off and on.
The photo I posted shows the stairs dropping more than 12 inches..even 3 feet would make someone wonder why they are not going all the way down. none of the discussion really surrounds the testing done in 1972. the document in question was from testing done in 1963.
-
McNally gave me his number so I could contact him through texting, I asked him how far the steps opened before getting on them and his reply was..2.5 feet only opening another half a foot. this could be due to his weight being distributed over a wider area since he was on his ass sliding down. he was traveling much faster than 305 which had a greater wind load on the stairs pushing them upward. I guess you all got a lot of snow up north. he sent about 8 pics of the area outside his home.
-
For those reading and seeing the name McNally wondering the connection. he was a copycat hijacker several months after Cooper's jump. his full name is Martin McNally and hijacked an American Airlines Boeing 727 in June of 1972. we have exchanged dozens of emails about the hijacking and other topics for the last 6 months or so.
-
7:36 est. take off
(7:40 est) 4 minutes after takeoff Tina went forward (Tina)
7:42 air stair light on Tina with us, (Pilot)
7:45 have stair light on (still), (Pilot)
(7:50 est) = 10 min later Cooper call can’t get stairs down (Tina)
7:54 Tina said Cooper has “knapsack" tied to waist
Fly, examine what you have written. Tina was already in the cockpit prior to 7:50. you are taking 10 minutes has a timestamp vs estimation. Cooper called very early about not getting the stairs down. she seen him tying the money to his waste as she closed the curtain. that would be the 7:40 mark. she never went past the cockpit door until they landed. why would the same events happen twice. it's very specific detailing he can't get them down at the start of the flight and not 20 minutes after the flight or during or past the 7:54 mark.
nothing is on the transcripts about any flash or any lights past the 7:45 report. these are all after the fact and could possibly be inaccurate.
-
The 7:54 report is the pilots relaying what Tina seen earlier in the flight. the same for the contents of the briefcase describing the bomb. they are simply relaying what she seen minutes to hours before since the bomb was well known by then.
When she closed the curtain and Cooper is standing by the door tying money to himself with a parachute on, one can only assume he is ready to jump. that's what they were reporting. it wasn't as if it happened seconds before the 7-54 mark.
Tina got in the cockpit and then they had to deal with Cooper and the trouble he was having. a gap in reporting probably occurred since they had there hands full at the time and then reported what Tina said.
It's actually the ground that provokes the response about the knapsack. they radio saying the quicker they believe he's gone the sooner they can land. they respond with what Tina seen earlier in the flight.
-
7:57 they ground radios for Tina to describe to the pilots the briefcase contents. then some discussion about elevations air temps and indicate staying at 10k till he has left the plane. 8:05 they report trying to contact Cooper twice and get a response of "everything is ok" nothing happens because they go right into possibly landing at Medford which is before Reno. this is discussed all the way to 8:10 then report the oscillations at 8:12
-
The pressure gauge is a factor in the steps momentarily closing. so is the statement about the stairs being lowered. that's in the transcripts and time stamped. newspapers and 302's have been noted having error's. if Cooper did anything with the stairs between 7:45 and 8:10 it would of been noted as all the other actions were.
The document (302) marked 12888 is confusing because the events are not in order. It gives a timeline of Cooper calling about the stairs after 8:10 and then makes a claim of the stairs being fully extended. then Cooper responds with a no.
It's marked and stamped on the transcripts that Cooper is having trouble with the stairs. it's fact they were communicating with him noted on the transcripts. Rataczak backs this up on the HBO documentary.
He communicates by inter-phone having trouble with the stairs. a couple minutes later they report a light and partially extended stairs. the conversation here could of lead up to the answer of "no" approx. 20 minutes go by and the last communication is reported at 8:05 indicating "everything is ok" which is far from a "no"
The ground radio's about "10 minutes later" the quicker they know Cooper is gone, the "the quicker u can land" this prompts the pilot to report what Tina seen earlier in the flight while returning to the Cockpit and shouldn't be noted as if it just occurred.
The transcripts have faults as well. nothing is noted about any lights or reading from the EP. after they believe Cooper jumped. a gap in communication can be seen where you would think a lot of discussion would take place. Rataczak makes a claim after the fact of being 99% sure he left the plane but the transcripts tell a different story. at 8:52 they give a report of 55 minutes as the last communication with Cooper. that would be 7:57. do we now run like the wind with that report?
They term used for fully extended could be a reference to Cooper being on the stairs causing them to extend. things can get mixed up easily when gather information. somebody needs to try and get answers from the surviving crew before it's too late. the manually recorded transcripts give the impression of possibly "fully extended" by stating they were "extended further". this could be confused with fully extended. people interpret things differently..
-
–
[Bill Rataczak has been quoted as saying something like: at some point there was a sudden pressure pulse felt in the ears, that the enunciator light went out momentarily, ]
Many thanks for the replies. I located this reference in Skipp Porteous' interview with Mr Rataczak, dated approximately 2009, posted at dropzone.com. The quotation is as follows: "... we felt a tremendous amount of pressure bump in our ears ... We also got confirmation on the Flight Engineer’s panel indicating that the stairs had momentarily closed."
-
The Harrison note differ as well. the manual transcripts stamp a time of 8:52 with Cooper's last communication at 55 minutes. Harrison has it documented at 9:00 which makes sense with the 55 minutes. then we have several references of the famous 23 miles DME from Portland. you would hope to find an 8 minute gap but instead find a 4 minute gap with other reports. he writes twice 8:22 but in the last record of events he writes 8:18. Harrison writes a time of 9:52 with 305 being 58 miles DME from RBL Vor. the transcripts report 10:05 giving a 13 minute gap.
R99, any input..I realize the teletype will have a delay but will the timing differ with each transmission?
Dfs, can you post the entire interveiw?
-
The Harrison note differ as well. the manual transcripts stamp a time of 8:52 with Cooper's last communication at 55 minutes. Harrison has it documented at 9:00 which makes sense with the 55 minutes. then we have several references of the famous 23 miles DME from Portland. you would hope to find an 8 minute gap but instead find a 4 minute gap with other reports. he writes twice 8:22 but in the last record of events he writes 8:18. Harrison writes a time of 9:52 with 305 being 58 miles DME from RBL Vor. the transcripts report 10:05 giving a 13 minute gap.
R99, any input..I realize the teletype will have a delay but will the timing differ with each transmission?
Dfs, can you post the entire interveiw?
The MOCA (Minimum Obstacle Clearance Altitude) and the MCA (Minimum Communications Altitude) for the segment of V-23 south of Portland are both 10,000 feet ASL. The MCA refers to communications with Air Traffic Control sites and not to the ARINC sites.
The "FBI Notes" state at 9:42 PM PST direct communications with the airliner through the ARINC radio patch and teletype system were not possible at that time. Instead, UAL 4331 and WAL 328, who were apparently flying high enough to still be in communication with the ARINC system, relayed communications between the hijacked airliner and the ARINC system which were then passed to NWA stations in Seattle and Minneapolis.
Consequently, there would be a greater delay between reporting the location of the airliner and that information being received by NWA stations than if the airliner itself was in direct contact with an ARINC station. Also, the time would vary depending on the work load on the ARINC system and the length of the messages.
The FBI Notes also state that the airliner was told to contact the SFC (San Francisco) ARINC station at 10:30 PM PST. See these notes as well as the Oakland ATC Center transcripts for more information on this and the above. Remember that the airliner was switched to the Oakland ATC Center at 8:45 PM PST.
-
Dfs, can you post the entire interveiw?
The interview appears to be almost a whole chapter from the book "Into the Blast". I don't know whether the authors gave permission for such a lengthy quotation to be made public. Having said that, I think this link will bring it up:
https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56036-db-cooper/page/1990/?tab=comments#comment-4290349
-
Thanks, I already found it last night. I seen where Blevins stated for years about the light that wasn't true. posting that Rat and Anderson seen the light go on and off. another reason you have to watch what is written. Robert posted it in 2012, I believe.
-
anyone know the names of the F-106 pilots? Over at the F-106 facebook page, there's a post that one of them was Roy Keyt of the 318th FIS (now deceased).
Here's a photo of the late Lt. Col. (then Major) Roy Keyt, pilot of the second F-106. Lead pilot was Major Frank Loesch.
-
I mentioned this in the News thread, but I wanted to post the data here. First, below is a link to the relevant article:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/20/us/united-airlines-flight-returns-debris/index.html
The flight departed at 1:04. At 1:08 as it was over Broomfield, CO, the engine blew and debris fell on the Northmoor and Red Leaf neighborhoods. The plane immediately turned to return to the airport. Approximately, three to five minutes later, more debris came off the engine subsequently landing in Commons Park.
As indicated on the flight path map attached below, both debris drops were located directly along the flight path. There was no rain and the wind was blowing at 15 mph at 220 degrees (southwest). The plane in question was a Boeing 777 and the right engine is the one that exploded and dropped debris. It maintained 10,000 feet and traveling at approximately 350 mph for most of the time in which it was raining debris.
Some caveats, whereas the Hicks placard was quite small and light, most of the parts of the engine were metal. Still, there are several cellphone videos of small pieces of what appear to be plastic gently floating to the ground.
Despite these facts, it would appear that most (if not all) of the debris fell straight down with little deviation from the flight path despite the wind. I encourage everyone to factcheck me and add their own thoughts.
ETA: Here is a great video that includes the flight communications along with the flight path:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7-zh7Sebr8
-
Debris falling...about 1:12 into the video
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEAg3B_WUYs&ab_channel=TravelNewsGroup
-
For more specific debris location, there are photos of debris indicating that it fell on the east side of the soccer fields at Commons Park in Broomfield.
That is virtually underneath the flight path. There seems to be no deviation from the flight path despite 15 mph winds from the southwest. I’d be interested to know if any smaller, lighter debris will be found miles from the flight path.
-
Not the first time something like this has happened with parts of the engine or cowling coming off...
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKDWVyEWqd8&ab_channel=TheFlightChannel
-
Shutter,
Given that it appears the debris from yesterday’s incident fell straight down underneath the flight path, what would account for the insistence that the Hicks placard floated several miles off 305s flight path? Yesterday had the same altitude, same wind speed, same wind direction. So what would account for the miles deviation of the Hicks placard? Just it’s weight?
-
Shutter,
Given that it appears the debris from yesterday’s incident fell straight down underneath the flight path, what would account for the insistence that the Hicks placard floated several miles off 305s flight path? Yesterday had the same altitude, same wind speed, same wind direction. So what would account for the miles deviation of the Hicks placard? Just it’s weight?
Shutter, permit me to inject something here. Nothing from an airliner that is doing at least 200+ MPH falls straight down. Everything has an initial forward motion along the flight path, but the heavier objects will continue further along that path than the lighter objects which will slow down much faster. Things such as the Cooper placard will slow down almost instantly. But in short order, everything is moving vertically with respect to the air mass and subject to the winds aloft.
The heavier objects will be on the ground first and the lighter objects will take longer and thus will drift horizontally much further. In sky diving, a no-pull skydiver falling head first from 10,000 feet will be on the ground in about 40 seconds. If he is in a stable spread, it will take about 60 seconds. If he is under canopy from 10,000 feet, the descent rate will be about 1200 feet per minute and he will be on the ground in about 8 minutes.
-
Shutter,
Given that it appears the debris from yesterday’s incident fell straight down underneath the flight path, what would account for the insistence that the Hicks placard floated several miles off 305s flight path? Yesterday had the same altitude, same wind speed, same wind direction. So what would account for the miles deviation of the Hicks placard? Just it’s weight?
Shutter, permit me to inject something here. Nothing from an airliner that is doing at least 200+ MPH falls straight down. Everything has an initial forward motion along the flight path, but the heavier objects will continue further along that path than the lighter objects which will slow down much faster. Things such as the Cooper placard will slow down almost instantly. But in short order, everything is moving vertically with respect to the air mass and subject to the winds aloft.
The heavier objects will be on the ground first and the lighter objects will take longer and thus will drift horizontally much further. In sky diving, a no-pull skydiver falling head first from 10,000 feet will be on the ground in about 40 seconds. If he is in a stable spread, it will take about 60 seconds. If he is under canopy from 10,000 feet, the descent rate will be about 1200 feet per minute and he will be on the ground in about 8 minutes.
So I assume experiments have been done other than the one determining that the noise they heard was verified to be him leaping from the stairs? So accounting for the wind speed and direction that night, (I do not know how accurate weather report on winds and such were in 1971?), and his weight and all, they should have done a simulation with both scenario's. The chute deployed and the chute not. But it seems pretty obvious that he did make it, deploy the chute, because if he had simply crashed to his demise, SOMETHING WOULD HAVE BEEN FOUND. How many are still alive that were in the cock pit? I know the captain passed away a long time ago. And I know Bruce said that one guy changes his story often? They really must come up with an accurate course in the Victor 23 path. I have heard the reports that they are unsure of the course taken? Even with very high winds as they say there were that night, how far would something that heavy drift?
It would be good to try and do a simulation with weather conditions that were as similar as possible to that night. I know that is not easy
-
Shutter,
Given that it appears the debris from yesterday’s incident fell straight down underneath the flight path, what would account for the insistence that the Hicks placard floated several miles off 305s flight path? Yesterday had the same altitude, same wind speed, same wind direction. So what would account for the miles deviation of the Hicks placard? Just it’s weight?
Shutter, permit me to inject something here. Nothing from an airliner that is doing at least 200+ MPH falls straight down. Everything has an initial forward motion along the flight path, but the heavier objects will continue further along that path than the lighter objects which will slow down much faster. Things such as the Cooper placard will slow down almost instantly. But in short order, everything is moving vertically with respect to the air mass and subject to the winds aloft.
The heavier objects will be on the ground first and the lighter objects will take longer and thus will drift horizontally much further. In sky diving, a no-pull skydiver falling head first from 10,000 feet will be on the ground in about 40 seconds. If he is in a stable spread, it will take about 60 seconds. If he is under canopy from 10,000 feet, the descent rate will be about 1200 feet per minute and he will be on the ground in about 8 minutes.
So I assume experiments have been done other than the one determining that the noise they heard was verified to be him leaping from the stairs? So accounting for the wind speed and direction that night, (I do not know how accurate weather report on winds and such were in 1971?), and his weight and all, they should have done a simulation with both scenario's. The chute deployed and the chute not. But it seems pretty obvious that he did make it, deploy the chute, because if he had simply crashed to his demise, SOMETHING WOULD HAVE BEEN FOUND. How many are still alive that were in the cock pit? I know the captain passed away a long time ago. And I know Bruce said that one guy changes his story often? They really must come up with an accurate course in the Victor 23 path. I have heard the reports that they are unsure of the course taken? Even with very high winds as they say there were that night, how far would something that heavy drift?
It would be good to try and do a simulation with weather conditions that were as similar as possible to that night. I know that is not easy
There are many scenarios that would have DBC perish in the jump without any remains being found.
Also, despite a vocal minority disputing it, 305 flew down Victor 23.
-
A flight simulation has been done retracing the path made by the Air Force. you have things to consider. how accurate was the timing of the jump. did they look in the right place. you read reports of the oscillation and pressure bump occurring close together and reports of minutes apart. parts of the search area were impenetrable. lots of variables, especially for 1971.
you could pretty much put the plane anywhere east or west from the Columbia close to Amboy and get similar times
with flight since the plane never flew far enough east or west to disrupt any timing.
The Air Force made the map. they had two radar systems. the first was the same system used at civilian airports we know and the second was the Sage radar that protected the country from enemy aircraft. it's not really written in stone exactly how they made the map or what radar they used. the job of the sage radar was to identify all the aircraft in the sky 24/7. they had to mark or "paint" each target so they would know exactly what was in the air at any given time.
The flight path has been disputed by a few believing the path was more westerly flying over the Columbia in the Tina bar area. it is a plausible path but goes against all the known evidence. it's supported by several factors with timing in the flight, the placard found and the money location on Tbar.
There is some who believe the path was more easterly as well including agents..
The weather. that has some issues. a report showing a possible wind change around the time of the jump is in the 302's and a report from a commercial pilot not far behind flight 305. a wrench gets thrown into everything surrounding this case. some say it was pouring and other say it was light rain as weather was documented.
If you are not sure of any type of simulations or wind direction etc. how can one come to a conclusion of life or death? based on what I know or believe, I think it's possible he made it but can't say for certain. the copycats made it. even at faster speeds. some having zero experience.
-
A flight simulation has been done retracing the path made by the Air Force. you have things to consider. how accurate was the timing of the jump. did they look in the right place. you read reports of the oscillation and pressure bump occurring close together and reports of minutes apart. parts of the search area were impenetrable. lots of variables, especially for 1971.
you could pretty much put the plane anywhere east or west from the Columbia close to Amboy and get similar times
with flight since the plane never flew far enough east or west to disrupt any timing.
The Air Force made the map. they had two radar systems. the first was the same system used at civilian airports we know and the second was the Sage radar that protected the country from enemy aircraft. it's not really written in stone exactly how they made the map or what radar they used. the job of the sage radar was to identify all the aircraft in the sky 24/7. they had to mark or "paint" each target so they would know exactly what was in the air at any given time.
The flight path has been disputed by a few believing the path was more westerly flying over the Columbia in the Tina bar area. it is a plausible path but goes against all the known evidence. it's supported by several factors with timing in the flight, the placard found and the money location on Tbar.
There is some who believe the path was more easterly as well including agents..
The weather. that has some issues. a report showing a possible wind change around the time of the jump is in the 302's and a report from a commercial pilot not far behind flight 305. a wrench gets thrown into everything surrounding this case. some say it was pouring and other say it was light rain as weather was documented.
If you are not sure of any type of simulations or wind direction etc. how can one come to a conclusion of life or death? based on what I know or believe, I think it's possible he made it but can't say for certain. the copycats made it. even at faster speeds. some having zero experience.
One of the benefits of being part of a major show like the one on the History Channel is that a lot of people reach out to you afterwards.
In fact, I was contacted by a commercial pilot for another airline who was sitting in the cockpit of his airliner at SeaTac the night of the skyjacking and watched 305 as it sat off in the distance and listened to radio communication between the 305 pilots and the tower. This is because SeaTac was shut down during the incident and they couldn't depart.
He watched 305 depart SeaTac and was finally permitted to depart SeaTac about half an hour later. Ironically his flight was to PDX, therefore he was only about 30 minutes behind 305. He described the weather to me that night and mentioned nothing of the kind of winds that Bohar (sic?) mentions. In fact, the weather was described precisely as we understand it today, the weather arriving from the southwest which is typical.
-
I would have to read the 302 again on the commercial pilots comments but don't know how he got that information in the first place..
-
I called 377 yesterday and spoke with him awhile about the case. I mentioned to him that I believe there is something I am missing that will put it all together. Meaning, I believe somewhere in the files, evidence, pictures, etc., there is a small piece of evidence that is being overlooked that could unlock the key to everything.
To that end, I have been going over a lot of materials at an almost forensic level to find that missing link. I would encourage others to do the same.
-
Perhaps Bohar was an example of injecting ones self into the crime?
-
Perhaps Bohar was an example of injecting ones self into the crime?
I think that may well be the case. I believe some of the witnesses on the flight did the same. In fact, the only witnesses from the flight that I pay attention to are the three flight attendants and Bill Mitchell to a lesser degree--because he didn't know what was going on.
-
I have never been certain of Mitchell. even his statements soon after the hijacking were not detailed. I question a lot of what he really seen or remembered. he often hides under the memory clause and might of gotten over his head, not sure. he sounds like a nice guy but he troubles me, always has...
-
The three flight attendants were remarkably consistent in their descriptions: 45ish, 6' - 6'1", olive complexion.
-
Shutter,
Given that it appears the debris from yesterday’s incident fell straight down underneath the flight path, what would account for the insistence that the Hicks placard floated several miles off 305s flight path? Yesterday had the same altitude, same wind speed, same wind direction. So what would account for the miles deviation of the Hicks placard? Just it’s weight?
Shutter, permit me to inject something here. Nothing from an airliner that is doing at least 200+ MPH falls straight down. Everything has an initial forward motion along the flight path, but the heavier objects will continue further along that path than the lighter objects which will slow down much faster. Things such as the Cooper placard will slow down almost instantly. But in short order, everything is moving vertically with respect to the air mass and subject to the winds aloft.
The heavier objects will be on the ground first and the lighter objects will take longer and thus will drift horizontally much further. In sky diving, a no-pull skydiver falling head first from 10,000 feet will be on the ground in about 40 seconds. If he is in a stable spread, it will take about 60 seconds. If he is under canopy from 10,000 feet, the descent rate will be about 1200 feet per minute and he will be on the ground in about 8 minutes.
So I assume experiments have been done other than the one determining that the noise they heard was verified to be him leaping from the stairs? So accounting for the wind speed and direction that night, (I do not know how accurate weather report on winds and such were in 1971?), and his weight and all, they should have done a simulation with both scenario's. The chute deployed and the chute not. But it seems pretty obvious that he did make it, deploy the chute, because if he had simply crashed to his demise, SOMETHING WOULD HAVE BEEN FOUND. How many are still alive that were in the cock pit? I know the captain passed away a long time ago. And I know Bruce said that one guy changes his story often? They really must come up with an accurate course in the Victor 23 path. I have heard the reports that they are unsure of the course taken? Even with very high winds as they say there were that night, how far would something that heavy drift?
It would be good to try and do a simulation with weather conditions that were as similar as possible to that night. I know that is not easy
I believe both William Rataczak and Harald Anderson are still alive and both were interviewed in a recent TV program on the hijacking. The problem with these TV interviews is that the right questions don't get asked and the result is they are not very informative.
The weather stories put out by Captain Bohan and others do not agree with the actual measured weather for the night of the hijacking. Bohan claims to have had an 80 Knot headwind from the southeast on his flight between SEATAC and Portland and about a 30 knot crosswind component when landing to the southeast at Portland. There were no 80 Knot winds aloft in the Seattle/Portland area that evening and the actual measured ground wind at Portland for the day of the hijacking never exceeded about 10 Knots. Bohan's claims can be ignored.
Thanks to Tom Kaye's efforts, the hourly weather sequence reports and the forecast winds aloft for the entire Pacific Northwest area have long been available for the time of the hijacking. Kaye also recently came up with the measured winds aloft for the time of the hijacking. All of this information is probably posted somewhere on one of Shutter's sites.
The measured winds aloft were slightly higher than the forecast winds aloft but never exceeded about 35 Knots from the southwest for 10,000 feet above sea level and lower altitudes. The weather at Portland for the time the hijacked airliner was passing through was always described as light rain and good visibility with several cloud layers and a complete overcast at 5000 feet. The sea level barometric pressure was above standard (29.92 in.Hg.) and increasing from Seattle south and that means the weather was improving the further south the airliner flew.
There seems to be some misconceptions about the airliner being far off the V-23 airway. For what is now called the Western Flight Path, the airliner was never more than 3 or 4 miles from V-23 and that was only for a very brief time as it bypassed Portland on the west side. All of the Western Flight Path is in controlled airspace and it was while on that flight path that the T-33, F-102s, and F-106s were initially vectored to intercept the airliner.
The WFP passes about 1000 feet west of Tina Bar and the airliner basically flew over the Columbia River for about 10 miles as it was passing Tina Bar. If Cooper was a no-pull and jumped while in the Tina Bar area, he would have landed on the east side of the Columbia River and west of the Northwest Lower River Road. The money could never have made it to Tina Bar if he had landed on the east side of the Northwest Lower River Road. This had been discussed at length over the years.
As a no-pull, Cooper would be a very difficult figure to locate in the brush and wooded area along the east bank of the Columbia River. There are many, many instances of searches that could not find extremely large objects in such terrain.
-
Let's take the money and think this through:
The money weighed 20 lbs. If it got wet it would have weighed appreciably more.
Now assuming he rid himself of everything except the money and that the FBI dropzone is correct, DBC would have had to walk approximately 30 miles in very difficult terrain, in poor weather conditions, while avoiding being seen, carrying a 20 lbs bag of cash.
Think about that for a moment. I challenge anyone to attempt a 30-mile walk carrying a 20 lbs weight in good conditions let alone what I described above.
For anyone, especially someone in his mid-40's, this is bordering on physically impossible--especially if he injured himself in any manner during the jump and landing.
This means DBC had to land much closer to Tena Bar than the FBI thinks. Unless, of course, someone wants to argue that he had the money in the trunk of his car and that he drove it to Tena Bar to bury it which makes absolutely no sense.
Needless to say, I do not believe DBC died that night by way of no-pulling on or near Tena Bar. Therefore, I consider the money find alone an extremely compelling piece of evidence that almost single-handedly significantly limits the actual dropzone to within a few miles of Tena Bar. If I'm right about that, the FBI Flight Path cannot be correct and the Western Flight Path cannot be incorrect.
-
Let's take the money and think this through:
The money weighed 20 lbs. If it got wet it would have weighed appreciably more.
Now assuming he rid himself of everything except the money and that the FBI dropzone is correct, DBC would have had to walk approximately 30 miles in very difficult terrain, in poor weather conditions, while avoiding being seen, carrying a 20 lbs bag of cash.
Think about that for a moment. I challenge anyone to attempt a 30-mile walk carrying a 20 lbs weight in good conditions let alone what I described above.
For anyone, especially someone in his mid-40's, this is bordering on physically impossible--especially if he injured himself in any manner during the jump and landing.
This means DBC had to land much closer to Tena Bar than the FBI thinks. Unless, of course, someone wants to argue that he had the money in the trunk of his car and that he drove it to Tena Bar to bury it which makes absolutely no sense.
Needless to say, I do not believe DBC died that night by way of no-pulling on or near Tena Bar. Therefore, I consider the money find alone an extremely compelling piece of evidence that almost single-handedly significantly limits the actual dropzone to within a few miles of Tena Bar. If I'm right about that, the FBI Flight Path cannot be correct and the Western Flight Path cannot be incorrect.
EU, while we disagree about the no-pull and some other details, we certainly agree that all indications are that Cooper jumped very near Tina Bar. And the Western Flight Path is definitely correct.
-
Let's take the money and think this through:
The money weighed 20 lbs. If it got wet it would have weighed appreciably more.
Now assuming he rid himself of everything except the money and that the FBI dropzone is correct, DBC would have had to walk approximately 30 miles in very difficult terrain, in poor weather conditions, while avoiding being seen, carrying a 20 lbs bag of cash.
Think about that for a moment. I challenge anyone to attempt a 30-mile walk carrying a 20 lbs weight in good conditions let alone what I described above.
For anyone, especially someone in his mid-40's, this is bordering on physically impossible--especially if he injured himself in any manner during the jump and landing.
This means DBC had to land much closer to Tena Bar than the FBI thinks. Unless, of course, someone wants to argue that he had the money in the trunk of his car and that he drove it to Tena Bar to bury it which makes absolutely no sense.
Needless to say, I do not believe DBC died that night by way of no-pulling on or near Tena Bar. Therefore, I consider the money find alone an extremely compelling piece of evidence that almost single-handedly significantly limits the actual dropzone to within a few miles of Tena Bar. If I'm right about that, the FBI Flight Path cannot be correct and the Western Flight Path cannot be incorrect.
EU, while we disagree about the no-pull and some other details, we certainly agree that all indications are that Cooper jumped very near Tina Bar. And the Western Flight Path is definitely correct.
So if that's the case, did they just simply get the flight path wrong, or did they intentionally put out a wrong flight path?
-
Let's take the money and think this through:
The money weighed 20 lbs. If it got wet it would have weighed appreciably more.
Now assuming he rid himself of everything except the money and that the FBI dropzone is correct, DBC would have had to walk approximately 30 miles in very difficult terrain, in poor weather conditions, while avoiding being seen, carrying a 20 lbs bag of cash.
Think about that for a moment. I challenge anyone to attempt a 30-mile walk carrying a 20 lbs weight in good conditions let alone what I described above.
For anyone, especially someone in his mid-40's, this is bordering on physically impossible--especially if he injured himself in any manner during the jump and landing.
This means DBC had to land much closer to Tena Bar than the FBI thinks. Unless, of course, someone wants to argue that he had the money in the trunk of his car and that he drove it to Tena Bar to bury it which makes absolutely no sense.
Needless to say, I do not believe DBC died that night by way of no-pulling on or near Tena Bar. Therefore, I consider the money find alone an extremely compelling piece of evidence that almost single-handedly significantly limits the actual dropzone to within a few miles of Tena Bar. If I'm right about that, the FBI Flight Path cannot be correct and the Western Flight Path cannot be incorrect.
EU, while we disagree about the no-pull and some other details, we certainly agree that all indications are that Cooper jumped very near Tina Bar. And the Western Flight Path is definitely correct.
So if that's the case, did they just simply get the flight path wrong, or did they intentionally put out a wrong flight path?
I think they simply got the flight path wrong. I suspect the error occurred by way of the Air Force using the radar hits from the Air Force chase planes and not 305 itself. Remember, the chase planes were directed to fly approximately 10 miles east of 305 as the airliner headed south. Moreover, they would pass 305 up, then have to circle back around because of the speed issues.
-
Let's take the money and think this through:
The money weighed 20 lbs. If it got wet it would have weighed appreciably more.
Now assuming he rid himself of everything except the money and that the FBI dropzone is correct, DBC would have had to walk approximately 30 miles in very difficult terrain, in poor weather conditions, while avoiding being seen, carrying a 20 lbs bag of cash.
Think about that for a moment. I challenge anyone to attempt a 30-mile walk carrying a 20 lbs weight in good conditions let alone what I described above.
For anyone, especially someone in his mid-40's, this is bordering on physically impossible--especially if he injured himself in any manner during the jump and landing.
This means DBC had to land much closer to Tena Bar than the FBI thinks. Unless, of course, someone wants to argue that he had the money in the trunk of his car and that he drove it to Tena Bar to bury it which makes absolutely no sense.
Needless to say, I do not believe DBC died that night by way of no-pulling on or near Tena Bar. Therefore, I consider the money find alone an extremely compelling piece of evidence that almost single-handedly significantly limits the actual dropzone to within a few miles of Tena Bar. If I'm right about that, the FBI Flight Path cannot be correct and the Western Flight Path cannot be incorrect.
EU, while we disagree about the no-pull and some other details, we certainly agree that all indications are that Cooper jumped very near Tina Bar. And the Western Flight Path is definitely correct.
So if that's the case, did they just simply get the flight path wrong, or did they intentionally put out a wrong flight path?
They simply got the flight path wrong. And that is the probable reason that the FBI will not release the un-redacted radio transcripts from the Seattle ATC Center. Compare the Seattle ATC Center transcripts with the Oakland ATC Center transcripts and you will see what I am talking about. The Oakland ATC Center transcripts are textbook air traffic control communications for the 1971 time frame.
-
The air force tracked every plane that took off and was labeled shortly there after. they would know which planes were which.
-
I don't argue with people who think the moon landing was faked. I don't argue with people who think the earth is flat. I don't argue with people who think Trump won the election.
I also no longer argue with people who think the flight path was anything other than the central one. The physical, circumstantial, and documented evidence is utterly overwhelming, and any other suggestions aren't worth considering.
That said, there are many other logical scenarios that place the money on Tena Bar besides landing near there or Cooper walking there - particularly those involving the river.
-
A flight simulation has been done retracing the path made by the Air Force. you have things to consider. how accurate was the timing of the jump. did they look in the right place. you read reports of the oscillation and pressure bump occurring close together and reports of minutes apart. parts of the search area were impenetrable. lots of variables, especially for 1971.
you could pretty much put the plane anywhere east or west from the Columbia close to Amboy and get similar times
with flight since the plane never flew far enough east or west to disrupt any timing.
The Air Force made the map. they had two radar systems. the first was the same system used at civilian airports we know and the second was the Sage radar that protected the country from enemy aircraft. it's not really written in stone exactly how they made the map or what radar they used. the job of the sage radar was to identify all the aircraft in the sky 24/7. they had to mark or "paint" each target so they would know exactly what was in the air at any given time.
The flight path has been disputed by a few believing the path was more westerly flying over the Columbia in the Tina bar area. it is a plausible path but goes against all the known evidence. it's supported by several factors with timing in the flight, the placard found and the money location on Tbar.
There is some who believe the path was more easterly as well including agents..
The weather. that has some issues. a report showing a possible wind change around the time of the jump is in the 302's and a report from a commercial pilot not far behind flight 305. a wrench gets thrown into everything surrounding this case. some say it was pouring and other say it was light rain as weather was documented.
If you are not sure of any type of simulations or wind direction etc. how can one come to a conclusion of life or death? based on what I know or believe, I think it's possible he made it but can't say for certain. the copycats made it. even at faster speeds. some having zero experience.
One of the benefits of being part of a major show like the one on the History Channel is that a lot of people reach out to you afterwards.
In fact, I was contacted by a commercial pilot for another airline who was sitting in the cockpit of his airliner at SeaTac the night of the skyjacking and watched 305 as it sat off in the distance and listened to radio communication between the 305 pilots and the tower. This is because SeaTac was shut down during the incident and they couldn't depart.
He watched 305 depart SeaTac and was finally permitted to depart SeaTac about half an hour later. Ironically his flight was to PDX, therefore he was only about 30 minutes behind 305. He described the weather to me that night and mentioned nothing of the kind of winds that Bohar (sic?) mentions. In fact, the weather was described precisely as we understand it today, the weather arriving from the southwest which is typical.
This is important information, EU. Thanks. What was the guy's name?
-
I don't argue with people who think the moon landing was faked. I don't argue with people who think the earth is flat. I don't argue with people who think Trump won the election.
I also no longer argue with people who think the flight path was anything other than the central one. The physical, circumstantial, and documented evidence is utterly overwhelming, and any other suggestions aren't worth considering.
That said, there are many other logical scenarios that place the money on Tena Bar besides landing near there or Cooper walking there - particularly those involving the river.
You see Chaucer, this is the kind of statement that one would consider rude. After all, the inference in the first paragraph is clear.
Now, let me describe the extent of the evidence supporting the FBI Flight Path: A guy from the Air Force hands the FBI a map a few days after the skyjacking and says "Here's the flight path."
There you go. That's it. Very compelling.
The problem is that the physical evidence does not support the FBI Flight Path--Tena Bar, placard, fiberglass skirt. Oh, and a grand total of ZERO has been found along the FBI Flight Path where one would expect to find something.
As for the river and Tena Bar: Explain the June diatoms. Explain three individual packets. Explain the money being found 50 feet from the water's edge and several feet above the average river surface level. Oh, and explain the timing of the infallible FBI Flight Path.
Good luck.
-
The air force tracked every plane that took off and was labeled shortly there after. they would know which planes were which.
The radar station was physically located on McChord AFB and the Seattle ATC Center (and tower controllers) had information from that station displayed on their controller's screens. Tracking the commercial flights was the responsibility of the Seattle ATC Center and the commercial flights used their onboard navigation equipment, which used the VORTAC system stations, to stay on V-23. After about 60 miles from the McChord AFB radar station, the airliner's onboard equipment was probably more accurate than anything coming from the McChord radar.
It appears that the USAF had to go back to their raw radar data and no one bothered to talk to the Seattle ATC Center controllers. This is where the Seattle ATC Center radio transcripts could fill in a tremendous amount of very significant information.
-
The air force tracked every plane that took off and was labeled shortly there after. they would know which planes were which.
The radar station was physically located on McChord AFB and the Seattle ATC Center (and tower controllers) had information from that station displayed on their controller's screens. Tracking the commercial flights was the responsibility of the Seattle ATC Center and the commercial flights used their onboard navigation equipment, which used the VORTAC system stations, to stay on V-23. After about 60 miles from the McChord AFB radar station, the airliner's onboard equipment was probably more accurate than anything coming from the McChord radar.
It appears that the USAF had to go back to their raw radar data and no one bothered to talk to the Seattle ATC Center controllers. This is where the Seattle ATC Center radio transcripts could fill in a tremendous amount of very significant information.
According to Ammerman, the radar station providing data displayed on his screen at Seattle ATC was located near Salem, OR. Moreover, the fact that the jet was only flying at 10K feet inhibited the data. Also, the target location variance when 305 was near Toledo he estimated would be about 15 miles. Meaning, the forward slash on the radar display on his screen represented a length of about 15 miles and the only thing he knew was that the jet was somewhere on that line. Near PDX, he estimated the variance was about 5 miles.
-
Would Portland's ATC be involved in tracking 305?
-
Well, the fiberglass was never confirmed being found. it explains a part was found, not a piece of one.
The placard has come under fire with no visible reason the placard was on 305. it was years later they claim it was missing? lots of flags here to consider before calling this evidence. you could easily build something that can't be built using this "evidence"
Down playing the Air Force is a little dramatic isn't it?
Tracking the commercial flights was the responsibility of the Seattle ATC Center
Yes, but it was also the Air Force who had to monitor every flight in the air which is about the same as Seattle, Portland or any other airport with radar and controllers. if the enemy came in they had to know where all the friendlies were so they would track or shoot them down.
Ammerman also agreed the path looked close, no? he also believes the dots on the transcripts are other transmissions not related to 305, correct?
I see the same amount of problems with any given path you try. that's my opinion...
-
Would Portland's ATC be involved in tracking 305?
Portland does not have an ATC. Oakland is the next ATC south of Seattle.
That said, PDX does have a tower with radar.
-
Would Portland's ATC be involved in tracking 305?
It depends. R99 doesn't believe so but they were flying into there airspace with a bomb. reports from radar operators back this up but is not believed by a few.
-
Would Portland's ATC be involved in tracking 305?
Not likely. The only way Portland would get involved would be if the airliner was landing at Portland, in which case the Seattle ATC Center controller would hand the airliner off to the Portland approach controller.
The Seattle ATC Center would have agreements with the various towers along the way about how to handle the transiting aircraft. There is nothing to suggest that the hijacked airliner contacted any tower or other air traffic control function except the Seattle ATC and Oakland ATC Centers until it was handed off to the Reno approach controller.
-
Would Portland's ATC be involved in tracking 305?
It depends. R99 doesn't believe so but they were flying into there airspace with a bomb. reports from radar operators back this up but is not believed by a few.
Again, there is nothing to suggest that the hijacked airliner was ever in touch with the Portland tower or in airspace controlled by the Portland tower.
-
Would Portland's ATC be involved in tracking 305?
It depends. R99 doesn't believe so but they were flying into there airspace with a bomb. reports from radar operators back this up but is not believed by a few.
We have to understand what transpired here with PDX.
Portland Tower was not involved with 305. I'm not certain how they would know anything, after all an airliner passing over Portland usually does so traveling in the high altitude airway. That said, even though 305 was not in the high altitude airway, it was in the medium altitude airway at 10k feet.
Apparently there was a Portland controller watching what he thought was 305. That said, I wonder how he knows for certain he was viewing 305 when there were a total of four jets, all travelling above the lower altitude airway. Also, I seriously question the ability of this controller to recall precisely where 305 was at 8:12 PM days after the fact. Remember, he's simply watching the target and has no idea that Cooper jumped at 8:12. Therefore, why would he happen to remember precisely where the jet happened to be at that exact moment days afterward?
-
Thanks R99. I thought there was a comment from one of Portland's ATCs stating he could distinguish the difference between 305 and the chase planes due to their difference in elevations? He might have also mentioned a difference in speeds?(maybe?)
-
Thanks R99. I thought there was a comment from one of Portland's ATCs stating he could distinguish the difference between 305 and the chase planes due to their difference in elevations
There are several comments from them on 302's..they didn't have to be in touch with 305...
-
I don't mean to imply that the approach controller was in communication with 305, only that the controller was observing them on his radar.
-
Thanks R99. I thought there was a comment from one of Portland's ATCs stating he could distinguish the difference between 305 and the chase planes due to their difference in elevations
There are several comments from them on 302's..they didn't have to be in touch with 305...
Let me add that there is nothing to suggest that air traffic at Portland was adversely affected by the hijacking. That is, the air traffic at PDX was apparently coming and going more or less normally. But take offs and presumably landings were stopped at SEATAC until after the hijacked airliner departed. And it was on the ground at SEATAC for more than two hours.
It is entirely possible that the Seattle ATC managers advised other ATC managers that they had a hijacking in progress and that it might be coming their way, so stay alert. Al Lee, the NWA Chief Pilot at SEATAC apparently had the Seattle ATC managers pass the word to the Oakland ATC managers that the airliner had some flight control problems under some conditions.
So when the airliner was handed off to the Oakland ATC controller, about the first thing he did was boot the USAF Air Rescue C-130 off the VHF frequency (he told it to communicate with him only on the UHF frequency) and the second thing he did was to ask the airliner pilots for details on what their control problems were.
They explained that they could only handle minor descent rates and this factor resulted in the airliner having to abort its first attempt to land at Reno.
-
I don't mean to imply that the approach controller was in communication with 305, only that the controller was observing them on his radar.
In the redacted Seattle ATC Center radio transcripts, about the only thing that was routinely included was during handoffs from one controller to another the airliner was directed to push the "ident" function on their transponder. And that was the way the two controllers knew they were talking about the same radar target. In the initial contact with the new controller, the airliner routinely stated its altitude which was standard procedure in 1971.
I don't know if the flight data information was displayed on the controller radar targets in 1971, but the Portland tower controllers may have known that the hijacked airliner was flying south from SEATAC even if they didn't know which target it was on their screens, or even if it appeared on their screens.
-
How many targets would have been flying on v23 (between Seattle and Portland) during the time of the hijacking? Wasn't traffic restricted to 305 and the chase planes?
-
I don't argue with people who think the moon landing was faked. I don't argue with people who think the earth is flat. I don't argue with people who think Trump won the election.
I also no longer argue with people who think the flight path was anything other than the central one. The physical, circumstantial, and documented evidence is utterly overwhelming, and any other suggestions aren't worth considering.
That said, there are many other logical scenarios that place the money on Tena Bar besides landing near there or Cooper walking there - particularly those involving the river.
You see Chaucer, this is the kind of statement that one would consider rude. After all, the inference in the first paragraph is clear.
Now, let me describe the extent of the evidence supporting the FBI Flight Path: A guy from the Air Force hands the FBI a map a few days after the skyjacking and says "Here's the flight path."
There you go. That's it. Very compelling.
The problem is that the physical evidence does not support the FBI Flight Path--Tena Bar, placard, fiberglass skirt. Oh, and a grand total of ZERO has been found along the FBI Flight Path where one would expect to find something.
As for the river and Tena Bar: Explain the June diatoms. Explain three individual packets. Explain the money being found 50 feet from the water's edge and several feet above the average river surface level. Oh, and explain the timing of the infallible FBI Flight Path.
Good luck.
Sorry. Didn't mean to be impolite, but it's true.
We've been over this a million times. None of the physical evidence you have stated supports a western flight. Period. In fact, some of the evidence you stated may not even be evidence to begin with.
Your presumption is that "someone got it wrong". Who? The Air Force, whose literal job it was to track each and every aircraft in our airspace to defend against Soviet attack? The radar data, which was state of the art at the time? The unit assigned to interpret that radar data? The 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron based at McChord? About 20 to 30 active duty airmen and 5 to 7 civilian contractors who train endlessly and do this stuff in their sleep? Your premise is based "someone got wrong"?
So, yeah, when given the choice between "the USAF hands the FBI a map and says, "Here's the flight path" or "Someone got screwed up." I'll take the USAF. Every. Single. Time. Compound that with all the other evidence, the suggestion that the flight path was anything other than down Victor 23 is to me nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
As for your Tena Bar comment, I am on record as having put forward an explanation for all of the things you mentioned, and IMO is more plausible than the USAF and FBI "messed up" up the flight path.
Think me rude or not, but your and other's continued pushing of this unsubstantiated fantasy, obfuscates the truth and is ultimately detrimental to the case. Sorry, but I won't indulge your fantastical theories by engaging you in an argument about it. Flat earthers and 911 truthers have "evidence" too, and it doesn't make their theories any more legitimate.
This flight path was settled years ago. Has been settled repeatedly since. Continues to be settled. Will remain settled in the future. IMO, this thread should be locked.
-
1) The placard came from 305. The FBI said as much. To suggest it did not come from 305 is to say that someone in the FBI identified this instructional placard pertaining to the airstairs emergency release coming from a jet that didn't even have an airstairs emergency release. How is that possible? That's kind of like saying, this exit sign came from a jet that doesn't even have an exit.
2) The fiberglass piece came from the airstairs of a 727. Also, the FBI wrongly stated a piece that size wasn't missing from 305 which is clearly incorrect (we can see the panels missing in film and photos).
3) And the money was found where the money was found. Three independent packets buried together no where near the FBI dropzone.
4) Nothing has ever been found along the FBI Flight Path after 50 years. Nothing. Zero.
I think I'll let the evidence--the stuff listed above--dictate what I believe.
All of that said, I am still interested for someone to explain to me how ransom money that left the jet at 8:12 PM ended up at Tena Bar via the Columbia.
-
1) The placard came from 305. The FBI said as much. To suggest it did not come from 305 is to say that someone in the FBI identified this instructional placard pertaining to the airstairs emergency release coming from a jet that didn't even have an airstairs emergency release. How is that possible? That's kind of like saying, this exit sign came from a jet that doesn't even have an exit.
Research by Shutter and Flyjack would suggest otherwise. Regardless, the placard was found along Victor 23 and what variables that affected its location between the time it would have left the aircraft in 1971 to the time it was found is completely unknown.
2) The fiberglass piece came from the airstairs of a 727. Also, the FBI wrongly stated a piece that size wasn't missing from 305 which is clearly incorrect (we can see the panels missing in film and photos).
It has never been confirmed that this piece came from 305. Regardless, the exact location of the find is unknown, but Cinebar, the town associated with the find is located east of Victor 23.
3) And the money was found where the money was found. Three independent packets buried together no where near the FBI dropzone.
There are other means for the money to end up where it was other than dropping near Tena Bar. Also, you're using the money find as evidence for the flight path and the flight path as evidence for the money find. This ends up being no evidence at all.
4) Nothing has ever been found along the FBI Flight Path after 50 years. Nothing. Zero.
Other than the placard you mentioned, the panel you mentioned, and the parachute that Cossey said wasn't his. Regardless, absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence.
I think I'll let the evidence--the stuff listed above--dictate what I believe.
So will I.
All of that said, I am still interested for someone to explain to me how ransom money that left the jet at 8:12 PM ended up at Tena Bar via the Columbia.
This assumes the money left the plane at 8:12 which is in far more dispute than the flight path itself. Interesting that you dispute the flight path despite a mountain of evidence but happily accept the 8:12 jump time which has far less evidence - almost like you are cherry-picking evidence to fit your pet theory.
That's the nice thing about not having a pet theory or suspect that I have to make the pieces fit for. I can just look at the evidence and draw conclusions or change them.
I respect the work you have done on the case, but I'm sorry, regarding the flight path, you're just wrong.
-
Interesting that you dispute the 8:12 jump time but are OK with the much more complicated flight path.
I can point to many errors on the part of the FBI and others. Therefore, why is the flight path treated as gospel? The FBI itself even entertained the Washougal Washdown Theory and a more easterly flight path after the money find. It seems to me that if the FBI is willing to accept that perhaps the flight path is off, others should be open to that suggestion too.
Finally, given the info pertaining to the placard and Cinebar finds, I think it is damn near impossible that these items didn't come from 305. After all, both have been confirmed as coming from within the interior of a 727 in the airstairs cone area. Which, by definition, means that they had to come from a jet that was flying with its airstairs deployed. Exactly how many commercial 727s fly with their airstairs deployed?
-
Cinbar, they describe a part, not a piece of one. we have another part from the stairs that also doesn't belong to 305..two separate 302's..
The placard is under serious question..."the FBI said as much" they also show a path they said was the right one? what do they know about the placard other than what is told to them. is it documented missing November 24, 1971? an interior photo clearly shows the emergency function missing from where it should be if it was installed on 305. if the system was not on the plane the placard wouldn't be on it? that's pretty simple logic. how it got where it was found could become the real mystery..
First they claimed it was missing several days after the hijacking and another report claims it was missing after the test in January of 1972? one time or both times and only documented 8 years later? where did the placard go, it's not in evidence and Cowlitz doesn't have it. they don't have any documents what so ever of the incident. poof, as Jo would say.
In my opinion I see multiple flags here..
-
I think we're getting into semantics when we're debating "part" versus "pieces of a part." The Boeing employee who found the part and verified it came from within a 727 stated a size which matches the size of the missing panels. Moreover, he stated that the part came from the same spot as the missing panels, "above the door."
The placard: How is it possible that the FBI announced that the placard came from a jet that didn't even have the part that the placard referenced? That would be like the FBI announcing that a window shade came from a jet that didn't even have any windows. That would be a colossal F up. Again, how could this be possible? Moreover, if the placard didn't come from 305, which commercial 727 did it come from flying with its airstairs deployed?
All of that said, we know for damn sure where the money was found. With that in mind, how could the money have gotten to Tena Bar from the FBI Dropzone? If the FBI is wrong about the dropzone, why can't they be wrong about the flight path?
-
I think we're getting into semantics when we're debating "part" versus "pieces of a part." The Boeing employee who found the part and verified it came from within a 727 stated a size which matches the size of the missing panels. Moreover, he stated that the part came from the same spot as the missing panels, "above the door."
The placard: How is it possible that the FBI announced that the placard came from a jet that didn't even have the part that the placard referenced? That would be like the FBI announcing that a window shade came from a jet that didn't even have any windows. That would be a colossal F up. Again, how could this be possible? Moreover, if the placard didn't come from 305, which commercial 727 did it come from flying with its airstairs deployed?
All of that said, we know for damn sure where the money was found. With that in mind, how could the money have gotten to Tena Bar from the FBI Dropzone? If the FBI is wrong about the dropzone, why can't they be wrong about the flight path?
the panels or skirting is two pieces. one for each side. the agent should of known if he mentioned a portion or a piece of a larger part.
The placard
If you read the newspapers they flip flop on it even being from 305. a colossal fuck up would be the flight path being off vs a placard. one would be the fault of the Air Force and the placard would lie upon the FBI. one thing I noticed in the 302's. it was shown to NWO and they didn't state whether 305 had the function. they should of confirmed it vs stating it came from a 727.
I'm showing what I see and one of the things I agree with on with Flyjack. he was the one who posted the still shot of the interior of the plane. the video is still on YouTube, I believe. I went back and forth with him in emails and forums over the years stating we didn't know if 305 had the function. it appears that it didn't and this throws a huge flag into this in my opinion.
-
Interesting that you dispute the 8:12 jump time but are OK with the much more complicated flight path.
This is objectively and categorically untrue. There is FAR more evidence pointing to a Victor 23 flight path than an 8:12 jump and you and I and everyone else both know it.
I can point to many errors on the part of the FBI and others. Therefore, why is the flight path treated as gospel? The FBI itself even entertained the Washougal Washdown Theory and a more easterly flight path after the money find. It seems to me that if the FBI is willing to accept that perhaps the flight path is off, others should be open to that suggestion too.
The FBI and the United States Air Force both believe the central flight path is accurate. Moreover, there is no concrete evidence pointing to a western flight path. Again, you are relying on the deus ex machina of "someone messed up". Until you can prove "someone" messed up, then I'll side with the guys actually tracking the flight and reconstructing the radar date and conducting a massive, million dollar search.
Finally, given the info pertaining to the placard and Cinebar finds, I think it is damn near impossible that these items didn't come from 305. After all, both have been confirmed as coming from within the interior of a 727 in the airstairs cone area.
Not sure this is accurate either. We don't know at all where that placard or that fiberglass piece came from. Still, if they did in fact come from 305, then both pieces support a central flight path. So, if you want to believe they did come from 305, then have it because they actually support my theory rather than yours.
Look, as I have said, I'm done debating this because there is no debate. The facts are obvious. The evidence is clear. If you and others want to be contrarian, then I certainly won't stand in your way, but I believe you are wrong and I think you are wasting your time. A top-notch researcher as yourself should dedicate their time and energy to more open-ended questions.
Just my two cents.
-
Interesting that you dispute the 8:12 jump time but are OK with the much more complicated flight path.
This is objectively and categorically untrue. There is FAR more evidence pointing to a Victor 23 flight path than an 8:12 jump and you and I and everyone else both know it.
I can point to many errors on the part of the FBI and others. Therefore, why is the flight path treated as gospel? The FBI itself even entertained the Washougal Washdown Theory and a more easterly flight path after the money find. It seems to me that if the FBI is willing to accept that perhaps the flight path is off, others should be open to that suggestion too.
The FBI and the United States Air Force both believe the central flight path is accurate. Moreover, there is no concrete evidence pointing to a western flight path. Again, you are relying on the deus ex machina of "someone messed up". Until you can prove "someone" messed up, then I'll side with the guys actually tracking the flight and reconstructing the radar date and conducting a massive, million dollar search.
Finally, given the info pertaining to the placard and Cinebar finds, I think it is damn near impossible that these items didn't come from 305. After all, both have been confirmed as coming from within the interior of a 727 in the airstairs cone area.
Not sure this is accurate either. We don't know at all where that placard or that fiberglass piece came from. Still, if they did in fact come from 305, then both pieces support a central flight path. So, if you want to believe they did come from 305, then have it because they actually support my theory rather than yours.
Look, as I have said, I'm done debating this because there is no debate. The facts are obvious. The evidence is clear. If you and others want to be contrarian, then I certainly won't stand in your way, but I believe you are wrong and I think you are wasting your time. A top-notch researcher as yourself should dedicate their time and energy to more open-ended questions.
Just my two cents.
Chaucer, let me add my two cents here about your so-called research skills. You recently claimed to have solved one of the Zodiac ciphers. You and your associates got your 15 minutes of fame over a 1 or 2 day period as I predicted. But in fact, you hadn't even determined what constituted the Zodiac cipher in question.
You are in no position to lecture anyone about doing research. So let some hot air out of your ego.
-
Interesting that you dispute the 8:12 jump time but are OK with the much more complicated flight path.
This is objectively and categorically untrue. There is FAR more evidence pointing to a Victor 23 flight path than an 8:12 jump and you and I and everyone else both know it.
I can point to many errors on the part of the FBI and others. Therefore, why is the flight path treated as gospel? The FBI itself even entertained the Washougal Washdown Theory and a more easterly flight path after the money find. It seems to me that if the FBI is willing to accept that perhaps the flight path is off, others should be open to that suggestion too.
The FBI and the United States Air Force both believe the central flight path is accurate. Moreover, there is no concrete evidence pointing to a western flight path. Again, you are relying on the deus ex machina of "someone messed up". Until you can prove "someone" messed up, then I'll side with the guys actually tracking the flight and reconstructing the radar date and conducting a massive, million dollar search.
Finally, given the info pertaining to the placard and Cinebar finds, I think it is damn near impossible that these items didn't come from 305. After all, both have been confirmed as coming from within the interior of a 727 in the airstairs cone area.
Not sure this is accurate either. We don't know at all where that placard or that fiberglass piece came from. Still, if they did in fact come from 305, then both pieces support a central flight path. So, if you want to believe they did come from 305, then have it because they actually support my theory rather than yours.
Look, as I have said, I'm done debating this because there is no debate. The facts are obvious. The evidence is clear. If you and others want to be contrarian, then I certainly won't stand in your way, but I believe you are wrong and I think you are wasting your time. A top-notch researcher as yourself should dedicate their time and energy to more open-ended questions.
Just my two cents.
Chaucer, let me add my two cents here about your so-called research skills. You recently claimed to have solved one of the Zodiac ciphers. You and your associates got your 15 minutes of fame over a 1 or 2 day period as I predicted. But in fact, you hadn't even determined what constituted the Zodiac cipher in question.
You are in no position to lecture anyone about doing research. So let some hot air out of your ego.
LOL
Let me put my two cents in about YOUR research skills. Had you actually done any you would have known that at NO TIME did I claim to have had any part in solving the Z340. I didn't. Yes, Dave Oranchak, an acquaintance of mine, did but I did not nor did I ever make any claims that I had anything to do with it.
Moreover, had you done even further research you would have known that despite your claims to the contrary, the Z340 WAS solved, and the solution was confirmed by the FBI and countless other cryptographers.
If you think you somehow know better than all of them, well then my ego isn't the one we should be talking about here.
Meanwhile, keep trying to impress us with your "research skills". It's certainly doing wonders for your credibility. :rofl:
-
I'm showing what I see and one of the things I agree with on with Flyjack. he was the one who posted the still shot of the interior of the plane. the video is still on YouTube, I believe. I went back and forth with him in emails and forums over the years stating we didn't know if 305 had the function. it appears that it didn't and this throws a huge flag into this in my opinion.
305 did not have the version you're looking for. Specifically, the type with a second small door with two holes that pulls off and requires a plastic cover to be broken etc.
The Hicks' placard would have been on the one main door because that is where the emergency release is located. When I toured the old 727 at the museum in Tucson a year or so ago, it too had only one compartment but it had a placard on the door that said Emergency Airstair Control. That entire unit was referred to as an emergency airstair release control.
Now as to what version we're looking at--meaning single handle that does two things, or separate handle, or only one handle to release in emergency--I don't know. But the instructions on the Hicks' placard says nothing about pulling off a cover or breaking a plastic barrier. Obviously the Hicks' placard referred to a different version.
-
I spoke with Bruce Kitt about a year ago. we discussed the placard and the functions of the stairs. Boeing refers to the opening of the stairs by the box to the right of the stairs at the top. a lever is pushed and pulled to operate. I've never seen the emergency function inside the same box for normal operations.
The stairs are considered an emergency exit.
The placard indicates pulling a red handle that breaks a lock wire to allow the function to work. the normal function has a black lever and doesn't break any lock wire. several placards can be found on the door inside and on the outside. one is visible in the photo that shows the interior of the stairs.
Instructions are also on the small panel you speak of that you access to pull the red handle that breaks the lock wire when it's used. it appears to be another safety feature when the normal function doesn't work. on the outside of the plane is an access door where the ground crew can open and close the stairs. it also has an emergency function if the lever fails or hydraulic pressure is lost. a pump can be used to open and close them.
I'm not sure what airlines it was but there was an accident and the plane was on the ground and the stews opened the door to release the stairs but they failed to go down. they didn't know about the emergency function because they were never properly trained about the function. it also conceals the panel/door when the door for the normal operation of the stairs is opened. this was after the fact but explains they system and how it works.
I agree the normal operation control box is called emergency stair control. as mentioned it's considered a emergency exit. safety cards show this as a emergency exit unless it's a water landing. it will have an X over the opening on the card deleting the exit.
-
I spoke with Bruce Kitt about a year ago. we discussed the placard and the functions of the stairs. Boeing refers to the opening of the stairs by the box to the right of the stairs at the top. a lever is pushed and pulled to operate. I've never seen the emergency function inside the same box for normal operations.
The stairs are considered an emergency exit.
The placard indicates pulling a red handle that breaks a lock wire to allow the function to work. the normal function has a black lever and doesn't break any lock wire. several placards can be found on the door inside and on the outside. one is visible in the photo that shows the interior of the stairs.
Instructions are also on the small panel you speak of that you access to pull the red handle that breaks the lock wire when it's used. it appears to be another safety feature when the normal function doesn't work. on the outside of the plane is an access door where the ground crew can open and close the stairs. it also has an emergency function if the lever fails or hydraulic pressure is lost. a pump can be used to open and close them.
I'm not sure what airlines it was but there was an accident and the plane was on the ground and the stews opened the door to release the stairs but they failed to go down. they didn't know about the emergency function because they were never properly trained about the function. it also conceals the panel/door when the door for the normal operation of the stairs is opened. this was after the fact but explains they system and how it works.
I agree the normal operation control box is called emergency stair control. as mentioned it's considered a emergency exit. safety cards show this as a emergency exit unless it's a water landing. it will have an X over the opening on the card deleting the exit.
Yes, it's all very odd.
The Hicks' placard clearly describes the operation different than the ones that I've seen that mention breaking the plastic cover. Also, I have never seen a secondary unit other than the one with a two holes entry pull-away panel. Moreover, I've never seen anything about a lock wire breaking other than the Hicks' placard.
I have seen emergency placards on the main door as mentioned. It's almost as if the airstairs we're designed primarily to be opened from the outside by the ground crew like the undercarriage baggage compartment. However, they could be released from the inside in the case of an emergency.
It's clear that there were different versions of the release apparatus for some reason.
-
The safety cards explain that you pull the panel off and a plastic cover is removed to access the T handle to operate the emergency function. once that is done about 3 feet of cable with the red T handle will be hanging down the side of the stairwell wall. there is writing on the panel with the holes in it that possibly explain how to remove it and the large placard might be how to operate the function.
Not a single photo can be found with this placard in place. we have found several pics or still shots of the emergency system installed that has the panel with the two holes the safety cards describe. none had the placard on them. that doesn't mean they were never there but no pics can be found with the placard in place.
Now, after the accident mentioned above the FAA suggested steps be taken to properly train the crew about the functions of the stairs even suggesting to have the main door swing the opposite direction so it doesn't cover the emergency function and proper placards in place.
The photo below shows the two doors/panels in the stairs. the red arrow is the main function door and the yellow is the emergency system. the main door also has placards on it..
-
Different size placards can be found on the main door inside and out. the range in color and sizes. one is also inside the box where the "control lever" is. this is dictated in one of the documents by Boeing.
-
Where is there something referring to or showing the T-handle?
-
A video was made in reference to the stair functions. a photo can be seen showing the door open to the controls. it's labeled "outside entry door" which tends to confuse people thinking it's outside on the fuselage. it appears to have three placards on the inside. with no room for a larger placard. the exterior of the door is no different showing one or multiple placards and some have none. I believe time is at fault here with the placards being removed, painted over etc.
What is needed is the drawings specific to placard placement that shows exactly where all the placards are placed. I'm guessing this would be next to impossible to try and obtain. I use drawings similar to this called elevation drawings, or A01 thru A10 architectural drawings . they show me everything attached to the exterior of the building so nothing is covered or obscured. things like outlets, signs, window openings, lights, colors, stucco bands etc. I know exactly what the wall will look like before it comes out of the ground.
-
Where is there something referring to or showing the T-handle?
I believe it's described in Boeing documents and can be seen on some safety cards...
-
The one thing that can be established is that the Hicks' placard describes use of the "handle" in terms different than other placards. Reading the placard it could refer to a T-handle that is pulled--visually it makes more sense with a break wire too. Is it possible that this feature was located somewhere else in the back airstairs cone and not right next to the regular door? Interestingly, the placard is pretty large relative to other similar placards, so it needs a pretty large spot to be featured. It also describes opening a door versus removing a panel.
-
Also, I've looked closely at the screen grab of the film from 305 and cannot be certain if there is a separate door next to the main panel door or not. Do you have a super clear picture? I can see what appears to be a shadow on the wall where the two-holes would be, but that could be a reflection of the silver placard on the front of the main door.
-
The normal stair control is described as a lever and is black. all the safety cards show the emergency system "if stairs are jammed" to be in the same spot and describe pulling a handle. Northwest doesn't have a safety card with this feature that has been found. they only show the normal stair function on the cards.
A certain amount were retro fitted "kits" but not a lot were sold and I would guess they would always be around the normal control box for less confusion and might need to be inline to work correctly.
The box above in the stairs appears to be inline with the controls on the ground under the fuselage..
-
Let's take the money and think this through:
The money weighed 20 lbs. If it got wet it would have weighed appreciably more.
Now assuming he rid himself of everything except the money and that the FBI dropzone is correct, DBC would have had to walk approximately 30 miles in very difficult terrain, in poor weather conditions, while avoiding being seen, carrying a 20 lbs bag of cash.
Think about that for a moment. I challenge anyone to attempt a 30-mile walk carrying a 20 lbs weight in good conditions let alone what I described above.
For anyone, especially someone in his mid-40's, this is bordering on physically impossible--especially if he injured himself in any manner during the jump and landing.
This means DBC had to land much closer to Tena Bar than the FBI thinks. Unless, of course, someone wants to argue that he had the money in the trunk of his car and that he drove it to Tena Bar to bury it which makes absolutely no sense.
Needless to say, I do not believe DBC died that night by way of no-pulling on or near Tena Bar. Therefore, I consider the money find alone an extremely compelling piece of evidence that almost single-handedly significantly limits the actual dropzone to within a few miles of Tena Bar. If I'm right about that, the FBI Flight Path cannot be correct and the Western Flight Path cannot be incorrect.
This one really got me thinking EU. 20 pounds does not seem like much, until you've actually had to carry it for more than a few minutes. He did not even have a good backpack to carry it in. If it was wet, then it was even harder to carry. Plus the weight was not evenly distributed. Maybe a 45 year old smoker can try to put a bag together and walk around the DZ at night carrying the bag and give us some input on what it is like. It leads me to believe that whoever Cooper was, he would have needed to hide the money quickly, or have a means to get it out of there (car, boat).
-
Let's take the money and think this through:
The money weighed 20 lbs. If it got wet it would have weighed appreciably more.
Now assuming he rid himself of everything except the money and that the FBI dropzone is correct, DBC would have had to walk approximately 30 miles in very difficult terrain, in poor weather conditions, while avoiding being seen, carrying a 20 lbs bag of cash.
Think about that for a moment. I challenge anyone to attempt a 30-mile walk carrying a 20 lbs weight in good conditions let alone what I described above.
For anyone, especially someone in his mid-40's, this is bordering on physically impossible--especially if he injured himself in any manner during the jump and landing.
This means DBC had to land much closer to Tena Bar than the FBI thinks. Unless, of course, someone wants to argue that he had the money in the trunk of his car and that he drove it to Tena Bar to bury it which makes absolutely no sense.
Needless to say, I do not believe DBC died that night by way of no-pulling on or near Tena Bar. Therefore, I consider the money find alone an extremely compelling piece of evidence that almost single-handedly significantly limits the actual dropzone to within a few miles of Tena Bar. If I'm right about that, the FBI Flight Path cannot be correct and the Western Flight Path cannot be incorrect.
This one really got me thinking EU. 20 pounds does not seem like much, until you've actually had to carry it for more than a few minutes. He did not even have a good backpack to carry it in. If it was wet, then it was even harder to carry. Plus the weight was not evenly distributed. Maybe a 45 year old smoker can try to put a bag together and walk around the DZ at night carrying the bag and give us some input on what it is like. It leads me to believe that whoever Cooper was, he would have needed to hide the money quickly, or have a means to get it out of there (car, boat).
Indeed, my new thinking is that DBC landed somewhere between the southern end of the Ridgefield Wildlife Refuge (Ridgeport Dairy Unit) and the Tena Bar money spot. The timing works out well too if you embrace the Western Flight Path which would put the jet a couple thousand feet west of the Columbia River at that point.
-
This is what I found so far. I posted it on the DZ a while back. not sure if it's from a safety card or a document..
-
The Hicks' placard seems to indicate some type of pull handle--versus lever--emergency release that is not the normal release. Where it differs from the other pull handle releases is that it references a door, it is quite large, and it is separate from the two-hole panel placard that is on the two-hole panel.
-
The actual emergency release is not a normal function and has a red handle that you pull out. instructions are also on the small panel with the two holes. I don't think we are looking for some sort of different panel. two are the only one's known with releasing the stairs. the third would be activated from the ground...
-
The actual emergency release is not a normal function and has a red handle that you pull out. instructions are also on the small panel with the two holes. I don't think we are looking for some sort of different panel. two are the only one's known with releasing the stairs. the third would be activated from the ground...
Then how do you account for what the Hicks' placard actually says? It mentions opening a door. It also doesn't mention a plastic covering that has to be broken behind the two-hole panel. Moreover, where does the placard go? It is way too large to fit on the back side of the two-hole panel from what I can see or anywhere inside of the two-hole cavity.
-
The safety card below shows a red handle but is not a T handle as described in other documents or cards. some show the handle with the cable hanging down that looks similar to a lawnmower pull cord..possibly different year and models with changes.
-
As mentioned before. the panel with the holes in it has instructions as well. those could be for removing the panel and the plastic cover. not a lot of room for all the instructions.
The normal stair release box has 5-6 placards when it's relatively simple instructions. push down on the button and move forward and pull back. pretty simple and yet it's loaded with placards?
-
A guess would be the placard was placed above the panel with the two holes as sort of a step 2 operation. we see multiple placards on the main control box.
I have shown a picture in the past that possibly shows this placard above the small panel. the problem is it'as screenshot of a camera panning inside the stairwell. only a corner is captured. I will have to put it on Google drive to post. can't get it small enough without distorting the pic.
-
It's very frustrating watching these video's taken inside the stairs. I find myself screaming at the video like a horror movie. they bypass the control box every single time. they have no problem shoving your face into the flight data recorder :rofl:
-
The Hicks' placard is clearly unique in terms of its wording and size. It does make sense that there would be a handle to pull like shown above. It makes sense to me if the cavity concealing the red handle is different than the two-hole version we're seeing. Otherwise I'm simply at a loss for how it all adds up.
These placards are approved by the FAA and are very clearly and specifically worded so as not to confuse people during an emergency. References to opening a door strikes me as very specific, plus the fact it simply says pull the handle after that. It doesn't add an extra instruction to break the plastic cover panel.
-
The FAA and NTSB can't catch everything. sadly, new rules will apply after an accident. it was obvious in the 727 that crashed. the stew used the normal stair release and nothing happened. they discovered she didn't know about the emergency handle and nobody realized the normal stair control door would hide the function when left open. they can suggest, recommend and force rules. it depends on the problem.
They suggested having the door swing the opposite direction, never happened. proper training about the functions, probably was done. and better placards with better instructions. not sure if that happened either.
-
It's even worse in the cockpit today. so many things can go wrong if they are not followed to the T. confusion can happen with a lot of things turned off and on and not discovered until an accident occurs. design errors are found the hard way.
-
Regarding what all of this means concerning 305 is another matter.
The FBI sat on the Hicks' find for months in order to verify that it came from 305--which they did. Now we're being asked to believe that they F'd this up and that someone overlooked that there actually wasn't a red handle to pull on 305 after looking into this very basic thing for months. I'm having a very hard time swallowing that especially considering that I have no reasonable explanation for how such a placard finds its way into the woods after separating from the interior cone of a 727 during flight to begin with.
-
I seriously doubt it took months to resolve. they didn't have a clue it was or could of been missing when the plane landed in Reno. 8 years go by and the stories begin.
If the emergency system was not on the plane it's pretty obvious they were wrong with the assumptions given in 1978. no documents about it missing two days later or after testing. that's critical. they noticed it missing among all the other placards? why didn't the other placards come off or why would it be on the wall vs the door where the other placards were?
The door could of been open hiding it from Cooper but I don't see it in the video or the still. that was my one thing holding back from saying it might not of come from 305. if it becomes beyond a shadow of doubt, which appears to be close based on what is known then Hicks becomes questionable. something is wrong somewhere...
-
I believe a drink is in order about now :chr2:
Hold your fire, hold your fire...I need to reload :rofl:
-
It's clear to me that part of the problem with the FBI's investigation is that it lacked institutional memory after a few years. In other words, as new agents entered the investigation they were unaware of what had been discovered or transpired up to that point.
I think this plays a role in the fiberglass find in 1975. It may have played a role in the Hicks' find in 1978. It certainly played a role with Larry Carr not realizing the cigarette butts hadn't been lost, but rather destroyed. It also played a part with Larry not knowing where the yellow FBI Flight Path map came from.
It is important to remember this fact as we read through the 302s. Ultimately it is going to lead to errors in the 302s which makes it difficult for those of us investigating today to ascertain what is accurate and what is flawed.
-
I have to disagree with this due to the nature of how the guy describes the part. he doesn't mention it being a piece of a part. it's implied or written as a complete piece. they guy looked up the part number which I believe you couldn't find on the skirting? you would expect him to say it was part of the skirting from the stairs.
Maybe it's just me but I would want to know more about the part vs the size and if I was the founder, I would explain what the part is used for since I took the time to look the number up or explain it's only a portion of something. the guy worked for Boeing. the Ingrams didn't tell them they found all the money?
-
I have to disagree with this due to the nature of how the guy describes the part. he doesn't mention it being a piece of a part. it's implied or written as a complete piece. they guy looked up the part number which I believe you couldn't find on the skirting? you would expect him to say it was part of the skirting from the stairs.
Maybe it's just me but I would want to know more about the part vs the size and if I was the founder, I would explain what the part is used for since I took the time to look the number up or explain it's only a portion of something. the guy worked for Boeing. the Ingrams didn't tell them they found all the money?
Shutter, are you suggesting that the Ingrams did find all the money (all $200,000)? :o
Eric has a point about the FBI losing institutional memory. Even if the FBI has a million pages of documentation, there are still many things that don't get written down. And the FBI agents could retire after 25 years of service so any agent involved in the initial Cooper investigation was probably long gone by 1995. Was Larry Carr even born in 1971 when the hijacking occurred?
-
It was more of an example. no, they didn't tell the FBI they had all the money. the hunter who found the part didn't specify the part being partial or a piece of one. it's explained, at least in my view as a whole part.
Larry Carr has nothing to do with the placard or part found...
-
Another "coincidence" that I find intriguing is that according to the timing of the flight path--both FBI and Western--I estimate that 305 would be very near Tena Bar at about 8:13 to 8:14.
I find it remarkable that the jump time happens to put DBC very near where the money was found. Considering the flight lasted about 207 minutes, isn't it a fantastical coincidence that the jump time lines up within a minute or two of where the money was later found? Or perhaps this isn't coincidence at all and DBC jumped and landed very near Tena Bar.
-
It's hard to follow some things that are said over time. some don't believe the Air Force map but believe the placard evidence and certain times on the transcripts. then discuss memory issues with the FBI. it's kind of contradicting?
-
It was more of an example. no, they didn't tell the FBI they had all the money. the hunter who found the part didn't specify the part being partial or a piece of one. it's explained, at least in my view as a whole part.
Larry Carr has nothing to do with the placard or part found...
That's my point.
-
That's not a point. even if the FBI had memory problems it doesn't dismiss documents made during any certain period. they seem to have problems keeping track of what was documented over 50 years. could be lazy agents not wanting to spend the time reading the files or even knowing how to find things.
We don't have much left if the FBI and the Air Force didn't have a clue what they were doing. if you believe that, then nothing can be used to build a theory?
Also, some discredit Paul S. from NWO making things worse...
-
As I mentioned to 377 a few days ago on the phone, I've had this nagging feeling that I'm missing something right in front of me concerning this case that could serve as the linchpin. And I think that linchpin may be the money find.
We know where the money was found. We know that 305 was probably within 120 seconds of Tena Bar at the 8:12 jump time. We know that lugging--at a minimum--a 20 lbs. bag of cash wasn't easy for a guy in his mid-40's who apparently was a smoker wearing loafers and a suit.
That said, I am convinced that the truth of it all is staring us right in the face. That is, that this is really no more complicated than DBC jumped very near 8:12 pm and landed very near Tena Bar where he temporarily stashed that money before later coming back to retrieve it.
-
You can't really judge Cooper because of his age and his smoking. plenty of people, including myself are in good shape who have smoked for years and able to carry on like everyone else. then the fact of feeling like an escaped convict with dogs on your ass will get you in gear pretty quick. no hunger is going to bother you unless you stop for a long period or feel safe enough with the surroundings that would bring back the hunger and the cold.
Put a guy out there a hundred pounds over weight and never seen a treadmill or his feet in ten years will run out of gas in 20 minutes without gear..
-
You can't really judge Cooper because of his age and his smoking. plenty of people, including myself are in good shape who have smoked for years and able to carry on like everyone else. then the fact of feeling like an escaped convict with dogs on your ass will get you in gear pretty quick. no hunger is going to bother you unless you stop for a long period or feel safe enough with the surroundings that would bring back the hunger and the cold.
Put a guy out there a hundred pounds over weight and never seen a treadmill or his feet in ten years will run out of gas in 20 minutes without gear..
Of course you can make some reasoned assumptions based upon the real-world challenges he faced.
I'm 55 y/o, 6'3", weigh 205 lbs, don't smoke, and am in pretty good shape. That said, put me in the middle of no where at night when it is cold and raining wearing loafers and a suit with a raincoat, load me down with at least a 20 lb bag of cash, and force me to start walking through brush, and mud puddles and sticker bushes all while trying to avoid being seen before the sun rises and I'm not getting any further than a mile or two before I decide, "I've got to stash this shit somewhere or else I'm going to get caught or die out here."
Additionally, I'm going to be thinking that I can get back to a warm restaurant or somewhere else a lot faster if I'm not trying to replicate some survivalist challenge.
It's smart, but more importantly, it's probably going to be physically required. I'm telling you, just the act of searching for about 6 hours or so each day during filming wiped us all out.
-
It's not going to be the same. you have nothing to strive for other than trying to prove a point while out there. a criminal gains power and adrenaline. his life is on the line. he knows he has to move or trouble will find him quick. kind of like a mother picking up a car to save her son. we have no clue what Cooper was doing in his life to gain an advantage.
Sure, it's possible he hid the money and got out fast. McCoy did that and was able to go back and get it..
-
That's not a point. even if the FBI had memory problems it doesn't dismiss documents made during any certain period. they seem to have problems keeping track of what was documented over 50 years. could be lazy agents not wanting to spend the time reading the files or even knowing how to find things.
We don't have much left if the FBI and the Air Force didn't have a clue what they were doing. if you believe that, then nothing can be used to build a theory?
Also, some discredit Paul S. from NWO making things worse...
Do you believe any FBI agent read the entire Cooper file? Larry Carr apparently made a serious effort to familiarize himself with the case file, but how many other agents who were assigned to the case over the years did the same thing?
-
That's not a point. even if the FBI had memory problems it doesn't dismiss documents made during any certain period. they seem to have problems keeping track of what was documented over 50 years. could be lazy agents not wanting to spend the time reading the files or even knowing how to find things.
We don't have much left if the FBI and the Air Force didn't have a clue what they were doing. if you believe that, then nothing can be used to build a theory?
Also, some discredit Paul S. from NWO making things worse...
Do you believe any FBI agent read the entire Cooper file? Larry Carr apparently made a serious effort to familiarize himself with the case file, but how many other agents who were assigned to the case over the years did the same thing?
Can you prove they didn’t? Moreover, if they did, would it change your mind in the case?
-
I guess you could ask what decade they read all the files. we have no idea what agent X did in 1988?
One of the problems I see with the FBI is the failure to close a case or allow a cold case team go through it with a fine tooth comb. most cases are closed anywhere from months to several years. once it starts going nowhere it gets put on the shelf.
The 70's had the placard and the John Doe warrant.
The 80's the money was found at the beginning of the decade.
The 90's got Lyle and Jo :rofl:
2000's we have the DNA, Tom Kaye and the particles/diatoms.
-
I guess you could ask what decade they read all the files. we have no idea what agent X did in 1988?
One of the problems I see with the FBI is the failure to close a case or allow a cold case team go through it with a fine tooth comb. most cases are closed anywhere from months to several years. once it starts going nowhere it gets put on the shelf.
The 70's had the placard and the John Doe warrant.
The 80's the money was found at the beginning of the decade.
The 90's got Lyle and Jo :rofl:
2000's we have the DNA, Tom Kaye and the particles/diatoms.
Simply digitizing the case like Fly has done would have helped. As noted, the FBI did have suspects who worked in industrial chemicals, for example.
-
Frankly the single greatest thing that the FBI could do is simply open the files up and give greater access to the evidence. After 50 years, why not?
By engaging citizen sleuths you're essentially crowd sourcing which means you're leveraging a lot more minds and a lot more resources--financial and otherwise.
The Zodiac cipher was cracked by a private group. The Golden State Killer was identified by a private group. DBC can also be resolved by a private group if given proper access to the evidence and files.
As for me, if I'm successful in my Congressional run I am going to attempt to change the law to afford citizen sleuths a legitimate opportunity to solve some of these cold case crimes after a certain period of time. Why not?
-
Law enforcement, at the local, state, and federal levels, work on cold cases that are decades old on a regular basis. Institutional memory is important, and each investigator that inherits a cold case goes through the case with a fine toothed comb. However, also important is a fresh set of eyes and new perspectives that may illuminate parts of a case that other investigators may not have considered. It also allows for multiple levels of accountability and redundancy. If one guys missed something earlier, a new investigator can identify that.
I've met and spoken with retired and active detectives who work 50+ year old cold cases. They are the ones that eat at them the most and they leave virtually no stone unturned in investigating them.
-
Frankly the single greatest thing that the FBI could do is simply open the files up and give greater access to the evidence. After 50 years, why not?
By engaging citizen sleuths you're essentially crowd sourcing which means you're leveraging a lot more minds and a lot more resources--financial and otherwise.
The Zodiac cipher was cracked by a private group. The Golden State Killer was identified by a private group. DBC can also be resolved by a private group if given proper access to the evidence and files.
As for me, if I'm successful in my Congressional run I am going to attempt to change the law to afford citizen sleuths a legitimate opportunity to solve some of these cold case crimes after a certain period of time. Why not?
I agree 100% that cold case files should be made public after a certain time - 50 years perhaps - especially if there has been no movement in the case. I've been vocal about California law enforcement agencies releasing all the files and information pertaining to the Zodiac case which is even older than Cooper, but because the case is still an active homicide investigation, there is nothing but silence. Very frustrating.
However, if you will permit me one quibble, GSK was identified by law enforcement using a private DNA website, not by a private group itself.
-
Frankly the single greatest thing that the FBI could do is simply open the files up and give greater access to the evidence. After 50 years, why not?
By engaging citizen sleuths you're essentially crowd sourcing which means you're leveraging a lot more minds and a lot more resources--financial and otherwise.
The Zodiac cipher was cracked by a private group. The Golden State Killer was identified by a private group. DBC can also be resolved by a private group if given proper access to the evidence and files.
As for me, if I'm successful in my Congressional run I am going to attempt to change the law to afford citizen sleuths a legitimate opportunity to solve some of these cold case crimes after a certain period of time. Why not?
I agree 100% that cold case files should be made public after a certain time - 50 years perhaps - especially if there has been no movement in the case. I've been vocal about California law enforcement agencies releasing all the files and information pertaining to the Zodiac case which is even older than Cooper, but because the case is still an active homicide investigation, there is nothing but silence. Very frustrating.
However, if you will permit me one quibble, GSK was identified by law enforcement using a private DNA website, not by a private group itself.
In reality, none of the Zodiac ciphers have been broken nor have the self-styled solvers even determined what constitutes the actual ciphers. GSK was identified by private individuals and a DNA company working in concert with law enforcement personnel.
-
Frankly the single greatest thing that the FBI could do is simply open the files up and give greater access to the evidence. After 50 years, why not?
By engaging citizen sleuths you're essentially crowd sourcing which means you're leveraging a lot more minds and a lot more resources--financial and otherwise.
The Zodiac cipher was cracked by a private group. The Golden State Killer was identified by a private group. DBC can also be resolved by a private group if given proper access to the evidence and files.
As for me, if I'm successful in my Congressional run I am going to attempt to change the law to afford citizen sleuths a legitimate opportunity to solve some of these cold case crimes after a certain period of time. Why not?
I agree 100% that cold case files should be made public after a certain time - 50 years perhaps - especially if there has been no movement in the case. I've been vocal about California law enforcement agencies releasing all the files and information pertaining to the Zodiac case which is even older than Cooper, but because the case is still an active homicide investigation, there is nothing but silence. Very frustrating.
However, if you will permit me one quibble, GSK was identified by law enforcement using a private DNA website, not by a private group itself.
In reality, none of the Zodiac ciphers have been broken nor have the self-styled solvers even determined what constitutes the actual ciphers. GSK was identified by private individuals and a DNA company working in concert with law enforcement personnel.
None of what you said is accurate and a 90 second Google search would verify that, but please keeping talking because it continues to impugn your credibility.
-
Frankly the single greatest thing that the FBI could do is simply open the files up and give greater access to the evidence. After 50 years, why not?
By engaging citizen sleuths you're essentially crowd sourcing which means you're leveraging a lot more minds and a lot more resources--financial and otherwise.
The Zodiac cipher was cracked by a private group. The Golden State Killer was identified by a private group. DBC can also be resolved by a private group if given proper access to the evidence and files.
As for me, if I'm successful in my Congressional run I am going to attempt to change the law to afford citizen sleuths a legitimate opportunity to solve some of these cold case crimes after a certain period of time. Why not?
I agree 100% that cold case files should be made public after a certain time - 50 years perhaps - especially if there has been no movement in the case. I've been vocal about California law enforcement agencies releasing all the files and information pertaining to the Zodiac case which is even older than Cooper, but because the case is still an active homicide investigation, there is nothing but silence. Very frustrating.
However, if you will permit me one quibble, GSK was identified by law enforcement using a private DNA website, not by a private group itself.
In reality, none of the Zodiac ciphers have been broken nor have the self-styled solvers even determined what constitutes the actual ciphers. GSK was identified by private individuals and a DNA company working in concert with law enforcement personnel.
None of what you said is accurate and a 90 second Google search would verify that, but please keeping talking because it continues to impugn your credibility.
Chaucer, there is a difference between claiming that the Zodiac ciphers have been solved and actually solving them. Any number of people have claimed solutions and none of these "solutions" are correct and, in fact, contradict each other.
You need to a Google search on both the Zodiac and GSK matters.
-
Keep talking, Robert. Please.
Meanwhile, I encourage everyone to google what he is talking about and tell me if he's right.
-
People are free to believe what they want to believe or not believe. That alone should not be an invitation to be a dick or jump someone's shit. It really gets very old, especially from those who haven't contributed a damn thing to the investigation.
I've stated that I believe the Western Flight Path is accurate. Moreover, I point to what I consider evidence supporting this belief:
1) The placard: Of course I realize some are now arguing that the placard is from some other 727. That said, I'm still having a very hard time believing that the FBI attributed the placard--which references a red handle--to 305 if 305 doesn't have a red handle. Not mention all of the other problems explaining how an interior placard ended up outside.
2) The fiberglass skirt: We know that a large piece of a Boeing 727 from atop the rear airstairs door was found in the woods and verified by Boeing's 727 section. We also know that a similarly sized piece went missing off of 305 from atop the rear airstairs door. We know the FBI in 1975 said there was not a large piece missing from 305. We know this is incorrect.
3) The money find: We know where the money was found. We know where the FBI search area was. We know that they are 20 miles apart as the crow flies. And we know that the Western Flight Path not only flies within a couple thousand feet of where the money was found, but we also know that 305 flying along the Western Flight Path would have passed Tena Bar within approximately 120 seconds of DBC's jump time.
This is all very compelling to me. If others choose to see it differently, so be it.
Cheers!
-
2) The fiberglass skirt: We know that a large piece of a Boeing 727 from atop the rear airstairs door was found in the woods and verified by Boeing's 727 section.
Yes, but it doesn't specify several things. it reads as a whole part, nothing in reference to a piece of a larger part. one would tend to believe the Boeing employee would tell him it's part of the skirting that came off while the stairs were open. why just give a size and say it was above the stairs.
Verification is going to be hard since so much time has passed. the guy might be a goner by now?
-
1) The placard: Of course I realize some are now arguing that the placard is from some other 727. That said, I'm still having a very hard time believing that the FBI attributed the placard--which references a red handle--to 305 if 305 doesn't have a red handle. Not mention all of the other problems explaining how an interior placard ended up outside.
I'm not sure if any believes it's from another jet as much as it might not be from 305. it's not just the handle. it appears to not have the emergency function (305) there is no lock wire required with the normal stair function. if it didn't have this, then why would the placard be on the aircraft? these are very concerning issues. no other placards came off with pressure changes. it doesn't make sense or add up. the FBI hasn't a clue about it. they go by what is told to them. had Northwest confirmed it was from 305 we would have the answer.
no 302's reference the placard missing. even days later they pulled they pulled the stairwell panels off to see if Cooper could of hid behind them..actually, they might of been told it takes two people to remove the panels vs taking them out..will read the 302 again.
-
1) The placard: Of course I realize some are now arguing that the placard is from some other 727. That said, I'm still having a very hard time believing that the FBI attributed the placard--which references a red handle--to 305 if 305 doesn't have a red handle. Not mention all of the other problems explaining how an interior placard ended up outside.
I'm not sure if any believes it's from another jet as much as it might not be from 305. it's not just the handle. it appears to not have the emergency function (305) there is no lock wire required with the normal stair function. if it didn't have this, then why would the placard be on the aircraft? these are very concerning issues. no other placards came off with pressure changes. it doesn't make sense or add up. the FBI hasn't a clue about it. they go by what is told to them. had Northwest confirmed it was from 305 we would have the answer.
no 302's reference the placard missing. even days later they pulled they pulled the stairwell panels off to see if Cooper could of hid behind them..
Has it been confirmed that 305 did not have an emergency release mechanism? If it has then there would not be a red handle anywhere on the jet. Yet the placard references a red handle. The FBI stated that they believed the placard was from 305--this after not revealing the placard to the public for months.
Remember, I contacted the placard supplier and they verified that this placard was affixed to the interior of the back airstairs cone area. Moreover, the placard is not perforated with small holes as is typical for exterior placards. Plus the placard was in reasonably good shape and not worn like other exterior placards.
Finally, if a jet does not have an interior emergency release mechanism, will it have an exterior emergency release mechanism?
-
People are free to believe what they want to believe or not believe. That alone should not be an invitation to be a dick or jump someone's shit. It really gets very old, especially from those who haven't contributed a damn thing to the investigation.
I've stated that I believe the Western Flight Path is accurate. Moreover, I point to what I consider evidence supporting this belief:
1) The placard: Of course I realize some are now arguing that the placard is from some other 727. That said, I'm still having a very hard time believing that the FBI attributed the placard--which references a red handle--to 305 if 305 doesn't have a red handle. Not mention all of the other problems explaining how an interior placard ended up outside.
2) The fiberglass skirt: We know that a large piece of a Boeing 727 from atop the rear airstairs door was found in the woods and verified by Boeing's 727 section. We also know that a similarly sized piece went missing off of 305 from atop the rear airstairs door. We know the FBI in 1975 said there was not a large piece missing from 305. We know this is incorrect.
3) The money find: We know where the money was found. We know where the FBI search area was. We know that they are 20 miles apart as the crow flies. And we know that the Western Flight Path not only flies within a couple thousand feet of where the money was found, but we also know that 305 flying along the Western Flight Path would have passed Tena Bar within approximately 120 seconds of DBC's jump time.
This is all very compelling to me. If others choose to see it differently, so be it.
Cheers!
No one is "jumping in anyone's shit". No one is "being a dick". I'm challenging your assertions. In response, you are the one who began name-calling.
Again, the three pieces of evidence that you just used to support your conclusions are flimsy at best and contradictory at worst. Meanwhile, the central flight path has mountains of documented, official evidence from the FBI and USAF.
Yes, you have every right to hold whatever opinion you want, but the amount of work someone has or has not put into the case is not proportional to the accuracy of their claims.
Saying your conclusions are wrong is not "being a dick" or "jumping in someone's shit", it's how collaborative research is conducted.
Meanwhile...I'm busying googling this Zodiac guy...who knew? :rofl:
-
The FBI stated that they believed the placard was from 305
Believed is not confirmed...no, not all 727-100 aircraft had a separate control or emergency function. zero, were on the 200 series. this is what causes the problem.
1) the small panel on the wall has instructions on the front.
2) the larger placard could of been supplied to go above the panel giving further instructions.
3) the panel can not been seen in the stairwell. I know you use the poor quality to help support the possibility of it being obscured but I don't see it along with others.
4) a placard can be seen in the stairwell even with the poor quality photo. why didn't that one come off?
I fully understand exactly where the placard goes. it's not relevant if it doesn't belong on 305. how it got on the ground and found would become the real mystery. I suggest calling Boeing back and asking specific questions about the placard and it's reason.
-
The FBI stated that they believed the placard was from 305
Believed is not confirmed...no, not all 727-100 aircraft had a separate control or emergency function. zero, were on the 200 series. this is what causes the problem.
1) the small panel on the wall has instructions on the front.
2) the larger placard could of been supplied to go above the panel giving further instructions.
3) the panel can not been seen in the stairwell. I know you use the poor quality to help support the possibility of it being obscured but I don't see it along with others.
4) a placard can be seen in the stairwell even with the poor quality photo. why didn't that one come off?
I fully understand exactly where the placard goes. it's not relevant if it doesn't belong on 305. how it got on the ground and found would become the real mystery. I suggest calling Boeing back and asking specific questions about the placard and it's reason.
Shutter,
Let's say for the sake of argument that the Hicks placard WAS from 305. It's location would put it virtually underneath V-23. While there have been suggestions since that the wind would have carried it miles eastward, I've seen no evidence of this. Furthermore, we don't know what mechanisms would have acted on the placard in the years between 1971 and its discovery. It could have ended up in a tree and then blown westward, no? It could have gotten caught up in updrafts or downdrafts blowing in off the Cascades. My point is that even if the placard was from 305, it can't be used as evidence of a western flight path. Would you agree or disagree?
-
The FBI stated that they believed the placard was from 305
Believed is not confirmed...no, not all 727-100 aircraft had a separate control or emergency function. zero, were on the 200 series. this is what causes the problem.
1) the small panel on the wall has instructions on the front.
2) the larger placard could of been supplied to go above the panel giving further instructions.
3) the panel can not been seen in the stairwell. I know you use the poor quality to help support the possibility of it being obscured but I don't see it along with others.
4) a placard can be seen in the stairwell even with the poor quality photo. why didn't that one come off?
I fully understand exactly where the placard goes. it's not relevant if it doesn't belong on 305. how it got on the ground and found would become the real mystery. I suggest calling Boeing back and asking specific questions about the placard and it's reason.
It does not appear that there is a two-hole emergency release panel on the 305 jet next to the main access door based upon the poor quality screenshot that I've seen. That said, I wouldn't bet my life on it because I do see a dark splotch or shadow where I would expect to see the two holes.
The thing to consider is that the Hicks' placard seems to reference a somewhat different version of the emergency release system. Therefore, do we really know what we're dealing with here? Could the panel have been located on the port side of the jet stairway as is the exterior emergency release door on 727s?
All I know is that it should take an FBI agent a grand total of 3 seconds to determine whether 305 had an emergency release panel with a red handle in it. If it didn't then the placard simply could not have come from 305. That said, the FBI didn't come to that conclusion. Why? Did it, perhaps, actually have and emergency release panel with a red handle even though it's not obvious to us?
-
To be fair, I'm not completely sold it doesn't belong on 305. after seeing the video and the still it backs up things said in the past. I'm pretty sure it wasn't on 305. many have made similar claims, including myself about the condition of the placard. wind, movement have all be discussed. it is strange to believe it sat where it landed for almost 8 years without moving or being overgrown. it's very light, extremely light. Hicks claims it was in some brush.
Points are brought up about the placard. it's an interior placard. typically, they remain in the interior. I agree completely. I question how this could be anything but from a plane with the stairs down. it's really hard to disprove. perhaps our hunter punked us all. I don't think it would be hard for Hicks to find the flight path or the general area, even in 1978.
A certain amount of planes the same series or 100's had kits that could be purchased from Boeing and installed on them. they could be no different than the one's we see in the photo's over the years having this option. I don't know.
Northwest confirms the placard comes from the same type of plane but fail to confirm they had the system installed. it's very frustrating getting half the answers all the time.
-
Nothing would be on the opposite side of the stairwell...everything appears to be installed in line possibly on a wire system linking together. it's all mechanical and hydraulics.
8 years later the FBI wouldn't take 3 seconds for anything. plus, another placard was being looked at during the same period. phone calls and fax machines were the communications used. we see things stretched out in the 302's doesn't mean they were 24/7 on that one subject. they investigated with a search, sent the placard to NWO and waited for a response from them and Boeing.
I can't see it in the video or the still shots. IMO it's not on that wall. you push the main lever to release. pull a red handle to release. it's two different controls.
Here is a super blowup. it's distorted but you can see a shadow below the main door and nothing beside the lower bottom right of the door. you see a gap in the trim but that's not it either.
-
Nothing would be on the opposite side of the stairwell...everything appears to be installed in line possibly on a wire system linking together. it's all mechanical and hydraulics.
8 years later the FBI wouldn't take 3 seconds for anything. plus, another placard was being looked at during the same period. phone calls and fax machines were the communications used. we see things stretched out in the 302's doesn't mean they were 24/7 on that one subject. they investigated with a search, sent the placard to NWO and waited for a response from them and Boeing.
I can't see it in the video or the still shots. IMO it's not on that wall. you push the main lever to release. pull a red handle to release. it's two different controls.
Here is a super blowup. it's distorted but you can see a shadow below the main door and nothing beside the lower bottom right of the door. you see a gap in the trim but that's not it either.
This is not accurate pertaining to the exterior emergency release door and unit...it's on the port side, opposite the side of the normal exterior airstair release.
-
How were the placards mounted on the exterior of the 727's? Weren't they "glued" on? Or were they riveted?
-
The access panel on the bottom of the fuselage is on the right side of the plane looking from the back...a placard on the opposite side tells you this..
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjXB1Y9kISg&ab_channel=trent1963
-
How were the placards mounted on the exterior of the 727's? Weren't they "glued" on? Or were they riveted?
None that I know of are riveted. I'm sure there is a difference in the adhesive used especially to the rear of the aircraft where fuel can get on them. typically, placards are placed when the plane is near completion..
Below is a pic of the port side side with a placard..
-
Here is the starboard side with the controls and placard...it appears they had a frame around them at one point..(placard)
-
The access panel on the bottom of the fuselage is on the right side of the plane looking from the back...a placard on the opposite side tells you this..
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjXB1Y9kISg&ab_channel=trent1963
Some jets don't have an emergency exterior release. Others do. It's on portside. See pic
-
Just speculating from general aviation knowledge, but I would expect the interior and exterior emergency release handles to be on the same side of the airplane, because I would think that they would both access the same physical mechanics of releasing the door from the hydraulic system. The normal operational handles wouldn't necessarily have to be next to them or each other because they are basically switches to activate the hydraulics.
-
It depends on what is considered emergency release. they are all called that. the reference appears to be about one plane vs a model. it states except no. 293...possibly?
They changed the emergency panel over time it appears. the safety cards show different handles that are pulled. the optional two hole system was not on all the planes. kits were sold..Hominid believes over time they did away completely with the system. it's another reason we don't see a lot of them or the placard.
-
Reading Flyjacks post fills in the gaps I was looking for. the 727-200 had the emergency system built into the normal stair functions. that's why it doesn't need or require as separate function. the document states a T handle...I knew I got it from somewhere..
According to the document posted by Fly it shows the external controls also had an emergency system with the same function. that would put the placard on the exterior of the plane and not on the exterior of the plane via airstairs. I haven't seen this function on the exterior or the placard in place. I would still like to verify the function but appears to resolve the problem..
-
What is interesting is they tell you to remove both covers to get to the red handle on the exterior operation and only state removing one cover on the interior. safety cards show two covers..
-
Shutter,
Given that it appears the debris from yesterday’s incident fell straight down underneath the flight path, what would account for the insistence that the Hicks placard floated several miles off 305s flight path? Yesterday had the same altitude, same wind speed, same wind direction. So what would account for the miles deviation of the Hicks placard? Just it’s weight?
Shutter, permit me to inject something here. Nothing from an airliner that is doing at least 200+ MPH falls straight down. Everything has an initial forward motion along the flight path, but the heavier objects will continue further along that path than the lighter objects which will slow down much faster. Things such as the Cooper placard will slow down almost instantly. But in short order, everything is moving vertically with respect to the air mass and subject to the winds aloft.
The heavier objects will be on the ground first and the lighter objects will take longer and thus will drift horizontally much further. In sky diving, a no-pull skydiver falling head first from 10,000 feet will be on the ground in about 40 seconds. If he is in a stable spread, it will take about 60 seconds. If he is under canopy from 10,000 feet, the descent rate will be about 1200 feet per minute and he will be on the ground in about 8 minutes.
So I assume experiments have been done other than the one determining that the noise they heard was verified to be him leaping from the stairs? So accounting for the wind speed and direction that night, (I do not know how accurate weather report on winds and such were in 1971?), and his weight and all, they should have done a simulation with both scenario's. The chute deployed and the chute not. But it seems pretty obvious that he did make it, deploy the chute, because if he had simply crashed to his demise, SOMETHING WOULD HAVE BEEN FOUND. How many are still alive that were in the cock pit? I know the captain passed away a long time ago. And I know Bruce said that one guy changes his story often? They really must come up with an accurate course in the Victor 23 path. I have heard the reports that they are unsure of the course taken? Even with very high winds as they say there were that night, how far would something that heavy drift?
It would be good to try and do a simulation with weather conditions that were as similar as possible to that night. I know that is not easy
There are many scenarios that would have DBC perish in the jump without any remains being found.
Also, despite a vocal minority disputing it, 305 flew down Victor 23.
The only scenario I can imagine him not surviving the jump, and not finding things would be a water landing. If he were to perish on land, even with animal predation, the clothes and other items are going to be there. But the water is not the ocean. So better chance something shows up especially the things he had on him. I am a firm believer he got out. Hell, it took months, but even many items from flight 370 washed up in Madagascar.
-
The man that founded Tektronix actually drowned in the Columbia River. His body was never found. So, if Cooper landed in the water, it’s possible that nothing would have ever been found.
-
I realize this is farfetched (?), but I can imagine a scenario in which Cooper died in the jump and WAS found. If Cooper either went in as a no-pull, or if he was injured in the landing, unable to hike out, and succumbed... I can imagine a scenario where he is found at some time by (a) hunter(s). After some thought/discussion, he/they decide to bury/dispose of all the evidence and keep the money. Farfetched, yeah, but possible.
-
I realize this is farfetched (?), but I can imagine a scenario in which Cooper died in the jump and WAS found. If Cooper either went in as a no-pull, or if he was injured in the landing, unable to hike out, and succumbed... I can imagine a scenario where he is found at some time by (a) hunter(s). After some thought/discussion, he/they decide to bury/dispose of all the evidence and keep the money. Farfetched, yeah, but possible.
After 50 years and very few clues, it’s not that far fetched.
-
Interesting, dudeman. I agree with Parrotheadvol, not that farfetched, especially considering some of the other "stories" being peddled recently. The scenario you present deserves some consideration.
-
Years back on the DZ, can't remember who, they posted an article about a skydiver lost in the Columbia in front of a lot of people. 3 came down in the water and two were saved. the third jumper was never found...
-
Shutter, it appears that you do not have the green square when you're on, like the rest of us. So we never know when you're lurking? Ha!
-
I see it on...you guys can't? is my name showing in the bottom left on the main page?
-
Nope although it does say "one hidden"
-
Ok, I know what the deal is....fixing..
-
Should be visible now?
-
Should be visible now?
Also, I posted a link to DZ for someone today and the post vanished. (at least I could never find it again). Is there something wrong with posting links to DZ here now?
-
All,
I was having dinner with my science friend Bruce the other night and he asked about Cooper. I told him there was a big discussion about the flight path and the placard drift rate. Bruce is retired from JPL, created the first clear air turbulence instrument and was on the team that discovered the ozone hole. He described the boundary layer over land (as opposed to water) as going from 0-3000 feet or so and it is in this layer that the winds typically are in a different direction from winds aloft. He said the way to answer the question is get the radiosonde data from those dates in that area and it would show the winds from ground to 12K+ feet or so. It turns out that the data is tricky to get and condense into readable form so I had to bribe him with a steak dinner and now we have the data!
The two closest locations were Salem just south of Portland and Quillayute Bruce said was just west of Seattle. They launch twice a day at 5pm and 5am so that is the data we have. I had him pull a second random day Nov 11 for comparison and you can see that the winds then were actually east near the ground. Nov 24 looks pretty consistent all the way down but seems to be more southerly than we had estimated. Now you can do a proper analysis. :)
Tom Kaye
Thanks to FlyJack, Tom Kaye's post on the radiosonde data is #1751, April 12, 2019, on this thread.
I have never been able to figure out how to include some links in replies so you will have to go to the original post.
Shutter, Andrade1812, Georger, Chaucer, and yours truly "Thanked" TK. Aren't some of you now claiming you have never seen this post even though you replied to it?
-
Thanks to georger I was able to see some of Tom's data on wind speed. According to that, the wind direction and wind speed were remarkably consistent from Seattle down to Portland - even at higher altitudes. This isn't anything new. Tom posted this a couple of years ago. What's interesting is that the wind direction was less from the southwest and more from the south. In fact, I'd say the wind was blowing at an angle of 250 or 260 degrees rather than the commonly held 220. Other historical data from Weather Underground support this: the wind was blowing from the south around 6 pm and had slowly shifted to the south-southwest by 10 pm.
Wind speed was light at 10,000 feet but jumped dramatically at 8,000 feet before tailing off quite quickly the closer you get to the ground.
Not sure if this really affects much, but interesting to me nonetheless.
-
Shutter, Andrade1812, Georger, Chaucer, and yours truly "Thanked" TK. Aren't some of you now claiming you have never seen this post even though you replied to it?
You need to be specific in who you are referring to when you have multiple names in a quote. I have never made that claim. I can't speak for the other names since it wasn't relevant to me. If you are not sure, then you shouldn't post names of those not involved.
-
Thanks to georger I was able to see some of Tom's data on wind speed. According to that, the wind direction and wind speed were remarkably consistent from Seattle down to Portland - even at higher altitudes. This isn't anything new. Tom posted this a couple of years ago. What's interesting is that the wind direction was less from the southwest and more from the south. In fact, I'd say the wind was blowing at an angle of 250 or 260 degrees rather than the commonly held 220. Other historical data from Weather Underground support this: the wind was blowing from the south around 6 pm and had slowly shifted to the south-southwest by 10 pm.
Wind speed was light at 10,000 feet but jumped dramatically at 8,000 feet before tailing off quite quickly the closer you get to the ground.
Not sure if this really affects much, but interesting to me nonetheless.
Chaucer, I hate to have to ask you this, but have you ever heard of a "compass rose"? If not, here is a brief tutorial for you.
True North (which is not to be confused with Magnetic North) is labeled 000 degrees or 360 degrees which is the same thing here. Going around a circle in a clockwise direction (oddly enough this is the same direction all the hands on a clock rotate, although I have seen exceptions to this), 090 degrees is labeled East, 180 degrees is labeled South, 270 degrees is labeled West, and 360 degrees is labeled North as is 000 degrees.
In your post above, you list the winds as coming from a more westerly direction, not more southerly direction, than the data supports. Your claims about the wind velocity are not accurate either.
A close look at the radiosonde data shows that the winds at 10,000 feet above sea level are essentially from 225 degrees, which is the southwest, and the velocity at that altitude is about 35 Knots. The winds at lower altitudes do not decrease as fast as you suggest.
The FAA has excellent publications, which are downloadable and free, on their web page. Some of those publications relate to aircraft navigation and some to aviation weather. I suggest that you download them and give them a good study. You might learn something. Good luck.
-
Thanks to georger I was able to see some of Tom's data on wind speed. According to that, the wind direction and wind speed were remarkably consistent from Seattle down to Portland - even at higher altitudes. This isn't anything new. Tom posted this a couple of years ago. What's interesting is that the wind direction was less from the southwest and more from the south. In fact, I'd say the wind was blowing at an angle of 250 or 260 degrees rather than the commonly held 220. Other historical data from Weather Underground support this: the wind was blowing from the south around 6 pm and had slowly shifted to the south-southwest by 10 pm.
Wind speed was light at 10,000 feet but jumped dramatically at 8,000 feet before tailing off quite quickly the closer you get to the ground.
Not sure if this really affects much, but interesting to me nonetheless.
Chaucer, I hate to have to ask you this, but have you ever heard of a "compass rose"? If not, here is a brief tutorial for you.
True North (which is not to be confused with Magnetic North) is labeled 000 degrees or 360 degrees which is the same thing here. Going around a circle in a clockwise direction (oddly enough this is the same direction all the hands on a clock rotate, although I have seen exceptions to this), 090 degrees is labeled East, 180 degrees is labeled South, 270 degrees is labeled West, and 360 degrees is labeled North as is 000 degrees.
In your post above, you list the winds as coming from a more westerly direction, not more southerly direction, than the data supports.
You're right. I should have said that the winds appear to be coming from 200 to 190. Appreciate the correction.
Your claims about the wind velocity are not accurate either.
Yes, at 10,000 feet the wind speed was an average of 35 knots. By 5000 feet is was at 28 knots. At ground level it was at 13 knots. A decrease of 22 knots over 10000 feet seems considerable.
The FAA has excellent publications, which are downloadable and free, on their web page. Some of those publications relate to aircraft navigation and some to aviation weather. I suggest that you download them and give them a good study. You might learn something. Good luck.
I appreciate the suggestion. In return, I'd be happy to give you some books on the Zodiac Killer and the GSK. We can always learn something.
Thanks again, Bob.
-
So, the wind data is really meaningless and the drift calculations are no good.
The FBI files have wind from the S at 8 PM at Toledo, 15 miles from the placard find location.
Flyjack, are these ground winds? winds aloft is what is required when dealing with things in the air. ground winds are obviously about the ground conditions. winds aloft are different in several ways. direction and speeds can differ from the ground. I'm not sure how high ground winds are calculated but a guess would be low altitude.
-
I cannot believe we're still debating winds. The radiosonde data for that night was abundantly clear.
Also, Toledo is at an elevation of 121'. The placard find location is at an elevation of around 1300'.
-
The real take away is that Ulis and Robert99 have misrepresented and leveraged this irrelevant wind data to advance a narrative...
It is dishonest.
When you see a comment like above. it will give cause to ask questions...
-
The real take away is that Ulis and Robert99 have misrepresented and leveraged this irrelevant wind data to advance a narrative...
It is dishonest.
When you see a comment like above. it will have cause to ask questions...
I really don't understand the need for some to troll. It must be a jealousy thing. Frankly I could care less what TrollJack has to say. What has he contributed to the case other then theories such as:
1) Cooper really wanted to fly to Mexico but changed his mind and decided to jump near Vancouver.
2) The money came from a dump on the Columbia River.
3) Tina was hiding cash in her coat pocket that was visible in footage from Reno.
4) There were five parachutes delivered to the airport.
5) Cooper didn't want the jet to depart with the airstairs down even though it says so.
6) Eric stole his investigative research on the tie.
7) DB Cooper was 5' 8"
8) And, of course, the wind was actually coming from the south or southeast that night.
All very compelling theories that the world is itching to learn more about.
-
Someone, probably FJ, has posted on DropZone that Cooper jumped near Lake Oswego which is apparently a small protuberance in the Williamette River on the south side of Portland. Lake Oswego is also the name of the subdivision adjacent to this lake with the subdivision known as West Linn being about five miles further south.
In describing his helicopter ride, Himmelsbach states in his book (p. 42) that they took off from PIA and flew to the southwest side of Portland. He said that he recognized the West Linn subdivision and that he lived there.
At 8:18 PM, the airliner reported that it was 23 DME miles south of what is now named the Battleground VORTAC. This puts it directly over the West Linn area. And that is roughly 20 miles from Tina Bar. Cooper had long departed the aircraft by the time the aircraft was over West Linn. The claim of jumping near Lake Oswego can be ignored.
-
Someone, probably FJ, has posted on DropZone that Cooper jumped near Lake Oswego which is apparently a small protuberance in the Williamette River on the south side of Portland. Lake Oswego is also the name of the subdivision adjacent to this lake with the subdivision known as West Linn being about five miles further south.
In describing his helicopter ride, Himmelsbach states in his book (p. 42) that they took off from PIA and flew to the southwest side of Portland. He said that he recognized the West Linn subdivision and that he lived there.
At 8:18 PM, the airliner reported that it was 23 DME miles south of what is now named the Battleground VORTAC. This puts it directly over the West Linn area. And that is roughly 20 miles from Tina Bar. Cooper had long departed the aircraft by the time the aircraft was over West Linn. The claim of jumping near Lake Oswego can be ignored.
No no no. I have followed FJ daily for years. FJ has never posted that Cooper jumped near Lake Oswego.
In fact FJ posted tonight at DZ that your claim is untrue.
Let's leave it at that. Your claim is false. Go see FJ's post at DZ tonight ....
-
Someone, probably FJ, has posted on DropZone that Cooper jumped near Lake Oswego which is apparently a small protuberance in the Williamette River on the south side of Portland. Lake Oswego is also the name of the subdivision adjacent to this lake with the subdivision known as West Linn being about five miles further south.
In describing his helicopter ride, Himmelsbach states in his book (p. 42) that they took off from PIA and flew to the southwest side of Portland. He said that he recognized the West Linn subdivision and that he lived there.
At 8:18 PM, the airliner reported that it was 23 DME miles south of what is now named the Battleground VORTAC. This puts it directly over the West Linn area. And that is roughly 20 miles from Tina Bar. Cooper had long departed the aircraft by the time the aircraft was over West Linn. The claim of jumping near Lake Oswego can be ignored.
No no no. I have followed FJ daily for years. FJ has never posted that Cooper jumped near Lake Oswego.
In fact FJ posted tonight at DZ that your claim is untrue.
Let's leave it at that. Your claim is false. Go see FJ's post at DZ tonight ....
Georger, you need to head back over to DZ to see what FJ has just posted about some of your claims. :))
-
I don't recall FJ making any claims the flight path was west or near Lake Oswego. I could see one of his theories placing the money there but not by parachute...
Also, FJ, I didn't claim you changed anything with the wind data from Toledo. I simply pointed out that wind direction and speeds differ in the air vs the ground. the best known directions were done with balloons. I agree it's becoming irrelevant if the placard wasn't on the plane. several things still need to be verified..
1) the emergency function was also on the exterior control center. a document does support this but we haven't seen the system.
2) The placard was used in both area's since the function was the same in two different area's of the plane.
Boeing gave the suggestion of the pressure change causing the placard to come off in the stairwell. one would tend to believe they would tell them one was also outside of the stairwell for the other control system/box/center and could of come off of any 727 with this option. the biggest problem was the fact of NWO failing to say whether 305 had the option or not. IMO, it's not busted just yet. at least to satisfy everyone beyond a shadow of doubt..
I agree the photo from the video of the inside of the stairs doesn't show the function. it's poor quality and hopefully a better quality video/photo will surface with a vivid view of the area.
-
Dated 12/6/78
This decal is located on the outside of the aircraft near the rear door.
A facsimile of copy of the Boeing aircraft standard marker number BAC27DPA-152 was provided. also provided by (redacted) were two blueprints for the location of this decal on the aircraft. each blueprint is marked in black ink noting where the decal is located.
I've read this dozens of times and have been confused as to why they would have two sets of blueprints. seeing the document explaining the functions of the stairs tells of two different area's with the same emergency function. one being inside the stairwell next to the main control door and outside under the fuselage "near the rear door" I also have a document stating the system is interconnected..
You don't need two sets of print to show one location. you need two sets showing another location. the problem is they don't specify this. it's hard to confirm this since drawings are very large and detailed. the sets I use break down different parts of the building. I look at the four pages of each side of the building. then you have a numbering and letter system that can be found that directs you to a page that details what you are trying to see. it still could of been done with one set showing the placard right beside the main control box settling any question as to where it is placed. they sent two sets marking where the placard was placed.
I can tell the controls are on the starboard side of 305. a photo of the stairs shows a placard that is seen on several other 727's that state's the emergency controls are on the opposite side. we know they are on that side. sadly, not one single photo can be found of this placard inside or outside of any aircraft viewed by either video or stills. very frustrating.
The reason for having a placard stating to look on the other side suggests as Eric claimed that the controls could of been on the port side at one point. a placard was then put in place on latter models to direct the ground to the location. it wouldn't be there for no reason.
-
Shutter, are you saying that you see an exterior placard that references the emergency airstairs release being on the other side of the jet?
-
It's a placard directing you to look on the other side of the aircraft for the exterior controls...
-
Also, when the doc says the placard is outside the jet near the rear door, what they mean is outside the bulkhead door, not the airstairs door.
-
It's possible. the exterior controls are near the rear door as well...
-
It's a placard directing you to look on the other side of the aircraft for the exterior controls...
So it references the regular exterior airstairs release? It does not refer to the "break wire" release?
-
This placard can be seen on 305..
-
It's a placard directing you to look on the other side of the aircraft for the exterior controls...
So it references the regular exterior airstairs release? It does not refer to the "break wire" release?
Actually, nothing except the placard states that. not even the safety cards speak of any wire break.
-
It's possible. the exterior controls are near the rear door as well...
Remember, the placard seller verified that the placard was affixed inside the jet near the bulkhead door. Also, the Hicks' placard is not scored as is done with exterior placards. Moreover, the Hicks' placard is in good shape--not scratched up like other exterior placards.
-
This placard can be seen on 305..
What pic or footage?
-
The document that shows all the functions describes the exterior and interior having the same emergency function when the option is installed. that would lead one to believe two of the same placards would be used?
-
It's a placard directing you to look on the other side of the aircraft for the exterior controls...
So it references the regular exterior airstairs release? It does not refer to the "break wire" release?
Actually, nothing except the placard states that. not even the safety cards speak of any wire break.
That's what I've said...the Hicks' placard is unique. It appears to reference a particular version of this emergency airstair release.
-
This placard can be seen on 305..
What pic or footage?
The one after the testing..
-
The document that shows all the functions describes the exterior and interior having the same emergency function when the option is installed. that would lead one to believe two of the same placards would be used?
Remember, the ASA info card states that the exterior emergency release pull handle is located on the port side of their 727s.
-
Point being, there appear to be a few installment options and locations for the various T handles.
-
The reality is, the placard doesn't match anything. if the system was not next to the main control and the placard was on the door. none of the placards would of been on the exterior of the door. even in the poor quality pic you can see a placard on the door?
-
The much bigger problem for me is that the FBI stated it came from 305. Therefore, it is reasonable to deduce that 305 had that option on the jet.
-
Read my original post...I believe you may be correct that the exterior controls might of been on the earlier models. why would they need to tell you to look on the other side?
-
The much bigger problem for me is that the FBI stated it came from 305. Therefore, it is reasonable to deduce that 305 had that option on the jet.
I don't see it on 305. the FBI doesn't know unless told. they did flip flop saying it could of been from any 727
-
Read my original post...I believe you may be correct that the exterior controls might of been on the earlier models. why would they need to tell you to look on the other side?
It appears to me that the main exterior release system (also called an emergency release for some reason) is on the starboard side. And, the other break wire release system may be on the port side of the jet, as with ASA.
-
The much bigger problem for me is that the FBI stated it came from 305. Therefore, it is reasonable to deduce that 305 had that option on the jet.
I don't see it on 305. the FBI doesn't know unless told. they did flip flop saying it could of been from any 727
Where does it say that? There is the media report where they say it's a million to one that it didn't come from 305.
The second placard from Skamania County is completely different.
-
I just posted a pic with the placard directing you to the starboard side. the early models might of been on the port side. the ground crew might look and see nothing and be confused until they read the placard directing them to the other side. constant changes and bugs were worked during the first couple years. they don't have placards telling the ground crew the cargo door is on the other side?
-
It is reported in the newspapers that can be sketchy, I agree..the other problem is the placard appears not to be in evidence any longer or wasn't shown to Tom.
-
I just posted a pic with the placard directing you to the starboard side. the early models might of been on the port side. the ground crew might look and see nothing and be confused until they read the placard directing them to the other side. constant changes and bugs were worked during the first couple years. they don't have placards telling the ground crew the cargo door is on the other side?
All that placard says is that the regular system to lower the airstairs from the outside is on the starboard side. This is not the same system with the break wire. Again, look at the ASA doc which clearly says that system is on the portside of the exterior.
-
It is reported in the newspapers that can be sketchy, I agree..the other problem is the placard appears not to be in evidence any longer or wasn't shown to Tom.
Neither were the hairs in evidence apparently. How about grabbing DNA directly from Cooper's hairs.
-
You are missing the point...the placard makes no sense being on the port side when the starboard side also has a placard. it dorects you away from the port side completely telling you nothing is there..."airstair emergency exit handle on opposite side of airplane..
A similar door can be seen in the lower left of that photo and a small plate riveted shut that had something there at one point.
-
Shutter, give me a call to discuss.
-
Here's a question for experts on the "FBI map".
Does anyone know the significance of the handwritten letters “NC” (abeam Seattle), “NO” or “NB” (abeam Pigeon Springs, Washington), “NA” or “XA” (abeam Salem, Oregon), and “NQ” or “NO” (abeam Eugene, Oregon)?
-
Hominid explained it years back. If not mistaken it has something to do with the breaks in the piecing the path together into one. if I'm wrong someone will correct..
-
Has anyone ever tried to apply a percentage chance of DB hitting land as opposed to water? And if he did hit water, as unpleasant as it would have been, as long as he could swim he could have made it don't you think? I am not sure how wide the Columbia is?
-
Here's a question for experts on the "FBI map".
Does anyone know the significance of the handwritten letters “NC” (abeam Seattle), “NO” or “NB” (abeam Pigeon Springs, Washington), “NA” or “XA” (abeam Salem, Oregon), and “NQ” or “NO” (abeam Eugene, Oregon)?
It was the military "LandNav" grid system.
-
SMSgt Wally Johnson, in his 2013 interview with the Washington State Historical Society, identified Captain Thomas Spangler as the co-pilot on the "sled test" flight of 01.06.1972.
Question for experts on the sled test flight. Has anyone contacted Captain Spangler, or does anyone know whether he is still alive?
-
Has anyone ever tried to apply a percentage chance of DB hitting land as opposed to water? And if he did hit water, as unpleasant as it would have been, as long as he could swim he could have made it don't you think? I am not sure how wide the Columbia is?
Well, sort of, back at DZ years ago. PLF inventoried the streams and water areas in Clark County, some in the Columbia basin. His interest was possible water routes for the money to Tina Bar. Take the original NWA search map, determine the areas of water vs land mass in each jump zone ... if you have the tools to do this ? The probability of Cooper hitting water vs land goes way up as the flight path gets closer to the Columbia. There are posts about this back at DZ ...
-
letters “NC” (abeam Seattle), “NO” or “NB” (abeam Pigeon Springs, Washington), “NA” or “XA” (abeam Salem, Oregon), and “NQ” or “NO” (abeam Eugene, Oregon)?
It was the military "LandNav" grid system.
OK, that makes sense if we read the annotations (from north to south) as NC, NB, NA and NV. If I understand correctly, the Military Grid Reference System (MGRS) uses the letters A through V excluding I and O.
In that case, these map references should be preceded by a 2-character code such as 1P, 2Q, 3P etc, as shown in the attachment.
Does anyone have a link to digital versions of the NC, NB, NA and NV quadrangles?
-
“NC” (abeam Seattle), “NO” or “NB” (abeam Pigeon Springs, Washington), “NA” or “XA” (abeam Salem, Oregon), and “NQ” or “NO” (abeam Eugene, Oregon)?
It was the military "LandNav" grid system.
On further research, I believe that these annotations are not from the Military Grid Reference System (MGRS). The MGRS quadrangles for the flight path from Seattle-Tacoma to Salem are ET, ES, ER, EQ (see attachment).
-
“NC” (abeam Seattle), “NO” or “NB” (abeam Pigeon Springs, Washington), “NA” or “XA” (abeam Salem, Oregon), and “NQ” or “NO” (abeam Eugene, Oregon)?
It was the military "LandNav" grid system.
On further research, I believe that these annotations are not from the Military Grid Reference System (MGRS). The MGRS quadrangles for the flight path from Seattle-Tacoma to Salem are ET, ES, ER, EQ (see attachment).
According to my notes, it's the GEOREF system:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Geographic_Reference_System
Not MGRS
-
“NC” , “NO” or “NB”, “NA” or “XA”, and “NQ” or “NO”?
According to my notes, it's the GEOREF system:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Geographic_Reference_System
Thanks, got it now. This site converts latitude and longitude to GEOREF and other grids: https://www.earthpoint.us/convert.aspx.
So the four annotations (from north to south) correspond to the GEOREF quadrangles DKNC, DKNB, DKNA and DJNQ.
-
I have stated that I have a strong suspicion pertaining to the whereabouts of the attache case and missing parachutes. To that end, I'll be engaging in a search in a very specific area at the end of this month. I will be accompanied by a member of the media just in case something is found.
Ultimately, proving the veracity of theories requires hard, physical evidence. And to the best of my knowledge, the only way to acquire such evidence is to search for it.
Along the same lines: Forging relationships with networks, the media and other powers-that-be opens doors that would otherwise be closed. I saw this during the History Channel show whereby we gained special access to the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, as well as garnered special permission from the FBI in a couple of areas.
Forging and leveraging such relationships is smart...not selling out.
-
Forging relationships with networks, the media and other powers-that-be opens doors that would otherwise be closed. I saw this during the History Channel show whereby we gained special access to the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, as well as garnered special permission from the FBI in a couple of areas.
This is true. Also, production budgets certainly help in financing the logistics of searches and research.
Forging and leveraging such relationships is smart...not selling out.
I've seen the 'selling out' topic debated a few times. The bottom line is, television shows (and movies) are products. The people making them are investing time and money to make a product that they sell for profit. None of those people are working for free. And if any of you are working with them, neither should you.
-
I concur.
-
Let's see - this is flight path thread. I will post on the flight path. And the drop of DB Cooper.
Going back to 2008 which was 13 years ago, SP Larry Carr was given permission to come to a public forum, Dropzone, a forum known for having people with technical skills, to seek the help of the public. Forum members were as interested in questioning Larry as he was getting input from them. At length Larry posted:
"Jan 22, 2008, 1:03 PM
Post #1298 of 1694 (759 views)
Registered: Sep 7, 2007
Re: [SafecrackingPLF] Columbia Waterline [In reply to]
Since there is nothing that reasonably points to someone planting the money, we can rule out any jump point that could not put Cooper near a tributary. If Cooper jumped over or just south of Orchard he would have been blown north and east several miles. If the farthest south jump point shown on the map I posted is 8:12, then where would the plane be at 8:13, 8:14 and 8:15. Also don't forget you could factor in a flight path .5 mile east of the flight path line from Battleground to Salem.
and
I never posted anything to suggest this, I posted that if you look at the information surrounding the money, Cooper had to have jumped further south than what was originally believed. On the map the furthermost point south is at 8:12 PM, he must have jumped more around 8:15 PM but not after. The crew must have made a mistake in their reporting time of the incident.
The crew knew they were not over Portland and we know, because of where the money was found, it had to have been further south than the 8:12 PM point on the map. That should reveal a new search are
Once we have the distance the bag can travel, a hydrologist needs to pinpoint a location nearest to the 8:15 PM flight path that could drain into the Columbia. If the pieces of the puzzle fit we solved part of the mystery. If it is way off, back to work."
Maybe now that the placard hypothesis is dead, maybe people need to go back to the beginning? Its just an idea. It's not cyberbullying. It's just a thought based on the original thoughts that once drove the Cooper chase. No emojis were used in this post.
Chaucer?
-
Let's see - this is flight path thread. I will post on the flight path. And the drop of DB Cooper.
Going back to 2008 which was 13 years ago, SP Larry Carr was given permission to come to a public forum, Dropzone, a forum known for having people with technical skills, to seek the help of the public. Forum members were as interested in questioning Larry as he was getting input from them. At length Larry posted:
"Jan 22, 2008, 1:03 PM
Post #1298 of 1694 (759 views)
Registered: Sep 7, 2007
Re: [SafecrackingPLF] Columbia Waterline [In reply to]
Since there is nothing that reasonably points to someone planting the money, we can rule out any jump point that could not put Cooper near a tributary. If Cooper jumped over or just south of Orchard he would have been blown north and east several miles. If the farthest south jump point shown on the map I posted is 8:12, then where would the plane be at 8:13, 8:14 and 8:15. Also don't forget you could factor in a flight path .5 mile east of the flight path line from Battleground to Salem.
and
I never posted anything to suggest this, I posted that if you look at the information surrounding the money, Cooper had to have jumped further south than what was originally believed. On the map the furthermost point south is at 8:12 PM, he must have jumped more around 8:15 PM but not after. The crew must have made a mistake in their reporting time of the incident.
The crew knew they were not over Portland and we know, because of where the money was found, it had to have been further south than the 8:12 PM point on the map. That should reveal a new search are
Once we have the distance the bag can travel, a hydrologist needs to pinpoint a location nearest to the 8:15 PM flight path that could drain into the Columbia. If the pieces of the puzzle fit we solved part of the mystery. If it is way off, back to work."
Maybe now that the placard hypothesis is dead, maybe people need to go back to the beginning? Its just an idea. It's not cyberbullying. It's just a thought based on the original thoughts that once drove the Cooper chase. No emojis were used in this post.
Chaucer?
I have a lot to say about that. I have some business to handle, and I need to some time to gather some of my research together, but I will respond to this today.
-
Let's see - this is flight path thread. I will post on the flight path. And the drop of DB Cooper.
Going back to 2008 which was 13 years ago, SP Larry Carr was given permission to come to a public forum, Dropzone, a forum known for having people with technical skills, to seek the help of the public. Forum members were as interested in questioning Larry as he was getting input from them. At length Larry posted:
"Jan 22, 2008, 1:03 PM
Post #1298 of 1694 (759 views)
Registered: Sep 7, 2007
Re: [SafecrackingPLF] Columbia Waterline [In reply to]
Since there is nothing that reasonably points to someone planting the money, we can rule out any jump point that could not put Cooper near a tributary. If Cooper jumped over or just south of Orchard he would have been blown north and east several miles. If the farthest south jump point shown on the map I posted is 8:12, then where would the plane be at 8:13, 8:14 and 8:15. Also don't forget you could factor in a flight path .5 mile east of the flight path line from Battleground to Salem.
and
I never posted anything to suggest this, I posted that if you look at the information surrounding the money, Cooper had to have jumped further south than what was originally believed. On the map the furthermost point south is at 8:12 PM, he must have jumped more around 8:15 PM but not after. The crew must have made a mistake in their reporting time of the incident.
The crew knew they were not over Portland and we know, because of where the money was found, it had to have been further south than the 8:12 PM point on the map. That should reveal a new search are
Once we have the distance the bag can travel, a hydrologist needs to pinpoint a location nearest to the 8:15 PM flight path that could drain into the Columbia. If the pieces of the puzzle fit we solved part of the mystery. If it is way off, back to work."
Maybe now that the placard hypothesis is dead, maybe people need to go back to the beginning? Its just an idea. It's not cyberbullying. It's just a thought based on the original thoughts that once drove the Cooper chase. No emojis were used in this post.
Chaucer?
I have a lot to say about that. I have some business to handle, and I need to some time to gather some of my research together, but I will respond to this today.
Packets and paper straps is going to be the next thing to fall. Talked to Tom. Tom says he thinks FJ's claim that paper straps dissolve after eight years, is nonsense.
-
Let's see - this is flight path thread. I will post on the flight path. And the drop of DB Cooper.
Going back to 2008 which was 13 years ago, SP Larry Carr was given permission to come to a public forum, Dropzone, a forum known for having people with technical skills, to seek the help of the public. Forum members were as interested in questioning Larry as he was getting input from them. At length Larry posted:
"Jan 22, 2008, 1:03 PM
Post #1298 of 1694 (759 views)
Registered: Sep 7, 2007
Re: [SafecrackingPLF] Columbia Waterline [In reply to]
Since there is nothing that reasonably points to someone planting the money, we can rule out any jump point that could not put Cooper near a tributary. If Cooper jumped over or just south of Orchard he would have been blown north and east several miles. If the farthest south jump point shown on the map I posted is 8:12, then where would the plane be at 8:13, 8:14 and 8:15. Also don't forget you could factor in a flight path .5 mile east of the flight path line from Battleground to Salem.
and
I never posted anything to suggest this, I posted that if you look at the information surrounding the money, Cooper had to have jumped further south than what was originally believed. On the map the furthermost point south is at 8:12 PM, he must have jumped more around 8:15 PM but not after. The crew must have made a mistake in their reporting time of the incident.
The crew knew they were not over Portland and we know, because of where the money was found, it had to have been further south than the 8:12 PM point on the map. That should reveal a new search are
Once we have the distance the bag can travel, a hydrologist needs to pinpoint a location nearest to the 8:15 PM flight path that could drain into the Columbia. If the pieces of the puzzle fit we solved part of the mystery. If it is way off, back to work."
Maybe now that the placard hypothesis is dead, maybe people need to go back to the beginning? Its just an idea. It's not cyberbullying. It's just a thought based on the original thoughts that once drove the Cooper chase. No emojis were used in this post.
Chaucer?
OK, I was dealing with a minor family emergency so I am just getting around to addressing this. The first thing that sticks out is that Carr claims that the farthest south point is 8:15. This is confusing because Rat later told him that the pressure bump was 10 to 15 minutes after last contact. Was this post made after Rat's second statement? If it is, then we don't need a tributary to flow into the Columbia. We have the Columbia itself.
The other issue is the wind. Carr states that Cooper would have been blown north and east. However, the winds near Portland were from the south at 5mp at 7pm but had shifted from the south-southwest at 12 mph by 10pm. In the absence of any more detailed wind data, we have to assume that by 8:15 the wind was closer to coming from the south than the southwest. This is problematic for the river landing theory because based on my calculations, Cooper would have to jump near the south bank to end up in the middle of the river or directly over the river to end up on the north bank. This is taking into consideration both the wind and the forward throw. If Cooper jumped directly over the north bank of the river, say near Pearson Field, he would have ended up approximately .3 miles to the north or northeast which would put him near the Louis and Clark Highway. I am going to be continuing to look into the wind and potential dropzone between the I-5 and I-205 bridge. If anyone has any data on a potential. Columbia River dropzone already, please let me know.
-
Let's see - this is flight path thread. I will post on the flight path. And the drop of DB Cooper.
Going back to 2008 which was 13 years ago, SP Larry Carr was given permission to come to a public forum, Dropzone, a forum known for having people with technical skills, to seek the help of the public. Forum members were as interested in questioning Larry as he was getting input from them. At length Larry posted:
"Jan 22, 2008, 1:03 PM
Post #1298 of 1694 (759 views)
Registered: Sep 7, 2007
Re: [SafecrackingPLF] Columbia Waterline [In reply to]
Since there is nothing that reasonably points to someone planting the money, we can rule out any jump point that could not put Cooper near a tributary. If Cooper jumped over or just south of Orchard he would have been blown north and east several miles. If the farthest south jump point shown on the map I posted is 8:12, then where would the plane be at 8:13, 8:14 and 8:15. Also don't forget you could factor in a flight path .5 mile east of the flight path line from Battleground to Salem.
and
I never posted anything to suggest this, I posted that if you look at the information surrounding the money, Cooper had to have jumped further south than what was originally believed. On the map the furthermost point south is at 8:12 PM, he must have jumped more around 8:15 PM but not after. The crew must have made a mistake in their reporting time of the incident.
The crew knew they were not over Portland and we know, because of where the money was found, it had to have been further south than the 8:12 PM point on the map. That should reveal a new search are
Once we have the distance the bag can travel, a hydrologist needs to pinpoint a location nearest to the 8:15 PM flight path that could drain into the Columbia. If the pieces of the puzzle fit we solved part of the mystery. If it is way off, back to work."
Maybe now that the placard hypothesis is dead, maybe people need to go back to the beginning? Its just an idea. It's not cyberbullying. It's just a thought based on the original thoughts that once drove the Cooper chase. No emojis were used in this post.
Chaucer?
OK, I was dealing with a minor family emergency so I am just getting around to addressing this. The first thing that sticks out is that Carr claims that the farthest south point is 8:15. This is confusing because Rat later told him that the pressure bump was 10 to 15 minutes after last contact. Was this post made after Rat's second statement? If it is, then we don't need a tributary to flow into the Columbia. We have the Columbia itself.
The other issue is the wind. Carr states that Cooper would have been blown north and east. However, the winds near Portland were from the south at 5mp at 7pm but had shifted from the south-southwest at 12 mph by 10pm. In the absence of any more detailed wind data, we have to assume that by 8:15 the wind was closer to coming from the south than the southwest. This is problematic for the river landing theory because based on my calculations, Cooper would have to jump near the south bank to end up in the middle of the river or directly over the river to end up on the north bank. This is taking into consideration both the wind and the forward throw. If Cooper jumped directly over the north bank of the river, say near Pearson Field, he would have ended up approximately .3 miles to the north or northeast which would put him near the Louis and Clark Highway. I am going to be continuing to look into the wind and potential dropzone between the I-5 and I-205 bridge. If anyone has any data on a potential. Columbia River dropzone already, please let me know.
Could Cooper have bailed close to the Columbia and began his drift, but got separated from the money due to some shock force, at separation from the plane or just after jumping when the chute opens? The money bag goes straight to the ground close to or in the Columbia, while Cooper drifts.
-
Georger,
That’s absolutely a possibility. Similar to what happened to McNally. That would explain why no body, chute, and briefcase were ever located.
-
Georger,
That’s absolutely a possibility. Similar to what happened to McNally. That would explain why no body, chute, and briefcase were ever located.
The very big problem as I see it is that there is no plausible scenario for the money to travel 12 miles to Tena Bar, then three of the 100 packets self-bury for several years, while the other 97 packets and everything else disappear off the face of the earth--even the man himself.
Not to mention, this has to happen seven months after the skyjacking because of the diatoms. Which also means the money could not have landed in the river because hitting the water at 100 mph the bag is going to go right to the bottom if not break open on impact.
In short, I just don't see how this theory fleshes out.
-
The very big problem as I see it is that there is no plausible scenario for the money to travel 12 miles to Tena Bar, then three of the 100 packets self-bury for several years, while the other 97 packets and everything else disappear off the face of the earth--even the man himself.
Some of the money falls out of the bag at Tena Bar while the rest end up at the bottom of the Columbia. It's not complicated. Not everything, particularly nature, follows hard and fast rules. We've all heard stories of a tornado ripping through a town and the only thing left standing is a religious statue. Why? Who knows? Same thing could apply here.
Not to mention, this has to happen seven months after the skyjacking because of the diatoms. Which also means the money could not have landed in the river because hitting the water at 100 mph the bag is going to go right to the bottom if not break open on impact.
Agreed. My theory does not have the money hitting the water directly the night of the hijacking. So, yes, I would agree that if the money ends up in the water, it's under the surface in less than a minute.
These islands are state parks. They're accessible by anyone. Moreover, there are public-access laws in place that govern shoreline along the entirety of the Columbia River and island shoreline. Simply put, people are allowed free access to the beach. And these shorelines and properties are regularly visited year-round in the Pacific Northwest.
We are talking about 7 months - half of which would have been in the winter when visitor numbers would have been reduced - in 1971 when the property was own by Port of Portland for possible expansion of the airport.
My point is that there is no land adjacent to, or on, the Columbia River that hasn't seen every square inch regularly traversed by hikers, boaters, partiers and the like year-in and year-out for decades. Again, this is in the middle of a large metropolitan area literally right next to PDX.
Again, we're not talking years and years. We're talking 7 months. Also, you make it wound as if these islands and riverbanks are like the Mall of the Americas. I think that's an inaccurate characterization. I do not think it is unreasonable to think that a body and/or a bag of money could remain undiscovered for 7 months in that area.
-
Some of the money falls out of the bag at Tena Bar while the rest end up at the bottom of the Columbia. It's not complicated. Not everything, particularly nature, follows hard and fast rules. We've all heard stories of a tornado ripping through a town and the only thing left standing is a religious statue. Why? Who knows? Same thing could apply here.
Again, the big problem is getting the bag to travel 12 miles not to mention the act of self-burial which I think is damn near impossible.
Perhaps there is an example someone can provide of paper--magazine for example, or other paper currency--being buried by minimal to light wave action on a beach somewhere for eight years.
Back to the 12 miles: You really are left with some scenario where the money hitches a ride on something for 12 miles--again only in the month of June after hanging out somewhere else unnoticed for seven months.
In my diseased mind, some guy burying the cash is a hell of a lot easier to contemplate.
-
Some of the money falls out of the bag at Tena Bar while the rest end up at the bottom of the Columbia. It's not complicated. Not everything, particularly nature, follows hard and fast rules. We've all heard stories of a tornado ripping through a town and the only thing left standing is a religious statue. Why? Who knows? Same thing could apply here.
Again, the big problem is getting the bag to travel 12 miles not to mention the act of self-burial which I think is damn near impossible.
Perhaps there is an example someone can provide of paper--magazine for example, or other paper currency--being buried by minimal to light wave action on a beach somewhere for eight years.
Back to the 12 miles: You really are left with some scenario where the money hitches a ride on something for 12 miles--again only in the month of June after hanging out somewhere else unnoticed for seven months.
In my diseased mind, some guy burying the cash is a hell of a lot easier to contemplate.
Yeah, I fully admit that I have no hard evidence to support the "hitchhiker theory". It's definitely just a hypothesis but the pieces seem to fit. I'll be working to try to provide some evidence as to the 12 mile drift and the self-burial.
Thanks for the input.
-
Of course, given the opportunity to speak with Bill Rataczak at length, I decided to ask him some questions related to the flight and flight path:
1) I asked him if the jet was on autopilot as they flew south over Washington State.
Bill said no, that he was flying the jet by hand. He stated that the jet had flown largely on autopilot through out the day as it made its way from the East Coast. However, that the flight out of Seattle was different.
Bill told me that the reason he hand flew the jet was because they were not certain how the jet would respond once the airstairs were lowered. Simple as that.
2) I asked him very specifically whether DBC originally wanted the jet to take off from Seattle with the airstairs down, or whether he only wanted the jet to have its airstairs lowered after takeoff--as one person has insisted, even though the FBI files are crystal clear.
Bill told me that DBC, from the beginning, wanted the jet to depart Seattle with the airstairs down. However, he pushed back saying that this was not possible. Bill went on to say that the 727 with its swept back wings can occasionally tilt back too far and scrape the runway on take off. Therefore, the 727 has the skid plate that protrudes near the back-bottom to protect the fuselage. Bill told Cooper--via Tina--therefore, they cannot take off with the airstairs down. This was somewhat of an issue with Cooper, but he acquiesced and allowed the jet to take off with the airstairs up, but they would be lowered immediately upon take off.
3) I asked Bill if he had seen the FBI Flight Path Map.
Bill said he isn't sure. He said the only flight path map he has seen was one drawn up by Paul Soderlin which he still has in his files and will bring with him to CC21.
4) I asked Bill about the series of turns over Vancouver, PDX, and Portland depicted on the FBI Flight Path Map -- likely the same as Sodelin's"--and asked him if that looked correct or if he remembered flying the jet like that.
Bill told me he does not recall flying the jet like that. He essentially remembers flying straight segments albeit by hand.
-
One other thing:
Bill told me--as he has stated before--that the moment they felt Cooper jump (which he described as a diving board-type event) he (Bill) radioed Minneapolis and told them to mark the time/spot. Therefore, a precise time for the jump should have been recorded by Minneapolis.
-
Hearing first hand from Bill will be a very good thing. however, we see error's that are either from him or statements made shortly after the hijacking. the right questions need to be asked.
The crew appeared to help Paul with the map he made. documents state that "the crew of the above airline has now spotted a possible area for the suspected departure of the hijacker to be over Merwin lake, near woodland, Washington"
Ask if he can recall how close to the Battleground VOR 305 was and did they fly VOR to VOR and can he recall how far off centerline from V23 was deviated..
They also made a statement of using the autopilot during most of the flight through Washington. most of the path is relatively straight flight.
Statements of the past need to be brought into the conversation along with asking if the flight path could be over the location the money was found in 1980 vs any maps made shortly after the fact showing different. also, whether they were aware of there position vs the ground and did Anderson plot anything for record.
Try to determine if the oscillation and pressure bump was immediate or minutes apart.
The time of the possible jump has been well established through the transcripts and his interview. the location or coords seems to be the error..
50 years is a long time and it could be rather easy to "guide" him into things. lots of things need to be put on the table for review moving forward in a positive direction..
-
The time of the possible jump has been well established through the transcripts and his interview. the location or coords seems to be the error...
The timing of the oscillations is fairly well established, but the time of the jump which would equate to the pressure bump is unknown. It’s not in the transcripts or the 302s. All we know is that it occurred after 8:12. Other than that, all we have are Rat’s own statement on the matter which ranges from 5 to 15 minutes after 8:05.
If he could pin down a better jump time, it would be a game changer.
-
The time of the possible jump has been well established through the transcripts and his interview. the location or coords seems to be the error...
The timing of the oscillations is fairly well established, but the time of the jump which would equate to the pressure bump is unknown. It’s not in the transcripts or the 302s. All we know is that it occurred after 8:12. Other than that, all we have are Rat’s own statement on the matter which ranges from 5 to 15 minutes after 8:05.
If he could pin down a better jump time, it would be a game changer.
Rataczak was quite adamant that Cooper jumped at 8:13pm when we spoke on the phone in 2009.
-
Rat has been consistent about notifying Minneapolis at the moment of the pressure bump--or "diving board" using his words.
The 5-10 minute reference is merely Rat retelling the story to agents. All he's saying is that he contacted Minneapolis at the moment of the jump which was 5-10 minutes after the last DBC convo. The exact time is recorded with Minneapolis nonetheless.
-
Bill describes the jump in the HBO documentary. they appear to go by the pressure bump vs the oscillation. that's why I'm wondering if there is or was a time gap. they have explained it being one after the other. the transcripts states the crew claiming the time of where he left the plane. nothing is said after that transmission. he also explains it was mentioned about the time but not the location for "pinpointing" the spot.
'crew reported oscillations of the cabin rate climb indicator. this is probably due to the hijackers weight on the stairs. stairs extending further, result affect on cabin pressure. may be best estimate of when he exited the airplane."
This could be take two ways. Cooper getting on the stairs and lowering them or getting to the bottom and jumping within moments of getting on the stairs. it affected the cabin rate gauge twice. the noise increased as he went down and then subsided..all the actions could of taken place in less than a minute and not 5-10 minutes apart. this term could be taken out of context. this is what needs to be confirmed.
-
The point is that we do not have the exact time he jumped.
-
They have the approx. time but the location is the key factor. the transcripts can mark the time but not the location unless they state where the plane was or the crew does the same. this was the critical error from the start. nobody appears to have thought about this critical point during the time in question..they let it slip right through there fingers..
-
The oscillations refer to Cooper walking down the stairs. Bill told me they could tell when this was happening and that the further down the stairs DBC got the more pronounced the disturbance got. Then there was the "diving board" when DBC jumped and Bill radioed Minneapolis. This exact time is recorded somewhere. Given that Bill has a lot of papers related to or from Soderlind, the 8:13 time may be precisely the time. Moreover, it seems to be the time (thereabouts) that the FBI used.
-
The point is that we do not have the exact time he jumped.
Again, Rataczak told me repeatedly that Cooper jumped at 8:13pm, when we spoke in 2009.
-
I'm perfectly comfortable with the 8:13 jump time. BTW, Bill is sharp. He isn't some old guy digging into some hazy past.
-
I'm perfectly comfortable with the 8:13 jump time. BTW, Bill is sharp. He isn't some old guy digging into some hazy past.
I don't think anyone is accusing Bill of anything. he has admitted memory issues just as the rest has. we have conflicting stories between two guys sitting next to each other. statements made in previous years not adding up to what is said in the 80. 90's etc.
Hopefully, Bill can clear up a lot of the misinformation. I don't see anything bad coming of this?
-
I'm perfectly comfortable with the 8:13 jump time. BTW, Bill is sharp. He isn't some old guy digging into some hazy past.
I don't think anyone is accusing Bill of anything. he has admitted memory issues just as the rest has. we have conflicting stories between two guys sitting next to each other. statements made in previous years not adding up to what is said in the 80. 90's etc.
Hopefully, Bill can clear up a lot of the misinformation. I don't see anything bad coming of this?
What exactly are you talking about? What conflicting stories?
-
I'm perfectly comfortable with the 8:13 jump time. BTW, Bill is sharp. He isn't some old guy digging into some hazy past.
I don't think anyone is accusing Bill of anything. he has admitted memory issues just as the rest has. we have conflicting stories between two guys sitting next to each other. statements made in previous years not adding up to what is said in the 80. 90's etc.
Hopefully, Bill can clear up a lot of the misinformation. I don't see anything bad coming of this?
Everyone has memory issues as they get older. I wouldn't even call them "issues" in most cases, things just didn't happen quite the way we remember them. Unless, of course, you're one of those Christiansen witnesses, in which case your memory is impeccable.
-
East and west for one between the pilot and copilot. one says west over Woodland while the other says east of V23..
-
Everyone has memory issues as they get older. I wouldn't even call them "issues" in most cases, things just didn't happen quite the way we remember them. Unless, of course, you're one of those Christiansen witnesses, in which case your memory is impeccable.
Very true, experts say you don't really know your own history or view it different years later that becomes skewed. that's why you say "I always thought it was this or that" finding out years later you were wrong..I don't think that's the case here though..
-
East and west for one between the pilot and copilot. one says west over Woodland while the other says east of V23..
I really don't know. I'm not sure precisely what Rataczak formerly stated about east of V23 or at what point.
-
I believe he has been quoted flying further east than 2 miles off center of V23...I think Bruce has the answer to that one..
-
To be clear, Rataczak didn't say anything to me about east or west of V23. He just told me he was flying the jet because they didn't know what to expect with the airstairs down. He said they were in constant contact with Soderlind as well as Soderlind had patched in a Boeing test pilot (maybe Wallick) somehow.
-
I believe he has been quoted flying further east than 2 miles off center of V23...I think Bruce has the answer to that one..
Well, when I speak to him next I'll ask him.
-
It's troubling things we read that cause problems. we have to rely on what is reported by the witnesses. when you read different events about two people in the same event. it causes problems reaching a conclusion. hopefully, we can weed all of this out. I don't think anyone expected you to resolve this in 70 minutes...
-
Remember, according to Rataczak Cooper jumped before they hit the suburbs of Portland--I'm certain he meant Vancouver which is arguably a suburb of Portland.
-
Vancouver is a city on the north bank of the Columbia River in the U.S. state of Washington. It is the largest suburb of Portland, Oregon. Incorporated in 1857, Vancouver had a population of 161,791 as of the 2010 U.S. census, making it the fourth-largest city in Washington state.
-
It's troubling things we read that cause problems. we have to rely on what is reported by the witnesses. when you read different events about two people in the same event. it causes problems reaching a conclusion. hopefully, we can weed all of this out. I don't think anyone expected you to resolve this in 70 minutes...
I got an answer to the auto-pilot question, his viewing of the FBI Flight Map as well as his recollections of the path, and the airstairs on takeoff BS. I call that pretty damn good.
-
As I mentioned about conflicting reports. it's documented twice they used the autopilot..this is what's disturbing when reading the files.
-
For what it's worth, he immediately told me he was hand flying at the point and why. And, it makes sense.
-
It doesn’t matter what we feel “comfortable” with or what we “think” or what we “accept”. It’s what we can prove.
And we can’t prove 8:13 is the jump time. All we can prove is that the jump occurred sometime after 8:12. It’s possible he jumped directly after the oscillations. It’s also possible it was several moments or minutes after.
It’s all guesswork.
-
It doesn’t matter what we feel “comfortable” with or what we “think” or what we “accept”. It’s what we can prove.
And we can’t prove 8:13 is the jump time. All we can prove is that the jump occurred sometime after 8:12. It’s possible he jumped directly after the oscillations. It’s also possible it was several moments or minutes after.
It’s all guesswork.
It's not guess work. The exact time was noted by Soderlind which Rataczak says was 8:13. Moreover, the FBI has used the same time. Their search was based off of oscillations starting at 8:10 and running through to pressure bump at 8:13. Regardless, you are nowhere near the Columbia if you roll with the FBI Flight Path.
-
It's conflicting. anyway you look at the data. I understand Bill's point but was that the conclusion throughout the flight? they made a statements that is was used most of the time in Washington and further south. it also documents it being procedure. he needs to clear up the confusion. it's not damaging proof of anything so why the conflicting statements?
-
It doesn’t matter what we feel “comfortable” with or what we “think” or what we “accept”. It’s what we can prove.
And we can’t prove 8:13 is the jump time. All we can prove is that the jump occurred sometime after 8:12. It’s possible he jumped directly after the oscillations. It’s also possible it was several moments or minutes after.
It’s all guesswork.
It's not guess work. The exact time was noted by Soderlind which Rataczak says was 8:13. Moreover, the FBI has used the same time. Their search was based off of oscillations starting at 8:10 and running through to pressure bump at 8:13. Regardless, you are nowhere near the Columbia if you roll with the FBI Flight Path.
1. There is a difference between “oscillations” and “pressure bump”.
2. There’s no mention of a “pressure bump” in the transcripts or any time of a pressure bump in the 302s.
3. Rataczak has also given a range between 8:10 and 8:20.
So, yes, I think it’s guesswork. More investigation is needed, and hopefully more 302s and more information from Rat and others will allow us to zero in on an exact time.
-
It's conflicting. anyway you look at the data. I understand Bill's point but was that the conclusion throughout the flight? they made a statements that is was used most of the time in Washington and further south. it also documents it being procedure. he needs to clear up the confusion. it's not damaging proof of anything so why the conflicting statements?
I don't know if Bill made such statements or not--there is nothing in his 302 from November 24-25. That said, the jet was probably on autopilot from PDX to SEA which may account for any prospective misunderstanding.
-
It doesn’t matter what we feel “comfortable” with or what we “think” or what we “accept”. It’s what we can prove.
And we can’t prove 8:13 is the jump time. All we can prove is that the jump occurred sometime after 8:12. It’s possible he jumped directly after the oscillations. It’s also possible it was several moments or minutes after.
It’s all guesswork.
It's not guess work. The exact time was noted by Soderlind which Rataczak says was 8:13. Moreover, the FBI has used the same time. Their search was based off of oscillations starting at 8:10 and running through to pressure bump at 8:13. Regardless, you are nowhere near the Columbia if you roll with the FBI Flight Path.
1. There is a difference between “oscillations” and “pressure bump”.
2. There’s no mention of a “pressure bump” in the transcripts or any time of a pressure bump in the 302s.
3. Rataczak has also given a range between 8:10 and 8:20.
So, yes, I think it’s guesswork. More investigation is needed, and hopefully more 302s and more information from Rat and others will allow us to zero in on an exact time.
Let's not play semantics here.
1) The oscillations refer to Cooper's time on the stairs as he was descending. Again Rataczak told me he could tell as he was walking down the stairs because they were lowering further into the airstream and creating more of a disturbance.
The term "pressure bump" is just a term used to denote the jump. Again, Rataczak referred to this being like a "diving board" springing back.
2) We know perfectly well what transpired whether the files use the term pressure bump or not.
3) You have to understand the context of the conversation relating the last communication with the jump. The important point being that this was during an interview which, by definition, was after the event. This doesn't change that during the event itself the precise time was noted.
No guess work here. We know what happened and when. The question is, where.
-
I don't know if Bill made such statements or not
None of us know until Bill is confronted with these documents. highly unlikely they are referring to anything but the flight from Sea to Reno. the 24 and 25th mean nothing.
-
Even with a time frame it's guesswork. exact coords and time would not be guess work if this were the case. it's always been reported as the best known area where Cooper bailed. Bill wasn't even certain himself. he's on record stating they didn't know if Cooper was still on the plane. lots of confusion surrounds all of this.
-
It doesn’t matter what we feel “comfortable” with or what we “think” or what we “accept”. It’s what we can prove.
And we can’t prove 8:13 is the jump time. All we can prove is that the jump occurred sometime after 8:12. It’s possible he jumped directly after the oscillations. It’s also possible it was several moments or minutes after.
It’s all guesswork.
It's not guess work. The exact time was noted by Soderlind which Rataczak says was 8:13. Moreover, the FBI has used the same time. Their search was based off of oscillations starting at 8:10 and running through to pressure bump at 8:13. Regardless, you are nowhere near the Columbia if you roll with the FBI Flight Path.
1. There is a difference between “oscillations” and “pressure bump”.
2. There’s no mention of a “pressure bump” in the transcripts or any time of a pressure bump in the 302s.
3. Rataczak has also given a range between 8:10 and 8:20.
So, yes, I think it’s guesswork. More investigation is needed, and hopefully more 302s and more information from Rat and others will allow us to zero in on an exact time.
Let's not play semantics here.
1) The oscillations refer to Cooper's time on the stairs as he was descending. Again Rataczak told me he could tell as he was walking down the stairs because they were lowering further into the airstream and creating more of a disturbance.
The term "pressure bump" is just a term used to denote the jump. Again, Rataczak referred to this being like a "diving board" springing back.
2) We know perfectly well what transpired whether the files use the term pressure bump or not.
3) You have to understand the context of the conversation relating the last communication with the jump. The important point being that this was during an interview which, by definition, was after the event. This doesn't change that during the event itself the precise time was noted.
No guess work here. We know what happened and when. The question is, where.
Making sure we use precise terms is not “playing semantics”. The term “oscillations” is not the same as “pressure bump”. The oscillations preceded the pressure bump.
Rat has made several statements regarding the time of the jump and they all end up in a 10 minute range.
The fact remains that we do not know exactly when the oscillations ended and the pressure bump occurred. We only know a period of time when the oscillations were occurring. Cooper could have jumped anywhere between 8:10 to 8:20.
Rat has made several statements regarding the time of the jump and they all end up in a 10 minute range.
-
One other thing:
Bill told me--as he has stated before--that the moment they felt Cooper jump (which he described as a diving board-type event) he (Bill) radioed Minneapolis and told them to mark the time/spot. Therefore, a precise time for the jump should have been recorded by Minneapolis.
Here is what is recorded in the teletype transmissions through the ARINC system. The radio link would probably record these short messages about one to two minutes before the times listed in the teletype print outs.
8:05 PM - The flight crew reported that they had just talked to Cooper over the PA system and he said everything was okay. This was the last contact with Cooper.
8:12 PM - The flight crew reported getting some oscillations in the cabin. (He) must be doing something with the air stairs.
An entry in the "FBI Notes" states that 8:11 PM is probably the best time for Cooper jumping.
If there were no further oscillations, then Cooper jumped about 8:11 PM or 8:12 PM.
The above are plain documented facts and there is nothing to contradict them. Even if Rataczak said some decades later that Cooper didn't even jump at all, these times are still valid.
-
To be clear, Rataczak didn't say anything to me about east or west of V23. He just told me he was flying the jet because they didn't know what to expect with the airstairs down. He said they were in constant contact with Soderlind as well as Soderlind had patched in a Boeing test pilot (maybe Wallick) somehow.
Samuel Lewis "Lew" Wallick was a Boeing test pilot and was the project pilot for the Boeing 727. He made the first flight of the 727 and flew many of the tests involved in getting it certified by the FAA.
-
One other thing:
Bill told me--as he has stated before--that the moment they felt Cooper jump (which he described as a diving board-type event) he (Bill) radioed Minneapolis and told them to mark the time/spot. Therefore, a precise time for the jump should have been recorded by Minneapolis.
Here is what is recorded in the teletype transmissions through the ARINC system. The radio link would probably record these short messages about one to two minutes before the times listed in the teletype print outs.
8:05 PM - The flight crew reported that they had just talked to Cooper over the PA system and he said everything was okay. This was the last contact with Cooper.
8:12 PM - The flight crew reported getting some oscillations in the cabin. (He) must be doing something with the air stairs.
An entry in the "FBI Notes" states that 8:11 PM is probably the best time for Cooper jumping.
If there were no further oscillations, then Cooper jumped about 8:11 PM or 8:12 PM.
The above are plain documented facts and there is nothing to contradict them. Even if Rataczak said some decades later that Cooper didn't even jump at all, these times are still valid.
Again, “oscillations” are mentioned, not “pressure bump”. The oscillations were literally defined as “doing something with the stairs”, not “jumping”.
The oscillations didn’t necessarily end at 8:12. That’s simply when they weren’t mentioned again. Cooper could have jumped - thereby causing a pressure bump - any time after 8:12.
-
My understanding is that the oscillations lasted one to two minutes. Again, this is when DBC is making his way along the airstairs and any wait time at the end of the airstairs.
The oscillations are followed by a pressure bump which denotes when DBC jumped.
The semantics I'm referencing relates to use of the term "pressure bump." Whether the FBI used the term or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the pressure literally did bump thereby creating a sensation in the ears and a bouncing of the dials on the instrument panel.
Rataczak states the pressure bump occurred at 8:13. Therefore, it seems very likely that Cooper actually jumped during the 8:13 minute. If that's not convincing enough, well then okay and it's certainly your prerogative.
-
One other thing:
Bill told me--as he has stated before--that the moment they felt Cooper jump (which he described as a diving board-type event) he (Bill) radioed Minneapolis and told them to mark the time/spot. Therefore, a precise time for the jump should have been recorded by Minneapolis.
Here is what is recorded in the teletype transmissions through the ARINC system. The radio link would probably record these short messages about one to two minutes before the times listed in the teletype print outs.
8:05 PM - The flight crew reported that they had just talked to Cooper over the PA system and he said everything was okay. This was the last contact with Cooper.
8:12 PM - The flight crew reported getting some oscillations in the cabin. (He) must be doing something with the air stairs.
An entry in the "FBI Notes" states that 8:11 PM is probably the best time for Cooper jumping.
If there were no further oscillations, then Cooper jumped about 8:11 PM or 8:12 PM.
The above are plain documented facts and there is nothing to contradict them. Even if Rataczak said some decades later that Cooper didn't even jump at all, these times are still valid.
Again, “oscillations” are mentioned, not “pressure bump”. The oscillations were literally defined as “doing something with the stairs”, not “jumping”.
The oscillations didn’t necessarily end at 8:12. That’s simply when they weren’t mentioned again. Cooper could have jumped - thereby causing a pressure bump - any time after 8:12.
The oscillations stopped when Cooper jumped and, conversely, Cooper jumped just a second or two before the oscillations stopped.
The airliner was 23 DME miles (nautical miles) south of what is now named the Battleground VORTAC, and on the edge of V-23, at 8:18 PM. Since the airliner had a ground speed of about 3 Nautical Miles per minute, this does not fit into your theory of a late jump or even jumping north of the Columbia River.
-
I believe he has been quoted flying further east than 2 miles off center of V23...I think Bruce has the answer to that one..
Bill told me that the wind had blown them "east," and he figured they were in the eastern portion of V-23. I pressed him a bit on this and he was generally vague on the question of whether he was east-enough to get over the Washougal drainage. Nevertheless, Ralph Himmelsbach was adamant that Bill told him they were over the Washougal.
-
My understanding is that the oscillations lasted one to two minutes. Again, this is when DBC is making his way along the airstairs and any wait time at the end of the airstairs.
The oscillations are only mentioned in the 302s form 8:10 to 8:12. That doesn’t mean that’s how long they lasted.
The oscillations are followed by a pressure bump which denotes when DBC jumped.
The semantics I'm referencing relates to use of the term "pressure bump." Whether the FBI used the term or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the pressure literally did bump thereby creating a sensation in the ears and a bouncing of the dials on the instrument panel.
I’m not arguing that point. I am merely pointing out the difference between oscillations and a pressure bump. The oscillations are not when Cooper jumped. The pressure bump is. There is not time for the pressure bump, therefore no time for the jump.
Rataczak states the pressure bump occurred at 8:13. Therefore, it seems very likely that Cooper actually jumped during the 8:13 minute. If that's not convincing enough, well then okay and it's certainly your prerogative.
He also later states that it was 5 to 10 minutes after last contact and then later 10 to 15 minutes after last contact. If you want to believe one data point and not others, then that’s certainly you’re prerogative.
My point remains that we do not know exactly when Cooper jumped.
-
The oscillations stopped when Cooper jumped
And there is nothing in the transcripts or 302s about when the oscillations stopped.
and, conversely, Cooper jumped just a second or two before the oscillations stopped.
There is absolutely no evidence for this. It is pure speculation on your part.
The airliner was 23 DME miles (nautical miles) south of what is now named the Battleground VORTAC, and on the edge of V-23, at 8:18 PM.
No, the time when the airline indicated it was 23 miles south of Battleground was 8:22, not 8:18.
Since the airliner had a ground speed of about 3 Nautical Miles per minute, this does not fit into your theory of a late jump or even jumping north of the Columbia River.
Yes, it does. Please see above.
-
He also later states that it was 5 to 10 minutes after last contact and then later 10 to 15 minutes after last contact. If you want to believe one data point and not others, then that’s certainly you’re prerogative.
My point remains that we do not know exactly when Cooper jumped.
You are still not understanding my point. Let me try one more time.
All he was recounting was that the time between the two events was 5-10 minutes. This is because at that point no one had reported to him that the last communication was at 8:05 and that his "mark your maps" comment was at 8:13.
It was merely a general reference of the time between the two events. It does not mean that the authorities hadn't marked precisely the time of each of the two events.
That's as far as I can go with this.
-
He also later states that it was 5 to 10 minutes after last contact and then later 10 to 15 minutes after last contact. If you want to believe one data point and not others, then that’s certainly you’re prerogative.
My point remains that we do not know exactly when Cooper jumped.
You are still not understanding my point. Let me try one more time.
All he was recounting was that the time between the two events was 5-10 minutes. This is because at that point no one had reported to him that the last communication was at 8:05 and that his "mark your maps" comment was at 8:13.
It was merely a general reference of the time between the two events. It does not mean that the authorities hadn't marked precisely the time of each of the two events.
That's as far as I can go with this.
The “10 to 15 minutes” statement was giving to SA Carr about ten years ago. Also, to my knowledge, the 8:13 time is not on any official documented evidence. If it is, please share.
I agree, we have belabored this argument. I will still stand by my original statement which is we do not know exactly when Cooper jumped.
-
He also later states that it was 5 to 10 minutes after last contact and then later 10 to 15 minutes after last contact. If you want to believe one data point and not others, then that’s certainly you’re prerogative.
My point remains that we do not know exactly when Cooper jumped.
You are still not understanding my point. Let me try one more time.
All he was recounting was that the time between the two events was 5-10 minutes. This is because at that point no one had reported to him that the last communication was at 8:05 and that his "mark your maps" comment was at 8:13.
It was merely a general reference of the time between the two events. It does not mean that the authorities hadn't marked precisely the time of each of the two events.
That's as far as I can go with this.
Let me add my two cents to this. Cooper is going to get off those stairs as fast as possible.
The wind chill factor alone was as much as 30 or 40 degrees below zero and he was simply not dressed to handle anything close to that. There was no reason for him to do anything except walk down the stairs and jump. He could have disposed of the brief case and anything else he wanted to throw away without causing any significant oscillations on the stairs.
There is no rational basis for a jump time outside the 8:11 to 8:13 time frame.
-
The fact is that the FBI knows precisely when Rataczak notified Minneapolis about the pressure bump--and therefore presumably DBC's jump time.
The only way they wouldn't know is if Soderlind didn't mark the time down which seems highly unlikely. In fact, Rataczak may well be able to confirm this.
Moreover, the FBI seems quite certain that he jumped somewhere in that 8:11-8:13 window--perhaps accounting for some variance in the time on whatever clock was used to stamp the time and the amount of time involved for Airinc to transmit the message.
-
He also later states that it was 5 to 10 minutes after last contact and then later 10 to 15 minutes after last contact. If you want to believe one data point and not others, then that’s certainly you’re prerogative.
My point remains that we do not know exactly when Cooper jumped.
You are still not understanding my point. Let me try one more time.
All he was recounting was that the time between the two events was 5-10 minutes. This is because at that point no one had reported to him that the last communication was at 8:05 and that his "mark your maps" comment was at 8:13.
It was merely a general reference of the time between the two events. It does not mean that the authorities hadn't marked precisely the time of each of the two events.
That's as far as I can go with this.
Let me add my two cents to this. Cooper is going to get off those stairs as fast as possible.
The wind chill factor alone was as much as 30 or 40 degrees below zero and he was simply not dressed to handle anything close to that. There was no reason for him to do anything except walk down the stairs and jump. He could have disposed of the brief case and anything else he wanted to throw away without causing any significant oscillations on the stairs.
This is a fine opinion, and it could very well be true, but it has no basis in any evidence and is just speculation. There is truly no way we can confirm what happened or didn’t happen on those stairs other than at some point Cooper jumped from them.
There is no rational basis for a jump time outside the 8:11 to 8:13 time frame.
This is objectively not true.
-
The fact is that the FBI knows precisely when Rataczak notified Minneapolis about the pressure bump--and therefore presumably DBC's jump time.
The only way they wouldn't know is if Soderlind didn't mark the time down which seems highly unlikely. In fact, Rataczak may well be able to confirm this.
Moreover, the FBI seems quite certain that he jumped somewhere in that 8:11-8:13 window--perhaps accounting for some variance in the time on whatever clock was used to stamp the time and the amount of time involved for Airinc to transmit the message.
The FBI may know EXACTLY what time Cooper jumped, but the fact still remains that WE don’t. That hasn’t been made public in any official documentation. If a 302 pops up that pinpoints a time, or an USAF map with the jump time plotted or some other type of evidence like that tells us an exactly time, then fantastic. Until such time, we have what we have which is a time frame between 8:10 and 8:20 which is probably closer to 8:15 to 8:17. Still and all, we don’t know when Cooper jumped. I’m not sure what more I need to say to underscore this point, so I’m just not going to say anything more about it. It is what it is.
I do have to say, EU, that for a guy who claims that the FBI is guilty of human error all over this case, you do seem quite certain that they got the jump time right.
-
The fact is that the FBI knows precisely when Rataczak notified Minneapolis about the pressure bump--and therefore presumably DBC's jump time.
The only way they wouldn't know is if Soderlind didn't mark the time down which seems highly unlikely. In fact, Rataczak may well be able to confirm this.
Moreover, the FBI seems quite certain that he jumped somewhere in that 8:11-8:13 window--perhaps accounting for some variance in the time on whatever clock was used to stamp the time and the amount of time involved for Airinc to transmit the message.
The FBI may know EXACTLY what time Cooper jumped, but the fact still remains that WE don’t. That hasn’t been made public in any official documentation. If a 302 pops up that pinpoints a time, or an USAF map with the jump time plotted or some other type of evidence like that tells us an exactly time, then fantastic. Until such time, we have what we have which is a time frame between 8:10 and 8:20 which is probably closer to 8:15 to 8:17. Still and all, we don’t know when Cooper jumped. I’m not sure what more I need to say to underscore this point, so I’m just not going to say anything more about it. It is what it is.
I do have to say, EU, that for a guy who claims that the FBI is guilty of human error all over this case, you do seem quite certain that they got the jump time right.
Once again, this is not accurate. We have FBI files with the times referenced. Moreover, we also have the search zone which was based upon the formerly stated jump times.
Regarding the FBI and human error: I'm assuming that Paul Soderlind (NWO) was capable of reading a clock.
-
The fact is that the FBI knows precisely when Rataczak notified Minneapolis about the pressure bump--and therefore presumably DBC's jump time.
The only way they wouldn't know is if Soderlind didn't mark the time down which seems highly unlikely. In fact, Rataczak may well be able to confirm this.
Moreover, the FBI seems quite certain that he jumped somewhere in that 8:11-8:13 window--perhaps accounting for some variance in the time on whatever clock was used to stamp the time and the amount of time involved for Airinc to transmit the message.
The FBI may know EXACTLY what time Cooper jumped, but the fact still remains that WE don’t. That hasn’t been made public in any official documentation. If a 302 pops up that pinpoints a time, or an USAF map with the jump time plotted or some other type of evidence like that tells us an exactly time, then fantastic. Until such time, we have what we have which is a time frame between 8:10 and 8:20 which is probably closer to 8:15 to 8:17. Still and all, we don’t know when Cooper jumped. I’m not sure what more I need to say to underscore this point, so I’m just not going to say anything more about it. It is what it is.
I do have to say, EU, that for a guy who claims that the FBI is guilty of human error all over this case, you do seem quite certain that they got the jump time right.
Once again, this is not accurate. We have FBI files with the times referenced. Moreover, we also have the search zone which was based upon the formerly stated jump times.
Regarding the FBI and human error: I'm assuming that Paul Soderlind (NWO) was capable of reading a clock.
Yes, I’ve referenced those times repeatedly in my posts and none of them refer to an 8:13 jump time or any jump time or any pressure bump for that matter. But I’ve said this same thing for hours now and you and R99 continue to obfuscate the issue.
I’m done. Good night.
-
The fact is that the FBI knows precisely when Rataczak notified Minneapolis about the pressure bump--and therefore presumably DBC's jump time.
The only way they wouldn't know is if Soderlind didn't mark the time down which seems highly unlikely. In fact, Rataczak may well be able to confirm this.
Moreover, the FBI seems quite certain that he jumped somewhere in that 8:11-8:13 window--perhaps accounting for some variance in the time on whatever clock was used to stamp the time and the amount of time involved for Airinc to transmit the message.
The FBI may know EXACTLY what time Cooper jumped, but the fact still remains that WE don’t. That hasn’t been made public in any official documentation. If a 302 pops up that pinpoints a time, or an USAF map with the jump time plotted or some other type of evidence like that tells us an exactly time, then fantastic. Until such time, we have what we have which is a time frame between 8:10 and 8:20 which is probably closer to 8:15 to 8:17. Still and all, we don’t know when Cooper jumped. I’m not sure what more I need to say to underscore this point, so I’m just not going to say anything more about it. It is what it is.
I do have to say, EU, that for a guy who claims that the FBI is guilty of human error all over this case, you do seem quite certain that they got the jump time right.
Once again, this is not accurate. We have FBI files with the times referenced. Moreover, we also have the search zone which was based upon the formerly stated jump times.
Regarding the FBI and human error: I'm assuming that Paul Soderlind (NWO) was capable of reading a clock.
Yes, I’ve referenced those times repeatedly in my posts and none of them refer to an 8:13 jump time or any jump time or any pressure bump for that matter. But I’ve said this same thing for hours now and you and R99 continue to obfuscate the issue.
I’m done. Good night.
Again, not accurate. And, oh yeah, the guy flying the damn jet stated 8:13. Yet, I obfuscate. I really can't make it any more clear.
-
He also later states that it was 5 to 10 minutes after last contact and then later 10 to 15 minutes after last contact. If you want to believe one data point and not others, then that’s certainly you’re prerogative.
My point remains that we do not know exactly when Cooper jumped.
You are still not understanding my point. Let me try one more time.
All he was recounting was that the time between the two events was 5-10 minutes. This is because at that point no one had reported to him that the last communication was at 8:05 and that his "mark your maps" comment was at 8:13.
It was merely a general reference of the time between the two events. It does not mean that the authorities hadn't marked precisely the time of each of the two events.
That's as far as I can go with this.
Let me add my two cents to this. Cooper is going to get off those stairs as fast as possible.
The wind chill factor alone was as much as 30 or 40 degrees below zero and he was simply not dressed to handle anything close to that. There was no reason for him to do anything except walk down the stairs and jump. He could have disposed of the brief case and anything else he wanted to throw away without causing any significant oscillations on the stairs.
This is a fine opinion, and it could very well be true, but it has no basis in any evidence and is just speculation. There is truly no way we can confirm what happened or didn’t happen on those stairs other than at some point Cooper jumped from them.
There is no rational basis for a jump time outside the 8:11 to 8:13 time frame.
This is objectively not true.
Chaucer, your response to the above is nonsense!
-
The fact is that the FBI knows precisely when Rataczak notified Minneapolis about the pressure bump--and therefore presumably DBC's jump time.
The only way they wouldn't know is if Soderlind didn't mark the time down which seems highly unlikely. In fact, Rataczak may well be able to confirm this.
Moreover, the FBI seems quite certain that he jumped somewhere in that 8:11-8:13 window--perhaps accounting for some variance in the time on whatever clock was used to stamp the time and the amount of time involved for Airinc to transmit the message.
The FBI may know EXACTLY what time Cooper jumped, but the fact still remains that WE don’t. That hasn’t been made public in any official documentation. If a 302 pops up that pinpoints a time, or an USAF map with the jump time plotted or some other type of evidence like that tells us an exactly time, then fantastic. Until such time, we have what we have which is a time frame between 8:10 and 8:20 which is probably closer to 8:15 to 8:17. Still and all, we don’t know when Cooper jumped. I’m not sure what more I need to say to underscore this point, so I’m just not going to say anything more about it. It is what it is.
I do have to say, EU, that for a guy who claims that the FBI is guilty of human error all over this case, you do seem quite certain that they got the jump time right.
Once again, this is not accurate. We have FBI files with the times referenced. Moreover, we also have the search zone which was based upon the formerly stated jump times.
Regarding the FBI and human error: I'm assuming that Paul Soderlind (NWO) was capable of reading a clock.
Yes, I’ve referenced those times repeatedly in my posts and none of them refer to an 8:13 jump time or any jump time or any pressure bump for that matter. But I’ve said this same thing for hours now and you and R99 continue to obfuscate the issue.
I’m done. Good night.
Chaucer, to amplify further on the above and the baloney that is being posted on dropzone today, the Seattle ATC radio transcripts have been heavily redacted and do not contain any information to pinpoint the exact location of the airliner when it was passing through the Portland area.
Three FOIA attempts were made through the FAA and FBI, and with the assistance of my US Congressman, to obtain the unredacted transcripts but were unsuccessful. The unredacted transcripts do in fact exist but are simply not going to be released. CYA.
Further, Fred Poynter's group at the WSHM made an analysis of the ARINC teletype transcripts and concluded that some were missing. That is, the teletype transcripts had also been redacted.
Simply because something is not in the redacted transcripts mentioned above does not mean it didn't happen. Some of the posters on DZ today are challenging information that Bill Rataczak included in a speech that he gave to a NWA inhouse group and that is published in a NWA inhouse publication.
The times given in the Seattle ATC Center radio transcripts are GMT (Greenwich Mean Time, which now has another name) times and are accurate to the second.
The times given in the ARINC teletype transcripts are the times the teletype operator pushed the "SEND" button on his teletype machine. The message in the transcript had arrived by radio anywhere from one to four minutes earlier and, depending on the operator's workload at a given moment, the operator required those minutes to format and type the information into his teletype.
The information radioed from the airliner to the ARINC operator was also heard by NWA personnel in Seattle and Minneapolis at the same time through a phone patch.
A careful comparison of the early ATC radio transcripts, for just after takeoff from SEATAC, and the teletype transcripts shows this difference in times. Some times are given for information received through the phone patch and can be compared with the later times the same teletype information was sent.
Typical of the nonsense being posted on DZ today, one of the posters claims that Cooper jumped as late as 8:20 PM and north of the Columbia River. The ARINC radio patch times indicate that the airliner crew reported being 23 DME (Nautical Miles) south of what is now known as the Battleground VORTAC at 8:18 PM. This location is on the far south side of Portland.
The posters who claim that what is now known as the Western Flight Path is wrong need to post their evidence. No one, including Georger, has offered any evidence to back up their claim. Instead, they use "faith based" reasoning since they don't have anything else.
-
The fact is that the FBI knows precisely when Rataczak notified Minneapolis about the pressure bump--and therefore presumably DBC's jump time.
The only way they wouldn't know is if Soderlind didn't mark the time down which seems highly unlikely. In fact, Rataczak may well be able to confirm this.
Moreover, the FBI seems quite certain that he jumped somewhere in that 8:11-8:13 window--perhaps accounting for some variance in the time on whatever clock was used to stamp the time and the amount of time involved for Airinc to transmit the message.
The FBI may know EXACTLY what time Cooper jumped, but the fact still remains that WE don’t. That hasn’t been made public in any official documentation. If a 302 pops up that pinpoints a time, or an USAF map with the jump time plotted or some other type of evidence like that tells us an exactly time, then fantastic. Until such time, we have what we have which is a time frame between 8:10 and 8:20 which is probably closer to 8:15 to 8:17. Still and all, we don’t know when Cooper jumped. I’m not sure what more I need to say to underscore this point, so I’m just not going to say anything more about it. It is what it is.
I do have to say, EU, that for a guy who claims that the FBI is guilty of human error all over this case, you do seem quite certain that they got the jump time right.
Once again, this is not accurate. We have FBI files with the times referenced. Moreover, we also have the search zone which was based upon the formerly stated jump times.
Regarding the FBI and human error: I'm assuming that Paul Soderlind (NWO) was capable of reading a clock.
Yes, I’ve referenced those times repeatedly in my posts and none of them refer to an 8:13 jump time or any jump time or any pressure bump for that matter. But I’ve said this same thing for hours now and you and R99 continue to obfuscate the issue.
I’m done. Good night.
Chaucer, to amplify further on the above and the baloney that is being posted on dropzone today, the Seattle ATC radio transcripts have been heavily redacted and do not contain any information to pinpoint the exact location of the airliner when it was passing through the Portland area.
Three FOIA attempts were made through the FAA and FBI, and with the assistance of my US Congressman, to obtain the unredacted transcripts but were unsuccessful. The unredacted transcripts do in fact exist but are simply not going to be released.
Further, Fred Poynter's group at the WSHM made an analysis of the ARINC teletype transcripts and concluded that some were missing. That is, the teletype transcripts had also been redacted.
Simply because something is not in the redacted transcripts mentioned above does not mean it didn't happen. Some of the claims on DZ today are challenging information that Bill Rataczak included in a speech that he gave to a NWA inhouse group and that is published in a NWA inhouse publication.
The times given in the Seattle ATC Center radio transcripts are GMT (Greenwich Mean Time, which now has another name) times and are accurate to the second.
The times given in the ARINC teletype transcripts are the times the teletype operator pushed the "SEND" button on his teletype machine. The message in the transcript had arrived by radio anywhere from one to four minutes earlier and, depending on the operator's workload at a given moment, required those minutes to format and type the information into his teletype.
The information radioed from the airliner to the ARINC operator was also heard by NWA personnel in Seattle and Minneapolis at the same time through a phone patch.
A careful comparison of the early ATC radio transcripts, for just after takeoff from SEATAC, and the teletype transcripts shows this difference in times. Some times are given for information received through the phone patch are given and can be compared with the later times the same teletype information was received.
Typical of the nonsense being posted on DZ today, one of the posters claims that Cooper jumped as late as 8:20 PM and north of the Columbia River. The ARINC radio patch times indicate that the airliner crew reported being 23 DME (Nautical Miles) south of what is now known as the Battleground VORTAC at 8:18 PM. This location is on the far south side of Portland.
The posters who claim that what is now known as the Western Flight Path is wrong need to post their evidence. No one, including Georger, has offered any evidence to back up their claim. Instead, they use a "faith based" reasoning since they don't have anything else.
The FBI etal published maps and search maps etcetera based on A flight path they thought was correct. That is not a claim by Georger or Lady Gaga! That is not "faith based"! Gagga and Georger dont have to post a God damned thing! Moreover nobody can prove or disprove your negative. You are just playing games again...
And it aint Georger's wife's responsibility either!
-
The FBI etal published maps and search maps etcetera based on A flight path they thought was correct. That is not a claim by Georger or Lady Gaga! That is not "faith based"! Gagga and Georger dont have to post a God damned thing! Moreover nobody can prove or disprove your negative. You are just playing games again...
And it aint Georger's wife's responsibility either!
Georger, you keep claiming that the Western Flight Path is incorrect. Nevertheless, you apparently can't state a single reason why it is incorrect. You are the one playing games! You can't have it both ways.
-
I completely understand why some (indeed most) believe in the veracity of the FBI Flight Path.
That said, as a subscriber to the Western Flight Path, I did not arrive at this believe cavalierly.
I can see we need to uncover a new nugget of information to help make the case for or against both the Western Flight Path and/or the FBI Flight Path. That is why I asked Rataczak the questions I did. That is also why I will be continuing my on-the-ground search later this month.
If anyone has any other thoughts or ideas that shed light or enable us to bring forth a new nugget, I'm all ears.
-
The ARINC radio patch times indicate that the airliner crew reported being 23 DME (Nautical Miles) south of what is now known as the Battleground VORTAC at 8:18 PM.
This is the second time you have made this statement, and it is completely and utterly WRONG. The time when that transmission was given was 8:22
The posters who claim that what is now known as the Western Flight Path is wrong need to post their evidence.
Again, WRONG. You and the others who support the WFP are the ones challenging the official flight path. You guys are the fringe outlier. The burden of proof is on YOU to prove the official flight path is not accurate. Thus far, you have failed spectacularly.
No one, including Georger, has offered any evidence to back up their claim. Instead, they use "faith based" reasoning since they don't have anything else.
Again, WRONG. The evidence for a central flight path is overwhelming and is evident in the 302s, the map, and common sense. It has been posted again and again and again and again, and you choose to ignore it, dismiss it, or muddle it.
-
Let's carry out an exercise that I'll call List The Physical Evidence whereby you list a piece--just one--of physical evidence that supports the FBI Flight Path.
In return, I'll do the same for the Western Flight Path.
In fact, I'll even start: The money find.
Your turn.
-
Let's carry out an exercise that I'll call List The Physical Evidence whereby you list a piece--just one--of physical evidence that supports the FBI Flight Path.
In return, I'll do the same for the Western Flight Path.
In fact, I'll even start: The money find.
Your turn.
No, EU. We are not going to play that game. You know the evidence for the central flight path. It’s in the 302s. It’s available in map form. Paul Sonderlind, the man you claim as the gospel truth when it comes to the 8:13 jump time, put it together along with the flight crew and radar data from the US Air Force
Again, you are the fringe outlier disputing the official account. The burden of proof is on you to disprove the official flight path.
I will say that claiming the money find as physical evidence of a western flight path is fallacious. I could just as easily use it as evidence of a central flight path since it is downstream from where the the flight path crosses the Columbia River.
-
The reason you don't want to "play my game" is because you can't. I knew the answer in advance. There is no evidence--not even the placard utilizing tortured weather data can be used anymore.
Let me ask you an honest question(s):
Doesn't it concern you in the least that not a single shred of evidence has ever been found anywhere near the FBI Flight Path? Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zero. After 50 years.
Is there not a point where you start to wonder why and how this is possible?
Is there not a point where you start to question what you think you know to be true (think The Palmer Report)?
Is there not a point where you say to yourself, "Something just doesn't add up?"
I'm serious about this.
In my opinion, it is foolhardy to belabor the deeds of others who say YES to any of the above questions and start looking in other areas. I also consider it foolish to stubbornly stand by a belief (FBI Flight Path) when after 50 years there is not a shred of hard evidence to support it.
Doesn't any of this concern you in the least? Seriously.
-
The reason you don't want to "play my game" is because you can't. I knew the answer in advance. There is no evidence--not even the placard utilizing tortured weather data can be used anymore.
Let me ask you an honest question(s):
Doesn't it concern you in the least that not a single shred of evidence has ever been found anywhere near the FBI Flight Path? Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zero. After 50 years.
Is there not a point where you start to wonder why and how this is possible?
Is there not a point where you start to question what you think you know to be true (think The Palmer Report)?
Is there not a point where you say to yourself, "Something just doesn't add up?"
I'm serious about this.
In my opinion, it is foolhardy to belabor the deeds of others who say YES to any of the above questions and start looking in other areas. I also consider it foolish to stubbornly stand by a belief (FBI Flight Path) when after 50 years there is not a shred of hard evidence to support it.
Doesn't any of this concern you in the least? Seriously.
I mean if it make you feel better about yourself to declare “victory” then go ahead. I don’t care. I’m not interested in “winning” or “being right”. I’m interested in solving the case, and if that ends up with me being TOTALLY wrong, I’d be a happy guy.
If you feel that there is “no evidence” to support a central flight path, then there is nothing I - or anyone else - can offer you to change your opinion. I know you have a lot invested - time, energy, money, etc. - in your theory and your accompanying suspect. To admit that you were wrong would be a crushing failure. So, I do understand your desire to cling to your theories in the face of overwhelming evidence otherwise. You’re mental health comes first. Take care of yourself.
-
You obviously don't know me at all. Ask anyone who actually does know me, how my mind works and how I roll, and they'll say: "Eric couldn't give a f#*K what people think or say. He is only interested in the truth."
I don't need to point any further than my History Chanel show and the DNA ending as it pertains to Sheridan Peterson to prove my point.
Moreover, I don't need to point any further than my recent announcement that I no longer consider the placard credible evidence based upon the evidence that others have produced.
My reputation speaks for itself and is intact. You are 100% wrong if you think I give a F#*K about being wrong. Indeed, by being wrong, I learn.
-
You obviously don't know me at all. Ask anyone who actually does know me, how my mind works and how I roll, and they'll say: "Eric couldn't give a f#*K what people think or say. He is only interested in the truth."
I don't need to point any further than my History Chanel show and the DNA ending as it pertains to Sheridan Peterson to prove my point.
Moreover, I don't need to point any further than my recent announcement that I no longer consider the placard credible evidence based upon the evidence that others have produced.
My reputation speaks for itself and is intact. You are 100% wrong if you think I give a F#*K about being wrong. Indeed, by being wrong, I learn.
Then we share something in common. All I care about is the truth and finding the answers to this case. I have no ego. No agenda. No suspect. If you came to me tomorrow and said I have rock solid proof that Sheridan Peterson was Cooper and he jumped over Tena Bar and buried the money and it was legit, I’d cheer and admit that “Damn! I was so wrong! Good for you.”
But I will let the facts guide me, and if I see a post from you or anyone that doesn’t pass the smell test as far as evidence, then I’ll call it out. More importantly, I’d expect the same from anyone else for me.
-
The ARINC radio patch times indicate that the airliner crew reported being 23 DME (Nautical Miles) south of what is now known as the Battleground VORTAC at 8:18 PM.
This is the second time you have made this statement, and it is completely and utterly WRONG. The time when that transmission was given was 8:22
The posters who claim that what is now known as the Western Flight Path is wrong need to post their evidence.
Again, WRONG. You and the others who support the WFP are the ones challenging the official flight path. You guys are the fringe outlier. The burden of proof is on YOU to prove the official flight path is not accurate. Thus far, you have failed spectacularly.
No one, including Georger, has offered any evidence to back up their claim. Instead, they use "faith based" reasoning since they don't have anything else.
Again, WRONG. The evidence for a central flight path is overwhelming and is evident in the 302s, the map, and common sense. It has been posted again and again and again and again, and you choose to ignore it, dismiss it, or muddle it.
Chaucer, you keep making false claims. The time of the 23 DME transmission over the ARINC radio link was 8:18 PM based on George Harrison's notes. The time the teletype operator pressed his SEND button was 8:22 PM. This has been explained dozens of times but it is something that you feel necessary to contradict to support your own theory.
For your information, when I first posted in 2010 that the FBI flight path was fatally flawed, I wasn't even aware of the placard. Sometime after that, Tom Kaye asked me to do an analysis of the placard free fall and gave me the GPS coordinates where the placard was found. And I did an extremely conservative analysis for him at that time.
ADDENDUM: In response to your post just above, you didn't pass the smell test and you are being called out again.
-
Long day today. haven't read all the comments yet...any windows broken...
-
Lol. Maybe a crack or two.
-
The time of the 23 DME transmission over the ARINC radio link was 8:18 PM based on George Harrison's notes. The time the teletype operator pressed his SEND button was 8:22 PM.
Bob,
How confident are you that Harrison's notes are correct and that he was keeping accurate time? This is an honest question - not trolling.
-
The time of the 23 DME transmission over the ARINC radio link was 8:18 PM based on George Harrison's notes. The time the teletype operator pressed his SEND button was 8:22 PM.
Bob,
How confident are you that Harrison's notes are correct and that he was keeping accurate time? This is an honest question - not trolling.
George Harrison was the top NWA official at SEATAC. You can bet your sweet bippy that he was listening in on that ARINC radio patch along with Al Lee and other senior NWA officials in Seattle. When he wrote down 8:18 PM for that 23 DME ARINC call you can be assured that it was 8:18 PM. You can also rest assured that senior NWA officials in Minneapolis heard that same call.
While the air traffic control people were not on the ARINC frequency, you can bet that the airliner received the attention of all the senior air traffic control managers in both the Seattle and Oakland ATC Centers. Hijackings got everyone's attention and cooperation.
-
The time of the 23 DME transmission over the ARINC radio link was 8:18 PM based on George Harrison's notes. The time the teletype operator pressed his SEND button was 8:22 PM.
Bob,
How confident are you that Harrison's notes are correct and that he was keeping accurate time? This is an honest question - not trolling.
George Harrison was the top NWA official at SEATAC. You can bet your sweet bippy that he was listening in on that ARINC radio patch along with Al Lee and other senior NWA officials in Seattle. When he wrote down 8:18 PM for that 23 DME ARINC call you can be assured that it was 8:18 PM. You can also rest assured that senior NWA officials in Minneapolis heard that same call.
While the air traffic control people were not on the ARINC frequency, you can bet that the airliner received the attention of all the senior air traffic control managers in both the Seattle and Oakland ATC Centers. Hijackings got everyone's attention and cooperation.
Thanks, Bob. I was reviewing Harrison's files on the Vault and came across two other notations that appear to indicate that the time was 8:22 when the plane was "23 miles DME...." Are these Harrison's notations as well? If not, whose might they be?
I have attached the files below.
-
The time of the 23 DME transmission over the ARINC radio link was 8:18 PM based on George Harrison's notes. The time the teletype operator pressed his SEND button was 8:22 PM.
Bob,
How confident are you that Harrison's notes are correct and that he was keeping accurate time? This is an honest question - not trolling.
George Harrison was the top NWA official at SEATAC. You can bet your sweet bippy that he was listening in on that ARINC radio patch along with Al Lee and other senior NWA officials in Seattle. When he wrote down 8:18 PM for that 23 DME ARINC call you can be assured that it was 8:18 PM. You can also rest assured that senior NWA officials in Minneapolis heard that same call.
While the air traffic control people were not on the ARINC frequency, you can bet that the airliner received the attention of all the senior air traffic control managers in both the Seattle and Oakland ATC Centers. Hijackings got everyone's attention and cooperation.
Thanks, Bob. I was reviewing Harrison's files on the Vault and came across two other notations that appear to indicate that the time was 8:22 when the plane was "23 miles DME...." Are these Harrison's notations as well? If not, whose might they be?
I have attached the files below.
Those 8:22 PM numbers are from the ARINC teletype printouts. Not everyone at Seattle was plugged into the phone patch.
If you want to haggle over this, here is where you need to start. Print out all the Seattle ATC transcipts from takeoff at 7:36 PM thru the handoff to the Oakland Center in northern California at 9:45 PM.
Print out all the ARINC teletype transcripts that you can find from just a few minutes after the hijacking at 3:00 PM until the handoff to the Oakland Center at 9:45 PM. Print out the "FBI Files" which are online here on Shutter's site. You will have a real neat pile of paper. Now compare everything that lists a time and location for the airliner.
There are two position reports given on the Seattle ATC transcripts immediately after takeoff for which ARNIC teletype transcripts exist. There is a two minute time difference between the ATC transmissions and a corresponding teletype transcript for the same event. You will have to do some digging to compare the 8:18 PM and 8:22 times.
Fred Poynter from the WSHM and I had a number of conversations with the ARINC headquarters staff about how the transcripts were prepared. They said after the airliner radioed a message to the ARINC ground station (and other people could hear this radio conversation after the phone patch was established) it was necessary for the ground station staff to "format" and type the message into the teletypewriter and then push the send button which would record the time sent at the bottom of the message. Even under the best conditions, there would be a finite time between the receipt of the radio communication and the teletypewriter message being sent. That time difference would be greater for long messages. The 8:18 PM time in the Harrison papers would probably be the start of the radio transmission.
The ARINC staff in Maryland was extremely cooperative with Fred and myself. I think everyone in the organization got involved and it looked like half of the people in the organization were being copied on all of the e-mails. Their technical people offered to evaluate the teletype transcripts that the Harrison family had loaned to the WSHM. However, those transcripts were no longer available to Fred. But again, the ARINC people were extremely interested and cooperative on this matter.
-
I’m not haggling or arguing. I sincerely want to hear your POV on this. Thanks.
-
For anyone interested in learning about aircraft navigation, the following is the place to start:
PILOT'S HANDBOOK OF AERONAUTICAL KNOWLEDGE, FAA-h-8083-25B
Chapter 16 of that handbook can be viewed and downloaded free at this location:
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/phak/media/18_phak_ch16.pdf
Hopefully, the above link is clickable and it should lead you to Chapter 16 of that handbook which is 35 pages long. Download this chapter, print it out, and then read it.
Reason for edit:Link repair by Shutter
-
The link should work now....
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAGgax4SmkQ&ab_channel=VectorPilotPrep
-
The plots on the map are from radar reports, correct. I forget how many times it revolves in a minute so this could be the reason for the extended plots or the difference in distance between the minutes?
-
The plots on the map are from radar reports, correct. I forget how many times it revolves in a minute so this could be the reason for the extended plots or the difference in distance between the minutes?
Shutter shot me a call earlier today and we talked about this.
It is a fool's errand to attempt to discern a 5-10 MPH ground speed difference based upon the radar plots on the yellow map.
First off, this is a basic yellow map with penciled radar plots from some dude 48 hours after the fact. To somehow suggest that there is any great degree of accuracy based upon a map that some guy could buy at a Texaco and throw down some plots with a pencil two days after the fact is ludicrous.
Additionally, the larger issue is that the radar in those days would make six rotations a minute--one every 10 seconds. Therefore, there are six radar plots for each one-minute time period.
So, you can see on the yellow map that some of the dots are closer than others. That is not because the pilots were F'ing around and speeding up and slowing down the jet. That is because some of the plots may have been the first plot of six, others may have been the sixth plot of six, still others may have been the third plot of six.
My point being, you cannot, with any degree of accuracy, measure the speed of 305 by simply looking at the penciled plots on a paper map.
-
The plots on the map are from radar reports, correct. I forget how many times it revolves in a minute so this could be the reason for the extended plots or the difference in distance between the minutes?
Shutter shot me a call earlier today and we talked about this.
It is a fool's errand to attempt to discern a 5-10 MPH ground speed difference based upon the radar plots on the yellow map.
First off, this is a basic yellow map with penciled radar plots from some dude 48 hours after the fact. To somehow suggest that there is any great degree of accuracy based upon a map that some guy could buy at a Texaco and throw down some plots with a pencil two days after the fact is ludicrous.
Additionally, the larger issue is that the radar in those days would make six rotations a minute--one every 10 seconds. Therefore, there are six radar plots for each one-minute time period.
So, you can see on the yellow map that some of the dots are closer than others. That is not because the pilots were F'ing around and speeding up and slowing down the jet. That is because some of the plots may have been the first plot of six, others may have been the sixth plot of six, still others may have been the third plot of six.
My point being, you cannot, with any degree of accuracy, measure the speed of 305 by simply looking at the penciled plots on a paper map.
That said, it's pretty safe to assume that 305 maintained 165 knots for the vast majority of the flight from Seattle to Portland, right? If that's the case, using the takeoff time of 7:36, it should be pretty easy to plot out minute segments with 2.75 NM between each plot point along yellow map path.
EU, your point stands though: we might be able to get a general overview, but nothing precise.
-
I didn't agree with a lot of our conversation. it was funny. we were both talking at the same time trying to get our points out...I have a bad habit of cutting in while someone is talking but we both did it this time :rofl:
I don't think Texaco sold sectional maps....
-
I didn't agree with a lot of our conversation. it was funny. we were both talking at the same time trying to get our points out...I have a bad habit of cutting in while someone is talking but we both did it this time :rofl:
I don't think Texaco sold sectional maps....
Nonetheless, what I said about six radar plots every minute is accurate.
-
Perhaps it would be better to say we disagreed on the map vs other subjects we spoke about and agreed to or had common thoughts etc.
-
I didn't agree with a lot of our conversation. it was funny. we were both talking at the same time trying to get our points out...I have a bad habit of cutting in while someone is talking but we both did it this time :rofl:
I don't think Texaco sold sectional maps....
Nonetheless, what I said about six radar plots every minute is accurate.
The six radar plots or "hits" per minute is correct. In the 1971 time frame, radars with rotating antennas made a complete revolution six times per minute or once ever 12 seconds. If the radar was interrogating your transponder, a little green light would flash on/off with ever hit or 12 seconds. If a number of radars were interrogating your transponder, the little green light was flashing on/off all the time.
-
The plots on the map are from radar reports, correct. I forget how many times it revolves in a minute so this could be the reason for the extended plots or the difference in distance between the minutes?
Shutter shot me a call earlier today and we talked about this.
It is a fool's errand to attempt to discern a 5-10 MPH ground speed difference based upon the radar plots on the yellow map.
First off, this is a basic yellow map with penciled radar plots from some dude 48 hours after the fact. To somehow suggest that there is any great degree of accuracy based upon a map that some guy could buy at a Texaco and throw down some plots with a pencil two days after the fact is ludicrous.
Additionally, the larger issue is that the radar in those days would make six rotations a minute--one every 10 seconds. Therefore, there are six radar plots for each one-minute time period.
So, you can see on the yellow map that some of the dots are closer than others. That is not because the pilots were F'ing around and speeding up and slowing down the jet. That is because some of the plots may have been the first plot of six, others may have been the sixth plot of six, still others may have been the third plot of six.
My point being, you cannot, with any degree of accuracy, measure the speed of 305 by simply looking at the penciled plots on a paper map.
That said, it's pretty safe to assume that 305 maintained 165 knots for the vast majority of the flight from Seattle to Portland, right? If that's the case, using the takeoff time of 7:36, it should be pretty easy to plot out minute segments with 2.75 NM between each plot point along yellow map path.
EU, your point stands though: we might be able to get a general overview, but nothing precise.
Let's do some elementary calculations. Assume that the airliner stayed on the V-23 centerline all the way. The airliner took off at SEATAC at 7:36 PM and was at the 23 DME miles point south of the Battleground/Portland VORTAC at 8:18. That is an elapsed time of 42 minutes.
The distance between SEATAC and the Battleground VORTAC is 105 Nautical Miles. Adding the 23 DME Nautical miles give a total distance of 128 Nautical Miles flown in those 42 minutes. That comes out as being a ground speed of 182.86 Knots (or Nautical Miles per Hour).
This is essentially the same as the 3.0 Nautical Miles per Minute that I have been claiming for the Ground Speed in the Portland area for the last 10+ years.
-
I calculated the FBI flight path as approximately 135 NM. I used a 46 minute trip (7:36 to 8:22). Simple division gives you 2.93 nautical miles per minute. So, yes, Bob, I would agree that an average of 3 NM/minute is accurate.
-
I calculated the FBI flight path as approximately 135 NM. I used a 46 minute trip (7:36 to 8:22). Simple division gives you 2.93 nautical miles per minute. So, yes, Bob, I would agree that an average of 3 NM/minute is accurate.
And your calculations give a Ground Speed of 176 Knots.
-
I didn't agree with a lot of our conversation. it was funny. we were both talking at the same time trying to get our points out...I have a bad habit of cutting in while someone is talking but we both did it this time :rofl:
I don't think Texaco sold sectional maps....
Nonetheless, what I said about six radar plots every minute is accurate.
The six radar plots or "hits" per minute is correct. In the 1971 time frame, radars with rotating antennas made a complete revolution six times per minute or once ever 12 seconds. If the radar was interrogating your transponder, a little green light would flash on/off with ever hit or 12 seconds. If a number of radars were interrogating your transponder, the little green light was flashing on/off all the time.
CORRECTION: That 12 seconds should be 10 seconds.
-
I’ve noticed a discrepancy in the plotted FBI flight path. I was hoping someone might be able to provide an explanation.
There is point plotted to the northeast of Pearson Airport just outside of Vancouver. The next plot visible is the one adjacent to the I-5 bridge leading into Portland. The problem is that those two points are over 5 nautical miles away from each other which would require 305 to suddenly increase its speed to over 330 knots. A more reasonable explanation is that there is another missing minute. There should be a plot point midway between these two near where Marine Park is today.
Any ideas other than “The FBI flight path is totally wrong”?
-
I’ve noticed a discrepancy in the plotted FBI flight path. I was hoping someone might be able to provide an explanation.
There is point plotted to the northeast of Pearson Airport just outside of Vancouver. The next plot visible is the one adjacent to the I-5 bridge leading into Portland. The problem is that those two points are over 5 nautical miles away from each other which would require 305 to suddenly increase its speed to over 330 knots. A more reasonable explanation is that there is another missing minute. There should be a plot point midway between these two near where Marine Park is today.
Any ideas other than “The FBI flight path is totally wrong”?
Nice last sentence! :rofl:
-
330 knots is not going to happen in that configuration. it's a timing issue. I don't believe they flew the plane like a boat throttling up and down over waves. you can't reach 330 knots in the time frame you have and then slam on the brakes back to 165-170? all of these grounds speeds and changes are crazy..
The map isn't a black box. looking at the map you can see they exceed 3 miles. that doesn't mean the plane HAD to reach those plots. it's a timing issue or you need to look at the alternate path...
-
Is it the 8:16 and 8:17 plots you are talking about?
-
I have attached the picture below. Flyjack suggest that the plot points off to the west need to be shifted over to the east. They were errors. That would seemingly put the plot point that is on the I-5 bridge out over the water. This would also significantly shift the flight path as it approached Portland
-
You are missing a plot...
-
The two red X's have been discussed before. Coincidentally, they also line up nicely as Western Flight Path plots . Thus far, no one has determined their significance.
-
You are missing a plot...
Where?
Also, I tried to do what FJ suggested and shift the plot points east. It creates a scenario that would require some really dramatic maneuvering from the aircraft - I'm not even sure if it's even physically possible. The yellow line on the picture is simple connect-the-dots. The red line is my best attempt at trying to smooth out how a plane would actually do that.
-
8:17 plot right before crossing the river..Pearson's field.
-
You would exceed the bank angle trying that path.
-
8:17 plot right before crossing the river..Pearson's field.
No, that's the one to the northeast, circled in blue. Is there one in between the two circles that I am not seeing?
-
Yes
-
Yes
I'm tripping right now. I don't see a red cross indicating a plot point at that location....
-
do you have maps with the pins and green line
-
do you have maps with the pins and green line
Yes, below. But If you look at the actual yellow map, there is no plot point in that location. At least I can't see it. Also, the coordinates from Hom don't list that either. I don't think the white map with the green line is accurate. Is it?
-
The two red X's have been discussed before. Coincidentally, they also line up nicely as Western Flight Path plots . Thus far, no one has determined their significance.
Ammerman should be able to answer that question. And he should also know who was working the intercept problems with him in order to get the chase planes to the airliner.
-
do you have maps with the pins and green line
So, on the yellow map, the plot point currently over the bridge moves up and over near Pearson? That doesn't look right...
Can you email me that entire map?
-
I put the photo in edit and can't see a cross...they appear to have moved the location in the turn making the next plot with the missing plot near Pearsons..it's not that they moved it. the seem to have changed the timing. the green plot shows a plot at Pearsons then the next cross is ignored connecting to the following cross below the radial turn..
-
See if this directs you to Sluggo's site. the maps will be on that page..
https://web.archive.org/web/20110210181740/http://n467us.com/
-
I put the photo in edit and can't see a cross...they appear to have moved the location in the turn making the next plot with the missing plot near Pearsons..it's not that they moved it. the seem to have changed the timing. the green plot shows a plot at Pearsons then the next cross is ignored connecting to the following cross below the radial turn..
Yes, and that brings me back to my initial problem. There is a plot point northwest of Vancouver and one adjacent to the I-5 bridge. But that distance is too great to travel in one minute. There SHOULD be a plot point near Pearson, but there isn't.
That's a problem.
-
The map with the times has a plot at Pearson..regardless to any plots you still need to turn at Pearsons field if you are flying and following the map. V23 is in line with Pearson..
-
So you’re sure there is a plot at Pearson even though there isn’t one on the yellow map?
-
I'm not sure of anything. I'm pointing out that the map with the green lines and times have an entry at 8:17 close to Pearsons field. either they missed the plot on the radial or modified the location switching two points.
They cut the radial turn out. a cross is there but they placed it at Pearsons and bypassed the radial turn making that the 8:18 time with the next cross..kind of what you are trying to do..
-
Who made this map?
-
I don't know.
-
It doesn't appear to be tampered with. it appears they made a correction or failed to see the red cross in the turn/curve/radius.
It wasn't done in the 70's by looking at the way it is presented..
-
Who ever put the green lines and times on the map also marked the bad radar return area's marked with red pins..
-
Who ever put the green lines and times on the map also marked the bad radar return area's marked with red pins..
You mean the three to the west of Portland?
-
Each plot has a blue dot..up in the area from Toledo to the Lewis you will see red dots..8:05 all the way to 8:11
R99, can you explain this. all I know is it's about the radar contacts..
-
Each plot has a blue dot..up in the area from Toledo to the Lewis you will see red dots..8:05 all the way to 8:11
R99, can you explain this. all I know is it's about the radar contacts..
If you're referring to the Sluggo map, the green dots (or red dots, I'm color blind) are the location of the jet at a specific time. The blue dots are an estimate of the location of the jet at a specific time.
-
That would be due to bad radar contacts..
-
That would be due to bad radar contacts..
Well you know my feelings about this map. I can't explain much about it--the three +'s NE of Portland, estimated times, missing dot at 20:04, circuitous path, etc..
-
appears to be 4 dots (crosses) possibly. look at the last red cross and go down to the left where the road leads to Hillsboro. I need to look at a better map...high rez.
-
If it's the mark on the far right end of the Hillsboro road over the bright yellow portion of the map, then indeed there may be another + at that point. Difficult to tell.
-
I don't see it on my sectional map from that period..
-
In the green circle in photo below
-
Yes, that's what I was referring to.
-
Hard to call..
-
Here is a link to my sectional map. you can save it or zoom in pretty close without losing clarity..at least on my end..
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11daIrQj2yXhJt7ktF6Qh0aS3BKZltu-T/view?usp=sharing
-
I believe that is another plot point, and it would seem to line up with the plot points along the line south of the I-5 bridge. They appear to be errors off by approximately 4.5 nautical miles.
That's not the biggest question on this section of the map, IMO. There is a plot point at approximately 45 39' and 122 34'. The next visible plot point is at approximately 45 36' 33" and 122 40' 28". There is over a 5 nautical mile distance between those two points. There doesn't appear to be any plot points between them. The map suggests that their should be one near the east side of Pearson Air Park, but that would only be 2 nautical miles to the next point by the bridge - and that's being generous.
-
You keep repeating this...one map shows the plots and black lines connecting them, correct. another map shows green lines connecting the points with times beside each plot, correct. the map with the times DOES show a plot just east of Pearson field and cuts the radial turn out. who did this is not known at the moment but appears to answer the question about having a plot at Pearson?
-
Yes, I know all that. My point is that the person who made the map created a plot point at Pearson that doesn't exist on the original. I guess we can assume there was supposed to be a plot point at Pearson, but I find that problematic. I'd like to be accurate. The second issue that if you add a plot point at Pearson then there is only 1 nautical mile between it and the plot point by the bridge. The whole thing is a bleeping mess.
-
I believe that is another plot point, and it would seem to line up with the plot points along the line south of the I-5 bridge. They appear to be errors off by approximately 4.5 nautical miles.
That's not the biggest question on this section of the map, IMO. There is a plot point at approximately 45 39' and 122 34'. The next visible plot point is at approximately 45 36' 33" and 122 40' 28". There is over a 5 nautical mile distance between those two points. There doesn't appear to be any plot points between them. The map suggests that their should be one near the east side of Pearson Air Park, but that would only be 2 nautical miles to the next point by the bridge - and that's being generous.
How do we know they are errors? How do we know that we're not looking at plots from multiple jets?
There were four jets related to this incident--305, two F-106's and one T-33. And I have seen enough through out this case to seriously question how this map was put together. Specifically what data was used and in what form was it presented? How were the four different jet radar plots separated? Who plotted this and when?
-
How do we know they are errors? How do we know that we're not looking at plots from multiple jets?
The transponder tags them on radar so they know who is who..
-
Interestingly the FBI Flight Path shows 305 flying literally over the top of Tomahawk Island Marina--which opened in 1971.
What are the possibilities that a boat was stolen from the marina the night of the skyjacking but went unnoticed by the authorities because they were transfixed with Ariel?
An interesting angle to consider for those who subscribe to the FBI Flight Path.
-
They appear to have removed the radial turn. that plot appears to now be placed at Pearson making it the 8:17 plot and the following plot after the radial turn became the 8:18 plot. why, I have no idea. if Cooper bailed minutes back the plane could do flips and it really would matter unless you get critical all the way down to when the plane lands.
-
No cars reported stolen or bikes or anything else? the money was "buried" on the beach. the same question can be asked, no? back in those days some people left the keys in the car...
-
I believe that is another plot point, and it would seem to line up with the plot points along the line south of the I-5 bridge. They appear to be errors off by approximately 4.5 nautical miles.
That's not the biggest question on this section of the map, IMO. There is a plot point at approximately 45 39' and 122 34'. The next visible plot point is at approximately 45 36' 33" and 122 40' 28". There is over a 5 nautical mile distance between those two points. There doesn't appear to be any plot points between them. The map suggests that their should be one near the east side of Pearson Air Park, but that would only be 2 nautical miles to the next point by the bridge - and that's being generous.
Looking at it, it seems pretty clear to me that they line up perfectly with the plot points under the black line. All of them are off by equal distances
How do we know they are errors? How do we know that we're not looking at plots from multiple jets?
There were four jets related to this incident--305, two F-106's and one T-33. And I have seen enough through out this case to seriously question how this map was put together. Specifically what data was used and in what form was it presented? How were the four different jet radar plots separated? Who plotted this and when?
-
No cars reported stolen or bikes or anything else? the money was "buried" on the beach. the same question can be asked, no? back in those days some people left the keys in the car...
The problem is if you steal a car or a bike you have to drive to Tena Bar and there are only two roads to the place--now there is only one.
Additionally, if you steal a car, why bury the cash? After all, if you get pulled over you're F'd whether you have the money in the trunk or not.
-
Nascar, Indy etc. all have numbers on the car. I doubt anyone has given a trophy to the wrong car by mistake?
Why bury the money if you have a boat?
-
They appear to have removed the radial turn. that plot appears to now be placed at Pearson making it the 8:17 plot and the following plot after the radial turn became the 8:18 plot. why, I have no idea. if Cooper bailed minutes back the plane could do flips and it really would matter unless you get critical all the way down to when the plane lands.
Yes, you've said this, but my point is that whoever did that, took it upon themselves to do it without evidence on the map. They invented a plot point. In my mind, that's a problem that needs to be reconciled, and I'm not sure the best way to do it.
You said that Pearson was along V23 so maybe you just split the different and put a plot point there like they have. I don't know. I am probably overanalyzing.
-
Burying the money with a boat is completely different. Obviously he could bury the cash then take the boat to another marina or beach and go about doing whatever he needs to do on land.
It's not like the cash is in the trunk of his car. It's not like the river is teeming with police.
Frankly it's a hell of a lot more plausible than the other options requiring floating logs, and unnoticed bodies, and money that finds its way out of the bank bag and self buries seven months after the skyjacking.
-
Burying the money with a boat is completely different. Obviously he could bury the cash then take the boat to another marina or beach and go about doing whatever he needs to do on land.
It's not like the cash is in the trunk of his car. It's not like the river is teeming with police.
Frankly it's a hell of a lot more plausible than the other options requiring floating logs, and unnoticed bodies, and money that finds its way out of the bank bag.
Was it L'Hommedieu who said that if he were Cooper, he would have used the river as a reference point on where to jump?
-
Obviously a jump that puts him near Tomahawk Island is problematic considering the pressure bump. Also, I do not believe DBC could see the ground when he jumped therefore it seems unlikely that he could plan much of anything regarding the eventual LZ.
-
Criminals don't do "plausible" things. that's why they get caught. we don't even know if Cooper survived. odds say he did. taking any transportation will get you out of any area,
Only if it could be proven one could say he had help. it doesn't suggest that but it's not to be dismissed 100%. a boat or car wouldn't be noticed unless the owner found it missing. you drive, float right out of danger. either works, both can go back and get the money with no need to bury..both are equally plausible IMO. neither appeared to have happened..
-
Obviously a jump that puts him near Tomahawk Island is problematic considering the pressure bump. Also, I do not believe DBC could see the ground when he jumped therefore it seems unlikely that he could plan much of anything regarding the eventual LZ.
I don't see any evidence of the jump being close to the river..
-
Obviously a jump that puts him near Tomahawk Island is problematic considering the pressure bump. Also, I do not believe DBC could see the ground when he jumped therefore it seems unlikely that he could plan much of anything regarding the eventual LZ.
I don't see any evidence of the jump being close to the river..
Neither do I. In fact, I don't see any evidence of the jump being anywhere other than near Tena Bar.
-
Having Bill at the conference will hopefully get some real facts into things. I think prior to his coming to the conference a package should be sent to him with the transcripts, the Air Force map (both) specific 302's surround statements from the crew or what they said so he is not blasted with questions he doesn't know about or seen.
This way, when a question is asked he can say "I read that and disagree or agree" things to bring him somewhat up to speed. (ground speed, of course) :rofl:
-
Obviously a jump that puts him near Tomahawk Island is problematic considering the pressure bump. Also, I do not believe DBC could see the ground when he jumped therefore it seems unlikely that he could plan much of anything regarding the eventual LZ.
I don't see any evidence of the jump being close to the river..
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. With that said, I'll fully admit that there is no smoking gun or concrete evidence that puts Cooper near the river.
However, I think there is strong circumstantial evidence that suggests it's possible. I hope Bill can clear some things up in that regard too.
I'll try to compile the evidence I have and post it here.
-
Bill himself appears to have given a time of 8:13...you can't place the plane near the river with that time frame. the plane would have to travel an average speed above the sweet spot calculated for optimal distance. we have documented speeds ranging from 155 to 180 in one entry. the others were multiple times with 165 and 170. 330 knots will damage the landing gear. if the radar plots are not accurate then you can't rely on them.
The simulation was able to match a lot of the parts of the flight. IMO, it doesn't answer any questions. lets say I found the exact 8:13 spot which was close to where the map shows it to be. they searched that area, now what? things start skewing passing Battle ground. I reach 7 minutes prior to crossing the river. plot or no plot.
-
Obviously a jump that puts him near Tomahawk Island is problematic considering the pressure bump. Also, I do not believe DBC could see the ground when he jumped therefore it seems unlikely that he could plan much of anything regarding the eventual LZ.
I don't see any evidence of the jump being close to the river..
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. With that said, I'll fully admit that there is no smoking gun or concrete evidence that puts Cooper near the river.
However, I think there is strong circumstantial evidence that suggests it's possible. I hope Bill can clear some things up in that regard too.
I'll try to compile the evidence I have and post it here.
I've read the "absence of evidence is not evidence" line before. I disagree. It can be construed as circumstantial in many cases.
Here's why.
First, in the case of identifying the wrong LZ, you will always find nothing. Therefore, not finding anything looks exactly like what one would expect if they're searching in the wrong area.
Second, the fact that the area has been walked over for decades and nothing has been found is problematic. For example, if the FBI theory was that DBC jumped over downtown Portland, and after 50 years not a shred of evidence had been found, I think it would be reasonable to deduce that the theory is wrong.
In my opinion, both of the above points are applicable in this case as it pertains to the FBI Flight Path and LZ.
On a separate issue...what is your working theory here? Is it that DBC jumped and landed near the Columbia River? Near PDX?
-
Obviously a jump that puts him near Tomahawk Island is problematic considering the pressure bump. Also, I do not believe DBC could see the ground when he jumped therefore it seems unlikely that he could plan much of anything regarding the eventual LZ.
I don't see any evidence of the jump being close to the river..
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. With that said, I'll fully admit that there is no smoking gun or concrete evidence that puts Cooper near the river.
However, I think there is strong circumstantial evidence that suggests it's possible. I hope Bill can clear some things up in that regard too.
I'll try to compile the evidence I have and post it here.
Well ... whether you know it or not progress is being made finally. Nobody now seriously thinks that CPR bailed in the lake Merwin area. For whatever reason Wm Scott firmly believed that, or should I say 'that was his public stance'. Scott never gave any reasons! And so far as I know neither Rczk or Andy would ever be nailed down to a specific time or place for CPR bailing.
Today we are talking 8:10-8:xx just north of Vancouver. (We were in the suburbs of Portland ... we could see the lights of coming up ...). Oscillations vs Bump is being discussed seriously. FJ is speculating 'the largest oscillation was the bump'. Dudeman has previously specified the causes of oscillations'. The Heisson Store robbery is finally on the table; likewise the rail line which comes down and goes just east of Tina Bar. FJ has produced an actual spread sheet of FP error and a brand new rounded graphic of the FBI flight path accounting for error! That's a first. ......................................... that's progress!
-
I reach the 8:16 location at 6:51. 6 minutes and 51 seconds into the flight. that's almost 7 minutes at the 8:16 location.
-
What do we conclude with this?
-
Flyjack, you need to place markers and times on the map...flying the path only shows one wide turn. 8:16 to the river location. the talk about wild turns is a ploy to deflect against the map. 8:12 to 8:13 are not huge or wide rolls. the lines you have drawn will remove the heavy roll at the 8:16 location.
-
Burying the money with a boat is completely different. Obviously he could bury the cash then take the boat to another marina or beach and go about doing whatever he needs to do on land.
It's not like the cash is in the trunk of his car. It's not like the river is teeming with police.
Frankly it's a hell of a lot more plausible than the other options requiring floating logs, and unnoticed bodies, and money that finds its way out of the bank bag.
Was it L'Hommedieu who said that if he were Cooper, he would have used the river as a reference point on where to jump?
And just exactly would he have seen the river through an undercast and two more cloud layers on a dark and rainy night?
-
Burying the money with a boat is completely different. Obviously he could bury the cash then take the boat to another marina or beach and go about doing whatever he needs to do on land.
It's not like the cash is in the trunk of his car. It's not like the river is teeming with police.
Frankly it's a hell of a lot more plausible than the other options requiring floating logs, and unnoticed bodies, and money that finds its way out of the bank bag.
Was it L'Hommedieu who said that if he were Cooper, he would have used the river as a reference point on where to jump?
And just exactly would he have seen the river through an undercast and two more cloud layers on a dark and rainy night?
If he bails at 8:11 his drift is not taking him anywhere near the river to see it for a landing or not! He is drifting away from the Columbia not too it.
You were not there in any event to see or not see - anything! The best you can give is an OPINION which you have stated 10,000000 times. You might contact Ratczk and tell him to withdraw his statement - because you know better based on your OPINION.
-
From 10,000 seeing things on the ground at night with no cloud coverage is not going to be simple either. the river will be black. sure there were gaps in the clouds but it's not going to be that simple to survey the ground. a gap in the clouds in the flight path won't allow you to see east and west if you are above the clouds or in them. Rat stated they were "in the soup"
-
From 10,000 seeing things on the ground at night with no cloud coverage is not going to be simple either. the river will be black. sure there were gaps in the clouds but it's not going to be that simple to survey the ground. a gap in the clouds in the flight path won't allow you to see east and west if you are above the clouds or in them. Rat stated they were "in the soup"
The issues for me is how good a navigator was Cooper and could he see any ground markers. Did he know the area from above? Did he know the area at all, from any reference point? He knew he started from Portland, going to SEA, he referenced Tacoma, .......... we have no idea what his capabilities were. Could R99 have succeeded where R99 says Cooper failed and died ?
-
It's really hard to figure out if Cooper was a navigator. he would need to stay in contact with the crew. Remember, McCoy was an experienced pilot and skydiver and still acted as a copilot to get where he wanted. Cooper had to assume where he was or assume he was on V23. if he flew any other flights the odds are it was a different route and altitude. I don't see the area well lit except for the dam. we don't even know if that would bleed through or gaps were in the clouds.
We don't seem to have any pilots that could fly over the area at night under the same conditions. that would be nice..
-
R99, any input on what Flyjack has been presenting?
-
From 10,000 seeing things on the ground at night with no cloud coverage is not going to be simple either. the river will be black. sure there were gaps in the clouds but it's not going to be that simple to survey the ground. a gap in the clouds in the flight path won't allow you to see east and west if you are above the clouds or in them. Rat stated they were "in the soup"
The issues for me is how good a navigator was Cooper and could he see any ground markers. Did he know the area from above? Did he know the area at all, from any reference point? He knew he started from Portland, going to SEA, he referenced Tacoma, .......... we have no idea what his capabilities were. Could R99 have succeeded where R99 says Cooper failed and died ?
I am not dumb enough to try something like that in the first place. I am not a member of Mensa, and at one time an even more selective such organization, for nothing.
-
I believe it was daylight when Cooper describes things on the ground?
-
I believe it was daylight when Cooper describes things on the ground?
There's also an assumption that DBC was correct. Meaning, we can't be certain that he actually pointed out Tacoma from the air and that it wasn't some other place.
I've said before that I've flown in and out of Seattle hundreds of times, therefore I am extremely familiar with the entire region which is huge. Tacoma--or for that matter, any specific location--isn't particularly easy to identify. If DBC was correct about identifying Tacoma, he had to have lived there or spent a lot of time flying in and out.
-
R99, any input on what Flyjack has been presenting?
I don't know how accurate radar plots were in 1971. But the rule of thumb for VORTAC stations was that when 60 nautical miles from the station, one degree was about 1 nautical mile wide. This plus the accuracy of the cockpit VOR receiver (which was allowed to be off by + or - two degrees from the selected radial, if I remember correctly), and making allowances for safety, is why airways were 4 nautical miles wide on each side of the radial that specified the airway. Some airways are wider than that for greater distances from the VORTAC station.
If the same accuracy applied to the McChord AFB radar, then the FBI flight path could actually be about 3 nautical miles wide in the Portland area. But this flight path can be argued until Georger's cows come home.
FlyJack's main interest seems to be doing anything to support a flight path that contradicts the Western Flight Path.
-
I believe it was daylight when Cooper describes things on the ground?
There's also an assumption that DBC was correct. Meaning, we can't be certain that he actually pointed out Tacoma from the air and that it wasn't some other place.
I've said before that I've flown in and out of Seattle hundreds of times, therefore I am extremely familiar with the entire region which is huge. Tacoma--or for that matter, any specific location--isn't particularly easy to identify. If DBC was correct about identifying Tacoma, he had to have lived there or spent a lot of time flying in and out.
EU is correct. It is not as easy to identify specific parts of urban areas at night as you might think.
-
i agree but believe the reference was made while it was still daylight. I also mention how hard it is to identify from the sky in day or night conditions then toss in cloud coverage..
-
i agree but believe the reference was made while it was still daylight. I also mention how hard it is to identify from the sky in day or night conditions then toss in cloud coverage..
This is a good point.
In the day with a cloudless sky, one may be able to pick out a landmark or two--i.e., Mt Rainier--which makes places somewhat easier to identify. However, with moderate cloud cover where some of the ground is covered, recognizing a specific area by way of looking down through a hole in the clouds is very difficult--again, unless you are very familiar with the area.
-
I believe the Air Force has the same system excluding the Sage. the problem with the sage is during that period 17 of the 23 radar stations were closed...
-
i agree but believe the reference was made while it was still daylight. I also mention how hard it is to identify from the sky in day or night conditions then toss in cloud coverage..
This is a good point.
In the day with a cloudless sky, one may be able to pick out a landmark or two--i.e., Mt Rainier--which makes places somewhat easier to identify. However, with moderate cloud cover where some of the ground is covered, recognizing a specific area by way of looking down through a hole in the clouds is very difficult--again, unless you are very familiar with the area.
they wouldn't be at 10,000 flying by Tacoma..not even sure what altitude they flew back but they start descending to land or go into a holding pattern.
-
i agree but believe the reference was made while it was still daylight. I also mention how hard it is to identify from the sky in day or night conditions then toss in cloud coverage..
This is a good point.
In the day with a cloudless sky, one may be able to pick out a landmark or two--i.e., Mt Rainier--which makes places somewhat easier to identify. However, with moderate cloud cover where some of the ground is covered, recognizing a specific area by way of looking down through a hole in the clouds is very difficult--again, unless you are very familiar with the area.
they wouldn't be at 10,000 flying by Tacoma..not even sure what altitude they flew back but they start descending to land or go into a holding pattern.
They would have passed Tacoma on the way up. Not sure what the altitude would have been but 10K sounds perfectly reasonable--if not higher. They were up there for hours.
-
Who did he tell this to. Tina was in the cockpit by that time. scratch that...I'm thinking of McChord..
-
Un scratch :rofl: Tina would be in the cockpit at this point. I doubt he was sight seeing when they left SeaTac.
I'm in the middle of something and a little distracted..
-
Reading Flyjacks last post I'm wondering where all these undocumented oscillations are coming from or what the 8:05 contact would have to do with oscillations.
Eric, didn't you say the crew contacted Cooper at 8:05 due to turbulence. this should be noticed on the FDR.
-
Reading Flyjacks last post I'm wondering where all these undocumented oscillations are coming from or what the 8:05 contact would have to do with oscillations.
Eric, didn't you say the crew contacted Cooper at 8:05 due to turbulence. this should be noticed on the FDR.
I read or heard something from Bill 1 or Bill 2...I don't think it's in the files--that there was a bump of turbulence which prompted the 8:05 (or perhaps it was 8:03) outreach to the back.
-
The response was at 8:05 so, it could of been a minute earlier. they made two attempts...imagine being at the bottom of the stairs...(which he wasn't)
-
Mason creek that drains into the east fork lewis river....
-
The response was at 8:05 so, it could of been a minute earlier. they made two attempts...imagine being at the bottom of the stairs...(which he wasn't)
From what I gather from Rataczak, as DBC started walking down the stairs there were some noticeable happenings that got somewhat more pronounced as the airstairs lowered further into the air stream. Then, shortly thereafter, it culminated in the diving board pop.
Both of these events were recorded in real time by Bill. First, he mentioned that Cooper must be doing something with the stairs. Then he mentioned, you may want to note your maps because our friend may have taken leave of us--or words to that effect.
-
A conversation with Cooper was at the start of the flight. he had trouble with the stairs. they leveled off at 7,000 and slowed the plane down for Cooper, including switching to 30 degree flaps. the 8:05 transmission was not a conversation. the answer is proof along with two attempts to contact him. the conversation was 20 minutes earlier..based on what Eric has mentioned, turbulence was the reason they contacted him at 8:05.
This is another thing that needs to be brought up at the conference..
-
I like what FJ is doing. He may have filled in a gap that may be crucial.
7:50-53 quick climb 7000 to 10,000 and hold. 170-180 knots. Crew on O2]
7:54 pm
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.
MSP: Roger. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch
There (to Company and FBI)
305: Roger.
With this comm everyone is alerted that Cooper may be bailing soon. After leaving this freq go to 131.8 we have direct phone patch ... to the company.
8:01 pm
MSP: What is altitude?
305: Now at 15 thousand. (typo) Indicator 160. Fuel flow 4000. 15 degree flap.
Gear down. CQN will stay at 10,000 until he has left.
MSP: Roger.
CQN will stay at 10,000 until he has left.
8:05 pm
305: Have attempted on two occasions to make contact with individual he
did not reply. Then used PA system and he said, “Everything is Ok”.
MSP: Roger.
Establishes Cooper still on the plane.
ANDERSON SAID, more time passed from 8:05 = 7 minutes later..
THIS HAS TO BE THE JUMP TIME (mark your maps)
8:12 pm
305: Getting some oscillations in the cabin. Must be doing something with
the air stairs.
MSP: Roger.
FJ's estimated best guess jump time?
Crew discusses and waits to call it in..
8:20 pm
305: Called. (no response from Cooper)
MSP: Go to 131.8 (phone patch to company on that freq.)
SEADD: He (Nyrop?) is already on that frequency.
MSP: Roger. We are on the phone and will be talking to him shortly.
SEADD: Roger
People have conjectured what this means. Called? Called who? Called company? But FJ may have nailed this: called for Cooper! That makes sense in the total context of these passages. But, they waited a long time, until 8:20, to call to see if anyone answers in the back. No answer. FJ may have nailed what "Called" means and who was Called.
By 8:20 305 is across the Columbia and in Oregon, and Cooper is long gone. Called to the back at 8:20 and nobody answered. They might have not waited so long and called at 8:15 to see if anyone answered. 8:15-20 the crew may be busy talking to the Company etal explaining what has happened and trying to recover the correct jump time and place . . . finally as a check they think to call to the back one more time: no answer. Cooper is gone.
In addition, this establishes that the timestamps are neutral. Whether west-path vs. east-path ... the timestamps are a neutral fact.
-
How do you jump at 8:11 and state he doing something with the stairs at 8:12 on the radio that has the time correct. cooper left?
They have always went by the 8:11 mark.
When you look at the Harrison files problems exist as well. 8:18 is written for the 23 miles DME. the next entry is 8:52 but Harrison has it written as 9:00 which makes sense since he reports the crews last contact 55 minutes ago. the transcripts log the time at 8:52 which would be 8 minutes off. the same 8:52 entry states they are over the Eugene VOR which is 79 NM from the 23 mile location. using the 3 minute rule it comes up short of making Eugene by 16 minutes.
-
7:54 pm
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.
This is a delayed response from the question asked to 305. Tina seen him as she pulled the curtain closed going up front at around 7 40 ish. the ground starts the conversation about Cooper leaving prompting them to respond to what Tina seen.
-
How do you jump at 8:11 and state he doing something with the stairs at 8:12 on the radio that has the time correct. cooper left?
They have always went by the 8:11 mark.
When you look at the Harrison files problems exist as well. 8:18 is written for the 23 miles DME. the next entry is 8:52 but Harrison has it written as 9:00 which makes sense since he reports the crews last contact 55 minutes ago. the transcripts log the time at 8:52 which would be 8 minutes off. the same 8:52 entry states they are over the Eugene VOR which is 79 NM from the 23 mile location. using the 3 minute rule it comes up short of making Eugene by 16 minutes.
I would think real-time transmissions-reports would take priority over 2nd hand party notes put together after the fact? At no time was Harrison actively involved on the plane in real time.
-
7:54 pm
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.
This is a delayed response from the question asked to 305. Tina seen him as she pulled the curtain closed going up front at around 7 40 ish. the ground starts the conversation about Cooper leaving prompting them to respond to what Tina seen.
So what are you saying? "Called" at 8:20 does not refer to them calling the back but to someone else?
-
My above comment had nothing to do with the 8:20 entry?
Harrison was writing down things in real time. kind of hard to dispute.
Teletype, FDR, recordings can have error's for different reasons.
-
I'll have more to say about this later, but I said this on DZ:
There is a difference between the "oscillations" and the "pressure bump". The "oscillations" are like being pregnant and the "pressure bump" is like having a baby. At 8:11 the crew was reporting that the plane was "getting some oscillations in the cabin" (still pregnant). They did not report a pressure bump at that time (just gave birth). They did the same thing at 8:12 (although I'm open to the possibility of a 1 minute delay in the original 8:11 report). The FBI looked at the data and transmissions about "pressure fluctuations" and "oscillations" and incorrectly deduced that that meant that's when Cooper bailed. They looked at the woman who was 8 months pregnant and said "she just had a baby". That's their error and that confusion continues to this day.
We don't know when Cooper jumped, but we know that he had to have jumped AFTER 8:11 and probably after 8:12.
The 8:13 time that is repeated comes from Sonderlind who estimated the jumped time after the crew reported it an unknown time later. It's not official - just an educated guess based on crew statements.
Then you add in the statements from Rat and others about "not being in Portland Proper but in the suburbs and the immediate vicinity" and "seeing the lights of Portland coming up" "but not yet crossed the Columbia yet". That leads me to believe that the jump occurred nearer to the Columbia than originally thought. Proof? No, but strong circumstantial evidence. The FBI would seem to agree since they have moved the drop zone further south as time passed. I think they know they screwed the pooch with the 8:11 jump and ensuing search and adjusted it south - just not enough IMO.
TL;DR: The assumption that the oscillations and the pressure bump are the same thing is a mistake. Are they connected? Yes, but not the same thing. Like being pregnant vs. giving birth.
-
7:54 pm
MSP:
305: Roger. Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him
and thinks he will attempt a jump.
This is a delayed response from the question asked to 305. Tina seen him as she pulled the curtain closed going up front at around 7 40 ish. the ground starts the conversation about Cooper leaving prompting them to respond to what Tina seen.
So what are you saying? "Called" at 8:20 does not refer to them calling the back but to someone else?
It's a delayed response from the crew, reason? the ground said the following "As soon as reasonably sure the man has left the quicker you can land."
305 responds to what Tina had seen once she left the cabin at 7:40 ish and was pulling back the curtain. she seen him ready to jump. they respond with "Miss Mucklow said he apparently has the knapsack around him and thinks he will attempt a jump."
They didn't respond to what Tina had seen until 7:54....that's how I see it?
-
T
The 8:13 time that is repeated comes from Sonderlind who estimated the jumped time after the crew reported it an unknown time later. It's not official - just an educated guess based on crew statements.
Paul made the jump maps and calculated 8:11. why would he reference 8:13?
-
TThe 8:13 time that is repeated comes from Sonderlind who estimated the jumped time after the crew reported it an unknown time later. It's not official - just an educated guess based on crew statements.
Paul made the jump maps and calculated 8:11. why would he reference 8:13?
My understanding is that Sonderling came up with the 8:13 time. Wasn't that what Rataczak told Carr?
-
I don't recall him giving a time other than 10-15 minutes vs 5 to 10 said in the past. I believe Eric stated Bill said 8:13 unless I'm mistaken on that?
-
I don't recall him giving a time other than 10-15 minutes vs 5 to 10 said in the past. I believe Eric stated Bill said 8:13 unless I'm mistaken on that?
Yes, I know Eric has said Bill told him 8:13, but in regards to Sonderlind, my understanding is that Sonderlind estimated 8:13 based on the crew statements. I'm prepared to be wrong about that, maybe not?
-
I think you are wrong or we wold see a map referencing that point? several maps were made. check and see if the time was changed...
I know a reference is made stating the jump could go all the way down to the columbia or the search..
-
There have been several times officially associated with the jump ranging from 8:10 - 8:13. For a long time I tried to understand why there was any disparity at all.
Ultimately I reasoned that the oscillations began at 8:10 and that the pressure bump occurred at 8:13. But, that the FBI didn't really know what all of that meant--at least originally. In other words, they weren't certain at what point in this three-minute long sequence that Cooper actually jumped. Therefore, they considered the entire three minutes--covering about 10 miles--as a prospective landing zone for DBC.
Later, after the Pacific Ocean tests, I think they gained a better understanding of what happened and the proper sequence. Thus, DBC jumped at the end of the sequence, ultimately around 8:13.
Now, Rataczak explained to me that he immediately notified Soderlind via radio when the pressure bump occurred. Therefore, I believe that Rataczak was certain that DBC bailed at 8:13 from the beginning, even though the FBI wasn't quite certain. Therefore, the Pacific Ocean test.
All of this said, I think 8:13 is the most likely jump time. Moreover, this would have been before they reached Vancouver which is a suburb of Portland. To have jumped anywhere near the Columbia River using the FBI Flight Path puts you smack in the middle of the Greater Portland area which doesn't add-up considering Rataczak's comments about approaching the suburbs.
Now, the $64,000 question. Whether DBC jumped at 8:10, 8:11, 8:12 or 8:13, what does it matter? How does the money get to Tena Bar if you buy the FBI Flight Path? It is this question that you should be pondering.
-
I'm trying to figure out why they stayed with the 8:11 location if the crew believes it was 8:13. I'm not disputing the time the crew states but they appear to go against that?
-
I'm not sure what the crew believed. As for Rataczak, 8:13 was apparently his number.
One thing to consider also relates to the attache' case in particular. Meaning, I think the FBI deduced that if DBC simply chucked the attache' case and/or dummy reserve out the back, that this would have likely occurred near the beginning of the oscillations sequence. Therefore, this would have factored into their search area.
-
However, Anderson has said that they delayed in reporting the pressure bump. Also, the 8:12 time is purely a guess. We know it happened after the oscillations but when did the oscillations end? 8:14? 8:14? 8:15? 8:16? We don’t know. The reason the jump time is important to me is because if it’s close to the river then that would begin to offer an explanation for the money on Tena Bar.
But if we verify it happened earlier then that creates even more confusion.
-
However, Anderson has said that they delayed in reporting the pressure bump. Also, the 8:12 time is purely a guess. We know it happened after the oscillations but when did the oscillations end? 8:14? 8:14? 8:15? 8:16? We don’t know. The reason the jump time is important to me is because if it’s close to the river then that would begin to offer an explanation for the money on Tena Bar.
But if we verify it happened earlier then that creates even more confusion.
I cannot speak for Anderson's comments. I'm not really sure what his comments were, what context they were made in, and when they were made.
That said, Rataczak seems to be quite certain exactly what he said, when and to whom. Moreover, my impression from speaking with Rataczak was that the entire sequence leading to the jump was two or three minutes. This is also consistent with what what the FBI apparently believes as well.
I appreciate the desire to fully vet the time frame to see if the jet was anywhere near the Columbia River. That said, I just don't see how it is possible unless DBC somehow got caught up on the airstairs and was freed loose after several minutes. Still one would think that the pilots would have noticed this. Moreover, one would think that something would have been found somewhere at some point if DBC no-pulled near PDX.
-
The stairs weren’t opening like Cooper needed. Cooper called me on the interphone while Tina was riding up front with us. Cooper had let Tina come to the front. He yelled, "slow it down!." I stated back to Cooper, "OK." And we did; we slowed the plane.
This is from the start of the flight. they leveled off, slowed the plane down and went to 30 degree flaps.
The oscillations continued, as I remember, but were smoother and we hadn’t heard anything from Cooper.
This is also from the start of the flight and appears the oscillation smoothed out. Copper might of been on the first couple steps causing more disruption.
Bill called back to him and he finally answered. He said everything was “OK”
This is the 8:05 entry.
More time passed. And then suddenly came that “bump”. After the final "bump" which we felt with our ears, we all discussed it for awhile, waiting for another bump. It never repeated, so we assumed that was his exit.
Here, it appears to show the gap between the 8:05 entry and when Cooper was on the stairs. they describe two events or two bumps. one possibly Cooper on the stairs and the final bump being the door closing....
-
I went over this last night and checked again with the Harrison notes. apparently, he was monitoring the flight and taking notes.
We have several entries in the log that can be confusing.
The log/teletype reports at 8:22 the plane is at 23 miles DME.
Harrison notes the time at 8:18.
The next entry in the log is 8:52 stating they are over the Eugene VOR and talk about Cooper's last contact 55 minutes ago. that doesn't match the 8:52 entry. Harrison notes it at 9:00 which makes sense for the last contact at 55 minutes.
The problem appears to be the entry recorded has two time frames into one. (8:22 log)
Harrison notes at 8:50 they are over the Eugene VOR
Harrison notes the next entry as 9:00 for the reference to 55 minutes since they contacted Cooper.
The transcripts have them combined.
The distance between the 23 miles DME and the Eugene VOR is approx. 79 NM.
This gives approx. 26.3 minutes of flight.
This gives a time of 8:44
Then you look at the fuel. 4500 per hour x 3 is 13,500
The 8:22 entry shows 40,000 lbs of fuel.
The 8:52 entry shows 33,500 lbs of fuel
They burned 6,500 lbs in 30 minutes. which sounds right.
Harrison times are
8:18 and 8:50 with 32 minutes.
The fuel equals about the same.
We are still missing time. Harrison reports 165 at 8:18 and the transcripts report 170.
-
I went over this last night and checked again with the Harrison notes. apparently, he was monitoring the flight and taking notes.
We have several entries in the log that can be confusing.
The log/teletype reports at 8:22 the plane is at 23 miles DME.
Harrison notes the time at 8:18.
The next entry in the log is 8:52 stating they are over the Eugene VOR and talk about Cooper's last contact 55 minutes ago. that doesn't match the 8:52 entry. Harrison notes it at 9:00 which makes sense for the last contact at 55 minutes.
The problem appears to be the entry recorded has two time frames into one. (8:22 log)
Harrison notes at 8:50 they are over the Eugene VOR
Harrison notes the next entry as 9:00 for the reference to 55 minutes since they contacted Cooper.
The transcripts have them combined.
The distance between the 23 miles DME and the Eugene VOR is approx. 79 NM.
This gives approx. 26.3 minutes of flight.
This gives a time of 8:44
Then you look at the fuel. 4500 per hour x 3 is 13,500
The 8:22 entry shows 40,000 lbs of fuel.
The 8:52 entry shows 33,500 lbs of fuel
They burned 6,500 lbs in 30 minutes. which sounds right.
Harrison times are
8:18 and 8:50 with 32 minutes.
The fuel equals about the same.
We are still missing time. Harrison reports 165 at 8:18 and the transcripts report 170.
What is interesting is that if Harrison is accurate with the 8:18/23 DME stamp, then according to my version of the Western Flight Path--Maylay (not Toledo) direct to Canby--305 would be over Sauvie Island a 1000 feet or so south of Tena Bar at 8:13.
This would mean that DBC jumping at 8:13 and drifting to the NE would land just north of Tena Bar as I have theorized.
An intriguing coincidence to note in my mind.
-
I see a time gap I can't account for at the moment. I first did my calculations using the 9:00 time by Harrison until I realized it's two different entries that are one entry in the log. that's why I mentioned earlier thinking they arrived at Eugene at 9:00.
-
I see a time gap I can't account for at the moment. I first did my calculations using the 9:00 time by Harrison until I realized it's two different entries that are one entry in the log. that's why I mentioned earlier thinking they arrived at Eugene at 9:00.
The real question is what is the time at 23 DME?
-
If you use Harrison for path timing he puts the 23 miles DME at 8:18
The next entry is the 8:50 time over Eugene VOR
After that is the entry of 9:00 about the last contact being 55 minutes ago with Cooper that also matches.
It's 79 NM from the 23 mile location and should take 26.3 minutes of flight but we have 32 minutes between the entries..The 9:00 entry seems pretty solid to what the crew time reports.
-
If you use Harrison for path timing he puts the 23 miles DME at 8:18
The next entry is the 8:50 time over Eugene VOR
After that is the entry of 9:00 about the last contact being 55 minutes ago with Cooper that also matches.
It's 79 NM from the 23 mile location and should take 26.3 minutes of flight but we have 32 minutes between the entries..The 9:00 entry seems pretty solid to what the crew time reports.
How do you know it should take 26.3 minutes? This is a complicated function of the ground speed. Covering 3 miles (statute) per minute over ground puts it at 30.3 minutes.
-
Going by a 3 mile minute . if you don't use an average then how do you conclude?
-
Depending on wind speed and direction the ground speed will change but you would need to show a minute map to establish the path. speed will change but not a minute?
-
It's 62 NM from Sea to Toledo. if you use the 3 mile minute it calculates to 20.6 minutes. the timing is off due to going to 155 NM for a period then jumping up in speed. the remaining parts of the flight appear to be steady at 165-170.
When I first started flying this area I didn't slow down at the start of the flight and arrived early at Toledo.
-
I'm not sure I understand your point.
79 NM = 91 SM.
The ground speed can and will easily change over 91 miles. In fact, 10% isn't that big of a deal...3.0 miles per minute to 3.3 miles per minute.
The problem also is a mile or two or three can easily be added or shaved off depending upon precisely where 305 was at the time it was near the Eugene VOR. Was it just past, just before, directly over the top?
Trying to get precise to this degree is impossible. Way too many variables. We need to look for glaring flaws that cannot be easily explained.
-
I'm only writing what I see. we have a basic perimeter to use. I simply pointed out the time difference using a 3 mile minute.
How are you concluding the Tbar departure?
-
The Tena Bar jump is a little different in that we're only talking 16 SM so using an average speed of say 3 miles per minute is hardly noticeable from 3.3 miles per minute.
That said, your point is nonetheless correct. That is partly why I stated the jet would be a "1000 feet or so" south of Tena Bar.
In any case, it would be very near Tena Bar.
-
What do you mean by only using 16 SM?
-
The path will remain the same no matter where you jump?
-
I'm assuming DBC jumped at 8:13. If the jet was 23 DME at 8:18 then DBC jumped 5 minutes earlier. Back tracking 5 minutes along the Western Flight Path from 23 DME is about 16 miles north and puts the jet very near Tena Bar.
-
Ok, I see now...
-
SkyVector places it at 20 NM right to the money location to the 23 mile location..actually, it's 596 feet north of the money location
-
I measure 18 SM from the 23 DME to the money find spot. Again, the 23 DME on the Western Flight Path.
-
I'm using aviation charts? looks like it's a standoff... :rofl:
..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFa1-kciCb4&ab_channel=jordanharding
-
23 miles coords N45°23.34' W122°44.78'
Canby coords N45°18.67' W122°45.77'
5 NM between the two...
Battle Ground coords N45°44.93' W122°35.59'
Google shows it about 500 feet off...
-
The approximate coords for 23 DME on the Western Flight Path = 45.476966, -122.794428
The coords for the money find spot = 45.718564, -122.759423
The distance between the two is 16.777 SM
-
I'll stick with the aviation coords..
-
If I'm reading those coords correctly, it's too far west to register 23 miles DME to Battle Ground. still checking....
-
If I'm reading those coords correctly, it's too far west to register 23 miles DME to Battle Ground. still checking....
Yes that's actually 26 SM from Battle Ground which puts the 23 DME a couple of miles closer to Tena Bar...about 14 SM.
-
My point stands, in either case DBC jumps and lands very near Tena Bar where the money was found.
-
The simplest way, as R99 speaks of is from the Malay intersection down to the Canby intersection. this connects onto V23 (center) with hitting the 23 miles DME several miles north in the same path to Canby.
-
The simplest way, as R99 speaks of is from the Malay intersection down to the Canby intersection. this connects onto V23 (center) with hitting the 23 miles DME several miles north in the same path to Canby.
Yes that's correct. This puts the jet just west of Tena Bar either over the Columbia River or Sauvie Island on the way down.
-
I'm assuming DBC jumped at 8:13. If the jet was 23 DME at 8:18 then DBC jumped 5 minutes earlier. Back tracking 5 minutes along the Western Flight Path from 23 DME is about 16 miles north and puts the jet very near Tena Bar.
Actually, EU, I thought the same thing but in regards to the FBI path. Backtracking 5 minutes along the FBI flight path, would put an 8:13 jump spot very near the Columbia.
-
I'm assuming DBC jumped at 8:13. If the jet was 23 DME at 8:18 then DBC jumped 5 minutes earlier. Back tracking 5 minutes along the Western Flight Path from 23 DME is about 16 miles north and puts the jet very near Tena Bar.
Actually, EU, I thought the same thing but in regards to the FBI path. Backtracking 5 minutes along the FBI flight path, would put an 8:13 jump spot very near the Columbia.
Unless Cpr is an expert and drops then opens at about 1000ft feet, he is going to drift no matter the flight path. He will not land in the Columbia or at Tina Bar in any event even with a jump at 8:13. There is no scenario that drops money at the Ingram find location on Tina Bar. This isnt a murder where a body drops in place to be found 8 years later in the same place! ;)
-
According to the FBI Flight Path map, 305 crossed the Columbia over Tomahawk Island at 8:17. How then is it possible that over the next one minute (8:18) that 305 traveled another 9.5 NM to arrive at 23 DME? This would appear to suggest that the 8:22 time stamp would have to be accurate for the jet to arrive at 23 DME.
-
I'm assuming DBC jumped at 8:13. If the jet was 23 DME at 8:18 then DBC jumped 5 minutes earlier. Back tracking 5 minutes along the Western Flight Path from 23 DME is about 16 miles north and puts the jet very near Tena Bar.
Actually, EU, I thought the same thing but in regards to the FBI path. Backtracking 5 minutes along the FBI flight path, would put an 8:13 jump spot very near the Columbia.
Unless Cpr is an expert and drops then opens at about 1000ft feet, he is going to drift no matter the flight path. He will not land in the Columbia or at Tina Bar in any event even with a jump at 8:13. There is no scenario that drops money at the Ingram find location on Tina Bar. This isnt a murder where a body drops in place to be found 8 years later in the same place! ;)
Excellent point that he will DRIFT. In those conditions of course he would have. But once again I will ask, as I have asked some others, if he pulls the chords on either side, would it not give him at least some ability to alter the course of his landing spot? They have emphasized he had non steerable chutes. But couldn't you have a bit of control because it would have to change your direction if you pulled the chords? Sir Isaac Newton if you will. To some degree. To avoid hitting the water, if he was near the water. It seems they really do not have a very good idea as to where he landed. There is a bunch of wilderness that has to be covered. Just watching the first interview with the late captain, he seemed to want no part of discussing this any more than he had to for the cops? And they were all over the place depending on which one you talked to. A true mess as far as evidence for a landing spot.
-
I'm assuming DBC jumped at 8:13. If the jet was 23 DME at 8:18 then DBC jumped 5 minutes earlier. Back tracking 5 minutes along the Western Flight Path from 23 DME is about 16 miles north and puts the jet very near Tena Bar.
Actually, EU, I thought the same thing but in regards to the FBI path. Backtracking 5 minutes along the FBI flight path, would put an 8:13 jump spot very near the Columbia.
Unless Cpr is an expert and drops then opens at about 1000ft feet, he is going to drift no matter the flight path. He will not land in the Columbia or at Tina Bar in any event even with a jump at 8:13. There is no scenario that drops money at the Ingram find location on Tina Bar. This isnt a murder where a body drops in place to be found 8 years later in the same place! ;)
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
-
DBfan57 wrote: “... if he pulls the chords on either side, would it not give him at least some ability to alter the course of his landing spot?”
Not in an unmodified C9 or other round canopy. Without a steering vent mod, pulling on on side accomplishes very little. I’ve tried it on both a C9 and a Navy 26 ft Conical canopy. I think paratroopers called it “slipping”.
Cooper’s canopy might have had a four line release mod, which, if activated post deployment, would have given the canopy some useful forward speed and steerability. The chances of the so called “4 line cut” mod being activated successfully on a night jump without a flashlight is very low.
377
-
I'm assuming DBC jumped at 8:13. If the jet was 23 DME at 8:18 then DBC jumped 5 minutes earlier. Back tracking 5 minutes along the Western Flight Path from 23 DME is about 16 miles north and puts the jet very near Tena Bar.
Actually, EU, I thought the same thing but in regards to the FBI path. Backtracking 5 minutes along the FBI flight path, would put an 8:13 jump spot very near the Columbia.
Unless Cpr is an expert and drops then opens at about 1000ft feet, he is going to drift no matter the flight path. He will not land in the Columbia or at Tina Bar in any event even with a jump at 8:13. There is no scenario that drops money at the Ingram find location on Tina Bar. This isnt a murder where a body drops in place to be found 8 years later in the same place! ;)
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
Nope. If Cooper was a no-pull, he would be on the ground within 40 to 60 seconds. The general estimate is that his forward velocity would be canceled in about 1500 feet and he could have moved about 1000 feet laterally from the flight path under the existing conditions that evening.
If you have had a course in elementary physics, you will understand why the above numbers cannot be determined more accurately. And this is no put-down. :(
-
Western Flight Path
During one of my conversations with Cliff Ammerman he mentioned that the Oregon National Guard T-33 departed PDX heading WNW. It then turned north over Sauvie Island, then finally made a U-turn to the east (presumably around the northern part of Sauvie Island) and pulled in behind 305 some five miles back.
Additionally, I know from the ATC transcripts that Ammerman (R4) took over 305 at 7:59:15 from R2. This handoff would have been at the moment that 305 was turning around the Maylay Intersection.
Ammerman told me that he was having to toggle the radio back and forth as he communicated with the F-106's so as not to be heard over the radio in 305's cockpit just in case DBC happened to be listening in on the communications.
Ammerman told me that this was labor intensive and therefore he opted to hand over 305 to ATC controller R5 because his work load was too great handling 305, the two F-106's and the T-33.
The ATC transcripts show that this handoff to R5 took place at 8:13:14.
I believe the handover to R5 was precipitated by the T-33 entering the theater. Meaning, the T-33 pulled in behind 305 at approximately 8:13:14.
The 8:13:14 time stamp is also notable because it happens to be at the same time DBC jumped--assuming, of course, that 8:13 is the jump time as I have suggested.
In my mind this all makes sense because we know that the T-33 pulled in behind 305 five miles back. Therefore, if the T-33 made the U-turn in the northern part of Sauvie Island as mentioned earlier, this would put 305 five miles further down the track and, once again, very near Tena Bar at 8:13.
Needless to say, it also makes a lot of sense when you consider that the money was found at Tena Bar which is a place not at all easy to walk to from off the Tena Bar "island" considering DBC would be lugging 25 - 80 lbs worth of money, parachutes and/or attache' case.
-
I'm assuming DBC jumped at 8:13. If the jet was 23 DME at 8:18 then DBC jumped 5 minutes earlier. Back tracking 5 minutes along the Western Flight Path from 23 DME is about 16 miles north and puts the jet very near Tena Bar.
Actually, EU, I thought the same thing but in regards to the FBI path. Backtracking 5 minutes along the FBI flight path, would put an 8:13 jump spot very near the Columbia.
Unless Cpr is an expert and drops then opens at about 1000ft feet, he is going to drift no matter the flight path. He will not land in the Columbia or at Tina Bar in any event even with a jump at 8:13. There is no scenario that drops money at the Ingram find location on Tina Bar. This isnt a murder where a body drops in place to be found 8 years later in the same place! ;)
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
Nope. If Cooper was a no-pull, he would be on the ground within 40 to 60 seconds. The general estimate is that his forward velocity would be canceled in about 1500 feet and he could have moved about 1000 feet laterally from the flight path under the existing conditions that evening.
If you have had a course in elementary physics, you will understand why the above numbers cannot be determined more accurately. And this is no put-down. :(
Would this remain the same even if the plane was flying directly into the winds?
For example at approximately 8:17 305 was flying southwest and the winds were from the south-southwest at around 15mph. When Cooper jumped he would have continued forward due to his forward throw but eventually this would stop and he would face some drift in the opposite direction even if no-pulling. My point being that given those conditions, he would lawn dart into the ground almost directly underneath where he jumped. Correct?
-
But once again I will ask, as I have asked some others, if he pulls the chords on either side, would it not give him at least some ability to alter the course of his landing spot? They have emphasized he had non steerable chutes. But couldn't you have a bit of control because it would have to change your direction if you pulled the chords? Sir Isaac Newton if you will. To some degree. To avoid hitting the water, if he was near the water.
I have to laugh. Maybe you'll believe it now, but I should probably make a side bet with 377 about how long it will be before you ask that same question again. Not sure if Mr. Newton was a rigger, and no disrespect for his intellect, but I bet 377 and I both have more jumps than he does.
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
Pretty much what R99 said. You are pretty much correct in that if Cooper no-pulls, then drift isn't much of an issue. The forward throw will still happen regardless of winds, but it dissipates pretty quickly. High upper winds can cause some freefall drift, but not a whole lot. His body position could cause some 'slide', but again not a lot. Someone who no-pulls (or streamers) will end up pretty close to their exit point. Unfortunately, I witnessed my first one of those when I was about six.
-
I'm assuming DBC jumped at 8:13. If the jet was 23 DME at 8:18 then DBC jumped 5 minutes earlier. Back tracking 5 minutes along the Western Flight Path from 23 DME is about 16 miles north and puts the jet very near Tena Bar.
Actually, EU, I thought the same thing but in regards to the FBI path. Backtracking 5 minutes along the FBI flight path, would put an 8:13 jump spot very near the Columbia.
Unless Cpr is an expert and drops then opens at about 1000ft feet, he is going to drift no matter the flight path. He will not land in the Columbia or at Tina Bar in any event even with a jump at 8:13. There is no scenario that drops money at the Ingram find location on Tina Bar. This isnt a murder where a body drops in place to be found 8 years later in the same place! ;)
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
Nope. If Cooper was a no-pull, he would be on the ground within 40 to 60 seconds. The general estimate is that his forward velocity would be canceled in about 1500 feet and he could have moved about 1000 feet laterally from the flight path under the existing conditions that evening.
If you have had a course in elementary physics, you will understand why the above numbers cannot be determined more accurately. And this is no put-down. :(
Would this remain the same even if the plane was flying directly into the winds?
For example at approximately 8:17 305 was flying southwest and the winds were from the south-southwest at around 15mph. When Cooper jumped he would have continued forward due to his forward throw but eventually this would stop and he would face some drift in the opposite direction even if no-pulling. My point being that given those conditions, he would lawn dart into the ground almost directly underneath where he jumped. Correct?
Nope again. According to the people listening in on the phone patch, the airliner crew said at 8:18 PM that they were 23 DME nautical miles south of the Battleground/Portland VORTAC. They would be on the western edge of V-23 and flying almost straight south (actually about 178 degrees true). The wind velocity at 10,000 feet was about 35 knots from the southwest (225 degrees true). You can do some trig calculations to determine the headwind component and side component. But the point is Cooper is going to continue on down the flight path for a short distance and move laterally by an even shorter distance.
And again, have you had a course in elementary physics? ???
-
Robert, you're arguing against Chaucer's calculated reasoning, but you seem to be agreeing with his basic point, which is that if Cooper goes in, he's pretty close to his exit point, which is correct. No, I don't have a degree in physics, but sadly, I've watched a number of people do it.
-
Not sure if Mr. Newton was a rigger, and no disrespect for his intellect, but I bet 377 and I both have more jumps than he does.
Not only was Newton not a rigger, he made a mistake in some early aerodynamic calculations that reportedly delayed or discouraged the development of flying machines for a few years. But his mistake was caught fairly early and, in any event, aerodynamics wasn't much of a science in the early 1700s anyway.
-
DBfan57 wrote: “... if he pulls the chords on either side, would it not give him at least some ability to alter the course of his landing spot?”
Not in an unmodified C9 or other round canopy. Without a steering vent mod, pulling on on side accomplishes very little. I’ve tried it on both a C9 and a Navy 26 ft Conical canopy. I think paratroopers called it “slipping”.
Cooper’s canopy might have had a four line release mod, which, if activated post deployment, would have given the canopy some useful forward speed and steerability. The chances of the so called “4 line cut” mod being activated successfully on a night jump without a flashlight is very low.
377
Approximately 10:50 is the slipping technique
https://youtu.be/dcomlNIBlIU
Video alse includes technique for getting down from a tree with reserve.
-
Robert, you're arguing against Chaucer's calculated reasoning, but you seem to be agreeing with his basic point, which is that if Cooper goes in, he's pretty close to his exit point, which is correct. No, I don't have a degree in physics, but sadly, I've watched a number of people do it.
You are absolutely correct that a no-pull is going to land close to his exit point even from 10,000 feet.
The point about the physics and the comment that the the jump calculations for a no-pull are approximate needs some further explaining.
As Georger can attest, it is highly unlikely that any college physics textbook, either undergraduate or graduate, includes horizontal movement in the atmosphere without making gross assumptions, such as assume there is no atmosphere. At least I have never seen one.
Vertical movement in the atmosphere can be handled easily. But when you add the horizontal component to the vertical component, you end up with something like a fourth order nonlinear differential equation. And solving that is where the rubber really hits the road and it is basically unsolvable in a realistic time frame even with a Cray super computer.
-
As Georger can attest, it is highly unlikely that any college physics textbook, either undergraduate or graduate, includes horizontal movement in the atmosphere without making gross assumptions, such as assume there is no atmosphere. At least I have never seen one.
Vertical movement in the atmosphere can be handled easily. But when you add the horizontal component to the vertical component, you end up with something like a fourth order nonlinear differential equation. And solving that is where the rubber really hits the road and it is basically unsolvable in a realistic time frame even with a Cray super computer.
All good and well, but real-world, seat-of-your-pants... Spotting is an art form, and I've always maintained that I can put a pumpkin down a chimney from 12,500'. HA!
-
Approximately 10:50 is the slipping technique
But again, very minimal control. I've done it with a 35' T-10, a 28' flat, a Piglet, a Para-Commander, a 26' Navy Conical, and a 24' Preserve II, and I wouldn't count on it for any degree of accuracy. How wide is the Columbia?
-
Approximately 10:50 is the slipping technique
But again, very minimal control. I've done it with a 35' T-10, a 28' flat, a Piglet, a Para-Commander, a 26' Navy Conical, and a 24' Preserve II, and I wouldn't count on it for any degree of accuracy. How wide is the Columbia?
Wider than that truck...
-
Robert, you're arguing against Chaucer's calculated reasoning, but you seem to be agreeing with his basic point, which is that if Cooper goes in, he's pretty close to his exit point, which is correct. No, I don't have a degree in physics, but sadly, I've watched a number of people do it.
Thank you.
-
Robert, you're arguing against Chaucer's calculated reasoning, but you seem to be agreeing with his basic point, which is that if Cooper goes in, he's pretty close to his exit point, which is correct. No, I don't have a degree in physics, but sadly, I've watched a number of people do it.
Thank you.
"Pretty close" and "almost directly underneath" are two different things.
-
But once again I will ask, as I have asked some others, if he pulls the chords on either side, would it not give him at least some ability to alter the course of his landing spot? They have emphasized he had non steerable chutes. But couldn't you have a bit of control because it would have to change your direction if you pulled the chords? Sir Isaac Newton if you will. To some degree. To avoid hitting the water, if he was near the water.
I have to laugh. Maybe you'll believe it now, but I should probably make a side bet with 377 about how long it will be before you ask that same question again. Not sure if Mr. Newton was a rigger, and no disrespect for his intellect, but I bet 377 and I both have more jumps than he does.
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
Pretty much what R99 said. You are pretty much correct in that if Cooper no-pulls, then drift isn't much of an issue. The forward throw will still happen regardless of winds, but it dissipates pretty quickly. High upper winds can cause some freefall drift, but not a whole lot. His body position could cause some 'slide', but again not a lot. Someone who no-pulls (or streamers) will end up pretty close to their exit point. Unfortunately, I witnessed my first one of those when I was about six.
I assure you I am not asking again about the pull on the chord here. But your take on the no drift in that kind of a wind storm they had reported is laughable to me
-
But once again I will ask, as I have asked some others, if he pulls the chords on either side, would it not give him at least some ability to alter the course of his landing spot? They have emphasized he had non steerable chutes. But couldn't you have a bit of control because it would have to change your direction if you pulled the chords? Sir Isaac Newton if you will. To some degree. To avoid hitting the water, if he was near the water.
I have to laugh. Maybe you'll believe it now, but I should probably make a side bet with 377 about how long it will be before you ask that same question again. Not sure if Mr. Newton was a rigger, and no disrespect for his intellect, but I bet 377 and I both have more jumps than he does.
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
Pretty much what R99 said. You are pretty much correct in that if Cooper no-pulls, then drift isn't much of an issue. The forward throw will still happen regardless of winds, but it dissipates pretty quickly. High upper winds can cause some freefall drift, but not a whole lot. His body position could cause some 'slide', but again not a lot. Someone who no-pulls (or streamers) will end up pretty close to their exit point. Unfortunately, I witnessed my first one of those when I was about six.
I assure you I am not asking again about the pull on the chord here. But your take on the no drift in that kind of a wind storm they had reported is laughable to me
What "wind storm" are you talking about? The highest winds measured in the Portland area at 10,000 feet were about 35 knots and less than that at lower altitudes.
-
Robert, you're arguing against Chaucer's calculated reasoning, but you seem to be agreeing with his basic point, which is that if Cooper goes in, he's pretty close to his exit point, which is correct. No, I don't have a degree in physics, but sadly, I've watched a number of people do it.
Thank you.
"Pretty close" and "almost directly underneath" are two different things.
Nah. Come on, Robert, I think you're arguing for the sake of being argumentative. Chaucer's not trying to pinpoint Cooper's crater, hell, the jet itself can not be pinpointed. He's just looking for parameters with which to work his Tena Bar money theory.
-
But once again I will ask, as I have asked some others, if he pulls the chords on either side, would it not give him at least some ability to alter the course of his landing spot? They have emphasized he had non steerable chutes. But couldn't you have a bit of control because it would have to change your direction if you pulled the chords? Sir Isaac Newton if you will. To some degree. To avoid hitting the water, if he was near the water.
I have to laugh. Maybe you'll believe it now, but I should probably make a side bet with 377 about how long it will be before you ask that same question again. Not sure if Mr. Newton was a rigger, and no disrespect for his intellect, but I bet 377 and I both have more jumps than he does.
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
Pretty much what R99 said. You are pretty much correct in that if Cooper no-pulls, then drift isn't much of an issue. The forward throw will still happen regardless of winds, but it dissipates pretty quickly. High upper winds can cause some freefall drift, but not a whole lot. His body position could cause some 'slide', but again not a lot. Someone who no-pulls (or streamers) will end up pretty close to their exit point. Unfortunately, I witnessed my first one of those when I was about six.
I assure you I am not asking again about the pull on the chord here. But your take on the no drift in that kind of a wind storm they had reported is laughable to me
And exactly what do you base that on? I'm generally pretty low-key and don't like talking like this, but... I've been jumping since '79, been an instructor since '90. I stopped logging ages ago, but I've probably got somewhere between 15 and 18 thousand jumps. As I've said, SADLY I've watched people go in from exit at 12,500' to impact. I consider myself an expert at the (lost) art of spotting, which is determining the exit point in order to make the desired landing area, in a variety of weather conditions, including in upper winds well exceeding 70 knots. Remember, Chaucer is talking about a no-pull scenario here, not time under canopy. I'm not saying there would be no drift, just that it wouldn't be a whole lot. Robert99 seems to scientifically agree with that. So laugh if you will, but I think I'm giving a fairly well informed opinion here.
-
Robert, you're arguing against Chaucer's calculated reasoning, but you seem to be agreeing with his basic point, which is that if Cooper goes in, he's pretty close to his exit point, which is correct. No, I don't have a degree in physics, but sadly, I've watched a number of people do it.
Thank you.
"Pretty close" and "almost directly underneath" are two different things.
Nah. Come on, Robert, I think you're arguing for the sake of being argumentative. Chaucer's not trying to pinpoint Cooper's crater, hell, the jet itself can not be pinpointed. He's just looking for parameters with which to work his Tena Bar money theory.
Let me see if this will clarify things a bit. If the Cooper airliner ground track has a crosswind component, he will land downwind of that track if he is a no-pull. If the Cooper airliner ground track has a headwind component, he will not land downwind of his jump point on that track if he is a no-pull.
Keep in mind that the maximum wind at 10,000 feet was about 35 knots at the time Cooper jumped and less than that at lower altitudes. Also, keep in mind that Cooper will be on the ground and deceased in not more than 60 seconds if he is a no-pull.
If Cooper jumps in a hurricane with 200+ MPH winds, the above does not apply and all bets are off. :)
-
Robert, you're arguing against Chaucer's calculated reasoning, but you seem to be agreeing with his basic point, which is that if Cooper goes in, he's pretty close to his exit point, which is correct. No, I don't have a degree in physics, but sadly, I've watched a number of people do it.
Thank you.
"Pretty close" and "almost directly underneath" are two different things.
Nah. Come on, Robert, I think you're arguing for the sake of being argumentative. Chaucer's not trying to pinpoint Cooper's crater, hell, the jet itself can not be pinpointed. He's just looking for parameters with which to work his Tena Bar money theory.
Let me see if this will clarify things a bit. If the Cooper airliner ground track has a crosswind component, he will land downwind of that track if he is a no-pull. If the Cooper airliner ground track has a headwind component, he will not land downwind of his jump point on that track if he is a no-pull.
Keep in mind that the maximum wind at 10,000 feet was about 35 knots at the time Cooper jumped and less than that at lower altitudes. Also, keep in mind that Cooper will be on the ground and deceased in not more than 60 seconds if he is a no-pull.
If Cooper jumps in a hurricane with 200+ MPH winds, the above does not apply and all bets are off. :)
It was clear the first time you said it, and it isn't anything that I don't already know. But you seem to be arguing, yet your ultimate conclusion is the same as mine - If Cooper is a no-pull, then he doesn't end up too awfully far from his exit point. And I think that's all that Chaucer was after.
-
I'm assuming DBC jumped at 8:13. If the jet was 23 DME at 8:18 then DBC jumped 5 minutes earlier. Back tracking 5 minutes along the Western Flight Path from 23 DME is about 16 miles north and puts the jet very near Tena Bar.
Actually, EU, I thought the same thing but in regards to the FBI path. Backtracking 5 minutes along the FBI flight path, would put an 8:13 jump spot very near the Columbia.
Unless Cpr is an expert and drops then opens at about 1000ft feet, he is going to drift no matter the flight path. He will not land in the Columbia or at Tina Bar in any event even with a jump at 8:13. There is no scenario that drops money at the Ingram find location on Tina Bar. This isnt a murder where a body drops in place to be found 8 years later in the same place! ;)
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
The last comment above is the original Chaucer post and comment on drift if Cooper was a no-pull.
Replying directly to Chaucer's comments, statements, or whatever:
1. Drift is always an issue if the wind is blowing. It may be a big issue, a medium issue, or a little issue, but it is an issue.
2. Cooper jumped very near or over the Columbia River and the 35 knot wind at 10,000 feet was from 45 degrees off to the right of the airliner's track. Note that the track of the airliner was very close to 180 degrees true and the wind was from 225 degrees true.
3. Since the wind is from 45 degrees off the track, in this case the headwind and crosswind components have the same values. The headwind component would move Cooper back toward the jump point and the crosswind component would move him downwind from the track. He will not return to the original geographical jump point under any conditions but he will be in the neighborhood. Keep reading below.
The instant that Cooper separates from the airliner, he is subject only to gravity and his body aerodynamics. Once Cooper's horizontal motion with respect to the air mass has ceased, his horizontal motion and the air mass horizontal motion are the same. So when the "forward throw" comes to a stop, Cooper will already be slightly downwind of the track and maybe 1500 or 2000 feet below the 10,000 foot jump altitude. From that point, it is strictly straight down with respect to the air mass. And the air mass is moving horizontally at the wind speed.
There are two different frames of reference at play here. The aerodynamics are determined only with respect to the air mass. The geographical locations must take into account the fact that the air mass is moving with respect to the geography. Be sure to keep them straight.
-
But once again I will ask, as I have asked some others, if he pulls the chords on either side, would it not give him at least some ability to alter the course of his landing spot? They have emphasized he had non steerable chutes. But couldn't you have a bit of control because it would have to change your direction if you pulled the chords? Sir Isaac Newton if you will. To some degree. To avoid hitting the water, if he was near the water.
I have heard on Podcasts that there were 50 mile pr hour winds that night? Perhaps gusts? But it was certainly windy and raining. That you cannot argue
I have to laugh. Maybe you'll believe it now, but I should probably make a side bet with 377 about how long it will be before you ask that same question again. Not sure if Mr. Newton was a rigger, and no disrespect for his intellect, but I bet 377 and I both have more jumps than he does.
But if he no-pulls, then drift doesn’t become an issue. If he jumped near the Columbia then the plane is flying into the direction of the wind. That would negate the forward throw, correct?
Pretty much what R99 said. You are pretty much correct in that if Cooper no-pulls, then drift isn't much of an issue. The forward throw will still happen regardless of winds, but it dissipates pretty quickly. High upper winds can cause some freefall drift, but not a whole lot. His body position could cause some 'slide', but again not a lot. Someone who no-pulls (or streamers) will end up pretty close to their exit point. Unfortunately, I witnessed my first one of those when I was about six.
I assure you I am not asking again about the pull on the chord here. But your take on the no drift in that kind of a wind storm they had reported is laughable to me
What "wind storm" are you talking about? The highest winds measured in the Portland area at 10,000 feet were about 35 knots and less than that at lower altitudes.
-
I thought my point was clear. Of course Cooper isn't going to fall directly straight down and land precisely underneath the spot he jumped from. I was merely making the point that:
1. Drift is not as much of an issue with a no-pull than it is when one deploys his chute.
2. Forward throw would be mitigated by headwinds to a certain degree.
2. If Cooper jumped over the Columbia, say between the I-5 bridge and Pearson Air Park, then he is likely going to end up somewhere between the I-5 bridge and the Pearson Air Park on the ground.
I'm not seeing how any of those statements are particularly controversial, and I'm not understanding why Bob is being didactic about it.
(https://i.imgur.com/1F0U1Jm.gif)
-
I thought my point was clear. Of course Cooper isn't going to fall directly straight down and land precisely underneath the spot he jumped from. I was merely making the point that:
1. Drift is not as much of an issue with a no-pull than it is when one deploys his chute.
2. Forward throw would be mitigated by headwinds to a certain degree.
2. If Cooper jumped over the Columbia, say between the I-5 bridge and Pearson Air Park, then he is likely going to end up somewhere between the I-5 bridge and the Pearson Air Park on the ground.
I'm not seeing how any of those statements are particularly controversial, and I'm not understanding why Bob is being didactic about it.
And as someone with over four decades of first hand experience with human bodies in freefall, I'd say that you are correct. With the slight caveat that I don't know how far it is from the I-5 bridge to Pearson Air Park.
-------------------
Robert, I'm not sure what the psych profile is that you feel the need to argue with people with whom you are ultimately not disagreeing. And your calculations, such as they are, are missing at least three factors. I don't know where you live or what your physicality is, but ultimately I would say, put down your slide rule, close your textbooks, come out to 'Snore and I'll show you.
-
And as someone with over four decades of first hand experience with human bodies in freefall, I'd say that you are correct. With the slight caveat that I don't know how far it is from the I-5 bridge to Pearson Air Park.
Approximately 2.5 kilometers.
-
I thought my point was clear. Of course Cooper isn't going to fall directly straight down and land precisely underneath the spot he jumped from. I was merely making the point that:
1. Drift is not as much of an issue with a no-pull than it is when one deploys his chute.
2. Forward throw would be mitigated by headwinds to a certain degree.
2. If Cooper jumped over the Columbia, say between the I-5 bridge and Pearson Air Park, then he is likely going to end up somewhere between the I-5 bridge and the Pearson Air Park on the ground.
I'm not seeing how any of those statements are particularly controversial, and I'm not understanding why Bob is being didactic about it.
And as someone with over four decades of first hand experience with human bodies in freefall, I'd say that you are correct. With the slight caveat that I don't know how far it is from the I-5 bridge to Pearson Air Park.
-------------------
Robert, I'm not sure what the psych profile is that you feel the need to argue with people with whom you are ultimately not disagreeing. And your calculations, such as they are, are missing at least three factors. I don't know where you live or what your physicality is, but ultimately I would say, put down your slide rule, close your textbooks, come out to 'Snore and I'll show you.
Dudeman, I am not arguing with anyone. :o I was just answering questions that Chaucer asked, which is why I reposted his original post that asked those questions.
Engineer's slide rules have been obsolete since about 1970. And yes, I paid about $400 for an HP-35 (I think the designation was) in 1970.
Don't worry about my psychological health. In my younger days, I made it past a mandatory psychological evaluation that was necessary for me to participate in a certain project. I was ruled sane enough, or maybe crazy enough, to participate in that project (I don't remember which).
-
This was posted to an unknown Facebook group. I have been trying to find this Paul Jefferies to find out more about his story. However, if true - BIG IF - it would corroborate a landing in or near the Columbia. Any help identifying this guy is appreciated:
(https://i.imgur.com/sJEvFRT.png)
-
Flight Path Conundrum - More Eye-Witnesses in the East
I spoke with Carol Levanen today. She and her husband Dennis live in Heisson, WA and claim they saw 305 fly right over their house on Nov. 24, 1971.
"We heard a big roar and ran out of the house to see what it was. As I looked up I saw the belly of a large plane right above us."
Carol told me the plane was so low she thought it was going to crash into the nearby hillside that lies within the boundaries of Battleground Lake State Park.
Dennis said that the skies were overcast, but not rainy at that time.
Carol also said that she "reported" the sighting, but was never interviewed by the FBI or LE.
This makes the second and third personal sighting that I have been told, with Dona Elliott being the other. These sightings also comport with the "fiery object' sighting reported by "Janet" to Richard Tosaw and relayed to Galen Cook. That would make four credible sightings that place the 305 in the eastern part of V-23, which is where Bill Rataczak told me he was flying at 8:13. All these points are further east than the traditional FBI narrative, which places 305 several miles to the west. The feds initially claimed that DBC jumped over Battleground, WA and drifted a few miles to the northeast, landing in or around Amboy, WA. Oddly, when the Bureau revised their FP and LZ in the mid-1970s, they cited Orchards/Hockinson as the new DZ/LZ. That would put 305 more in-line with the Heisson fly-over.
Carol also said that they did not hear or see any other aircraft that night.
Lastly, Carol and Dennis both know Tom McDowell, who lives nearby. Tom led the ground search in Amboy on Friday-Sunday, November 26-28, 1971.
Lastly, lastly, a big thanks to Flyjack for the contact info and original lead to the Levanen's.
-
In the 'normal' narrative of the flight path, what altitude would the plane likely be at when passing over this area? How far is this area from the airport?
-
In the 'normal' narrative of the flight path, what altitude would the plane likely be at when passing over this area? How far is this area from the airport?
The airliner's altitude was 10,000 feet above sea level as it overflew the Portland/Vancouver area. The Portland International Airport is only 30 feet above sea level.
And for the zillionth time, the 8:00 PM sequence report for PIA listed two relatively low cloud layers with an overcast at 5000 feet. This is a visual ground observation and there is no information on any clouds above the 5000 foot overcast.
In view of the above, it is highly unlikely that anyone on the ground saw or heard the hijacked airliner as it passed the Portland/Vancouver area. The fact that the FBI ignored some of these claimed sightings is a redeeming factor in their investigation in my always humble opinion.
-
In the 'normal' narrative of the flight path, what altitude would the plane likely be at when passing over this area? How far is this area from the airport?
Ball-park figures: Heisson is about 75 miles south of Sea-Tac. 305 should have been at 10K altitude. Heisson is about 500 feet above sea level.
-
...it is highly unlikely that anyone on the ground saw or heard the hijacked airliner as it passed the Portland/Vancouver area.
I have to completely agree with that. Airliners climb to altitude pretty directly after takeoff. Apparently Cooper's plane paused their climb at 7K so he could mess with the stairs, but then they continued to 10. The idea of them buzzing a city 75 miles away is highly unlikely. As for the sound, as someone mentioned (I think EU?), the military chase jets are pretty loud, someone might have noticed that, but at 10K and low throttle (to try to keep back with the airliner's speed)?
Sometimes at the dropzone when I'm on the ground, if I notice some people who are there to watch friends/family do a tandem jump, I'll chat with them and try to point things out. As the airplane flies jump run at 12.5K overhead, it can be difficult for them to see the plane, and very hard for them to spot the bodies exiting. And that's in broad clear daylight.
So for these people to just happen to spot Cooper's airliner, especially that one lady who supposedly said she was backing her car out the driveway and happened to notice the plane, and the guy standing on the stairs throwing flares off? At night? Under clouds? I think not...
-
...it is highly unlikely that anyone on the ground saw or heard the hijacked airliner as it passed the Portland/Vancouver area.
I have to completely agree with that. Airliners climb to altitude pretty directly after takeoff. Apparently Cooper's plane paused their climb at 7K so he could mess with the stairs, but then they continued to 10. The idea of them buzzing a city 75 miles away is highly unlikely. As for the sound, as someone mentioned (I think EU?), the military chase jets are pretty loud, someone might have noticed that, but at 10K and low throttle (to try to keep back with the airliner's speed)?
Sometimes at the dropzone when I'm on the ground, if I notice some people who are there to watch friends/family do a tandem jump, I'll chat with them and try to point things out. As the airplane flies jump run at 12.5K overhead, it can be difficult for them to see the plane, and very hard for them to spot the bodies exiting. And that's in broad clear daylight.
So for these people to just happen to spot Cooper's airliner, especially that one lady who supposedly said she was backing her car out the driveway and happened to notice the plane, and the guy standing on the stairs throwing flares off? At night? Under clouds? I think not...
Except that the area in question was a well known noise abatement/noise complaint area ... documented ... and the 727 was flying dirty ? He said she said. Like a fish story.
-
She also said it was so low that they “thought it was going to crash”. You’re not going to say that about an airliner at 10,000 feet.
-
...As for the sound, as someone mentioned (I think EU?), the military chase jets are pretty loud, someone might have noticed that, but at 10K and low throttle (to try to keep back with the airliner's speed)?
Ahem... we now know from talking with Cliff Ammerman that he had directed the F-106s 10-20 miles east of 305 and placed them at a 20K altitude. Presumably this took place when he took control of their flights when they entered his sector south of Castle Rock, WA, a few minutes before DBC jumped.
-
We have a conundrum. Either the eyewitnesses are not telling the truth, or the official narrative that 305 was at 10K when DBC jumped is in error.
-
Except that the area in question was a well known noise abatement/noise complaint area...
I didn't know that part, so yeah, if they're flying dirty, which would require a bit more throttle, I suppose people might notice the sound. But see it?...
She also said it was so low that they “thought it was going to crash”. You’re not going to say that about an airliner at 10,000 feet.
Well there's the issue... How credible is that? Every other bit of evidence, including the pilots' statements, indicate that they climbed to altitude. With every other effort by them to accommodate Cooper's demands, for them to still be that low 75 miles after takeoff?...
We have a conundrum. Either the eyewitnesses are not telling the truth, or the official narrative that 305 was at 10K when DBC jumped is in error.
...Yeah
--------
...As for the sound, as someone mentioned (I think EU?), the military chase jets are pretty loud, someone might have noticed that, but at 10K and low throttle (to try to keep back with the airliner's speed)?
Ahem... we now know from talking with Cliff Ammerman that he had directed the F-106s 10-20 miles east of 305 and placed them at a 20K altitude. Presumably this took place when he took control of their flights when they entered his sector south of Castle Rock, WA, a few minutes before DBC jumped.
Okay, thanks.
-
I think anyone attesting to seeing 305 in the Vancouver area is full of shit. There are several reports as well concerning hearing a loud jet. This also seems unlikely to be 305 given its altitude and throttled back speed. The F-106s as the source for the noise--if this is accurate--makes a lot more sense. Not to mention there were two of them constantly passing and circling back around 305, albeit 10 miles or so to the east.
Of note, I have theorized and suspect that the F-106s being several miles east of 305 and flying somewhat more freely are actually the radar plot source for the FBI Flight Path map. In other words, I suspect the FBI Flight Path shows the F-106s and not 305. This, of course, would put 305 on the Western Flight Path as a few of us believe.
-
A handful of weeks back I started a private Facebook group called 'D.B. Cooper : Mystery Group.' We now have an active group of over 1400 members.
I've started doing Facebook Live events on occasion. These events have included a live broadcast of my Tena Bar dig, a conversation with Brian Ingram, and a conversation about suspects with Nicholas Broughton.
Next, I'd like to do a Facebook Live discussion/debate with someone about the FBI Flight Path versus the Western Flight Path. If anyone here is interested in joining me to discuss this hot topic, drop me a line. I'd like to do this tomorrow if possible.
Cheers!
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
When you say "disks" what kind of disks?
I'm assuming CD-R's
or are these flash drives of some kind?
CD-R should last 20 to 50 years at least.
What kind of format are these maps? Is there some proprietary format? what kind of suffix do the map files have in windows? When you say "would not work in my computer" what application was being used to "read" them....?
-
About four years ago, I ordered digital copies of the FAA's Low Altitude Enroute IFR maps L1 and L2 through the National Archives and a contractor who actually made the disks. The maps were in effect on November 24, 1971 and contained the navigational information that the NWA airliner would be using on it flight from Seattle to Reno.
When the contractor sent me the disks, they would not initially work on my computer. After quite a bit of work between the contractor and myself, we finally got the problem resolved. I made duplicate disks of both maps and sent them to Sluggo and he in turn posted them on his web page.
Recently, I tried to make duplicate copies of my "archive disks" in order to send the maps to the WSHM. But I have not been able to get any of the disks, which have worked in the past, to open. No reason for this can be determined. I am using the very same computer as before and only the normal upgrades to Windows 7 and to Internet Explorer 11 have been made.
I took the disks to one commercial shop and they told me the disks were corrupted. I have no idea how that could have happened and doubt if it did.
Do any of you computer wizards have a suggestion for correcting this problem?
When you say "disks" what kind of disks?
I'm assuming CD-R's
or are these flash drives of some kind?
CD-R should last 20 to 50 years at least.
What kind of format are these maps? Is there some proprietary format? what kind of suffix do the map files have in windows? When you say "would not work in my computer" what application was being used to "read" them....?
Snowmman, I donated those disks to Fred Poynter's group at the WSHM and he apparently got them to work. You might check out the Cooper information at WSHM for their current status, but I think they were online there for some time. I do not have any of those disks at the present time.
Here is the long story on that problem. When I started getting involved with the Cooper matter, I spent quite a bit of time (and money) getting copies of the IFR maps and other information that the airliner crew were using on the evening of the hijacking.
First, I had to check with the National Records Administration to determine if they even had a copy of those maps. They did and referred me to several subcontractors that worked with them and could digitize the maps for me. Those maps were quite large and the cost for digitizing them was either $20 or $25 per square foot. I selected a subcontractor and after they were digitized, I attempted to download the data from the subcontractor's site.
Despite claims of compatibility between their computers and mine, things just didn't work very well in practice. It took repeated, and I do mean repeated, attempts to get the bugs ironed out so that I could download the data onto disks. But we were eventually able to get it done. I duplicated the disks and sent copies to Sluggo.
Since I prefer to work with hard copies of the maps, I took the disks to a photographic facility in Tucson that had equipment capable of printing large items. They got the job done. My total investment in those maps was about $400.
-
wow. Robert99. lots of work. thanks for explaining.
-
A handful of weeks back I started a private Facebook group called 'D.B. Cooper : Mystery Group.' We now have an active group of over 1400 members.
I've started doing Facebook Live events on occasion. These events have included a live broadcast of my Tena Bar dig, a conversation with Brian Ingram, and a conversation about suspects with Nicholas Broughton.
Next, I'd like to do a Facebook Live discussion/debate with someone about the FBI Flight Path versus the Western Flight Path. If anyone here is interested in joining me to discuss this hot topic, drop me a line. I'd like to do this tomorrow if possible.
Cheers!
Marty Andrade will be joining me for the Facebook Live discussion about the FBI Flight Path and the Western Flight Path. Chaucer also offered to discuss...I appreciate that very much.
Will be today at 11AM Pacific.
-
Andrade is a much more competent guest to speak on the flight path than I. Glad he is participating.
-
R99: You and I have chatted on here about the ground speed vs air speed. As I understand, if a car's speedometer says 60MPH, then in an hour it will have traveled 60 miles, regardless of wind. That's because it measures ground speed. If an aircraft's speedometer says 60MPH, then it will only have traveled 60 miles if there is no wind. If there is a 10MPH headwind, then it will only have traveled 50 miles. Am I in the right ballpark here?
If so, any idea how the flight path was calculated using this info? Or, what was the average wind speed against the plane, or with the plane?
Granted on such a short flight, the air speed vs ground speed may not have made a huge difference. Thanks.
-
R99: You and I have chatted on here about the ground speed vs air speed. As I understand, if a car's speedometer says 60MPH, then in an hour it will have traveled 60 miles, regardless of wind. That's because it measures ground speed. If an aircraft's speedometer says 60MPH, then it will only have traveled 60 miles if there is no wind. If there is a 10MPH headwind, then it will only have traveled 50 miles. Am I in the right ballpark here?
If so, any idea how the flight path was calculated using this info? Or, what was the average wind speed against the plane, or with the plane?
Granted on such a short flight, the air speed vs ground speed may not have made a huge difference. Thanks.
back in those days, no such thing as GPS on the plane, right? So the plane couldn't record it's flight path (position relative to the earth)
my assumption is that all flight path map info we have, is from an external source..i.e. radar tracking.
if so, then the speed the airplane measures itself, at different times, is only of interest for crosschecking the externally generated info.
-
R99: You and I have chatted on here about the ground speed vs air speed. As I understand, if a car's speedometer says 60MPH, then in an hour it will have traveled 60 miles, regardless of wind. That's because it measures ground speed. If an aircraft's speedometer says 60MPH, then it will only have traveled 60 miles if there is no wind. If there is a 10MPH headwind, then it will only have traveled 50 miles. Am I in the right ballpark here?
If so, any idea how the flight path was calculated using this info? Or, what was the average wind speed against the plane, or with the plane?
Granted on such a short flight, the air speed vs ground speed may not have made a huge difference. Thanks.
You have the general idea correct. This has been discussed at length on both DropZone and here over the years. I suggest you look up those detailed calculations that I have posted on this subject for a better explanation. I would also suggest that you go to the FAA's website and download their free publications on navigation and such.
But here is the basic idea of how things work for aircraft navigation. And we will keep airspeed and ground speed separate initially. The airspeed indicator in an aircraft measures a pressure that is calibrated by a standard atmospheric model to read speed. Since the pressure/airspeed as measured is a function of temperature and altitude, the pilot must use a flight calculator to determine the actual (or true) airspeed as indicated by the cockpit instrument.
The calculated true airspeed is the speed of the aircraft through the air mass in which it is flying. Generally, the air mass is moving over the earth and must be allowed for in determining the aircraft's flight path over the ground. The winds aloft (or the direction and speed of movement of the air mass) are generally predicted by the National Weather Service and provided to aviators for flight planning purposes. In actual flight, the pilot can determine the direction and velocity of the wind to a reasonably accurate degree.
Assuming that the pilot is trying to track down the centerline of an airway or to fly a direct line between two points, he will probably need to calculate a wind correction angle unless he has a direct headwind or tailwind or no wind at all. Typical flight calculators can be used to determine the wind correction angle and the component of the headwind or tailwind that he is experiencing. If it is a headwind or tailwind component, it must be subtracted from or added to the true airspeed, as determined above, to determine the ground speed. And ground speed is what is needed to determine the time required to get from point A to point B.
There is considerably more to aircraft navigation than what I have mentioned above. So again, I suggest that you get the FAA publications on the subject and give them a very thorough reading.
On the subject of radar, posts on this site have indicated that in the Portland/Vancouver area, the McChord radar (which is about 80 miles or so from Portland) has an error of several miles. The VOR equipment in the airliner is more accurate than the radar in this case. And there are a lot more VOR stations (which are used to determine airways) than radar stations. So I will give priority to the VORs over the radars here.
-
"This line of position is called the VOR "radial". The intersection of radials from two different VOR stations can be used to fix the position of the aircraft, as in earlier radio direction finding (RDF) systems."
okay pre-gps, I guess location could be determined by the intersection of two VOR stations.
but again, that determination of location is independent of any speed determinations.
I'm not sure any determination of speed feeds into location determination?
Robert99, does it? I suppose it's a crosscheck for information , but not a primary contributor to location determination.
I forget, did Flight 305 record any such location info from two or more VOR signals at any time? Did the flight recorder record that at intervals? Could the flight path have been determined from the flight recorder? (we don't know how the flight path maps were generated? is that still right?)
-
"This line of position is called the VOR "radial". The intersection of radials from two different VOR stations can be used to fix the position of the aircraft, as in earlier radio direction finding (RDF) systems."
okay pre-gps, I guess location could be determined by the intersection of two VOR stations.
but again, that determination of location is independent of any speed determinations.
I'm not sure any determination of speed feeds into location determination?
Robert99, does it? I suppose it's a crosscheck for information , but not a primary contributor to location determination.
I forget, did Flight 305 record any such location info from two or more VOR signals at any time? Did the flight recorder record that at intervals? Could the flight path have been determined from the flight recorder? (we don't know how the flight path maps were generated? is that still right?)
Snowmman, I'm not sure what you are getting at here but I assume it relates to the last paragraph in my post above which does not involve speed. The intersection of radials from two different VORs determines a location as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC.
I doubt if the Flight Recorder on NWA 305 was accurate enough to determine the actual flight path. The flight recorder was apparently the same one installed on the 727 when it was manufactured in about 1965.
As has been discussed at length over the last 11 years, the only positions given in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts for the airliner on the flight to Reno are two points on V-12 just south of SEATAC. These two points are also identified in the ARINC teletype transcripts. There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
However, the airliner was handed off to the Oakland ATC center in northern California and the Oakland ATC radio transcripts have not been redacted. The first entry in those transcripts covers the hand-off from the Seattle ATC center and includes comments from Seattle controllers. They give the location and time of the handoff and Oakland and Reno Tower transcripts include relevant times and locations when the airliner was under their control.
-
thanks. I'm not really pursuing any thought, just wondering about it
you said
"as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC."
I didn't realize the DME could determine distance accurately from a single VORTAC
if it does, that still doesn't guarantee a fixed location by itself, right?
I suppose a collection of such measurements would be pretty good, from a single VORTAC though.
exact location is a tricky thing. A lot of times, planes just need to know direction and I guess distance to a point, right?
There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
yeah, that's crazy.
-
thanks. I'm not really pursuing any thought, just wondering about it
you said
"as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC."
I didn't realize the DME could determine distance accurately from a single VORTAC
if it does, that still doesn't guarantee a fixed location by itself, right?
I suppose a collection of such measurements would be pretty good, from a single VORTAC though.
exact location is a tricky thing. A lot of times, planes just need to know direction and I guess distance to a point, right?
There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
yeah, that's crazy.
A radial and DME distance from the same VORTAC does in fact determine a valid navigation fix (a precise geographical point) and such fixes were in use in 1971.
-
thanks. I'm not really pursuing any thought, just wondering about it
you said
"as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC."
I didn't realize the DME could determine distance accurately from a single VORTAC
if it does, that still doesn't guarantee a fixed location by itself, right?
I suppose a collection of such measurements would be pretty good, from a single VORTAC though.
exact location is a tricky thing. A lot of times, planes just need to know direction and I guess distance to a point, right?
There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
yeah, that's crazy.
A radial and DME distance from the same VORTAC does in fact determine a valid navigation fix (a precise geographical point) and such fixes were in use in 1971.
Let's get specific for a change! 'There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information'. You compare the SEA to PDX transcript with the Oakland transcript saying the Oakland to RNO transcript is UNREDACTED, while the SEA to PDX transcript is redacted. To remove all info that could direct people to precisely when and where Cooper jumped and landed.
Give us an example. Give an example of what precisely is redacted ?
What line or lines (information) in the Oakland-RNO transcript should be in the SEA-PDX transcript that have been redacted.
Or is this like Martha's breakfast, where she cooked waffles instead of pancakes, and you come along saying: Martha redacted breakfast? You wanted pancakes but she gave you waffles instead?
Get specific! What kind of pancakes did Martha redact! ? Give us examples of the information that should be, or must be, in the SEA-PDX transcript that will keep you satisfied and happy! ?
-
thanks. I'm not really pursuing any thought, just wondering about it
you said
"as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC."
I didn't realize the DME could determine distance accurately from a single VORTAC
if it does, that still doesn't guarantee a fixed location by itself, right?
I suppose a collection of such measurements would be pretty good, from a single VORTAC though.
exact location is a tricky thing. A lot of times, planes just need to know direction and I guess distance to a point, right?
There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
yeah, that's crazy.
A radial and DME distance from the same VORTAC does in fact determine a valid navigation fix (a precise geographical point) and such fixes were in use in 1971.
Let's get specific for a change! 'There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information'. You compare the SEA to PDX transcript with the Oakland transcript saying the Oakland to RNO transcript is UNREDACTED, while the SEA to PDX transcript is redacted. To remove all info that could direct people to precisely when and where Cooper jumped and landed.
Give us an example. Give an example of what precisely is redacted ?
What line or lines (information) in the Oakland-RNO transcript should be in the SEA-PDX transcript that have been redacted.
Or is this like Martha's breakfast, where she cooked waffles instead of pancakes, and you come along saying: Martha redacted breakfast? You wanted pancakes but she gave you waffles instead?
Get specific! What kind of pancakes did Martha redact! ? Give us examples of the information that should be, or must be, in the SEA-PDX transcript that will keep you satisfied and happy! ?
Georger, this has been discussed for the last 10+ years. All you need to do is read the post here on Shutter's site and on DropZone. The radio transcripts are posted here and on Sluggo's site.
Read the Oakland and Reno radio transcripts, which are textbook examples of air traffic control in the 1971 time frame. That same type of information should be in the Seattle radio transcripts but is not.
-
thanks. I'm not really pursuing any thought, just wondering about it
you said
"as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC."
I didn't realize the DME could determine distance accurately from a single VORTAC
if it does, that still doesn't guarantee a fixed location by itself, right?
I suppose a collection of such measurements would be pretty good, from a single VORTAC though.
exact location is a tricky thing. A lot of times, planes just need to know direction and I guess distance to a point, right?
There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
yeah, that's crazy.
A radial and DME distance from the same VORTAC does in fact determine a valid navigation fix (a precise geographical point) and such fixes were in use in 1971.
Let's get specific for a change! 'There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information'. You compare the SEA to PDX transcript with the Oakland transcript saying the Oakland to RNO transcript is UNREDACTED, while the SEA to PDX transcript is redacted. To remove all info that could direct people to precisely when and where Cooper jumped and landed.
Give us an example. Give an example of what precisely is redacted ?
What line or lines (information) in the Oakland-RNO transcript should be in the SEA-PDX transcript that have been redacted.
Or is this like Martha's breakfast, where she cooked waffles instead of pancakes, and you come along saying: Martha redacted breakfast? You wanted pancakes but she gave you waffles instead?
Get specific! What kind of pancakes did Martha redact! ? Give us examples of the information that should be, or must be, in the SEA-PDX transcript that will keep you satisfied and happy! ?
Georger, this has been discussed for the last 10+ years. All you need to do is read the post here on Shutter's site and on DropZone. The radio transcripts are posted here and on Sluggo's site.
Read the Oakland and Reno radio transcripts, which are textbook examples of air traffic control in the 1971 time frame. That same type of information should be in the Seattle radio transcripts but is not.
Yes you have recited this sermon for 10+ years.
If I read the Harrison notes for Oakland and Reno and compare them to SEA-PDX will that yield the examples you are referring to ?
-
thanks. I'm not really pursuing any thought, just wondering about it
you said
"as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC."
I didn't realize the DME could determine distance accurately from a single VORTAC
if it does, that still doesn't guarantee a fixed location by itself, right?
I suppose a collection of such measurements would be pretty good, from a single VORTAC though.
exact location is a tricky thing. A lot of times, planes just need to know direction and I guess distance to a point, right?
There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
yeah, that's crazy.
A radial and DME distance from the same VORTAC does in fact determine a valid navigation fix (a precise geographical point) and such fixes were in use in 1971.
Let's get specific for a change! 'There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information'. You compare the SEA to PDX transcript with the Oakland transcript saying the Oakland to RNO transcript is UNREDACTED, while the SEA to PDX transcript is redacted. To remove all info that could direct people to precisely when and where Cooper jumped and landed.
Give us an example. Give an example of what precisely is redacted ?
What line or lines (information) in the Oakland-RNO transcript should be in the SEA-PDX transcript that have been redacted.
Or is this like Martha's breakfast, where she cooked waffles instead of pancakes, and you come along saying: Martha redacted breakfast? You wanted pancakes but she gave you waffles instead?
Get specific! What kind of pancakes did Martha redact! ? Give us examples of the information that should be, or must be, in the SEA-PDX transcript that will keep you satisfied and happy! ?
Georger, this has been discussed for the last 10+ years. All you need to do is read the post here on Shutter's site and on DropZone. The radio transcripts are posted here and on Sluggo's site.
Read the Oakland and Reno radio transcripts, which are textbook examples of air traffic control in the 1971 time frame. That same type of information should be in the Seattle radio transcripts but is not.
Yes you have recited this sermon for 10+ years.
If I read the Harrison notes for Oakland and Reno and compare them to SEA-PDX will that yield the examples you are referring to ?
No. With the possible exception of the first two mentions of the airliner's location on V-23 within 5 minutes of its takeoff from SEATAC, the Harrison notes are based only on information received through the ARINC phone patch and teletype system.
Harrison did not have access to the Seattle or Oakland ATC radio communications. Those communications were strictly between the air traffic control people and the airliner crew. However, the air traffic control people apparently did pass one piece of information from NWA to the airliner. And that was to switch to a frequency for the ARINC site in the San Francisco area sometime after they had been handed off to the Oakland ATC center.
-
thanks. I'm not really pursuing any thought, just wondering about it
you said
"as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC."
I didn't realize the DME could determine distance accurately from a single VORTAC
if it does, that still doesn't guarantee a fixed location by itself, right?
I suppose a collection of such measurements would be pretty good, from a single VORTAC though.
exact location is a tricky thing. A lot of times, planes just need to know direction and I guess distance to a point, right?
There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
yeah, that's crazy.
A radial and DME distance from the same VORTAC does in fact determine a valid navigation fix (a precise geographical point) and such fixes were in use in 1971.
Let's get specific for a change! 'There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information'. You compare the SEA to PDX transcript with the Oakland transcript saying the Oakland to RNO transcript is UNREDACTED, while the SEA to PDX transcript is redacted. To remove all info that could direct people to precisely when and where Cooper jumped and landed.
Give us an example. Give an example of what precisely is redacted ?
What line or lines (information) in the Oakland-RNO transcript should be in the SEA-PDX transcript that have been redacted.
Or is this like Martha's breakfast, where she cooked waffles instead of pancakes, and you come along saying: Martha redacted breakfast? You wanted pancakes but she gave you waffles instead?
Get specific! What kind of pancakes did Martha redact! ? Give us examples of the information that should be, or must be, in the SEA-PDX transcript that will keep you satisfied and happy! ?
Georger, this has been discussed for the last 10+ years. All you need to do is read the post here on Shutter's site and on DropZone. The radio transcripts are posted here and on Sluggo's site.
Read the Oakland and Reno radio transcripts, which are textbook examples of air traffic control in the 1971 time frame. That same type of information should be in the Seattle radio transcripts but is not.
Yes you have recited this sermon for 10+ years.
If I read the Harrison notes for Oakland and Reno and compare them to SEA-PDX will that yield the examples you are referring to ?
No. With the possible exception of the first two mentions of the airliner's location on V-23 within 5 minutes of its takeoff from SEATAC, the Harrison notes are based only on information received through the ARINC phone patch and teletype system.
Harrison did not have access to the Seattle or Oakland ATC radio communications. Those communications were strictly between the air traffic control people and the airliner crew. However, the air traffic control people apparently did pass one piece of information from NWA to the airliner. And that was to switch to a frequency for the ARINC site in the San Francisco area sometime after they had been handed off to the Oakland ATC center.
Thats what I thought/assumed ? So why do you keep referring to the WSHM work that found 'redactions' using the Harrison notes? If the Harrison rolls dont even apply, whats the overlap btwn his rolls and the ATC radio communications? You keep bringing up the WSHM redactions work! WSHM redaction work in what transcripts?
-
thanks. I'm not really pursuing any thought, just wondering about it
you said
"as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC."
I didn't realize the DME could determine distance accurately from a single VORTAC
if it does, that still doesn't guarantee a fixed location by itself, right?
I suppose a collection of such measurements would be pretty good, from a single VORTAC though.
exact location is a tricky thing. A lot of times, planes just need to know direction and I guess distance to a point, right?
There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
yeah, that's crazy.
A radial and DME distance from the same VORTAC does in fact determine a valid navigation fix (a precise geographical point) and such fixes were in use in 1971.
Let's get specific for a change! 'There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information'. You compare the SEA to PDX transcript with the Oakland transcript saying the Oakland to RNO transcript is UNREDACTED, while the SEA to PDX transcript is redacted. To remove all info that could direct people to precisely when and where Cooper jumped and landed.
Give us an example. Give an example of what precisely is redacted ?
What line or lines (information) in the Oakland-RNO transcript should be in the SEA-PDX transcript that have been redacted.
Or is this like Martha's breakfast, where she cooked waffles instead of pancakes, and you come along saying: Martha redacted breakfast? You wanted pancakes but she gave you waffles instead?
Get specific! What kind of pancakes did Martha redact! ? Give us examples of the information that should be, or must be, in the SEA-PDX transcript that will keep you satisfied and happy! ?
Georger, this has been discussed for the last 10+ years. All you need to do is read the post here on Shutter's site and on DropZone. The radio transcripts are posted here and on Sluggo's site.
Read the Oakland and Reno radio transcripts, which are textbook examples of air traffic control in the 1971 time frame. That same type of information should be in the Seattle radio transcripts but is not.
Yes you have recited this sermon for 10+ years.
If I read the Harrison notes for Oakland and Reno and compare them to SEA-PDX will that yield the examples you are referring to ?
No. With the possible exception of the first two mentions of the airliner's location on V-23 within 5 minutes of its takeoff from SEATAC, the Harrison notes are based only on information received through the ARINC phone patch and teletype system.
Harrison did not have access to the Seattle or Oakland ATC radio communications. Those communications were strictly between the air traffic control people and the airliner crew. However, the air traffic control people apparently did pass one piece of information from NWA to the airliner. And that was to switch to a frequency for the ARINC site in the San Francisco area sometime after they had been handed off to the Oakland ATC center.
Thats what I thought/assumed ? So why do you keep referring to the WSHM work that found 'redactions' using the Harrison notes? If the Harrison rolls dont even apply, whats the overlap btwn his rolls and the ATC radio communications? You keep bringing up the WSHM redactions work! WSHM redaction work in what transcripts?
Georger, please get someone who is fluent in English to explain posts on this site to you. I have never said that the Harrison notes were redacted. But the WSHM digital group determined that the ARINC teletype transcripts had been redacted.
Repeat "The Harrison Notes and the ARINC teletype transcripts are two, repeat t-w-o, different things." 100 times before you go to bed tonight.
-
as per discussion of redactions, I have my doubts they will ever release them Robert99. The hijacking breached our national defense system. I don't think anyone wants to admit to that. ( gov. FBI military...)
-
thanks. I'm not really pursuing any thought, just wondering about it
you said
"as does a radial and DME distance from one VORTAC."
I didn't realize the DME could determine distance accurately from a single VORTAC
if it does, that still doesn't guarantee a fixed location by itself, right?
I suppose a collection of such measurements would be pretty good, from a single VORTAC though.
exact location is a tricky thing. A lot of times, planes just need to know direction and I guess distance to a point, right?
There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information as to when and where the airliner was. And the FBI refuses to release these unredacted transcripts.
yeah, that's crazy.
A radial and DME distance from the same VORTAC does in fact determine a valid navigation fix (a precise geographical point) and such fixes were in use in 1971.
Let's get specific for a change! 'There are 19 redactions in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts to remove all additional information'. You compare the SEA to PDX transcript with the Oakland transcript saying the Oakland to RNO transcript is UNREDACTED, while the SEA to PDX transcript is redacted. To remove all info that could direct people to precisely when and where Cooper jumped and landed.
Give us an example. Give an example of what precisely is redacted ?
What line or lines (information) in the Oakland-RNO transcript should be in the SEA-PDX transcript that have been redacted.
Or is this like Martha's breakfast, where she cooked waffles instead of pancakes, and you come along saying: Martha redacted breakfast? You wanted pancakes but she gave you waffles instead?
Get specific! What kind of pancakes did Martha redact! ? Give us examples of the information that should be, or must be, in the SEA-PDX transcript that will keep you satisfied and happy! ?
Georger, this has been discussed for the last 10+ years. All you need to do is read the post here on Shutter's site and on DropZone. The radio transcripts are posted here and on Sluggo's site.
Read the Oakland and Reno radio transcripts, which are textbook examples of air traffic control in the 1971 time frame. That same type of information should be in the Seattle radio transcripts but is not.
Yes you have recited this sermon for 10+ years.
If I read the Harrison notes for Oakland and Reno and compare them to SEA-PDX will that yield the examples you are referring to ?
No. With the possible exception of the first two mentions of the airliner's location on V-23 within 5 minutes of its takeoff from SEATAC, the Harrison notes are based only on information received through the ARINC phone patch and teletype system.
Harrison did not have access to the Seattle or Oakland ATC radio communications. Those communications were strictly between the air traffic control people and the airliner crew. However, the air traffic control people apparently did pass one piece of information from NWA to the airliner. And that was to switch to a frequency for the ARINC site in the San Francisco area sometime after they had been handed off to the Oakland ATC center.
Thats what I thought/assumed ? So why do you keep referring to the WSHM work that found 'redactions' using the Harrison notes? If the Harrison rolls dont even apply, whats the overlap btwn his rolls and the ATC radio communications? You keep bringing up the WSHM redactions work! WSHM redaction work in what transcripts?
Georger, please get someone who is fluent in English to explain posts on this site to you. I have never said that the Harrison notes were redacted. But the WSHM digital group determined that the ARINC teletype transcripts had been redacted.
Repeat "The Harrison Notes and the ARINC teletype transcripts are two, repeat t-w-o, different things." 100 times before you go to bed tonight.
So what are the the Harrison TTY printout rolls produced by ARINC?
No one is saying the HARRISON NOTES were redacted. But the public version of the TTY rolls were redacted ?
BTW, a full OCR version of the TTY roll is available. Have you ever seen it? Huh?
-
So what are the the Harrison TTY printout rolls produced by ARINC?
No one is saying the HARRISON NOTES were redacted. But the public version of the TTY rolls were redacted ?
BTW, a full OCR version of the TTY roll is available. Have you ever seen it? Huh?
Georger, you were the one claiming that the Harrison Notes were redacted. The picture you attached above is the ARINC TTY roll that was loaned to WSHM along with other items. The WSHM digital group analyzed that roll and determined that portions of it had been redacted.
If you know of a "full OCR version of the TTY roll", then get in touch with the WSHM and I am sure that they would like to get a copy for their Cooper exhibit.
-
So what are the the Harrison TTY printout rolls produced by ARINC?
No one is saying the HARRISON NOTES were redacted. But the public version of the TTY rolls were redacted ?
BTW, a full OCR version of the TTY roll is available. Have you ever seen it? Huh?
Georger, you were the one claiming that the Harrison Notes were redacted. The picture you attached above is the ARINC TTY roll that was loaned to WSHM along with other items. The WSHM digital group analyzed that roll and determined that portions of it had been redacted.
If you know of a "full OCR version of the TTY roll", then get in touch with the WSHM and I am sure that they would like to get a copy for their Cooper exhibit.
OK.
-
Wish I could find the recent post by the member who said he is a skydiver and believes Cooper made it UNLESS HE LANDED IN THE WATER? Why do many believe he could not have survived a water landing? I have heard often that these chutes can be used as floatation devices in emergency water landings? This was not near Buffalo in my neck of the woods and even if he landed in Lake Ontario or the Niagara River in November he would have a fighting chance, assuming he can swim? This River, the Colombia does not look so daunting to me. if he landed in the dead middle of that lake? Then his chances are not as good. But I do not know the dimensions or how big it is. I doubt its as big as Ontario and I wonder if you can see land from any point of it? My opinion is and will remain, he made it until proven otherwise. Is he still alive? Totally different question. Id give him about a 30-40% chance.
-
Wish I could find the recent post by the member who said he is a skydiver and believes Cooper made it UNLESS HE LANDED IN THE WATER? Why do many believe he could not have survived a water landing? I have heard often that these chutes can be used as floatation devices in emergency water landings? This was not near Buffalo in my neck of the woods and even if he landed in Lake Ontario or the Niagara River in November he would have a fighting chance, assuming he can swim? This River, the Colombia does not look so daunting to me. if he landed in the dead middle of that lake? Then his chances are not as good. But I do not know the dimensions or how big it is. I doubt its as big as Ontario and I wonder if you can see land from any point of it? My opinion is and will remain, he made it until proven otherwise. Is he still alive? Totally different question. Id give him about a 30-40% chance.
Having a parachute on in the water is tough. Add in moving water, cold, nighttime, then his chances of surviving are low. But still no body, no money, no missing persons. My issue with people talking about a water landing is over simple math. The possible land area he could have landed on versus the possible water area is a ratio of maybe 10 to 1, maybe more. Even if he jumped right over the Columbia, he still would have much more of a chance of landing on land than water. I've posted the pic before, but all one has to do is look at Google Maps of the area and see that the water makes up a small portion of the area. If it were Minnesota with all the lakes, then maybe there is a higher chance.
-
FlyJack is making some claims over at DropZone that relate to the flight path, but not in the way he thinks. FJ claims that in a DVD Rataczak states that Cooper jumped 28 miles north of Portland (presumably the Portland International Airport). According to the so-called FBI map, which FJ believes to be correct, that would place the jump point at the 8:07 PM point on the map. This does not support the NWA flight crew's estimate of an 8:11 PM jump time. And if the 8:11 PM jump time is correct, and other sources indicate it is as close as can be determined, then the FBI flight path can not be correct.
FJ also claims that the airliner was visually following I-5 south at Cooper's orders. FJ apparently does not understand VORTAC radio navigation and completely ignores the weather which prevented the airliner crew from even seeing ground objects since they were above an overcast and several additional cloud layers.
-
Wish I could find the recent post by the member who said he is a skydiver and believes Cooper made it UNLESS HE LANDED IN THE WATER? Why do many believe he could not have survived a water landing? I have heard often that these chutes can be used as floatation devices in emergency water landings?
IF he lands in the river, here are his issues:
How cold is the water, as in how quickly might hypothermia be an issue?
What is the current, as in if the parachute ends up downstream of him, how much of a 'pull' is awkwardly affecting him? The parachute that he used does not detach from the harness, so he cannot easily jettison it.
If the parachute lands on top of him, or wraps around him due to the current, that is a problem.
Packed parachutes can serve as temporary flotation, but he does not have a second, still-packed chute. The money bag might do the same, but how quickly does the air let out and it gets soaked with water?
He could conceivably get out of the harness and swim away, but the money bag tied to him would be in the way, and the other factors above could make that difficult.
-
Wish I could find the recent post by the member who said he is a skydiver and believes Cooper made it UNLESS HE LANDED IN THE WATER? Why do many believe he could not have survived a water landing? I have heard often that these chutes can be used as floatation devices in emergency water landings?
IF he lands in the river, here are his issues:
How cold is the water, as in how quickly might hypothermia be an issue?
What is the current, as in if the parachute ends up downstream of him, how much of a 'pull' is awkwardly affecting him? The parachute that he used does not detach from the harness, so he cannot easily jettison it.
If the parachute lands on top of him, or wraps around him due to the current, that is a problem.
Packed parachutes can serve as temporary flotation, but he does not have a second, still-packed chute. The money bag might do the same, but how quickly does the air let out and it gets soaked with water?
He could conceivably get out of the harness and swim away, but the money bag tied to him would be in the way, and the other factors above could make that difficult.
Tosaw had tunnel vision - he apparently thought the mere fact of money at Tena Bar meant C had to have landed in the river. ;)
-
Tosaw had tunnel vision - he thought the mere fact of money at Tena Bar meant C had to have landed in the river. ;)
in terms of tunnel vision:
I'm amazed at people who claim the FBI post-hijack experiments, were sufficient to "prove" when/where cooper jumped, based on pressure bumps and oscillations.
Whatever the FBI experiments proved, they didn't prove Cooper could not have jumped by Portland.
Sure, something probably happened up farther north too. But whatever happened there, doesn't mean Cooper couldn't have still been on the plane and jumped by Portland.
People want to believe that the experiments and pilot's testimony "prove" Cooper had to have jumped there. But there's just not enough experiments/data/info. It's possible, but not a sure thing.
The money find says Cooper jumped near the Columbia. There's really no other scenario that makes sense.
And: the amount of money found (maybe just one "bundle" as given to Cooper) and condition of the money, aligns with being at the bottom of the Columbia for a number of years, and then extracted by dredge.
It's funny that people try to calculate the risk of the actual jump to a fine degree, but seem a bit willy-nilly about the probability calculations of other scenarios that are attached to an overall story.
-
Tosaw had tunnel vision - he thought the mere fact of money at Tena Bar meant C had to have landed in the river. ;)
in terms of tunnel vision:
I'm amazed at people who claim the FBI post-hijack experiments, were sufficient to "prove" when/where cooper jumped, based on pressure bumps and oscillations.
Whatever the FBI experiments proved, they didn't prove Cooper could not have jumped by Portland.
Sure, something probably happened up farther north too. But whatever happened there, doesn't mean Cooper couldn't have still been on the plane and jumped by Portland.
People want to believe that the experiments and pilot's testimony "prove" Cooper had to have jumped there. But there's just not enough experiments/data/info. It's possible, but not a sure thing.
The money find says Cooper jumped near the Columbia. There's really no other scenario that makes sense.
And: the amount of money found (maybe just one "bundle" as given to Cooper) and condition of the money, aligns with being at the bottom of the Columbia for a number of years, and then extracted by dredge.
It's funny that people try to calculate the risk of the actual jump to a fine degree, but seem a bit willy-nilly about the probability calculations of other scenarios that are attached to an overall story.
Quoted for truth.
If one believes that Cooper safely landed in the FBI dropzone, then one must reasonably explain how some of the money ended up in the Columbia 18 miles southwest of there and at least 6 months after the jump.
-
So in the spirit of exploring the possibility that Cooper didn't jump at the time (~8:11 etc) of the pressure bump, is there a way that someone could exit a 727 from the aft stairwell under given altitude and speed conditions without causing the pressure bump ?
I believe that the 305 crew reported that after the 8:11 bump, they didn't experience that again for the rest of the flight, (I will have to go back and verify this). If this is true, then he had to have exited in a way that didn't cause the bump.
Is a literal knee bend with a jump off of the stairs required to create the springing action on the stairwell that causes the bump ? Or will any form of weight removal from the stairs cause the stairs to bounce or spring back up ?
One data point is the Martin Mcnally (copy cat) hijack. I believe I read that he went down the stairs on his ass and then turned around and held on with his hands while his feet were dangling and then simply let go. The pilots and crew of the Mcnally hijacking also experienced the pressure bump with Mcnally's exit as well.
So for the 8:11pm bump not to be Coop's jump, there would have to be a way to exit the plane without creating a bump right ? Or am I missing something ? Unless it's possible for some other factor that could cause the crew to not have noticed ?
-
So in the spirit of exploring the possibility that Cooper didn't jump at the time (~8:11 etc) of the pressure bump, is there a way that someone could exit a 727 from the aft stairwell under given altitude and speed conditions without causing the pressure bump ?
I believe that the 305 crew reported that after the 8:11 bump, they didn't experience that again for the rest of the flight, (I will have to go back and verify this). If this is true, then he had to have exited in a way that didn't cause the bump.
Is a literal knee bend with a jump off of the stairs required to create the springing action on the stairwell that causes the bump ? Or will any form of weight removal from the stairs cause the stairs to bounce or spring back up ?
One data point is the Martin Mcnally (copy cat) hijack. I believe I read that he went down the stairs on his ass and then turned around and held on with his hands while his feet were dangling and then simply let go. The pilots and crew of the Mcnally hijacking also experienced the pressure bump with Mcnally's exit as well.
So for the 8:11pm bump not to be Coop's jump, there would have to be a way to exit the plane without creating a bump right ? Or am I missing something ? Unless it's possible for some other factor that could cause the crew to not have noticed ?
I approach it differently. I don't doubt that the pressure bump felt was Cooper exiting the aircraft. However, I don't think that happened at 8:11. 8:11 is when the crew first reported experiencing "oscillations" and that he was "doing something with the stairs". The time of the "pressure bump" - the larger, more noticeable change in air pressure - is not documented and is unknown. All we know is that it happened some time after the oscillations are reported at 8:11.
In the 302s, the FBI continually confused these two terms - pressure oscillations and pressure bump - and that confusion lingers today. Still, they were two distinct things. My point is that we don't know the exact time of the pressure bump; thus, we don't know the exact time Cooper jumped.
-
So in the spirit of exploring the possibility that Cooper didn't jump at the time (~8:11 etc) of the pressure bump, is there a way that someone could exit a 727 from the aft stairwell under given altitude and speed conditions without causing the pressure bump ?
I believe that the 305 crew reported that after the 8:11 bump, they didn't experience that again for the rest of the flight, (I will have to go back and verify this). If this is true, then he had to have exited in a way that didn't cause the bump.
Is a literal knee bend with a jump off of the stairs required to create the springing action on the stairwell that causes the bump ? Or will any form of weight removal from the stairs cause the stairs to bounce or spring back up ?
One data point is the Martin Mcnally (copy cat) hijack. I believe I read that he went down the stairs on his ass and then turned around and held on with his hands while his feet were dangling and then simply let go. The pilots and crew of the Mcnally hijacking also experienced the pressure bump with Mcnally's exit as well.
So for the 8:11pm bump not to be Coop's jump, there would have to be a way to exit the plane without creating a bump right ? Or am I missing something ? Unless it's possible for some other factor that could cause the crew to not have noticed ?
I approach it differently. I don't doubt that the pressure bump felt was Cooper exiting the aircraft. However, I don't think that happened at 8:11. 8:11 is when the crew first reported experiencing "oscillations" and that he was "doing something with the stairs". The time of the "pressure bump" - the larger, more noticeable change in air pressure - is not documented and is unknown. All we know is that it happened some time after the oscillations are reported at 8:11.
In the 302s, the FBI continually confused these two terms - pressure oscillations and pressure bump - and that confusion lingers today. Still, they were two distinct things. My point is that we don't know the exact time of the pressure bump; thus, we don't know the exact time Cooper jumped.
Thanks Chaucer, good point...I know discussions on this board have ranged from 8:13 to I believe as late as 8:16 or 8:17. All the variability having to do with the oscillations leading to a bump and the flight crew not recalling the exact amount of time that passed between. That's another Cooper rabbit hole.... ;D
-
Wish I could find the recent post by the member who said he is a skydiver and believes Cooper made it UNLESS HE LANDED IN THE WATER? Why do many believe he could not have survived a water landing? I have heard often that these chutes can be used as floatation devices in emergency water landings? This was not near Buffalo in my neck of the woods and even if he landed in Lake Ontario or the Niagara River in November he would have a fighting chance, assuming he can swim? This River, the Colombia does not look so daunting to me. if he landed in the dead middle of that lake? Then his chances are not as good. But I do not know the dimensions or how big it is. I doubt its as big as Ontario and I wonder if you can see land from any point of it? My opinion is and will remain, he made it until proven otherwise. Is he still alive? Totally different question. Id give him about a 30-40% chance.
Having a parachute on in the water is tough. Add in moving water, cold, nighttime, then his chances of surviving are low. But still no body, no money, no missing persons. My issue with people talking about a water landing is over simple math. The possible land area he could have landed on versus the possible water area is a ratio of maybe 10 to 1, maybe more. Even if he jumped right over the Columbia, he still would have much more of a chance of landing on land than water. I've posted the pic before, but all one has to do is look at Google Maps of the area and see that the water makes up a small portion of the area. If it were Minnesota with all the lakes, then maybe there is a higher chance.
Thanks for the response. I believe he survived the jump. Absolutely
-
So in the spirit of exploring the possibility that Cooper didn't jump at the time (~8:11 etc) of the pressure bump, is there a way that someone could exit a 727 from the aft stairwell under given altitude and speed conditions without causing the pressure bump ?
I believe that the 305 crew reported that after the 8:11 bump, they didn't experience that again for the rest of the flight, (I will have to go back and verify this). If this is true, then he had to have exited in a way that didn't cause the bump.
Is a literal knee bend with a jump off of the stairs required to create the springing action on the stairwell that causes the bump ? Or will any form of weight removal from the stairs cause the stairs to bounce or spring back up ?
One data point is the Martin Mcnally (copy cat) hijack. I believe I read that he went down the stairs on his ass and then turned around and held on with his hands while his feet were dangling and then simply let go. The pilots and crew of the Mcnally hijacking also experienced the pressure bump with Mcnally's exit as well.
So for the 8:11pm bump not to be Coop's jump, there would have to be a way to exit the plane without creating a bump right ? Or am I missing something ? Unless it's possible for some other factor that could cause the crew to not have noticed ?
I approach it differently. I don't doubt that the pressure bump felt was Cooper exiting the aircraft. However, I don't think that happened at 8:11. 8:11 is when the crew first reported experiencing "oscillations" and that he was "doing something with the stairs". The time of the "pressure bump" - the larger, more noticeable change in air pressure - is not documented and is unknown. All we know is that it happened some time after the oscillations are reported at 8:11.
In the 302s, the FBI continually confused these two terms - pressure oscillations and pressure bump - and that confusion lingers today. Still, they were two distinct things. My point is that we don't know the exact time of the pressure bump; thus, we don't know the exact time Cooper jumped.
Thanks Chaucer, good point...I know discussions on this board have ranged from 8:13 to I believe as late as 8:16 or 8:17. All the variability having to do with the oscillations leading to a bump and the flight crew not recalling the exact amount of time that passed between. That's another Cooper rabbit hole.... ;D
Just my opinion based on my interpretation of what I’ve read. A lot of folks vehemently disagree with me. They’re certainly entitled to.
-
So in the spirit of exploring the possibility that Cooper didn't jump at the time (~8:11 etc) of the pressure bump, is there a way that someone could exit a 727 from the aft stairwell under given altitude and speed conditions without causing the pressure bump ?
I believe that the 305 crew reported that after the 8:11 bump, they didn't experience that again for the rest of the flight, (I will have to go back and verify this). If this is true, then he had to have exited in a way that didn't cause the bump.
Is a literal knee bend with a jump off of the stairs required to create the springing action on the stairwell that causes the bump ? Or will any form of weight removal from the stairs cause the stairs to bounce or spring back up ?
One data point is the Martin Mcnally (copy cat) hijack. I believe I read that he went down the stairs on his ass and then turned around and held on with his hands while his feet were dangling and then simply let go. The pilots and crew of the Mcnally hijacking also experienced the pressure bump with Mcnally's exit as well.
So for the 8:11pm bump not to be Coop's jump, there would have to be a way to exit the plane without creating a bump right ? Or am I missing something ? Unless it's possible for some other factor that could cause the crew to not have noticed ?
I approach it differently. I don't doubt that the pressure bump felt was Cooper exiting the aircraft. However, I don't think that happened at 8:11. 8:11 is when the crew first reported experiencing "oscillations" and that he was "doing something with the stairs". The time of the "pressure bump" - the larger, more noticeable change in air pressure - is not documented and is unknown. All we know is that it happened some time after the oscillations are reported at 8:11.
In the 302s, the FBI continually confused these two terms - pressure oscillations and pressure bump - and that confusion lingers today. Still, they were two distinct things. My point is that we don't know the exact time of the pressure bump; thus, we don't know the exact time Cooper jumped.
Thanks Chaucer, good point...I know discussions on this board have ranged from 8:13 to I believe as late as 8:16 or 8:17. All the variability having to do with the oscillations leading to a bump and the flight crew not recalling the exact amount of time that passed between. That's another Cooper rabbit hole.... ;D
According to George Harrison's notes, at 8:18 PM the flight crew reported over the ARINC radio link that they were 28 DME miles (which are nautical miles) south of the Portland VORTAC (which is now known as the Battleground VORTAC). The same information was transmitted over the ARINC teletype network at 8:22 PM.
This supports the jump time as being 8:11 to 8:12 PM.
Also, the stairs have to be substantially lowered for Cooper to have enough room to jump and he has to be near the bottom of the stairs for this to happen. Cooper jumping will result in the stairs slamming back into the fuselage.
-
So for the 8:11pm bump not to be Coop's jump, there would have to be a way to exit the plane without creating a bump right ? Or am I missing something ? Unless it's possible for some other factor that could cause the crew to not have noticed ?
I think you're mistaken in assuming the crew detected all possible pressure bumps and reported them.
Imagine this experiment:
Crew on a plane. They feel a pressure bump and say Cooper has exited the plane. Shortly after that, they fly around an airport, requiring increased attention. A second pressure bump (maybe less) occurs. (Cooper jumped then).
Does the crew always detect and report the second pressure bump? They already thought Cooper had jumped before that. And they were maybe more mentally focused on other things at this time?
-
another random thought I had.
The pressure bump experiment was done at one speed, plane flying straight?
What happens at different speeds, or when the plane is turning? (and at different amounts of turn?)
Does the same pressure bump happen, the same way?
-
Also, the stairs have to be substantially lowered for Cooper to have enough room to jump and he has to be near the bottom of the stairs for this to happen. Cooper jumping will result in the stairs slamming back into the fuselage.
The FBI did one experiment that achieved what you say.
Doesn't mean that every time someone jumps the aft stairs, there is *always* a pressure bump like that.
Sure it means it's possible to cause a pressure bump. Does it mean *always* ? or is the pressure bump of the same magnitude? What factors affect it?
Are you saying no factors affect it and it is always the same? How would you know that?
-
So for the 8:11pm bump not to be Coop's jump, there would have to be a way to exit the plane without creating a bump right ? Or am I missing something ? Unless it's possible for some other factor that could cause the crew to not have noticed ?
I think you're mistaken in assuming the crew detected all possible pressure bumps and reported them.
Imagine this experiment:
Crew on a plane. They feel a pressure bump and say Cooper has exited the plane. Shortly after that, they fly around an airport, requiring increased attention. A second pressure bump (maybe less) occurs. (Cooper jumped then).
Does the crew always detect and report the second pressure bump? They already thought Cooper had jumped before that. And they were maybe more mentally focused on other things at this time?
I'm not mistaken, I left that possibility open in my post :D
It is definitely possible that for whatever reason, they didn't detect a 2nd bump event. Something like that MAY be on the flight data recorder.
-
Also, the stairs have to be substantially lowered for Cooper to have enough room to jump and he has to be near the bottom of the stairs for this to happen. Cooper jumping will result in the stairs slamming back into the fuselage.
The FBI did one experiment that achieved what you say.
Doesn't mean that every time someone jumps the aft stairs, there is *always* a pressure bump like that.
Sure it means it's possible to cause a pressure bump. Does it mean *always* ? or is the pressure bump of the same magnitude? What factors affect it?
Are you saying no factors affect it and it is always the same? How would you know that?
First, due to the side panels on the stairs, Cooper has to go off the end of the stairs. Second, he has to be close to the end of the stairs when he jumps or he is going to get smacked when his weight is removed from the stairs and before he clears them. Third, remember that the pivot point for the stairs is at the bottom of the fuselage structure and the stairs have to be down quite a bit for Cooper to clear the fuselage cutout even if he is crawling down them on his hands and knees. The FBI tests perfectly illustrate this.
Other things being equal, the position of the unlocked stairs is going to be determined solely by the dynamic pressure from the airstream. And it will be repeatable.
-
Other things being equal, the position of the unlocked stairs is going to be determined solely by the dynamic pressure from the airstream. And it will be repeatable.
So you're saying the behavior of whatever hinges the aft stairs pivots on, is always the same? (and I suppose any hydraulic arm connections)
I think your statement that the dynamic pressure from the airstream is the *only* factor that affects the things leading up to the pressure bump, is not supported by anything other than speculation.
-
A plane flying straight will have the airstream in line with the aftstairs.
a plane turning will have some amount of airstream at an angle across the aftstairs.
How can it be that one knows that a turning airplane has dynamic pressure on the aftstairs the same way a plane flying straight does?
This is just an example of how there is variablity.
Now you can argue you *know* that the variability doesn't affect things. But since no experiment was done, you're just speculating.
-
A plane flying straight will have the airstream in line with the aftstairs.
a plane turning will have some amount of airstream at an angle across the aftstairs.
Expanding on this thought experiment
A plane flying straight doesn't have any airstream flowing through the gap between stairs and plane (the sides)
a turning plane will have some airstream flowing thru that gap
that will create pressure downwards, which might reduce a pressure bump effect.
-
thinking about the stability/instability of a loose aft stair on a plane flying
the pressure on the bottom of the airstair is immense, due to the speed.
But: apparently the additional weight of only around 200-220 lbs on the end of the airstair, is enough to open it, and when removed, cause the air stair to "pop up" causing a pressure bump.
this is kind of amazing, as it shows the relative instability of the airstair position. 220 lbs is not much compared to all the wind forces in place
So if the plane was turning and air was running over the top of the airstair, and maybe a twisting force was applied to the hinge (due to air force on the fabric on the handrails, and also the vertical risers of the stairs)...it's very unpredictable what would happen..
Small changes apparently cause big effects (i.e. the 220 lb change causes a big effect). Nonlinearity is always the tricky thing to model.
at one end of the thought experiment, I think we could agree that if the air was flowing at 90 degrees to the airstairs, the upward and downward pressures would probably be equal (unless there was some airfoil effect due to the different shapes on top and bottom of the airstair) and the airstair wouldn't move (and the friction at the hinges would be high due to high twisting forces)
So if the plane was turning, the overall effects would be somewhere between that extreme, and the one known data point (the FBI drop experiment)
It's not a simple linear analysis. Lots of random effects
-
I'm going to go as far as to suggest there were multiple pressure bumps up until the plane landed in Reno.
-
Other things being equal, the position of the unlocked stairs is going to be determined solely by the dynamic pressure from the airstream. And it will be repeatable.
So you're saying the behavior of whatever hinges the aft stairs pivots on, is always the same? (and I suppose any hydraulic arm connections)
I think your statement that the dynamic pressure from the airstream is the *only* factor that affects the things leading up to the pressure bump, is not supported by anything other than speculation.
Snowmman, let's go over this again. Did you notice that I said "other things being equal" along with the repeatable remark? I have never seen any comments on the Internet about the stairs behavior during turning flight and my comments applied to straight and level flight as have all the previous Internet discussions that I am aware of. Admittedly, if the airliner is flying upside down and backwards then the stairs will behave differently than they did during the Cooper hijacking and the FBI tests.
The pivot point for the stairs is fixed permanently in the airframe structure. There are several steps above that pivot point to get to the cabin floor level that are also permanently fixed in the airframe and have nothing to do with the movement of the stairs below the pivot point.
Further, the stairs below the pivot point have side "modesty" panels that are made of fabric or fiberglass and are not load-bearing panels. In the hijacking, pictures of the aircraft in Reno show that these modesty panels had been heavily damaged and partially blown away. In the FBI tests, these panels appear to have been removed to facilitate the photography. But they are not an important factor in the aerodynamics related to the stairs. It is going to be extremely windy and cold on those lowered stairs.
Again, given the same aircraft configuration, altitude, airspeed, weight on the stairs, etc., the results will be repeatable from one test to another.
-
I'm going to go as far as to suggest there were multiple pressure bumps up until the plane landed in Reno.
To get a "pressure bump" the stairs are going to have to slam back into the fuselage. And that is only going to happen once. That once is when Cooper jumped off the end of the stairs.
-
was just noticing someone else commenting on the randomness of airstair behavior (likely).
https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/3483/did-db-coopers-aircraft-land-safely-with-the-aft-stairs-open
Although the hydraulic actuators would have provided damping, the swirling wakes from the landing gear and flaps—not to mention the aircraft turbulence inherent when flying low and slow over mountains in a storm—undoubtedly wrenched the stairs up and down considerably. Cooper's exit has been romanticized as a high-dive into the unknown, but it was more like trying to exit a springboard during an earthquake, with his own weight just exacerbating the problem.
-
I'm going to go as far as to suggest there were multiple pressure bumps up until the plane landed in Reno.
To get a "pressure bump" the stairs are going to have to slam back into the fuselage. And that is only going to happen once. That once is when Cooper jumped off the end of the stairs.
okay, you can believe that.
I'm just not agreeing with you.
nice video of a 727 air stair being tested...just to see the up/down motion in normal operation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMLWmKpwJ_0
-
I'm going to go as far as to suggest there were multiple pressure bumps up until the plane landed in Reno.
To get a "pressure bump" the stairs are going to have to slam back into the fuselage. And that is only going to happen once. That once is when Cooper jumped off the end of the stairs.
okay, you can believe that.
I'm just not agreeing with you.
nice video of a 727 air stair being tested...just to see the up/down motion in normal operation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMLWmKpwJ_0
Snowmman, I suggest that you get a few minutes of flying time in a vertical wind tunnel. If you live in the San Francisco area, I am sure that 377 can tell you where to find just such a tunnel.
The wind speed that you will be exposed to in a vertical wind tunnel is only about 100 MPH. At the time Cooper jumped, the airliner was doing about 225 MPH. So you will be exposed to a much lower wind speed than Cooper experienced.
After the vertical wind tunnel experience, you will probably have somewhat more respect for aerodynamic forces.
-
Thank you Robert99 for describing your experiences in a wind tunnel.
I saw a movie of a bank robbery once. If necessary, I can describe how to rob a bank, if you're curious.
-
Thank you Robert99 for describing your experiences in a wind tunnel.
I saw a movie of a bank robbery once. If necessary, I can describe how to rob a bank, if you're curious.
My memory must be getting bad, I don't remember describing my experiences in a wind tunnel. I'll leave the bank robbing business to you.
-
Thank you Robert99 for describing your experiences in a wind tunnel.
I saw a movie of a bank robbery once. If necessary, I can describe how to rob a bank, if you're curious.
My memory must be getting bad, I don't remember describing my experiences in a wind tunnel. I'll leave the bank robbing business to you.
okay.
I guess next we'll debate why a flag flaps in the wind
I thought you loved Bernoulli?
Shouldn't you start opinionating on what it means when a dynamic system changes state with just 220 lbs (or so) of force in one direction. The wind forces we're talking about are over 220 lbs. The gravity forces are over 220 lbs (the weight of the airstair)
and then guessing about other sources or changes of force of similar magnitude could exist or stop being applied?
I mean I'm not saying something complicated.
I just think it's obvious the analysis of airstair behavior in turbulent winds from differing directions has been overly simplified.
-
I'm going to go as far as to suggest there were multiple pressure bumps up until the plane landed in Reno.
To get a "pressure bump" the stairs are going to have to slam back into the fuselage. And that is only going to happen once. That once is when Cooper jumped off the end of the stairs.
okay, you can believe that.
I'm just not agreeing with you.
nice video of a 727 air stair being tested...just to see the up/down motion in normal operation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMLWmKpwJ_0
Snowmman, you need to take a look at what FlyJack has posted on DropZone today in post #64445. It is just some facts that probably won't influence your opinions.
-
Thank you Robert99 for describing your experiences in a wind tunnel.
I saw a movie of a bank robbery once. If necessary, I can describe how to rob a bank, if you're curious.
My memory must be getting bad, I don't remember describing my experiences in a wind tunnel. I'll leave the bank robbing business to you.
okay.
I guess next we'll debate why a flag flaps in the wind
I thought you loved Bernoulli?
Shouldn't you start opinionating on what it means when a dynamic system changes state with just 220 lbs (or so) of force in one direction. The wind forces we're talking about are over 220 lbs. The gravity forces are over 220 lbs (the weight of the airstair)
and then guessing about other sources or changes of force of similar magnitude could exist or stop being applied?
I mean I'm not saying something complicated.
I just think it's obvious the analysis of airstair behavior in turbulent winds from differing directions has been overly simplified.
Snowmman, you need to do some research on aerodynamics. Since we have a 225 MPH free stream velocity, just where are the significant winds from different directions going to come from?
-
Is the correct response "Yessir!"
-
According to George Harrison's notes, at 8:18 PM the flight crew reported over the ARINC radio link that they were 28 DME miles (which are nautical miles) south of the Portland VORTAC (which is now known as the Battleground VORTAC). The same information was transmitted over the ARINC teletype network at 8:22 PM.
This supports the jump time as being 8:11 to 8:12 PM.
How?
-
Is the correct response "Yessir!"
No. The correct response is "I have Googled 'Aerodynamics' on the Internet, downloaded 1000 pages of material on the subject, and will read it as fast as I can."
-
According to George Harrison's notes, at 8:18 PM the flight crew reported over the ARINC radio link that they were 28 DME miles (which are nautical miles) south of the Portland VORTAC (which is now known as the Battleground VORTAC). The same information was transmitted over the ARINC teletype network at 8:22 PM.
This supports the jump time as being 8:11 to 8:12 PM.
How?
First, FlyJack has today posted documentation on DropZone that the people directly involved in the flight agreed that the best estimate of the jump time was 8:11 PM. I recommend that you read his post.
Chaucer, there is enough information on this site for you to make your own calculations as to how this supports the 8:11 PM jump time. If the calculations are too much for you, then here is a gross way to estimate the matter.
Proceed as follows. Take the GPS coordinates for the DME location mentioned above and substract them from the GPS coordinates for the SEATAC airport. This gives you a distance. Substract the 7:26 PM takeoff time from SEATAC from the 8:18 PM time at the DME location and this gives you a time. Divide the distance by the time and that gives you an average speed between those two points.
Then work backward from the DME location along the direct line between the two points to see the approximate location of the airliner at various times.
If all else fails, download the appropriate manuals from the FAA's web page and do some studying.
-
According to George Harrison's notes, at 8:18 PM the flight crew reported over the ARINC radio link that they were 28 DME miles (which are nautical miles) south of the Portland VORTAC (which is now known as the Battleground VORTAC). The same information was transmitted over the ARINC teletype network at 8:22 PM.
This supports the jump time as being 8:11 to 8:12 PM.
How?
First, FlyJack has today posted documentation on DropZone that the people directly involved in the flight agreed that the best estimate of the jump time was 8:11 PM. I recommend that you read his post.
Chaucer, there is enough information on this site for you to make your own calculations as to how this supports the 8:11 PM jump time. If the calculations are too much for you, then here is a gross way to estimate the matter.
Proceed as follows. Take the GPS coordinates for the DME location mentioned above and substract them from the GPS coordinates for the SEATAC airport. This gives you a distance. Substract the 7:26 PM takeoff time from SEATAC from the 8:18 PM time at the DME location and this gives you a time. Divide the distance by the time and that gives you an average speed between those two points.
Then work backward from the DME location along the direct line between the two points to see the approximate location of the airliner at various times.
If all else fails, download the appropriate manuals from the FAA's web page and do some studying.
You have still failed to explain how the DME information suggests an 8:11 jump. All the DME information did was indicate a location of 305 at a particular point in time. To my knowledge, it does nothing to indicate any time related to Cooper's jump.
If that's not accurate, please educate me.
-
All of the current "best info" doesn't provide a story about how the money arrived at Tena Bar in the condition it was found.
The most likely reason: the current best info has an error somewhere.
It's reminicent of the FBI/Carr being stuck on calling Cooper a whuffo. And claiming the evidence pointed to him being a whuffo. (it doesn't)
Any good investigation should always allow for some bit of "evidence" to be wrongly interpreted. Because that happens. It's not obvious why until after things are solved.
Arguably, it's unlikely multiple bits of evidence are wrongly interpreted. But highly likely one is.
-
All of the current "best info" doesn't provide a story about how the money arrived at Tena Bar in the condition it was found.
The most likely reason: the current best info has an error somewhere.
It's reminicent of the FBI/Carr being stuck on calling Cooper a whuffo. And claiming the evidence pointed to him being a whuffo. (it doesn't)
Any good investigation should always allow for some bit of "evidence" to be wrongly interpreted. Because that happens. It's not obvious why until after things are solved.
Arguably, it's unlikely multiple bits of evidence are wrongly interpreted. But highly likely one is.
Its highly unlikely " the money arrived at Tena Bar in the condition it was found." The condition of the money is a consequence of natural processes working, in-situ.
I pray to God nobody tries to claim the condition of the found money is due to "bank type bands" (paper straps) being around the bills! Or termite balls rolling the money to Tena Bar!
:rofl:
-
Its highly unlikely " the money arrived at Tena Bar in the condition it was found." The condition of the money is a consequence of natural processes working, in-situ.
well, you can break it down
1) the condition the money was in when handed to Cooper
2) The money didn't change state while Cooper had it..i.e. he didn't burn it or something.
3) The money was somewhere for a period of time. It was likely outdoors or under water. So it changed state
4) The money was then on Tena Bar. It then had another change of state.
So the final state, is basically dependent on 3 and 4.
it's unclear how that breaks down.
it's unlikely Cooper jumped and left the money on tena bar that night, so that 3 and 4 would be combined.
-
Its highly unlikely " the money arrived at Tena Bar in the condition it was found." The condition of the money is a consequence of natural processes working, in-situ.
well, you can break it down
1) the condition the money was in when handed to Cooper
2) The money didn't change state while Cooper had it..i.e. he didn't burn it or something.
3) The money was somewhere for a period of time. It was likely outdoors or under water. So it changed state
4) The money was then on Tena Bar. It then had another change of state.
So the final state, is basically dependent on 3 and 4.
it's unclear how that breaks down.
it's unlikely Cooper jumped and left the money on tena bar that night, so that 3 and 4 would be combined.
The Lab found particle evidence that the money has been exposed river water 'like Columbia River water'. Columbia river water is the common denominator. No other water environment. Not Lewis, not Washougal, only the Columbia.
-
According to George Harrison's notes, at 8:18 PM the flight crew reported over the ARINC radio link that they were 28 DME miles (which are nautical miles) south of the Portland VORTAC (which is now known as the Battleground VORTAC). The same information was transmitted over the ARINC teletype network at 8:22 PM.
This supports the jump time as being 8:11 to 8:12 PM.
How?
First, FlyJack has today posted documentation on DropZone that the people directly involved in the flight agreed that the best estimate of the jump time was 8:11 PM. I recommend that you read his post.
Chaucer, there is enough information on this site for you to make your own calculations as to how this supports the 8:11 PM jump time. If the calculations are too much for you, then here is a gross way to estimate the matter.
Proceed as follows. Take the GPS coordinates for the DME location mentioned above and substract them from the GPS coordinates for the SEATAC airport. This gives you a distance. Substract the 7:26 PM takeoff time from SEATAC from the 8:18 PM time at the DME location and this gives you a time. Divide the distance by the time and that gives you an average speed between those two points.
Then work backward from the DME location along the direct line between the two points to see the approximate location of the airliner at various times.
If all else fails, download the appropriate manuals from the FAA's web page and do some studying.
You have still failed to explain how the DME information suggests an 8:11 jump. All the DME information did was indicate a location of 305 at a particular point in time. To my knowledge, it does nothing to indicate any time related to Cooper's jump.
If that's not accurate, please educate me.
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
-
Yes, Bob. I know all of that. I’m asking you is how the DME information points to Cooper jumping at 8:11. Those are two totally unrelated pieces of data.
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
Billfold found in front yard at 1307 C Ave East. Oskaloosa, Iowa in Nov 1955.
We note that a plane flew near Oskaloosa Iowa in Sept 1955.
The plane 'explains' the billfold found in Nov 1955.
All based on redactions and comments Ammerman made.
?
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
Here is a quick snapshot of a straight line from the Malay Intersection (around Toledo, WA) to the Canby Intersection (Canby, OR). A question on this path would also be as to why there is no mention of the plane crossing I5 or flying along the Columbia River. One answer would be cloud cover.
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
Here is a quick snapshot of a straight line from the Malay Intersection (around Toledo, WA) to the Canby Intersection (Canby, OR). A question on this path would also be as to why there is no mention of the plane crossing I5 or flying along the Columbia River. One answer would be cloud cover.
post a picture - Im old fashioned!
Even if the fp went straight over the money find, that does not mean Cooper landed there given the winds at the time ... unless he drops straight down but even that is a parabolic curve!
There is no evidence of a west path. There is plenty of evidence of people trying to invent evidence to support one. The best evidence for a west path is: "Thats the way he woulda done it - or thats the way I wudda done it". West path = DB Cooper Ivermectin/Bleach ! Report any ill effects to your doctor immediately.
Here - your pdf.
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
Here is a quick snapshot of a straight line from the Malay Intersection (around Toledo, WA) to the Canby Intersection (Canby, OR). A question on this path would also be as to why there is no mention of the plane crossing I5 or flying along the Columbia River. One answer would be cloud cover.
The airliner was flying on Instruments above an overcast and several cloud layers. The flight crew was using radio navigation and, if the so-called FBI flight path is correct, were apparently having a hard time staying on the centerline of V-23. In reality, whether being flown manually or on autopilot, the airliner could stay within a few hundred feet of the centerline of V-23. Being on instruments, the flight crew did not need any visual ground references. That is why there is no mention of any ground objects except the "glow" through the clouds of the lights from the Vancouver/Portland area.
When on the Western Flight Path, the airliner crew would be flying headings specified by the ATC controller. They would not necessarily know their exact geographical position at a specific time and that is why, when Cooper jumped, Rataczak radioed (apparently over the ARINC radio/telephone link) to "mark your maps" rather than giving a specific location. But even while on the Western Flight Path the airliner was never more than about three miles from V-23 and that was for just a few minutes and it was always in controlled airspace.
In my very first post on Dropzone in 2010, I discussed why the so-called FBI flight path (although the FBI apparently didn't have anything to do with it in the first place) could not be correct. At that time I had never heard about the placard's find location but only became aware of it later when Tom Kaye asked me to do an analysis related to it. The placard's find location supports the Western Flight Path, meaning that it could have come from the hijacked airliner. But I will leave it to others to argue about whether it came from the hijacked airliner or not.
Where are these "flight logs" you mention coming from?
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
fcastle, the attached is from the Citizen Sleuths website (link below), not sure if you have seen this already or if this is what your looking for, but it has all 3 flight paths and TK/CSs conclusions:
https://citizensleuths.com/flightpath.html
-
bigger version of Toms chart ...
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
fcastle, the attached is from the Citizen Sleuths website (link below), not sure if you have seen this already or if this is what your looking for, but it has all 3 flight paths and TK/CSs conclusions:
https://citizensleuths.com/flightpath.html
Based on the three flight paths shown, the placard could only have come from the Western Flight Path. The winds aloft on the evening of the hijacking were from the southwest (225 degrees true) at about 30 knots down to a relatively low altitude. Consequently, the placard would not fall straight down to land under the FBI flight path. And it certainly would not move upwind from the blue line flight path.
-
Regarding the placard, I recall about a year or so ago, Shutter and EU went back and forth on whether the placard was from the outside or inside of the plane. With the obvious implication that IF it was from the outside, it could not be linked to flight 305. I though that they came to a consensus or agreement that it was from the outside of the plane. Shut, is my understanding correct ?
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
fcastle, the attached is from the Citizen Sleuths website (link below), not sure if you have seen this already or if this is what your looking for, but it has all 3 flight paths and TK/CSs conclusions:
https://citizensleuths.com/flightpath.html
Robert, I've seen this a number of times, and was looking at it when I posted asking for something better. This document does not really show towns or landmarks, it is a lot of labels with corresponding text further down the page. I was hoping there was something more like the FBI map that shows times and towns so I could see where the WFP was on Google Maps. Based off Bruce Smith's article that references you, it sounds like you think the plane flew a straight line from Malay to Canby. If that's the case, then I have what I need to satisfy my curiosity.
In terms of your earlier question about "flight logs." I used that as a general term, but I realize to a pilot like yourself it means something specific. I was referring to the 302s and communications, etc, not specifically a flight log. Taking everything into account, I still am curious as to the pros/cons of the WFP. I don't really debate this aspect of the case, so I just don't have the bandwith to spend a lot of time putting things down on paper. I just figured maybe someone has.
One thing I continue to be somewhat confused about is how fast the plane was going. 1. To determine where it was in relation to the ground 2. To determine speed between certain points, essentially the instantaneous speed versus average speed. 3. What was it like when he jumped out.
Citizen Sleuths quotes you as
4. Personal communication, Robert Nicholson: Mr. Nicholson did an independent calculation of the DME positions, time enroute and airspeed. His conclusions were that there was very little winds alloft and the ground speed of the plane was close to the airspeed. His analysis can be downloaded here
I was not aware that at an altitude of 10,000 feet that the relative speed could be so different. Citizen Sleuths writes this:
7. Quick calculation of DME positions vs speed.
19:40 14 miles DME south of SEA vor (Seatac airport)
20:22 23 miles DME south of PDX (PDX = Battleground in 1971)
Distance traveled = 130.75 miles in 42 minutes.
130.75/42=3.11 miles per minute
= 186 mph
= 161.63 knots
slight head wind
I'm guessing the 186MPH is ground speed?? If Cooper bailed out at 186 MPH versus 225MPH, would it make a big difference? I sense it would, but then again both are pretty fast compared to what I've experienced. Granted he was going out the back and not the side. I think it was Heady who said he jumped out going very fast. But if he said 300 MPH, what was that? Speed in the air, over ground, relative speed compared to wind/altitude etc.
Anyhow, maybe you have a calculation of where the plane was relative to the ground at certain times. Even if it is on the Western Flight path, at least it would show times and ground distance. Are you able to calculate this?
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
fcastle, the attached is from the Citizen Sleuths website (link below), not sure if you have seen this already or if this is what your looking for, but it has all 3 flight paths and TK/CSs conclusions:
https://citizensleuths.com/flightpath.html
Robert, I've seen this a number of times, and was looking at it when I posted asking for something better. This document does not really show towns or landmarks, it is a lot of labels with corresponding text further down the page. I was hoping there was something more like the FBI map that shows times and towns so I could see where the WFP was on Google Maps. Based off Bruce Smith's article that references you, it sounds like you think the plane flew a straight line from Malay to Canby. If that's the case, then I have what I need to satisfy my curiosity.
In terms of your earlier question about "flight logs." I used that as a general term, but I realize to a pilot like yourself it means something specific. I was referring to the 302s and communications, etc, not specifically a flight log. Taking everything into account, I still am curious as to the pros/cons of the WFP. I don't really debate this aspect of the case, so I just don't have the bandwith to spend a lot of time putting things down on paper. I just figured maybe someone has.
One thing I continue to be somewhat confused about is how fast the plane was going. 1. To determine where it was in relation to the ground 2. To determine speed between certain points, essentially the instantaneous speed versus average speed. 3. What was it like when he jumped out.
Citizen Sleuths quotes you as
4. Personal communication, Robert Nicholson: Mr. Nicholson did an independent calculation of the DME positions, time enroute and airspeed. His conclusions were that there was very little winds alloft and the ground speed of the plane was close to the airspeed. His analysis can be downloaded here
I was not aware that at an altitude of 10,000 feet that the relative speed could be so different. Citizen Sleuths writes this:
7. Quick calculation of DME positions vs speed.
19:40 14 miles DME south of SEA vor (Seatac airport)
20:22 23 miles DME south of PDX (PDX = Battleground in 1971)
Distance traveled = 130.75 miles in 42 minutes.
130.75/42=3.11 miles per minute
= 186 mph
= 161.63 knots
slight head wind
I'm guessing the 186MPH is ground speed?? If Cooper bailed out at 186 MPH versus 225MPH, would it make a big difference? I sense it would, but then again both are pretty fast compared to what I've experienced. Granted he was going out the back and not the side. I think it was Heady who said he jumped out going very fast. But if he said 300 MPH, what was that? Speed in the air, over ground, relative speed compared to wind/altitude etc.
Anyhow, maybe you have a calculation of where the plane was relative to the ground at certain times. Even if it is on the Western Flight path, at least it would show times and ground distance. Are you able to calculate this?
Fcastle866 and JAG, there is some misinformation attributed to me in the above posts. So rather than answer this particular post piecemeal, I am going to refer you back to some of the original posts on DropZone and we can start from there again. Due to the combining of several threads when DropZone reopened the Cooper thread, this may take a few days for me to locate them.
To answer your last paragraph above, those calculations were made and originally posted on DropZone years ago. They put the airliner almost directly overhead of Tena Bar at 8:11-8:12 PM and that accuracy surprised even me as I noted in the original post.
This matter will be continued. Fcastle866 and JAG check your PMs.
-
Chaucer, have you done what I recommend above? If you don't understand what I was saying above, please let me know and give me some idea about your level of understanding related to mathematics, navigation, etc., so that I can speak to your level.
well, speaking for myself, I know that 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
So you can start with that understanding.
2 neutrinos + 2 neutrinos = 749 neutrinos ! ;) ;)
Is there a map of the Western flight path? Also, is there a side by side comparison of the two flight paths (Western and FBI)? For instance: The pros/cons of both? I know there have been a lot of discussion on here, Facebook, etc. But is there a one page summary for those who do not get deep into the details? Things like:
Western Flight Path:
Explains the Tena Bar money find (Straight line from Malay Intersection to Canby Intersection)
Shows plane flying West of Portland and Vancouver so a bomb blast/crash would not kill as many people on the ground
Matches some of what Cliff Ammerman said.
FBI Flight Path:
Tracks more closely with V23
Explains the placard find
Matches with flight logs
etc. etc. Basically if someone just wanted to know the pros/cons and not get into an argument.
fcastle, the attached is from the Citizen Sleuths website (link below), not sure if you have seen this already or if this is what your looking for, but it has all 3 flight paths and TK/CSs conclusions:
https://citizensleuths.com/flightpath.html
Robert, I've seen this a number of times, and was looking at it when I posted asking for something better. This document does not really show towns or landmarks, it is a lot of labels with corresponding text further down the page. I was hoping there was something more like the FBI map that shows times and towns so I could see where the WFP was on Google Maps. Based off Bruce Smith's article that references you, it sounds like you think the plane flew a straight line from Malay to Canby. If that's the case, then I have what I need to satisfy my curiosity.
In terms of your earlier question about "flight logs." I used that as a general term, but I realize to a pilot like yourself it means something specific. I was referring to the 302s and communications, etc, not specifically a flight log. Taking everything into account, I still am curious as to the pros/cons of the WFP. I don't really debate this aspect of the case, so I just don't have the bandwith to spend a lot of time putting things down on paper. I just figured maybe someone has.
One thing I continue to be somewhat confused about is how fast the plane was going. 1. To determine where it was in relation to the ground 2. To determine speed between certain points, essentially the instantaneous speed versus average speed. 3. What was it like when he jumped out.
Citizen Sleuths quotes you as
4. Personal communication, Robert Nicholson: Mr. Nicholson did an independent calculation of the DME positions, time enroute and airspeed. His conclusions were that there was very little winds alloft and the ground speed of the plane was close to the airspeed. His analysis can be downloaded here
I was not aware that at an altitude of 10,000 feet that the relative speed could be so different. Citizen Sleuths writes this:
7. Quick calculation of DME positions vs speed.
19:40 14 miles DME south of SEA vor (Seatac airport)
20:22 23 miles DME south of PDX (PDX = Battleground in 1971)
Distance traveled = 130.75 miles in 42 minutes.
130.75/42=3.11 miles per minute
= 186 mph
= 161.63 knots
slight head wind
I'm guessing the 186MPH is ground speed?? If Cooper bailed out at 186 MPH versus 225MPH, would it make a big difference? I sense it would, but then again both are pretty fast compared to what I've experienced. Granted he was going out the back and not the side. I think it was Heady who said he jumped out going very fast. But if he said 300 MPH, what was that? Speed in the air, over ground, relative speed compared to wind/altitude etc.
Anyhow, maybe you have a calculation of where the plane was relative to the ground at certain times. Even if it is on the Western Flight path, at least it would show times and ground distance. Are you able to calculate this?
Fcastle866 and JAG, there is some misinformation attributed to me in the above posts. So rather than answer this particular post piecemeal, I am going to refer you back to some of the original posts on DropZone and we can start from there again. Due to the combining of several threads when DropZone reopened the Cooper thread, this may take a few days for me to locate them.
To answer your last paragraph above, those calculations were made and originally posted on DropZone years ago. They put the airliner almost directly overhead of Tena Bar at 8:11-8:12 PM and that accuracy surprised even me as I noted in the original post.
This matter will be continued. Fcastle866 and JAG check your PMs.
Maybe you can drag this out until the year 2050 ?
-
Interesting video from Antarctica, a woman opens a door with 60+ mph winds.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz2SeEzxMuE&ab_channel=AnthonyPowell
-
I jumped off the rear ramp of a C 130 that was flying WOT. I estimate the airspeed was around 350 mph. It was a test jump for a company that makes automatic openers for reserves, called AADs. I was outfitted with pressure sensors all over my exterior and a data recorder. They wanted to see how pressure fluctuated on a tumbling skydiver. Their AADs trigger on sensed pressure which is inversely proportional to altitude. High pressure indicates low altitude.
The exit was REALLY VIOLENT. I was wildly tumbling completely unable to stabilize. The angular rate of my tumbling was very high. Everything was a blur. I worried about my canopy accidentally deploying and the rapid deceleration dissecting a coronary artery. That has happened to some early head down freefallers whose rigs vibrated/fluttered open. My rig was designed for high speed freefall but I still worried. As I decelerated to freefall velocity I was able to stabilize and deploy my main canopy normally.
The company that paid for my test jump was very pleased with the data that was recorded from my wild ride. Turns out that there were large differences recorded simultaneously between pressure sensors mounted on different parts of my tumbling body.
Really high exit speed causes freefall chaos. At least it did with me. It’s odd to think about slowing down in freefall.
377
-
Geez, how did you get suckered into that, haha?
-
You called it right Dudeman. I found out later that they had asked many other jumpers all of whom declined. The “pay” was a free C 130 jump and a tshirt. I initially felt like a heroic test pilot specially selected for his courage and skills. That morphed into sucker pretty quickly.
377
-
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.
This is truly fascinating. https://www.airlineratings.com/news/sensational-new-finding-mh370-flightpath/
I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?
377
-
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.
This is truly fascinating. https://www.airlineratings.com/news/sensational-new-finding-mh370-flightpath/
I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?
377
Very interesting and definitely has merit. If you know K6MYC (Mike Stahl at M2 Res./Antennas) you should run this by Mike ;)). Mike would be interested in this - its right down his alley. Mike ran a few studies related to this for NASA and JPL when he was working with Stanford back in the 70s? Glad you brought this to our attention. Could this technique be used to check the fp of 305 ... my thought is its too old, but its worth a discussion. What are the inherent limitations of this process?
Im glad they are still looking for MH370.
Good post!
BTW you can still find Mike on 40m ~7150 working the South Pacific almost every night around 0600 UTC when there is propagation ... Mike is now 84 and still going strong. He is nothing short of amazing! The same old Mike we always knew!! :chr2:
-
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.
This is truly fascinating. https://www.airlineratings.com/news/sensational-new-finding-mh370-flightpath/
I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?
377
This is nonsense. The probability of little green men from Mars hijacking the MH370 airliner is greater than the probability that this fellow can reconstruct its flight path several years after the fact. ::)
-
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.
This is truly fascinating. https://www.airlineratings.com/news/sensational-new-finding-mh370-flightpath/
I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?
377
This is nonsense. The probability of little green men from Mars hijacking the MH370 airliner is greater than the probability that this fellow can reconstruct its flight path several years after the fact. ::)
Well of course, ... what else ! Have you reviewed the theory? https://www.airlineratings.com/news/mh370-set-off-radio-tripwires-confirming-location-says-new-report/
Never mind. Go back to sleep. All is well.
I dont see YOU doing anything! So what's your beef with people who are trying to help ....
-
The WSPR Protocol: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSPR_(amateur_radio_software)
Applications
Raspberry Pi as WSPR transmitter
The protocol was designed to test propagation paths on the LF, MF and HF bands. Also used experimentally at VHF and higher frequencies. Other applications include antenna testing, frequency stability and frequency accuracy checking. Usually a WSPR station contains a computer and a transceiver, but it is also possible to build very simple beacon transmitters with little effort. For example a simple WSPR beacon can be built using the Si 570,[5] or Si 5351.[6] The Raspberry Pi can also be used as WSPR beacon. Density distribution of WSPR spots, January 2014 vs July 2014, using only most distant reception per spot.
Note - an accurate clock is essential both for transmission, and decoding of received signals (native Windows timing is usually inadequate).
MH370
In May 2021, aerospace engineer Richard Godfrey suggested an examination of historical WSPR data to further define the flight path of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 on 8 March 2014, suggesting that there were "518 unique transmission paths that cross the area of interest around Malaysia, the Malacca Strait and the Indian Ocean. With the WSPR data provided every two minutes and the ability to check against the satellite data every hour it is possible to detect and track MH370 from two independent sources."[7]
However, the method used in this article is highly questionable; The reflected signal energy from aircraft in such distances is very small (inverse square law), much smaller than variance on the regular skywave signal due to multipath propagation, which can vary by tens of dB within seconds. Such difficulties make it necessary to use more advanced methods for radar applications at such distances in this frequency range (Over-the-horizon radar). But, the theory is sound. Better data may provide new insights especially if it agrees with prior techniques utilized which have already defined a general search area.
-
Can airliner flight paths be reconstructed after the fact? It appears that some can. This wouldn’t help with 305 because the system used to map ionospheric reflections using the Internet and HF ham radio signals wasn’t available in 1971.
This is truly fascinating. https://www.airlineratings.com/news/sensational-new-finding-mh370-flightpath/
I want to hear from Snowmman, Georger, Tom Kaye and other scientifically inclined Vortex dwellers. What do you think of this technique?
377
interesting. from that link. Proplab pro http://www.spacew.com/www/proplab.html
here's a review of various radio prop programs. Proplab Pro is available since 2007. 4 stars http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/qsl-review-propagation-software-research.htm
“I use Proplab Pro V3.1 for tracing radio waves around the globe. Proplab Pro was one of the first ionospheric physics-based HF radio signal ray-tracing engines in the world for the PC and has been maintained and developed for over 30 years. It continues to be used by research organisations, scientists, engineers, students, the military and amateur radio operators around the world. It is one of the only software packages to reliably predict ionospherically refracted HF radio signal behaviour. It uses both three-dimensional models of the ionosphere as well as three-dimensional topographical data of the Earth to provide unprecedented detail in modelling HF radio signal propagation worldwide.
GDTAAA is a software application that I have developed that uses a Vincenty WGS84 navigation engine to track aircraft, a spherical navigation engine to track WSPRnet data links and anomalies. In addition, I use the Proplab Pro V3.1 engine with its embedded IRI 2007 ionospheric model to perform global ionospheric mapping and ray tracing.”
-
One of the controversial claims made by Dr. Edwards in his book is that the timing of the plot points on the FBI flight path map are wrong.
To prove this claim, he references the notes of George Harrison. Dr. Edwards concludes that there are six different authors of the notes. He labels them A through F. He states that Author F made the notation “23 DME PDX” which indicates that Flight 305 was 23 nautical miles south of what is now the Battleground VORTEC. Author F marks this as occurring at 8:18. Two other authors marked the same event, but put this time as 8:22.
Edwards examines the remaining notes and times and concludes that Author F was listening to the radio transmissions in real time and that their time of 8:18 was accurate while the other two authors were reading the teletype printout which had a 2 to 4 minute delay.
Calculating the flight speed and distance in reverse, now puts the 8:11 - 8:13 jump time and drop zone farther south over the Columbia River.
I also tried to do this same thing, but I was unable to square that circle and make it work. Dr. Edwards puts forward compelling evidence, but this is a significant aspect of the case and is only given two pages of explanation. For such an important detail about the case, I would have liked to have seen more elaboration on it.
Lastly, in order to forestall any attacks directed MY way, I am non-committal about Dr. Edwards conclusions regarding this. I’m intrigued by it, but I don’t have an opinion one way or another basically because I don’t know enough about it to hold an opinion. Any of you who are more knowledgeable want to chime in?
-
377 wears 3 altimeters.
He never knows what altitude he's at...just picks the answer he likes best :)
That's the nice thing when there are multiple sources for the same data, you can just cherry pick the one you like best!
-
Snow has me figured out. Twice in 53 years of jumping, I’ve been down to my last parachute. I didn’t like that feeling at all. Plan B is fine until you are using plan B and realize there is no plan C. At that moment I wanted a reserve for my reserve. Three altimeters makes me feel better than I feel with just one. I think I may need a third canopy. Statistically it’s extraordinarily unlikely that I’ll ever use the tertiary reserve. So I won’t be wishing for a fourth canopy. Three should suffice.
When I mentioned a tertiary reserve to a rigger friend he laughed. He said a few were worn by CRW dogs, jumpers who fly linked canopy formations which occasionally devolve into horrific wraps (entangled canopies). He couldn’t recall any tertiary saves. He suggested humorously that instead of a third canopy I just carry a gun. “If you really need a third canopy and don’t have one at the time, just shoot yourself because it’s clearly your time to die.”
Now where can I put my second spare tire?
377
-
377, you put a big smile on my face. Thank you.
-
One of the controversial claims made by Dr. Edwards in his book is that the timing of the plot points on the FBI flight path map are wrong.
To prove this claim, he references the notes of George Harrison. Dr. Edwards concludes that there are six different authors of the notes. He labels them A through F. He states that Author F made the notation “23 DME PDX” which indicates that Flight 305 was 23 nautical miles south of what is now the Battleground VORTEC. Author F marks this as occurring at 8:18. Two other authors marked the same event, but put this time as 8:22.
Edwards examines the remaining notes and times and concludes that Author F was listening to the radio transmissions in real time and that their time of 8:18 was accurate while the other two authors were reading the teletype printout which had a 2 to 4 minute delay.
Calculating the flight speed and distance in reverse, now puts the 8:11 - 8:13 jump time and drop zone farther south over the Columbia River.
I also tried to do this same thing, but I was unable to square that circle and make it work. Dr. Edwards puts forward compelling evidence, but this is a significant aspect of the case and is only given two pages of explanation. For such an important detail about the case, I would have liked to have seen more elaboration on it.
Lastly, in order to forestall any attacks directed MY way, I am non-committal about Dr. Edwards conclusions regarding this. I’m intrigued by it, but I don’t have an opinion one way or another basically because I don’t know enough about it to hold an opinion. Any of you who are more knowledgeable want to chime in?
Chaucer, this has been discussed at length here for the last 10 years or so. It is as simple as anything can be. The airliner was at the 23 DME point at 8:18 PM and so reported that over the ARINC telephone patch that had been set up. Not everyone at the NWA facility at SEATAC, where the Harrison papers originated, was on the telephone patch.
The ARINC telephone patch went through the same ARINC facility that routinely communicated with aircraft through a dedicated VHF radio frequency. Routinely, the ARINC facility would then type up the communication and send it by teletype to subscribing stations. In this instance, the phone patch permitted the people in SEATAC and elsewhere to also listen in on the communications between the ARINC station and the airliner.
Nevertheless, the ARINC facility continued to prepare and transmit over the teletype system the essence of the communications it was receiving. This required a few minutes to do and the 8:22 PM time at the bottom of the message was the time the ARINC teletype operator pushed the "send" button on his machine.
The people who were on the phone patch got the time as 8:18 PM when the information was actually transmitted and the people who were not on the phone patch got the time as 8:22 PM from the time at the bottom of the teletype printout.
There is no problem with these times. There has never been a problem with these times.
-
Everyone, please stop discussing things.
It has all been discussed.
I will remind as necessary.
We can discuss the reminders, though.
-
Everyone, please stop discussing things.
It has all been discussed.
I will remind as necessary.
We can discuss the reminders, though.
Snowmman, if people would read the posts when they were originally done, we wouldn't have to repost the same information dozens of times. This matter related to the times will resurface again within the next few months and we will have to go through the same thing again.
-
Everyone, please stop discussing things.
It has all been discussed.
I will remind as necessary.
We can discuss the reminders, though.
Snowmman, if people would read the posts when they were originally done, we wouldn't have to repost the same information dozens of times. This matter related to the times will resurface again within the next few months and we will have to go through the same thing again.
Okay we will not repost the original material. All reposting of reminders about the reposting methodology are okay.
Since I am reminding relative to a repost about the repost methodology, this post is also covered by the relevant conventions.
-
377 wears 3 altimeters.
He never knows what altitude he's at...just picks the answer he likes best :)
That's the nice thing when there are multiple sources for the same data, you can just cherry pick the one you like best!
I jumped for years without any altimeter at all. I always know where I'm at. Because the planet doesn't lie.
-------
Q: What do you call the altitude under an open reserve?
A: A WASTE!
-
One of the controversial claims made by Dr. Edwards in his book is that the timing of the plot points on the FBI flight path map are wrong.
To prove this claim, he references the notes of George Harrison. Dr. Edwards concludes that there are six different authors of the notes. He labels them A through F. He states that Author F made the notation “23 DME PDX” which indicates that Flight 305 was 23 nautical miles south of what is now the Battleground VORTEC. Author F marks this as occurring at 8:18. Two other authors marked the same event, but put this time as 8:22.
Edwards examines the remaining notes and times and concludes that Author F was listening to the radio transmissions in real time and that their time of 8:18 was accurate while the other two authors were reading the teletype printout which had a 2 to 4 minute delay.
Calculating the flight speed and distance in reverse, now puts the 8:11 - 8:13 jump time and drop zone farther south over the Columbia River.
I also tried to do this same thing, but I was unable to square that circle and make it work. Dr. Edwards puts forward compelling evidence, but this is a significant aspect of the case and is only given two pages of explanation. For such an important detail about the case, I would have liked to have seen more elaboration on it.
Lastly, in order to forestall any attacks directed MY way, I am non-committal about Dr. Edwards conclusions regarding this. I’m intrigued by it, but I don’t have an opinion one way or another basically because I don’t know enough about it to hold an opinion. Any of you who are more knowledgeable want to chime in?
Chaucer, this has been discussed at length here for the last 10 years or so. It is as simple as anything can be. The airliner was at the 23 DME point at 8:18 PM and so reported that over the ARINC telephone patch that had been set up. Not everyone at the NWA facility at SEATAC, where the Harrison papers originated, was on the telephone patch.
The ARINC telephone patch went through the same ARINC facility that routinely communicated with aircraft through a dedicated VHF radio frequency. Routinely, the ARINC facility would then type up the communication and send it by teletype to subscribing stations. In this instance, the phone patch permitted the people in SEATAC and elsewhere to also listen in on the communications between the ARINC station and the airliner.
Nevertheless, the ARINC facility continued to prepare and transmit over the teletype system the essence of the communications it was receiving. This required a few minutes to do and the 8:22 PM time at the bottom of the message was the time the ARINC teletype operator pushed the "send" button on his machine.
The people who were on the phone patch got the time as 8:18 PM when the information was actually transmitted and the people who were not on the phone patch got the time as 8:22 PM from the time at the bottom of the teletype printout.
There is no problem with these times. There has never been a problem with these times.
Bob,
You seem to think that when an issue has been discussed, it is not worth discussing again. You also seem to think that because an issue has been discussed that any problems with it have been resolved.
I don't think either of those things are true - both in general and with this particular aspect.
23 nautical miles south of BTG VORTAC at 8:18 along the FBI flight path moves the believed jump time of 8:11 - 8:13. This is significant and requires further analysis, don't you agree?
Moreover, in looking at the plots (and yes, I know they aren't exact), it would appear that there is a plot missing between the plot just to the northeast of Vancouver and the plot just south of the I-5 bridge. The distance traveled would be nearly 6 miles - double the assumed speed of the plane.
So, it seems something doesn't add up here, and I'd like to know if Edwards is on to something or not.
Also, FWIW, Edwards is firmly an "FBI flight path guy", so you can't use these time as support for a WFP at least in regards to Edwards theories.
-
One of the controversial claims made by Dr. Edwards in his book is that the timing of the plot points on the FBI flight path map are wrong.
To prove this claim, he references the notes of George Harrison. Dr. Edwards concludes that there are six different authors of the notes. He labels them A through F. He states that Author F made the notation “23 DME PDX” which indicates that Flight 305 was 23 nautical miles south of what is now the Battleground VORTEC. Author F marks this as occurring at 8:18. Two other authors marked the same event, but put this time as 8:22.
Edwards examines the remaining notes and times and concludes that Author F was listening to the radio transmissions in real time and that their time of 8:18 was accurate while the other two authors were reading the teletype printout which had a 2 to 4 minute delay.
Calculating the flight speed and distance in reverse, now puts the 8:11 - 8:13 jump time and drop zone farther south over the Columbia River.
I also tried to do this same thing, but I was unable to square that circle and make it work. Dr. Edwards puts forward compelling evidence, but this is a significant aspect of the case and is only given two pages of explanation. For such an important detail about the case, I would have liked to have seen more elaboration on it.
Lastly, in order to forestall any attacks directed MY way, I am non-committal about Dr. Edwards conclusions regarding this. I’m intrigued by it, but I don’t have an opinion one way or another basically because I don’t know enough about it to hold an opinion. Any of you who are more knowledgeable want to chime in?
Chaucer, this has been discussed at length here for the last 10 years or so. It is as simple as anything can be. The airliner was at the 23 DME point at 8:18 PM and so reported that over the ARINC telephone patch that had been set up. Not everyone at the NWA facility at SEATAC, where the Harrison papers originated, was on the telephone patch.
The ARINC telephone patch went through the same ARINC facility that routinely communicated with aircraft through a dedicated VHF radio frequency. Routinely, the ARINC facility would then type up the communication and send it by teletype to subscribing stations. In this instance, the phone patch permitted the people in SEATAC and elsewhere to also listen in on the communications between the ARINC station and the airliner.
Nevertheless, the ARINC facility continued to prepare and transmit over the teletype system the essence of the communications it was receiving. This required a few minutes to do and the 8:22 PM time at the bottom of the message was the time the ARINC teletype operator pushed the "send" button on his machine.
The people who were on the phone patch got the time as 8:18 PM when the information was actually transmitted and the people who were not on the phone patch got the time as 8:22 PM from the time at the bottom of the teletype printout.
There is no problem with these times. There has never been a problem with these times.
Bob,
You seem to think that when an issue has been discussed, it is not worth discussing again. You also seem to think that because an issue has been discussed that any problems with it have been resolved.
I don't think either of those things are true - both in general and with this particular aspect.
23 nautical miles south of BTG VORTAC at 8:18 along the FBI flight path moves the believed jump time of 8:11 - 8:13. This is significant and requires further analysis, don't you agree?
Moreover, in looking at the plots (and yes, I know they aren't exact), it would appear that there is a plot missing between the plot just to the northeast of Vancouver and the plot just south of the I-5 bridge. The distance traveled would be nearly 6 miles - double the assumed speed of the plane.
So, it seems something doesn't add up here, and I'd like to know if Edwards is on to something or not.
Also, FWIW, Edwards is firmly an "FBI flight path guy", so you can't use these time as support for a WFP at least in regards to Edwards theories.
Chaucer, to the best of my knowledge, Sluggo pointed out the problems with the times marked on the FBI flight path map sometime before 2009. At least he was already aware of them when I first made contact with him in 2009. The times marked on that FBI map do not have anything to do with the Western Flight Path but they do point out problems with the FBI flight path.
This series of posts started with a discussion of whether the airliner was at the 23 DME location at 8:18 PM or 8:22 PM. I believe that you have indicated that Dr. Edwards went with the 8:18 PM time. And the reason for selecting the 8:18 PM time rather than the 8:22 PM time has been thoroughly explained over the last 10 years.
The 8:18 PM time for the airliner to be at the 23 DME location is a valid data point. There is nothing further to discuss with regards to it.
-
I was looking at DZ.com to see what I posted/thought back in the day about flight path.
it's too bad some of the annotated attachments are gone from DZ.com, but I was exploring things like this:
June 8, 2008
all we need:
1) Wind from the East at Portland
2) 6 mile error in the hand drawn flight path
(more like tracking I5)
3) 3 mile canopy drift (I'm guessing based on the '72 map, at canopy drifts)
then minimal float/money movement needed.
The bump time estimate can be reasonably fudged to be around the BTG vortac as required for the above.
Shilapoo lake area is interesting. They're planning on doing restoration there...have been discussing plans for years. It used to flood a lot..They have dikes and pumps I believe. Farmland in some area now. A lot is state owned for wildlife sanctuary etc.
But it's nice and remote. Maybe soft ground. Good auger-in potential.
-
And if you're going to focus on the extreme flood levels of 72 and 74
then talk about Vancouver Lake can be back in play
June 5, 2008
Vancouver Lake is interesting as a DZ if predicted jump near Vancouver.
Why: because it has huge surface area, almost rivaling the surface area of the Columbia, if you just include the 305 flight path crossing the Columbia area...
So it increases the probability of it being a money catcher/delivery system. (with water being the carrier)
It's also big enough to offset the lack of wind blowing to the west...i.e. money might land there, and get transported west by water.
There's also less distance for money to travel, compared to the long way on the Columbia, from the 305 crossing Columbia area.
See attached pic from Google Earth, showing Vancouver Lake and the money location.
The only problem is there is one? water channel out of Vancouver Lake now, and it's to the north, north of the money site. (you can see white water there even)
But what about 1971?
That cleared farm land between Vancouver Lake and the money site is called Shilapoo Lake.
The houseboat guy said:
"don't know much about Shillapoo lake, other than the fact that it was originally called Shallow Pool Lake, and the "indianized" the name to make it sound more like a Native American name. "
The 2nd attach is a topo map showing the region known as Shilapoo lake. You can see a thin curving blue line that's a stream. That alines with the curving green trees in the middle of the cleared land in the GE pic.
Getting money to cross Lower River Rd seems difficult.
But the 1996 information tells us that extreme flooding causes water levels to rise all the way to Lower River Road, at the Caterpillar Island area.
We also don't know what the Shilapoo Lake area looked like in 1971. It may not have been that cleared farmland.
We probably need topo maps from 1971 of the Shilapoo Lake/Vancouver Lake area, to muse further.
I like any area that might be deep mud that would allow Cooper to auger in and not be found.
-
This is all old stuff, but I'm not bothering with Edwards' book and his analysis...
Sluggo always liked to say:
"The crucial fact here is the oscillations were time-stamped but the pressure bump was not. The pressure bump time was estimated (by the flight crew) as 10 to 15 minutes after the 8:05 call to the back. That is the only time issue with any variability."
Chaucer, what does Edwards say the FBI docs say about that?
-
More old thoughts on Vancouver Lake, which again are interesting if you're going to talk about flood movements
June 8, 2008
(this might be the most interesting alternative?)
First: Land in Vancouver Lake. Then:
Money drain towards/down (edit) Lake River on the N side of Vancouver Lake, but take a quick turn and travel ~2 miles down the faint creek I've outlined in the attached.
It may have been more substantial in '71 before. Note it's still there, just doesn't connect to (edit) Lake River. It may have connected in the past, or during flood situations. I've also attached a topo map that shows the faint creek across Shilapoo Lake area (current map, may be different in '71)
nicely, it goes right toward Tena Bar. The '96 info tells us flooding can get water to Lower River Rd. (I'm not sure if that's Lower River Rd on the E side of Shillapoo, or the NW leg that's right next to Tena Bar)
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver_Lake
Vancouver Lake is a large lake just west of Vancouver, Washington, United States, north of the Columbia River and Portland, Oregon), south of Ridgefield, Washington and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
The lake is very shallow, with a maximum depth of 12-15 ft and a mean depth of less than 3 ft. There is an island in the northern half of the lake. The island was formed from tailings of an Army Corps of Engineers dredging project, which dredged around the perimeter of the lake in the early 1980s. Lake River flows from the north shore to the Columbia River near Ridgefield, Washington. Due to seasonal variation in relative river and lake levels, Lake River experiences intermittent flow reversal and flows into Vancouver Lake for considerable periods of time.
The sources for Vancouver Lake's water include a flushing channel (equipped wth tidal gates to control flows) from the Columbia river near the SW shoreline and Burnt Bridge Creek on the NE shoreline, which winds about ten miles through many of the city's residential areas. Until the 1980s this creek was neglected and a major source of pollution for the lake.
Lower River Road leads west out of Vancouver to a park on the shore of Vancouver Lake which includes a large swimming area. A trail leads to Frenchman's Bar Park on the nearby Columbia River.
-
More old thoughts on Vancouver Lake, which again are interesting if you're going to talk about flood movements
June 8, 2008
(this might be the most interesting alternative?)
First: Land in Vancouver Lake. Then:
Money drain towards/down (edit) Lake River on the N side of Vancouver Lake, but take a quick turn and travel ~2 miles down the faint creek I've outlined in the attached.
It may have been more substantial in '71 before. Note it's still there, just doesn't connect to (edit) Lake River. It may have connected in the past, or during flood situations. I've also attached a topo map that shows the faint creek across Shilapoo Lake area (current map, may be different in '71)
nicely, it goes right toward Tena Bar. The '96 info tells us flooding can get water to Lower River Rd. (I'm not sure if that's Lower River Rd on the E side of Shillapoo, or the NW leg that's right next to Tena Bar)
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver_Lake
Vancouver Lake is a large lake just west of Vancouver, Washington, United States, north of the Columbia River and Portland, Oregon), south of Ridgefield, Washington and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge.
The lake is very shallow, with a maximum depth of 12-15 ft and a mean depth of less than 3 ft. There is an island in the northern half of the lake. The island was formed from tailings of an Army Corps of Engineers dredging project, which dredged around the perimeter of the lake in the early 1980s. Lake River flows from the north shore to the Columbia River near Ridgefield, Washington. Due to seasonal variation in relative river and lake levels, Lake River experiences intermittent flow reversal and flows into Vancouver Lake for considerable periods of time.
The sources for Vancouver Lake's water include a flushing channel (equipped wth tidal gates to control flows) from the Columbia river near the SW shoreline and Burnt Bridge Creek on the NE shoreline, which winds about ten miles through many of the city's residential areas. Until the 1980s this creek was neglected and a major source of pollution for the lake.
Lower River Road leads west out of Vancouver to a park on the shore of Vancouver Lake which includes a large swimming area. A trail leads to Frenchman's Bar Park on the nearby Columbia River.
Snowmman, like most everything else Cooper related, your last several posts regurgitates some information that is not accurate.
As has been pointed out many times before, the Northwest Lower River Road is built on top of a levee. In the Tena Bar area, everything on the East side of that levee/road drains into Vancouver Lake and then North down Lake River for about 15 miles where it joins the Columbia River. Everything on the West side of that levee/road drains straight into the Columbia River.
The Flushing Channel is quite small and I have never seen a drop of water in it. It is so small that you may not even notice it when you drive over it.
-
I think, Robert99, your posts would be more lively if you used words like "vomit" rather than regurgitate.
Know your audience!
-
Bob,
I know there are issues with the timing of the plot points on the FBI map. My point of discussion is Flight 305 being 23 nautical miles south of BTG VTC at 8:18. This would put the plane near or over the Columbia at the supposed time of the jump. I think a great many people in the Vortex would be surprised that this detail is now fact and not worthy of discussion. It's kind of a big deal, don't you think?
Snow,
Dr. Edwards seems to agree with Sluggo. He writes that over time, the FBI began to use the term "oscillations" in place of the pressure bump. In essence, they confused the two things and therefore confused the two different times. That is why they went with the 8:11 time of the jump because that is when the oscillations were first reported. To his credit, Dr. Edwards lays out a compelling timeline (using the 302s) that shows how the FBI began conflating the oscillations and the pressure bump until, in their minds, they were the same event.
This is something I have been saying ad nauseum for years. The oscillations came first and continued for an undetermined period of time before concluding with a larger, more noticeable pressure "bump". The oscillations were reported by the crew at 8:11/8:12, but the pressure bump has no documented time attached to it. Essentially, we do not have an exact time that Cooper left the aircraft.
Also, and this isn't directly relevant, but Dr. Edwards also calls into question the validity of the sled test and suggests that the conclusion that the pressure bump was caused by DBC jumping may not be accurate. I do not know enough about the science behind Edwards's science to have an opinion on this.
-
Bob,
I know there are issues with the timing of the plot points on the FBI map. My point of discussion is Flight 305 being 23 nautical miles south of BTG VTC at 8:18. This would put the plane near or over the Columbia at the supposed time of the jump. I think a great many people in the Vortex would be surprised that this detail is now fact and not worthy of discussion. It's kind of a big deal, don't you think?
Chaucer, the 8:18 PM time at the 23 DME point has been a "fact" since the flight crew said they were at that point and Harrison recorded the time of their transmission as 8:18 PM. There is nothing further to discuss about it much less argue.
Do you want to argue or "discuss" that the 7:36 PM time of the takeoff from SEATAC is not correct?
-
I think, Robert99, your posts would be more lively if you used words like "vomit" rather than regurgitate.
Know your audience!
Do you mean there were too many syllables? :o
-
Bob,
I know there are issues with the timing of the plot points on the FBI map. My point of discussion is Flight 305 being 23 nautical miles south of BTG VTC at 8:18. This would put the plane near or over the Columbia at the supposed time of the jump. I think a great many people in the Vortex would be surprised that this detail is now fact and not worthy of discussion. It's kind of a big deal, don't you think?
Chaucer, the 8:18 PM time at the 23 DME point has been a "fact" since the flight crew said they were at that point and Harrison recorded the time of their transmission as 8:18 PM. There is nothing further to discuss about it much less argue.
Do you want to argue or "discuss" that the 7:36 PM time of the takeoff from SEATAC is not correct?
I'm not arguing at all. My point is that IF Flight305 was 23 nautical miles south of the Battle Ground beacon at 8:18 and not 8:22 then everything everyone has been saying about the Cooper case for 50 years is completely wrong. It puts the accepted flight time into question and changes the drop zone completely.
Don't you think that's something worthy of discussion?
-
Bob,
I know there are issues with the timing of the plot points on the FBI map. My point of discussion is Flight 305 being 23 nautical miles south of BTG VTC at 8:18. This would put the plane near or over the Columbia at the supposed time of the jump. I think a great many people in the Vortex would be surprised that this detail is now fact and not worthy of discussion. It's kind of a big deal, don't you think?
Chaucer, the 8:18 PM time at the 23 DME point has been a "fact" since the flight crew said they were at that point and Harrison recorded the time of their transmission as 8:18 PM. There is nothing further to discuss about it much less argue.
Do you want to argue or "discuss" that the 7:36 PM time of the takeoff from SEATAC is not correct?
I'm not arguing at all. My point is that IF Flight305 was 23 nautical miles south of the Battle Ground beacon at 8:18 and not 8:22 then everything everyone has been saying about the Cooper case for 50 years is completely wrong. It puts the accepted flight time into question and changes the drop zone completely.
Don't you think that's something worthy of discussion?
Chaucer, the 8:18 PM time at the 23 DME point is a FACT that in and of itself does NOT put the flight time into question. It does put the so-called FBI flight PATH into question. And I may have mentioned that point several hundred times both here and at DZ over the past 12 years.
It is the validity of the FBI flight path that should be discussed here rather than accepting it on faith and without question.
-
Chaucer, the 8:18 PM time at the 23 DME point is a FACT that in and of itself does NOT put the flight time into question. It does put the so-called FBI flight PATH into question. And I may have mentioned that point several hundred times both here and at DZ over the past 12 years.
It is the validity of the FBI flight path that should be discussed here rather than accepting it on faith and without question.
Bob,
The FBI flight path has times associated with its plot points. 7:54, 8:10, 8:11, etc. The FBI used these times along their flight path to determine when and where DB Cooper jumped from flight 305. If these times are accurate, then it would be impossible for 305 to be 23 nautical miles south of BTG beacon at 8:18 unless it very drastically increased its airspeed. So, if the 8:18 notation is correct, then the times of the FBI plot points are wrong. If the times of FBI plot points are correct, then the 8:18 notation is wrong. It is impossible for both of them to be correct. So, which is it?
The WFP theory is irrelevant in light of these facts.
Now, having the 8:18 notation be correct would be great for me because it would fit my theory of a jump near the Columbia, but I want any evidence I use to be scrutinized before I tout it. I am asking about it not to pick a fight with you, but to do my due diligence in researching the case.
-
Dr Edwards needs to shut up! These details have been explosively vomited for years and must not be discussed!
-
Chaucer, the 8:18 PM time at the 23 DME point is a FACT that in and of itself does NOT put the flight time into question. It does put the so-called FBI flight PATH into question. And I may have mentioned that point several hundred times both here and at DZ over the past 12 years.
It is the validity of the FBI flight path that should be discussed here rather than accepting it on faith and without question.
Bob,
The FBI flight path has times associated with its plot points. 7:54, 8:10, 8:11, etc. The FBI used these times along their flight path to determine when and where DB Cooper jumped from flight 305. If these times are accurate, then it would be impossible for 305 to be 23 nautical miles south of BTG beacon at 8:18 unless it very drastically increased its airspeed. So, if the 8:18 notation is correct, then the times of the FBI plot points are wrong. If the times of FBI plot points are correct, then the 8:18 notation is wrong. It is impossible for both of them to be correct. So, which is it?
The WFP theory is irrelevant in light of these facts.
Now, having the 8:18 notation be correct would be great for me because it would fit my theory of a jump near the Columbia, but I want any evidence I use to be scrutinized before I tout it. I am asking about it not to pick a fight with you, but to do my due diligence in researching the case.
Chaucer, you can take the 8:18 PM time to the bank. And if the airliner was on the Western Flight Path (basically on a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections), it would be almost directly overhead of Tena Bar at 8:11 PM, plus or minus a minute or so.
And if you think Cooper could have been a no-pull and landed just upstream (to the South) of Tena Bar and on solid ground on or between Caterpillar Island and the Northwest Lower River Road, then all that is necessary is for the spring flooding to reach his skeletal remains and move them down to where the money was found. More money was probably scattered along the downstream movement but some got lodged and was covered by sand and found at a later date by an eight-year-old boy. Everything else went on downstream.
It is as simple as that and doesn't need a miracle or human intervention.
-
Chaucer, you can take the 8:18 PM time to the bank.
I then to agree with you. So far, I have found no evidence to the contrary.
And if the airliner was on the Western Flight Path (basically on a straight line between the Malay and Canby Intersections), it would be almost directly overhead of Tena Bar at 8:11 PM, plus or minus a minute or so.
But this is where you lose me.
And if you think Cooper could have been a no-pull and landed just upstream (to the South) of Tena Bar and on solid ground
I think this is possible, but I’m open to the possibility he survived but lose the money ala McNally.
on or between Caterpillar Island and the Northwest Lower River Road,
Sorry, you lose me again. I just don’t think the WFP is valid in any way.
then all that is necessary is for the spring flooding to reach his skeletal remains and move them down to where the money was found. More money was probably scattered along the downstream movement but some got lodged and was covered by sand and found at a later date by an eight-year-old boy. Everything else went on downstream.
It is as simple as that and doesn't need a miracle or human intervention.
I agree with this.
Now, humor me for a minute. If the 8:18 notation is correct, AND the FBI flight path is correct, then that would put 305 in the immediate vicinity of the Columbia at the time of the reported oscillations/pressure bump, would it not?
Assuming the FBI flight path is accurate, wouldn’t the 8:18 Harrison note also support my notion of a landing along the Columbia between the bridges?
-
While studying for my FAA 107 https://www.amazon.com/Drone-FAA-License-Study-Guide/dp/1727096533
I was musing how it won't be too long until a drone will be able to travel the entire flight path on a single charge, right at tree level, taking video.
Would have been nice to have the technology back in the day. Better than a SR71.
This bad boy claims 55 min flight time
https://www.drdrone.ca/blogs/drone-news-drone-help-blog/matrice-300-rtk-review
Not clear what speed the max flight time is at, but max speed is 82.8 km/h (51 mph)
so, a ways to go, but eventually.
it has a load capacity of 2.7kg..if you stripped it down with a light camera, you might be able to jury-rig a heavier battery for more range right now.
-
Snow I saw a cool patent for extending e drone range. Equip them with inductive charging clamps as landing gear “claws”. They descend onto AC power lines and clamp on. Then they power down and hang on like bats upside down as they recharge their batteries. Would require some clever engineering but certainly doable.
So are you really studying for an FAA commercial drone license? I see you more as an outlaw type. No registration. No license. And an ADS-B transceiver that takes fake position info from your data feed.
377
-
Snow I saw a cool patent for extending e drone range. Equip them with inductive charging clamps as landing gear “claws”. They descend onto AC power lines and clamp on. Then they power down and hang on like bats upside down as they recharge their batteries. Would require some clever engineering but certainly doable.
So are you really studying for an FAA commercial drone license? I see you more as an outlaw type. No registration. No license. And an ADS-B transceiver that takes fake position info from your data feed.
377
damn. CIA figured out they need to focus on China.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/politics/cia-shift-china-train-manage-spies/index.html
How about those "loitering" SAMs from Iran (358's)
"Though a maximum speed or altitude has not been officially released it is thought that the missile is capable of cruising at around 500 KPH (c.300MPH) at an altitude of between 8000-12000 metres (c.26,000ft-39,000ft)."
https://militarymatters.online/defense-news/358-vs-scan-eagle-anti-drone-action/
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/new-iranian-missile-reported-to-be-loitering-sam
-
Even if this has already been answered I am respectfully asking someone to answer my questions about the flight path. It is indicated that it was tracked and beacon signals were transmitted every minute or whatever the timeframe was. My question is as follows.
If for example flight 305 transmitted a beacon signal at point #1 how far could the plane get if it veered to the west or east and then veer back by the time point 2 beacon signal was transmitted?
I am not saying this actually happened but I want to know how many miles east or west could the plane veer and then veer back by the time the next beacon signal was transmitted?
-
Even if this has already been answered I am respectfully asking someone to answer my questions about the flight path. It is indicated that it was tracked and beacon signals were transmitted every minute or whatever the timeframe was. My question is as follows.
If for example flight 305 transmitted a beacon signal at point #1 how far could the plane get if it veered to the west or east and then veer back by the time point 2 beacon signal was transmitted?
I am not saying this actually happened but I want to know how many miles east or west could the plane veer and then veer back by the time the next beacon signal was transmitted?
Cooperland is not functioning right now - hasnt for some time. No answers possible!
You want light at 2718? Go fix it yourself. Same for medical care . . . . .
-
Even if this has already been answered I am respectfully asking someone to answer my questions about the flight path. It is indicated that it was tracked and beacon signals were transmitted every minute or whatever the timeframe was. My question is as follows.
If for example flight 305 transmitted a beacon signal at point #1 how far could the plane get if it veered to the west or east and then veer back by the time point 2 beacon signal was transmitted?
I am not saying this actually happened but I want to know how many miles east or west could the plane veer and then veer back by the time the next beacon signal was transmitted?
All airliners and most general aviation aircraft (including my own) were equipped with transponders in the early 1970s. Do some Goggling if you want to see all the details of how that works. But basically, the radar's antenna rotated about six times per minute (or every 10 seconds) and when the radar painted an aircraft its transponder was interrogated and a blip for the aircraft showed up on the radar operator's screen.
In most of the flight from Seattle to the Portland area, the airliner's tail was pointed in the general direction of the radar site at McChord AFB just south of Seattle. The airliner was flying at about three nautical miles per minute in the Portland area and its transponder would be interrogated about every 10 seconds or each half of a nautical mile (roughly 3000 feet) along its flight path.
Any deviation in the flight path would be noted within 10 seconds and would be less than 3000 feet.
-
Has anyone drawn a path from SeaTac directly to Mexico?
This is to see, not where Cooper jumped, but maybe where his original intention was to jump.
He asked the plane to fly to Mexico and plans were only changed when he was told there wouldn't be enough fuel.
Cooper did not take this fuel information into consideration because he planned on jumping at a certain point not long after take off.
His original mindset and plan seems to have been to jump at a point, not too long after take off that was basically in a direct line from SeaTac to Mexico.
Jack
-
Has anyone drawn a path from SeaTac directly to Mexico?
This is to see, not where Cooper jumped, but maybe where his original intention was to jump.
He asked the plane to fly to Mexico and plans were only changed when he was told there wouldn't be enough fuel.
Cooper did not take this fuel information into consideration because he planned on jumping at a certain point not long after take off.
His original mindset and plan seems to have been to jump at a point, not too long after take off that was basically in a direct line from SeaTac to Mexico.
Jack
Based on his actions, I think Cooper was looking to jump at the earliest possible opportunity.
He wanted the airstairs down at takeoff.
He immediately put on the chutes and began jury-rigging the shroud lines and money bag.
Within 30 minutes after takeoff, he was testing the stairs.
Within an hour, he had jumped.
I would venture to guess that he gave the pilots Mexico City as a destination just to give the FBI the entire western United States to search.
-
The first communication about the aftstairs was at 6:21 which indicated DBC wanted the stairs down after takeoff. It seems that all other evidence points to DBC wanting the stairs deployed at takeoff which caused the pilots great consternation.
Even in her post flight interview, Mucklow says DBC requested the stairs down at takeoff.
Clearly nothing definitive, but I’d say the preponderance of evidence points to DBC wanting them down at takeoff.
-
The first communication about the aftstairs was at 6:21 which indicated DBC wanted the stairs down after takeoff. It seems that all other evidence points to DBC wanting the stairs deployed at takeoff which caused the pilots great consternation.
Even in her post flight interview, Mucklow says DBC requested the stairs down at takeoff.
Clearly nothing definitive, but I’d say the preponderance of evidence points to DBC wanting them down at takeoff.
The possibility of Cooper initially wanting the stairs extended after takeoff is I think a more recent revelation, it is in at least one 302 in part 64, see attached pic. But as far as I have seen and read, most of the documented dialogue between Cooper and the crew at this point in the hijacking have not mentioned this.
If it is in fact what he initially wanted, I am just not sure how much to read into it. It doesn't necessarily mean that he intended to fly all the way to Mexico with the stairs closed. Sure, it could be a tell or sign that the fact the plane now needed to land and refuel caused him to have to alter his original plan and get off of the plane ASAP because he didn't want to land again. But it also could just mean that he changed his request for a different concern, maybe he was worried that he or the crew would not be able to get the stairs open in flight and thought it would just be better to make sure they are extended before takeoff.
My bigger question regarding where he really wanted to jump is why not choose a flight and airport further south and closer to Mexico if that is truly where he wanted to go ? Why choose a flight from the Pacific Northwest ? Were there no 727 flights out of airports closer to the Mexican boarder ? Anyway, lots of variables, I am keeping an open mind, definitely not dismissing this theory. But I am still in the camp where I think he asked for Mexico first and foremost to get the plane flying south for a Washington state based jump and secondly to throw off law enforcement.
-
He said no stopping to Mexico...how would he expect the plane to get to Mexico in the configuration he requested..the plane can't make the trip in the right configuration..
-
Cooper was told both reason why the plane wouldn't make Mexico from Seattle, he was stubborn. I just don't think he was going to stick around on that plane. the biggest error is the failure to communicate properly about where they believe he jumped.
They were asked to go in the back and look but they didn't. then they were asking him to put the stairs up prior to landing when he was long gone. that gave him a huge edge if he survived...
-
There is certainly contradictory evidence Re: the aftstairs. However, most principals agree he wanted them down in takeoff causing great concern among the crew.
At the end of the day, we don’t know because the record is confused.
-
There is certainly contradictory evidence Re: the aftstairs. However, most principals agree he wanted them down in takeoff causing great concern among the crew.
At the end of the day, we don’t know because the record is confused.
After the argument between Cooper and Rataczak ended with Cooper agreeing to take off with the stairs fully retracted, Cooper is quoted somewhere as telling Tina that he knew the airliner could take off with the stairs partially down.
Cooper was apparently more familiar with the aft stairs than the NWA flight crew. This strongly suggests that Cooper had some prior connection with Boeing or some US Government agency or contractor.
-
While the initial radio transmission at 6:21 indicates that he wanted the airstairs deployed after takeoff, all of the crew interviews uniformly state that he wanted them down during takeoff. They say that DBC wanted stairs down at takeoff, and the pilots refused and told him it couldn't be done. He answered, "Yes, they can..." but then relented and said, "the cockpit can put it down after they get airborne."
Regardless, even if he DID want the airstairs deployed in flight, that doesn't indicate he planned on a later jump. His behavior leads one to believe that he wanted off that aircraft as soon as possible.
-
While the initial radio transmission at 6:21 indicates that he wanted the airstairs deployed after takeoff, all of the crew interviews uniformly state that he wanted them down during takeoff. They say that DBC wanted stairs down at takeoff, and the pilots refused and told him it couldn't be done. He answered, "Yes, they can..." but then relented and said, "the cockpit can put it down after they get airborne."
Regardless, even if he DID want the airstairs deployed in flight, that doesn't indicate he planned on a later jump. His behavior leads one to believe that he wanted off that aircraft as soon as possible.
My understanding of the situation is that Cooper planned to jump early in the flight and perhaps just south of Seattle. But the procedure for lowering the stairs on a commercial 727 was not what he expected. Consequently, he kept Tina on the aircraft, after apparently telling her she could leave with the other stewardesses. And despite Tina telling him how to do it, Cooper still had trouble lowering the stairs.
It must be remembered that anyone using the 727 for other than commercial airline operations, would probably specify the means and controls that they would want for lowering the stairs if such an action was necessary for their operations. While Cooper may have been familiar with lowering the stairs on 727s that were used in SEA and elsewhere, this may have been the first time that he had seen the stairs control panel in a standard commercial 727.
-
Whilst those airstairs are up, he is trapped with no means of escape. I can fully understand why he wanted them down/open ASAP regardless of where he wanted to jump.
-
Whilst those airstairs are up, he is trapped with no means of escape. I can fully understand why he wanted them down/open ASAP regardless of where he wanted to jump.
I agree.
I also think Cooper was successful because he was a engineer/pilot type, a "checklist guy". After the delay in the fueling and getting the money, lowering the aftstairs was next on his list and he was anxious to "get this show on the road".
-
You all seem to agree he planned this very well. But as well as he planned this there are those that do not believe he had plans after the jump based on things like what he was wearing and the weather and all. A fair argument but one can also argue he had help on the ground, or if one believes it was Old Richard McCoy as I do (about 85% ish), a former green beret is not going to just lay down and die. This will never end likely unless a smoking gun arises and those damn cigarettes would have helped. So many stupid videos coming out still just beating a dead horse over and over. I wont name names, but you know who you are!!!
-
For those of you who are committed to the so-called FBI flight path, go to DropZone and take a look at Georger's post #57121 and my reply to it.
-
If we assume the yellow map is accurate then, yes, 305 did pass west of PDX.
After it crossed over the Columbia from the east.
-
If there was no cloud coverage the crew would see PDX easily to the east..this is at 10,000 feet just after crossing the Columbia.
-
For the record, Flyjack's red line can also be dismissed. At several points, the airliner is about 3 nautical miles from the centerline of V-23. Other things being equal, aircraft are expected to stay on the centerline of Victor airways and there is a regulation stating that. If the flight crew couldn't keep the aircraft on the centerline, then their autopilot certainly could. Even the simplest wing leveler in a Cessna 150 could do that.
That's not the case in the matter, they were given the sky in order to keep everyone safe. most regulations went out the door with this problem. I believe they are expected to stay within the boundaries, unless in controlled airspace. why have them 8 miles wide?
Unless authorized by ATC, to operate an aircraft within controlled airspace under IFR, pilots must either fly ALONG the centerline when on a Federal airway or, on routes other than Federal airways, along the direct course between NAVAIDs or fixes defining the route
Just because a simple route can be layed out certainly doesn't imply that's what occurred? none of the crew said anything about why they would be looking miles away from where they actually were, or mention how simple they could layout the path within several minutes..
-
For the record, Flyjack's red line can also be dismissed. At several points, the airliner is about 3 nautical miles from the centerline of V-23. Other things being equal, aircraft are expected to stay on the centerline of Victor airways and there is a regulation stating that. If the flight crew couldn't keep the aircraft on the centerline, then their autopilot certainly could. Even the simplest wing leveler in a Cessna 150 could do that.
That's not the case in the matter, they were given the sky in order to keep everyone safe. most regulations went out the door with this problem. I believe they are expected to stay within the boundaries, unless in controlled airspace. why have them 8 miles wide?
Unless authorized by ATC, to operate an aircraft within controlled airspace under IFR, pilots must either fly ALONG the centerline when on a Federal airway or, on routes other than Federal airways, along the direct course between NAVAIDs or fixes defining the route
Just because a simple route can be layed out certainly doesn't imply that's what occurred? none of the crew said anything about why they would be looking miles away from where they actually were, or mention how simple they could layout the path within several minutes..
It is certainly true that the airliner crew were told they could make any deviation necessary to V-23 and that ATC would keep other aircraft out of their way. But that does not explain why they were wandering so far from the V-23 centerline, particularly in the Portland area.
South of Portland, the airliner would almost certainly want to stay on the centerline of V-23 due to concerns with the MOCA (Minimum Obstacle Clearance Altitude) and MCA (Minimum Communications Altitude) among other things. In some segments of V-23, 10,000 is the minimum altitude that any aircraft could meet those minimums. Even in the Portland area, the MCA for the Malay Intersection is 9500 feet.
Just staying on the centerline of V-23 does not require a superhuman effort. If the airliner wanted to bypass Portland with what they thought was a bomb onboard, the west side would be the logical choice. Even now Georger has admitted that his sources, apparently including FBI agents, were saying 10 years ago that the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side.
-
They were given the freedom of the sky, regardless of the airway. I believe Georger mentions bypassing PDX on the west side. they were west of a majority of population. you would have to fly over the ocean to avoid any kind of collateral damage. they were right over Vancouver, Toledo etc. not just Portland. I'm not sold they were that worried about the plane exploding or they would have diverted completely away from population.
Such simple questions to Rat could resolve this. many have spoken with him and fail to clear this up.
As mentioned above, the crew could of plotted the course out in less than a few minutes if they flew as straight as you claim.
I don't believe they mixed up the fighter jets with 305 either as Eric has mentioned. the SAGE tags every plane that is in the sky, 305 was in the air first and tracked prior to the jets.
-
The Portland ATC told the FBI that 305 was east of PDX.
The Troutdale ATC said that 305 was west of PDX.
I'd be curious of the timing of these reports because both are correct.
-
The Portland ATC told the FBI that 305 was east of PDX.
The Troutdale ATC said that 305 was west of PDX.
I'd be curious of the timing of these reports because both are correct.
In 1962 a United Airlines DC 8 mistakingly landed at the Small Troutdale Airport !
Troutdale Airport is about 10 miles East of PDX !
You could imagine the bewilderment of the passengers and crew to realize where this huge Jet had managed to land.
Needless to say it wasn’t a easy task to land on this short runway and then again to take off.
I have landed at Troutdale several times and it’s scary to think about landing a huge Jet with 81 passengers aboard.
-
305 is east of PDX for less than a minute and on the west side of PDX with zero question by using the sectional map plots.
-
For the record, Flyjack's red line can also be dismissed. At several points, the airliner is about 3 nautical miles from the centerline of V-23. Other things being equal, aircraft are expected to stay on the centerline of Victor airways and there is a regulation stating that. If the flight crew couldn't keep the aircraft on the centerline, then their autopilot certainly could. Even the simplest wing leveler in a Cessna 150 could do that.
That's not the case in the matter, they were given the sky in order to keep everyone safe. most regulations went out the door with this problem. I believe they are expected to stay within the boundaries, unless in controlled airspace. why have them 8 miles wide?
Unless authorized by ATC, to operate an aircraft within controlled airspace under IFR, pilots must either fly ALONG the centerline when on a Federal airway or, on routes other than Federal airways, along the direct course between NAVAIDs or fixes defining the route
Just because a simple route can be layed out certainly doesn't imply that's what occurred? none of the crew said anything about why they would be looking miles away from where they actually were, or mention how simple they could layout the path within several minutes..
It is certainly true that the airliner crew were told they could make any deviation necessary to V-23 and that ATC would keep other aircraft out of their way. But that does not explain why they were wandering so far from the V-23 centerline, particularly in the Portland area.
South of Portland, the airliner would almost certainly want to stay on the centerline of V-23 due to concerns with the MOCA (Minimum Obstacle Clearance Altitude) and MCA (Minimum Communications Altitude) among other things. In some segments of V-23, 10,000 is the minimum altitude that any aircraft could meet those minimums. Even in the Portland area, the MCA for the Malay Intersection is 9500 feet.
Just staying on the centerline of V-23 does not require a superhuman effort. If the airliner wanted to bypass Portland with what they thought was a bomb onboard, the west side would be the logical choice. Even now Georger has admitted that his sources, apparently including FBI agents, were saying 10 years ago that the airliner bypassed Portland on the west side.
It was reported that the plane remained on autopilot and that kept them on V-23? Is that incorrect? That is what they state on some of the shows on the case, done by for instance, National Geographic who are pretty respected.
-
The autopilot has been a point of contention.
The 302s show that Paul Soderlind believed the plane was on autopilot. Statements by Bill Rataczak decades later indicate that he was hand flying the aircraft until they reached Reno.
The FBI believed Soderlind.
My personal feelings on the autopilot are two-fold. One, it could be a combination of manual flying and autopilot. They may have flown a portion of the route on autopilot and other portions manually. Another possibility is that it was a different mode of autopilot. There is a great explanation of that here:
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/22496169-d-b-cooper-the-autopilot-and-the-course-corrections-update
Secondly, whether the autopilot was engaged or not is really a moot point. We know the plane flew down Victor 23. Whether they hand flew it or whether it was on autopilot, we know the flight path. Usually, the only people who care about the autopilot are those looking to poke holes in the USAF flight path or some other related agenda.
-
The autopilot has been a point of contention.
The 302s show that Paul Soderlind believed the plane was on autopilot. Statements by Bill Rataczak decades later indicate that he was hand flying the aircraft until they reached Reno.
The FBI believed Soderlind.
My personal feelings on the autopilot are two-fold. One, it could be a combination of manual flying and autopilot. They may have flown a portion of the route on autopilot and other portions manually. Another possibility is that it was a different mode of autopilot. There is a great explanation of that here:
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/22496169-d-b-cooper-the-autopilot-and-the-course-corrections-update
Secondly, whether the autopilot was engaged or not is really a moot point. We know the plane flew down Victor 23. Whether they hand flew it or whether it was on autopilot, we know the flight path. Usually, the only people who care about the autopilot are those looking to poke holes in the USAF flight path or some other related agenda.
I would add that there were some statements made that if the plane was on auto pilot, that the pilots would not be able to feel hijacker on the air stairs or notice a change in elevation/trim. So I think that adds a little more to this issue, we all know about the reported oscillations and pressure bump, but I also recall that it was reported by one of the pilots that they noticed a dip or raising of the nose ? So if that is the case, how could they have felt it if they were on auto pilot would be the question. Not sure if I am mixing some things up that are mutually exclusive, but that is how I am digesting it for the moment.
-
The autopilot has been a point of contention.
The 302s show that Paul Soderlind believed the plane was on autopilot. Statements by Bill Rataczak decades later indicate that he was hand flying the aircraft until they reached Reno.
The FBI believed Soderlind.
My personal feelings on the autopilot are two-fold. One, it could be a combination of manual flying and autopilot. They may have flown a portion of the route on autopilot and other portions manually. Another possibility is that it was a different mode of autopilot. There is a great explanation of that here:
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/22496169-d-b-cooper-the-autopilot-and-the-course-corrections-update
Secondly, whether the autopilot was engaged or not is really a moot point. We know the plane flew down Victor 23. Whether they hand flew it or whether it was on autopilot, we know the flight path. Usually, the only people who care about the autopilot are those looking to poke holes in the USAF flight path or some other related agenda.
I would add that there were some statements made that if the plane was on auto pilot, that the pilots would not be able to feel hijacker on the air stairs or notice a change in elevation/trim. So I think that adds a little more to this issue, we all know about the reported oscillations and pressure bump, but I also recall that it was reported by one of the pilots that they noticed a dip or raising of the nose ? So if that is the case, how could they have felt it if they were on auto pilot would be the question. Not sure if I am mixing some things up that are mutually exclusive, but that is how I am digesting it for the moment.
It also states in the 302s that should the plane be on autopilot, then Soderlind should be able to identify "bobs" on the flight data recorder indicating when the autopilot activated corrections. Later, Soderlind did find a "little bob" at 8:09. Would this "little bob" have occured if the plane was being hand flown? I can't say.
The point is that there is evidence existing both ways, and really why does it matter? The plane went from Seattle to Reno via Victor 23. Does it matter if it was on autopilot or not?
-
The autopilot has been a point of contention.
The 302s show that Paul Soderlind believed the plane was on autopilot. Statements by Bill Rataczak decades later indicate that he was hand flying the aircraft until they reached Reno.
The FBI believed Soderlind.
My personal feelings on the autopilot are two-fold. One, it could be a combination of manual flying and autopilot. They may have flown a portion of the route on autopilot and other portions manually. Another possibility is that it was a different mode of autopilot. There is a great explanation of that here:
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/22496169-d-b-cooper-the-autopilot-and-the-course-corrections-update
Secondly, whether the autopilot was engaged or not is really a moot point. We know the plane flew down Victor 23. Whether they hand flew it or whether it was on autopilot, we know the flight path. Usually, the only people who care about the autopilot are those looking to poke holes in the USAF flight path or some other related agenda.
I would add that there were some statements made that if the plane was on auto pilot, that the pilots would not be able to feel hijacker on the air stairs or notice a change in elevation/trim. So I think that adds a little more to this issue, we all know about the reported oscillations and pressure bump, but I also recall that it was reported by one of the pilots that they noticed a dip or raising of the nose ? So if that is the case, how could they have felt it if they were on auto pilot would be the question. Not sure if I am mixing some things up that are mutually exclusive, but that is how I am digesting it for the moment.
It also states in the 302s that should the plane be on autopilot, then Soderlind should be able to identify "bobs" on the flight data recorder indicating when the autopilot activated corrections. Later, Soderlind did find a "little bob" at 8:09. Would this "little bob" have occured if the plane was being hand flown? I can't say.
The point is that there is evidence existing both ways, and really why does it matter? The plane went from Seattle to Reno via Victor 23. Does it matter if it was on autopilot or not?
I think it would matter to the extent that it could impact how any investigator would interpret observations from the pilot(s). If it is believed that when on auto pilot, that the pilots wouldn't be able to feel the hijacker on the stairs (pushing down, jumping or going down and coming back up), then they may not give credence to the pilot saying that they felt the plane move up or down etc. and they may dismiss that observation. Conversely, if not on auto pilot, then observations by the pilot(s) would carry more weight in trying to determine if those observations provide clues to when and where he exited the plane. At least, that's how I am viewing it....good thought "vector" to explore :-)
-
SOME COMMENTS ON DR. EDWARDS BLOG POST OF NOVEMBER 13, 2022:
1. Airliners have a "minimum equipment list" that must be operational before they depart on a commercial flight. In the 1971 time frame, it appears that NWA had to have at least two operational radio transceivers for voice communications. These transceivers would be wired to be completely independent of each other so that if one failed for some reason the other would still be operational. They would have different power sources and different antenna systems. Consequently, the two transceivers could both transmit and receive at the same time. In the case of NWA 305, it appears that one transceiver was used for communicating with air traffic control, and the other transceiver was used for communicating with the ARINC ground stations.
Several years ago, Fred Poynter of the WSHM and I were informed by ARINC personnel that a typical large airliner today has as many as five transceivers.
2. Poynter's group at the WSHM did a detailed analysis of the ARINC teletype transcripts that the George Harrison family loaned to them and they concluded that there were missing teletype transcripts. And if I remember correctly, the existing transcripts indicated that the phone patch with NWA was established through the ARINC system before the airliner even landed in Seattle at about 5:30 PM PST. Several weeks ago, I suggested that Chaucer get a copy of the WSHM analysis from them but he has apparently not done so.
Further, it appears that teletype transcripts were also routinely made of the voice transmissions over the ARINC system. And according to Chaucer, Carr apparently told him about some of these transcripts that have not been released.
3. With several decades of experience in the military and as an Aeronautical Engineer in the DOD, I can categorically state that the dashed lines in the Seattle ATC transcripts mean that sections of those transcripts have been redacted. This is irrefutable despite any hopes to the contrary.
-
Robert,
Please do not put words in my mouth that I did not say. Let me be clear:
In my conversation with Larry Carr, he told me that there exists a full transcription of radio communications between Flight 305 and NWA Flight Operations in Minneapolis. These radio comms were made over the ARINC system, but are NOT teletype transcriptions. Further, he made NO reference to any redactions or missing parts of any comms. Rather, he simply said that this full transcription had not yet been released through the FBI Vault. There’s nothing spooky or nefarious going on, I assure you.
I have attached the one and only example of this full transcription that Carr is talking about that exists in the 302s. I have also attached the accompanying ARINC teletype of this same communication. You can see how a full transcription would be much more valuable in terms of information than the very abbreviated teletype facsimile.
(https://i.imgur.com/cyVDSrc.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/GQOjzBF.jpg)
-
Robert,
Please do not put words in my mouth that I did not say. Let me be clear:
In my conversation with Larry Carr, he told me that there exists a full transcription of radio communications between Flight 305 and NWA Flight Operations in Minneapolis. These radio comms were made over the ARINC system, but are NOT teletype transcriptions. Further, he made NO reference to any redactions or missing parts of any comms. Rather, he simply said that this full transcription had not yet been released through the FBI Vault. There’s nothing spooky or nefarious going on, I assure you.
I have attached the one and only example of this full transcription that Carr is talking about that exists in the 302s. I have also attached the accompanying ARINC teletype of this same communication. You can see how a full transcription would be much more valuable in terms of information than the very abbreviated teletype facsimile.
(https://i.imgur.com/cyVDSrc.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/GQOjzBF.jpg)
Chaucer, we apparently agree that complete copies of the ARINC and Seattle ATC transcripts would be most helpful.
-
I agree 100%.
In my opinion, they are the Rosetta Stone of the entire case.
-
My Discussions With A Senior Director At NORAD Regarding The NORJACK Case
I had the extraordinary opportunity to speak to a gentleman with unique insights into the SAGE radar system. His name is Len Camp. He was a lieutenant in the Canadian Forces, assigned to SAGE in Syracuse, NY as a flight controller in 1973. Two years later, he was promoted to the rank of Captain and was rated as a NORAD expert controller. He served with NORAD for 28 years and ended his career as a senior director for NORAD with a rank of Lt. Col.. He graduated from Syracuse with a degree in mathematical physics. He then graduated from the University of North Dakota with a degree in Space-based Radar and Small Satellites. He was trained in Aerospace Project Management with the Canadian Forces. He is currently the founder, CEO, and owner of HyperAero Consulting which consults the government and private companies on hypersonic aircraft.
NORAD was a joint US-Canada military organization intended to provide early warning in the event of a Soviet attack on the North American continent. There were a few dozen Canadians and Americans “co-manning” at each other’s control centers and headquarters. This ensured that bi-national cooperation was a critical part of the mission.
Lt. Col. Camp's expertise was in fighter control, so he had a ton of insight into how SAGE worked with interceptor jets. He said that there is a great deal of verbal communication between military and civilian air traffic control. When asked about Ammerman “taking over” the F-106s, Mr. Camp said that while it is feasible that one or both of the F-106 pilots was monitoring FAA frequencies and perhaps passing on first-hand information to Ammerman, the military would have absolutely retained control of the fighters during the intercept in accordance with FAA regulations (Order JO 7610.4W Special Operations).
When asked about the retention of the SAGE radar data, Mr. Camp was emphatic that the data would have been saved. His words were “absolutely and undoubtedly” all of the relevant data from the NORJACK hijacking would have been recorded and saved. In the event of an unusual incident, the weapons team, control center supervisor, or senior director could order the computer room to initiate a record for later analysis and/or evidence. For an event such as a commercial hijacking, the SAGE control center supervisor would likely have requested the computer personnel to put the data of the event “on record”. Recording SAGE radar data was a common occurrence and something the techs would have been extremely familiar with. In fact, he said that any aircraft - civilian or military squawking an emergency IFF (Identity Friend Or Foe). Mode 3 :hijack”, “lost comms”, or “emergency” would have automatically been recorded. The computer could then print this data out on computer card decks or long-form paper. This data would have been preserved as a stack of IBM cards for an indefinite period of time.
Further, a “data reduction” could be done to eliminate extraneous data in the airspace to only focus on the relevant aircraft. This would provide a summary of the recorded radar data and IFF tracks.
When asked about the possible construction of the yellow flight path map, Camp said that SAGE did not have the ability to print out a map. However, SAGE would print out the data, and it would then be translated by hand into GEOREF or the World Geographic Reference System. That could then be translated by hand into latitude and longitude. SAGE also had a special team of people who would do this in real time. There was a large glass display where data could be inputted using manual inputs: setting up special control zones, inputting flight plans, airbase weapons status, weather reports, etc.
So, they might receive a verbal report like: “from the Hawkeye beacon, 255 at 27,000” and could then manually plot that on the glass display. It would then be input into the AN/FSQ-7 Combat Direction Central or simply Q-7 which was the overall command and control system used by NORAD as a whole.
Each SAGE blockhouse kept a qualified air crew on staff to provide expertise in any aviation matters that the radar techs and computer personnel might not be familiar with. It’s possible that this was Capt. Spangler’s duty on the night of the hijacking. Capt. Spangler was a C-141 pilot attached to the 62nd Airlift Wing.
Mr. Camp suspects that Capt. Spangler received the printouts of the IFF codes and the corresponding SAGE radar symbology. This symbology would have then been translated into GEOREF and then into longitude and latitude along with the corresponding timestamps. .These timestamps would be down to the tenth of a second. The time frame of the computer is roughly 15 seconds with three sub-frames of about 5 seconds each. He considers it very likely Spangler chose the exact times spaced about a minute or apart to keep the clutter down on the map. Thus, it is highly likely that the radar plot points expressed in red Xs are exact down to within plus/minus 5 seconds. This means that if between 8:00:05 and 7:59:57, Spanger would have chosen 7:59:57 because it is closest to the round 8:00. This is significant regarding the timing of the map plot points.
Mr. Camp then believes that Capt. Spangler would have sat down at a drafting table and manually translated the GEOREF data into standard longitude and latitude onto the yellow sectional map.Later, an FBI agent would have added the blue ink “connect-the-dots and times. Camp considers it likely that the FBI would only have received the first plot of 7:54 and then been allowed to transfigure the rest of the information on its own.
When asked about any confusion in the aircraft with the data, Mr. Camp said there was absolutely no chance that SAGE would not be able to differentiate between the hijacked airliner, the Delta Darts or the T-33. The computer places track symbology on the fighter's data based on its call sign (ex. MP06) and a unique MODE 2 IFF assigned to each airframe as primary. The chase aircraft would be given a generic track number, usually UP21, but could also have a unique mode 2 code to help with track. Again, redundancy. It was literally used to “separate radar traffic”
Mode 2 was military only. It provides a 4-digit octal (12 bit) unit code or tail number. Mode 3 micivilian and provides a 4-digit octal (12 bit) identification code for the aircraft, assigned by the air traffic controller. Commonly referred to as a squawk code. Thus, the IFF codes for the chase planes and the hijacked plane would have been completely different and recognizable both to the radar operator to on the printed radar data provided to Capt. Spangler.\
Meanwhile, the airliner with a Mode 3 “hijack” gives the computer enhanced IFF to use in tracking logic. In other words, the hijacked airliner would have been the “star of the show” and would definitely be identifiable relative to the other aircraft.
When asked about SAGE “losing an aircraft”, Mr. Camp said the only way SAGE could “lose” an aircraft is if the aircraft fell below 10,000 feet. Gaps in coverage might occur due to terrain masking. Typically, TRACON or low altitude “gap filler” radar could provide that lost coverage if needed. Moreover, when asked about radar coverage, up to 20 radars could be tied to a single SAGE control center. He believes McChord had a dozen in 1971, perhaps more. Interesting, the first plot on the USAF map is 7:54 which corresponds to when Flight 305 reached an altitude of 10,000 feet AMSL.
Importantly, there were military radars all over the country, not just along the coasts and borders. The entire 360 degree sweep of the airspace would be fed to SAGE. Thus, SAGE was not just outward looking but its radar provided coverage to the entire North American continent.
Regarding the reliability of the SAGE system, by the 1970s, SAGE had a 99.5% reliability rate, according to Lt. Col. Camp. It also had BUIC or Back Up Interceptor Control sites that would act as redundancy should SAGE ever be knocked out by an attack. This is part of the military’s active redundancy concept. There was always a back-up to a back-up to a back-up.
Interestingly, Len put me in contact with the gentleman who was working the T-33’s training mission that night. We’ll call him John because he doesn’t want to be talked about publicly. It was a 3 on 1 mission with the Air National Guard. John handed off the T-33 to another operator who was working the F-106 chase planes.. He said that the 3 F-101 pilots were shocked that their target was diverted to a higher priority mission. This man was sitting next to the gentleman who was working the F-106 chase jets, but doesn’t remember much else because he was focused on his F-101s who no longer had a target.
So, what are the implications of Mr. Camp’s information?
First, we know what data was provided from SAGE. Second, we know how that data was used to create the flight path map.
We also know the margin of error of the map - one nautical miles north-east-west-south and 5 seconds one way or the other. This means the yellow USAF map is far more precise than previously believed. It gives a tighter north-south error than we have suspected.
We know that it eliminates any possibility that the map was constructed using faulty data.
We know that it eliminates the possibility that the chase jets were confused with 305. The SAGE radar data would have provided the Mode 2 and Mode 3 IFF codes that would have allowed Capt. Spanger to quickly identify which was the jetliner and which were the trailing aircraft.
We know it eliminates any possibility that SAGE would have “lost” Flight 305. Even if the radar operator was incompetent, the system still would have recorded the data. Also, SAGE recorded everything within a 360 circle of its airspace.
We know it eliminates any possibility that SAGE was “down” that night. It had a 99.5% reliability rate, and had multiple redundant systems in the event of a catastrophic failure.
Clearly, Mr. Camp’s testimony puts to rest any notion of a “westerly flight path”. The radar data is sound. The construction of the flight path map would have been based on sound and unimpeachable data.
If any question of a flight path outside the confines of Victor 23 ever existed, they should be squashed now. A flight path outside of Victor 23 was always fanciful and existed outside the boundaries of actual evidence. Mr. Camp’s testimony only underscores that. Moreover, Mr. Camp’s testimony is completely congruent with the FBI files we have seen.
There are two anchor points in this case. The first one is the flight path. The second is the money find at Tena Bar. There are two mysteries in this case. The first one is the identity of DB Cooper. The second is how did the money arrive at Tena Bar. The answer to both of those is unknown, but we can be as certain as possible that moving the flight path to account for the money find is untenable and not in accordance with any factual evidence.
The only question we should be asking ourselves - outside of the the identity of DB Cooper - is how did the money arrive here of the plane was over here.
-
Thanks for posting! Very interesting, especially the part about "John".
-
I have no doubt that Sage radar was working that night. Although 305's elevation might caused a very brief hiccup, at times , I see no reason to doubt the Sage radar. I believe Sage probably performed as expected. I believe it was the inability of the 106's to actually " intercept" flight 305 that caused a breech in our national defense system. I don't think it was foreseen that the 106's couldn't fly with 305 under the conditions of that night. The repercussions from this affected the case in a myriad of ways, in my humble opinion. I also believe this to (understandably) have been intentionally understated by the military and authorities.
-
I have no doubt that Sage radar was working that night. Although 305's elevation might caused a very brief hiccup, at times , I see no reason to doubt the Sage radar. I believe Sage probably performed as expected. I believe it was the inability of the 106's to actually " intercept" flight 305 that caused a breech in our national defense system. I don't think it was foreseen that the 106's couldn't fly with 305 under the conditions of that night. The repercussions from this affected the case in a myriad of ways, in my humble opinion. I also believe this to (understandably) have been intentionally understated by the military and authorities.
Haggar, here are some questions you apparently believe you have the answer to so please enlighten me:
1. Specifically, what is the SAGE radar you refer to? There were many radar sets operating in 1971, and I have never heard of one being called a SAGE radar.
2. What is the basis for your claim that the SAGE system was even operating the night of the hijacking? Never been proven to my knowledge.
3. What is the basis for your claim that the F-106s did not intercept the airliner? They did.
4. What is the basis for your claim that the hijacking breached the US national defense system? It didn't.
Eagerly awaiting your answers.
-
As I recall the F 106s never saw the 727. A “trash hauler” C 130 out of McChord did a visual intercept, much to the chagrin of the fighter jocks.
377
-
As I recall the F 106s never saw the 727. A “trash hauler” C 130 out of McChord did a visual intercept, much to the chagrin of the fighter jocks.
377
As I understand it, the C-130 joined up with the airliner in Oregon sometime before it was handed off to the Oakland Center in northern California. The C-130 did have visual contact and stayed with the airliner all the way to Reno.
The fighter aircraft did not have visual contact due to the bad weather in the Portland area. However, the F-106s did have radar contact with the airliner and that counts as a contact.