Author Topic: General Questions About The Case  (Read 708523 times)

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Thanked: 176 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3330 on: May 22, 2023, 03:56:24 PM »
I read an extended description of Al Tyre's reconnect with Ted in the famous truckstop breakfast in 1973

I hadn't noticed this before
"During the encounter in the service area in 1973, Tyre and Ted had breakfast together. Ted also asked him if he had followed the DB Cooper hijacking case. Tyre said he hadn't."

wonder if that's true.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2023, 03:57:15 PM by snowmman »
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Thanked: 176 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3331 on: May 22, 2023, 06:13:03 PM »
robert edwards commentary on the details of the boeing air stairs tests is reasonable, and here:
with discussion about hydraulics

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
also a later update
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
this second post has images showing oscillations in airplane altitude. I think he made the graphs from the data in the fbi files?

Edwards makes an interesting point:
"If on Flight 305 the autopilot was engaged (as the FBI assures us was the case) and "altitude hold" was switched on (which I think probable), it would compensate for the pitch-up without any intervention by the pilot, and would return the airplane to the desired angle of attack and to the desired altitude. There would surely have been some oscillations in the airplane's altitude, in the cabin's equivalent altitude, and in the cabin rate-of-climb (rate of change of cabin pressure), as there were in Boeing Test 100-1, summarized in the graphs below.]"

also:
"[I believe that there were at least three relevant differences between the Boeing tests and Flight 305.
* In the Boeing tests, the landing gear was up. On Flight 305, the gear was down.
* In the Boeing tests, according to my correspondent, the autopilot was probably disengaged. On Flight 305, according to two statements to the FBI by Northwest's Director of Flight Operations (Technical), the autopilot was engaged throughout most of the segment between Seattle and Reno. A former senior FBI agent advised me that the FBI had no reason to question these statements.
* In Boeing Test 100-1, all the interior panels in the stairwell were removed. to avoid possible damage. I do not know what the aerodynamic effects might have been, but I suspect that this condition would have created more turbulence in the stairwell. In Boeing Test 100-3, the panels were re-installed. On Flight 305, all the panels were in place."



He has a nice pic of N727000 doing a test drop over the Pacific with the stairs removed. Interestingly, the payload and parachute descend at a more vertical angle from the plane, then I've seen in other test drops. (in other tests)

interestingly Edwards said
"Back on March 5, 2020, I had submitted a FOIA request for all reports relating to the Boeing test flights. The FBI replied on July 6, 2020, to the effect that they had searched for the reports and found nothing."


and then the FBI released the files with the detailed test reports.
Weird.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2023, 06:24:10 PM by snowmman »
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Thanked: 176 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3332 on: May 22, 2023, 06:26:23 PM »
good thoughts by Edwards on the oscillations
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Edwards: (this is 8/16/22 so Edwards is musing post-book, and with new knowledge from newly released fbi files)

As mentioned in earlier posts, I discussed Boeing report D6-7771, on the Boeing tests 100-1 and 100-3 of the 727-22 in 1964, with an aerospace engineer who knows the Boeing 727 well.

He advised that on the Boeing tests, given the frequent references to manual trim, the autopilot was probably not engaged. However, with regard to Flight 305 between Seattle and Reno, I had reached the conclusion that the autopilot was almost certainly engaged most of the time.

This represented a significant difference between the configuration of the Boeing tests and that of Flight 305. With the autopilot engaged, any excursions in the control axes would be quickly corrected. Consequently, I would have expected any oscillations on Flight 305 to be much smaller than those on the Boeing tests.

I therefore asked my correspondent:
"... on Flight 305, given that the autopilot was engaged and that (probably) "altitude hold" was on, is there a way to estimate the maximum altitude excursions from 10,000 feet AMSL resulting from deployment of the airstair? I'm wondering: plus or minus 100 feet? More, or less?"
His reply was as follows [with my comments in square brackets]:
"... I would expect that [on Flight 305] the altitude fluctuation due to airstair deployment was less than 100 feet, especially with the autopilot engaged. The pilots would have needed to add some power to maintain airspeed. I am inclined to say that any altitude deviations of significance, if they existed, were more likely due to the weather of the evening [of November 24, 1971] than to the airstair deployment."
We recall that the crew's report of the oscillations on Flight 305 led to an estimate of the place and time of the hijacker's leap, which led to the delineation of a search area, where the FBI found nothing. We may wonder whether the oscillations on Flight 305 led the FBI down a wrong track, from which they were unable to return.
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1596
  • Thanked: 442 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3333 on: May 24, 2023, 04:51:15 AM »
Are you sure the 727 autopilot maintained AOA? I see only altitude hold in a casual look through my manuals. It would respond to the lowered stair but only by sensing a change in baro altitude and pitching up to maintain the set value. I may be incorrect. I have not looked at it in depth yet.

377
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1596
  • Thanked: 442 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3334 on: May 24, 2023, 05:04:24 AM »
Braden is still a fascinating DBC candidate.

When I spoke with MAC SOG MSgt Billy Waugh, he was quite certain Ted Braden was DB Cooper.
He said that most of his colleagues agreed.

Snowmman is in the building.

377
 

Offline Olemisscub

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • Thanked: 12 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3335 on: May 24, 2023, 09:54:34 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Braden is still a fascinating DBC candidate.

When I spoke with MAC SOG MSgt Billy Waugh, he was quite certain Ted Braden was DB Cooper.
He said that most of his colleagues agreed.

Snowmman is in the building.

377

Braden is one of a tiny handful of named suspects who I think still warrant further investigation. It's shocking he has never been featured in one of these TV documentaries. Although, that's really the impact of the wiki page. Most people are lazy and will just go to the wiki page (which gets as many as 500k hits a month). Braden didn't have a wikipedia entry until I made one for him. Compared to everyone else listed on the wiki page, Braden just blows them away, so I've noticed that he has gotten more pub lately in those random news articles about the case that you come across.

Anyways, I've often said on podcast interviews and such that if you gave 100 random people the surface level details of the Cooper case and told them to invent who DB Cooper was, 85 of them would invent someone very similar to Braden. A feloniously minded master skydiver with balls the size of gas-giant planets whose whereabouts were unknown at the time.

However, no suspect is perfect and Braden isn't without his flaws, although his flaws aren't nearly as damning as other suspects' flaws. I don't care that his eyes were hazel and not brown (hazel can look brown), but I do care that he was 5'8 and scrawny. I don't think Cooper was any taller than six feet, but he was probably close to it, and it'd be difficult to peg someone who was 5'8 as six feet. But hey, Spec Ops types have lots of tricks and maybe he had lifts within his shoes or something. Who knows. But his height is a bit of problem.

The second issue that I have with Braden is that I have a hard time believing that his photos weren't shown to the stews. We know that he WAS investigated as early as Spring of 72 because a former MACVSOG member has described FBI agents interviewing him about Braden at a North Carolina drop zone. This seems accurate because of course he was a suspect. There should be no doubt that FBI agents inquired with the military about any ex-green beret types who could have done this and Braden's name surely came up. Braden was also a known rabble rouser at the time, due to his Ramparts interview where he exposed the info of MACVSOG running CIA ops in Laos illegally. However, I asked Larry Carr recently about Braden and he said it's a name he never came across at all in the case files. That was a long time ago and was before Braden was a "household name" in the Vortex, so maybe Carr just forgot about it.

Also, with the latest info we have about Cooper almost certainly choosing to jump with a 24 foot canopy over a 26 foot canopy, this really seems like something a whuffo would do. I'm guessing Braden would have chosen the safer canopy to jump with, but who knows, maybe he waived the increased risk of injury with a 24 footer in favor of getting to the ground faster.
 

Offline Robert99

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1711
  • Thanked: 196 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3336 on: May 24, 2023, 01:03:18 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Are you sure the 727 autopilot maintained AOA? I see only altitude hold in a casual look through my manuals. It would respond to the lowered stair but only by sensing a change in baro altitude and pitching up to maintain the set value. I may be incorrect. I have not looked at it in depth yet.

377

I don't think any airliner autopilot had an Angle-of-Attack capability in 1971 and maybe not even today.  The AOA came into use primarily by the Navy for use during carrier landings which were flown manually.
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1596
  • Thanked: 442 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3337 on: May 24, 2023, 06:42:07 PM »
Turns out an AOA indicator provides very useful info for general aviation pilots. My son owns and flies a two seat carbon fiber Aero Shark with two very up to date glass panels. He not only has an a AOA indicator on each LCD panel but also a voice annunciator that will give a loud verbal warning if AOA increases beyond safe limits given other factors such as airspeed. He bought the plane used from an Air National Guard F-16 pilot. The seller gave him a lot of useful tips about AOA, info that was omitted from my son’s basic flight training. My son told me if you stay on top of AOA you will never have an unintended stall.

377
« Last Edit: May 24, 2023, 06:43:23 PM by 377 »
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1596
  • Thanked: 442 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3338 on: May 24, 2023, 06:51:28 PM »
One thing that always fascinated me was the ability of the MAC SOG jumpers to rendezvous after landing. Remember, they were in enemy territory and made their jumps at night. They had to stay quiet, and they couldn’t use flares or other visual signals to find each other. Turns out they used a portable low power AM broadcast band transmitter carried by the leader. All jumpers carried ordinary Japanese AM band transistor radios that had the normal internal ferrite bar antenna, which is very directional. They learned how to find the transmitter by swinging the radio receivers until they got a null, that is a dip in the signal strength. The null would point in the direction of the transmitter. Problem is that there is 180° ambiguity with these ferrite bar antennas. They could be pointing towards the transmitter or directly away from it. Somehow the jumpers resolved this ambiguity successfully, and always managed to rendezvous. Perhaps they noted a decrease in signal strength if they were walking away from the transmitter, and then could reverse course. 

Ted Braden was well-versed in this radio assisted rendezvous technique. 

377
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Thanked: 176 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3339 on: May 24, 2023, 09:02:10 PM »
The details don't work out.
But to feed the "what if"

But Braden supposedly worked in the past at a tool and die company.
machinist?

Don't have his full work history. not sure when he started trucking.
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Thanked: 176 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3340 on: May 24, 2023, 09:21:38 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
One thing that always fascinated me was the ability of the MAC SOG jumpers to rendezvous after landing. Remember, they were in enemy territory and made their jumps at night.

377

reminds me of this beacon ad that was in the fbi files. It was an ad. I have to find it again

377: how come you don't have this beacon in your collection?

Larry was a big proponent of "cooper must be someone the fbi didn't investigate"

There are no records of MACV-SOG investigations in the fbi files.
So if Larry was consistent he would say "of course we should investigate vietnam.. because the FBI didn't"

I liked Sheridan and Braden because they were two aspects of Vietnam that people didn't expect.
Age.
and
Civilian and Military.

Neither of those are expected. Which is why the FBI didn't investigate, I think.

interesting 12/6/78 fbi files 72 page 352
verification of decal on the found placard (snip attached)

also page 65 testimony of S. Lewis Wallick, test pilot on the air stairs test of the 727 ( I think he was the test pilot. I didn't double check the report snip above)

he provides more detail..this testimony was provided on November 30, 1971
interesting he didn't provide full detail on "oh yeah, we did extensive testing with airstairs down"...
he provides info, but doesn't say how he knows. (on Nov 30, 1971)
it wasn't until much later that Boeing was fully forthcoming about their testing.








 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Thanked: 176 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3341 on: May 24, 2023, 09:28:41 PM »
> Braden is one of a tiny handful of named suspects who I think still warrant further investigation. It's shocking he has never been featured in one of these TV documentaries. Although, that's really the impact of the wiki page. Most people are lazy and will just go to the wiki page (which gets as many as 500k hits a month). Braden didn't have a wikipedia entry until I made one for him.



The interesting thing about Braden, is that even though Pat his wife and his ex-MACV-SOG friends suspected him, apparently no one ever called the FBI and said "investigate Braden"

at least, not according to any records currently released.

Really need to do an FOIA on Braden.
If the fbi did investigate him with respect to a $250k insurance scam in the early '70s, per his wife Pat, that would be interesting info

I mean. divorce and a $250k scam in the right time frame.

Seems like a  "must-investigate-more"

I think Braden got a bunch of free passes because of Vietnam activities that were still secret.
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Thanked: 176 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3342 on: May 24, 2023, 09:31:24 PM »
> The second issue that I have with Braden is that I have a hard time believing that his photos weren't shown to the stews. We know that he WAS investigated as early as Spring of 72 because a former MACVSOG member has described FBI agents interviewing him about Braden at a North Carolina drop zone. This seems accurate because of course he was a suspect. There should be no doubt that FBI agents inquired with the military about any ex-green beret types who could have done this and Braden's name surely came up. Braden was also a known rabble rouser at the time, due to his Ramparts interview where he exposed the info of MACVSOG running CIA ops in Laos illegally. However, I asked Larry Carr recently about Braden and he said it's a name he never came across at all in the case files. That was a long time ago and was before Braden was a "household name" in the Vortex, so maybe Carr just forgot about it.

I have a hard time believing this FBI interview story.
Braden, as far as I can tell, was never a suspect, nor investigated.
Be happy to find info otherwise.
I mean, I can easily find Sheridan was suspect #112
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Thanked: 176 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3343 on: May 24, 2023, 09:33:07 PM »
The other thing people should be asking, is if Braden was so obvious, how come he wasn't mentioned until I introduced him?

And how, out of the Billions of possibles, did he pop out? :)

 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Thanked: 176 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #3344 on: May 24, 2023, 09:37:45 PM »
remember
Braden was out of the military for a while in 1971
so any chance of FBI latching on to him, would probably depend on either
a really indepth investigation like they did to civilian clubs in the usa
(FBI didn't do that though)

or someone calling in a tip on Braden.
no evidence of <even redacted< tips on macv-sog players.