Author Topic: Tena Bar Money Find (Read 1797444 times)

georger · « **Reply #2415 on:** December 13, 2016, 04:34:49 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Quote
the place turns out to be a popular heavily used sand bar! Those facts make the money find a ripe candidate for a plant theory or the claim Cooper had to have landed nearby vs not where the FBI says he landed.

I don't believe it's a sandbar, but none the less, it's troubling to any conclusion. we have a flight path, but nothing to back it up, even the FBI states it's the "believed flight path". I also question it to a certain degree. the other issue is the timing, or the actual time frame of the jump. the files even state they had the opportunity to pin point the location, but didn't.

We really don't have any proof Cooper landed with, or without the money. speculation gives us the odds due to lack of evidence on the ground. we also have the jump slowly getting closer to the Columbia from human error, or the possibility of human error. this is something I lean towards more than anything. this is 1971, not 2016. searching a river years later will probably give you negative results. Tosaw found this out. the river wasn't priority in 1971. it was miles above the river looking for Cooper.

The files point to them not having a clue where he jumped. nobody went back into the cabin, they failed to signal the following planes as per plan? they rushed the plane as soon as it landed searching for Cooper. the airport was covered in case he bailed short of the runway.

where these guys asleep when the crew made the comments? I see a lot of mistakes just in figuring out where he jumped.

where these guys asleep when the crew made the comments? I see a lot of mistakes just in figuring out where he jumped.

No they werent at least I dont think so -= read the Pilot notes! Two things are very clear reading the pilot notes. #1: they were in constant contact with Soderlind and others at NWA during the jump period; none of that revealed in the PI ATC Transcripts. and #2: they knew Cooper was about to jump and they were keeping track conveying timely messages to Soderlind, again none of this is in the ATC Transcripts, and #3: they were conveying their important messages to NWA and Solderlind and not to ATC - they were operating in private, as it were, handling and engaging in two separate channels of communication (ATC and then NWA/Solderlind/FBI).

These Pilot Notes are very important and tell exactly what was going on and who they were communicating with, and their level of awareness. But, in spite of all of that while they thought Cooper had jumped they still were not 100% sure Cooper still wasn't in the back when they landed at Reno because nobody had physically been in the back to see him leave the plane! That sounds contradictory but its a fact Ive had coming to grips with but I think its true.

This was an active crime scene. The crew was anything but sleeping. They didn't know what the true facts were, if Cooper had jumped or not and was still on the plane, all in spite of evidence (pressure readings) he probably had jumped ... they had nothing to confirm Cooper was actually gone until after landing at Reno and Scott goes to the back and looks and tells the tower 'apparently our friend has left us ... way back when...' ...

All of this is why I asked the NWA Historian "do you have the NWA-305 flight comms?" ... he laughed and said 'no its the one thing Ive always wanted and perused but we never were able to find them ...'.

These communications with NWA and Soderlind would tell the whole story. It's almost a given they were giving their position(s) to Soderlind in real time as best they could ... and those NWA-305 flight comms along with radar data McChord produced "is" the data on which the NWA/FBI Search Map is based.

One passage in the Pilot Notes is *crucial to this story. Rataczk asks somebody at NWA "Are you recording this!" and the answer is "Yes". That somebody was probably Soderlind. None of that is in the ATC Transcript.

These guys were anything but asleep ...

Shutter · « **Reply #2416 on:** December 13, 2016, 05:39:04 PM »

Well, then why is the flight path in question, along with the jump time? we seem to be back at "the really smart guys"

Yes, I believe the records would help unlock clues along with the flight data recorder, but that will probably never happen.

377 · « **Reply #2417 on:** December 13, 2016, 05:50:57 PM »

I have this dream that a useable raw radar tape still exists in USAF or FAA archives. It's just a dream. Unlikely that a mag tape that old would even be useable.

If the Cooper exit echo was tracked not only with rotating antenna PPI radar but also nodding antenna height finding radar (used by USAF) then we might be able to tell not only where Cooper jumped, but also if Cooper opened or went in at terminal velocity.

SAGE used AN/FPS-26 Frequency Agile Height Finder Radar.

377

georger · « **Reply #2418 on:** December 13, 2016, 11:25:56 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Well, then why is the flight path in question, along with the jump time? we seem to be back at "the really smart guys"

Yes, I believe the records would help unlock clues along with the flight data recorder, but that will probably never happen.

Thats the 64 dollar question!

georger · « **Reply #2419 on:** December 13, 2016, 11:29:12 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I have this dream that a useable raw radar tape still exists in USAF or FAA archives. It's just a dream. Unlikely that a mag tape that old would even be useable.

If the Cooper exit echo was tracked not only with rotating antenna PPI radar but also nodding antenna height finding radar (used by USAF) then we might be able to tell not only where Cooper jumped, but also if Cooper opened or went in at terminal velocity.

SAGE used AN/FPS-26 Frequency Agile Height Finder Radar.

377

all true... Just my opinion, but when the Dir of the NWA History Assoc cant get the tapes or the original NWA tapes ... what does that mean? Im not the only one to ask him the question.

The Pilot Notes indicate very clearly there were important (maybe crucial) communications going on between 305 and NWA (Soderlind and others) aside from communications with ATC; a whole dialogue was occurring with NWA all during the jump period and after. The importance of these communications is underscored when (Rataczak?) asks: 'Is this being recorded?'. They all knew that a crucial record was being made.

Shutter · « **Reply #2420 on:** December 14, 2016, 06:41:34 AM »

I believe critical things were said that we don't see, but my problem points to them not addressing the jump time very well, or really knowing if he jumped. the transcripts mention addressing him prior to landing (about the stairs) they also discuss the point of slowly gaining altitude taking away the oxygen. if they knew if left the plane, they wouldn't have done the above. then the lack of checking the cabin, or even looking under the curtain.

It appears they had to piece everything together by over looking the point of getting the actual time he left the plane. the oscillation is mentioned again, but nothing about the pressure bump. this again could give critical error's in pinpointing his jump. (human error)

sailshaw · « **Reply #2421 on:** December 14, 2016, 10:33:18 AM »

377 You say: "How do you explain the currency chard field substantially below the found bills?"

The simple explanation for the shards being buried under the three bundles is that the three bundles and the chards that fell off the bundles arrived at Tina Bar in some sort of a sack and the bundles were removed first and placed next to the hole first dug in the sand, then the chards which were in the bottom of the sack were shaken out of the carrying bag and into the fairly deep hole, The three bundles were then placed on top sand that covered the chards so that the money could be found by just clearing away the 2 inshes of sand covering the bundles. That should explain how the chards ended up below the bundles but there is no proof that it was done that way, but it does show that the plant could have been a plant by Dwayne and his method of doing it. (no I don't know what happened to the sack that carried the bundles to Tina Bar, unless the bag was eaten by DB as he was very hungry. Ha Ha Ha.)

Bob Sailshaw
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

377 · « **Reply #2422 on:** December 14, 2016, 12:31:30 PM »

I agree with Georger about the importance of the aircraft to company comms which were distinct from the aircraft to FAA ATC comms.

As for the longevity of mag tape recordings, it is a crap shoot. I have some tapes from 1968 that are playable. They have lost the high frequencies which give them a muddy sound, but you can easily understand what the singers are saying. Many tapes from that era are unplayable due to ferric oxide delamination from the underlying plastic tape. Some of the old tapes have visibly flaking oxide layers, other old tapes look like new. If you Google magnetic tape recording longevity, the consensus seems to be that 30 years is the longest you can expect, but I have proof that that limit can be exceeded.

One guy posted this:
#6
Old 09-17-2009, 03:20 PM
Musicat Musicat is online now
Charter Member

Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 19,079
The age of the tape is less relevant than you may think. The storage and original chemical composition is more important. If you stored it at room temp, that's not bad for starters.

I have audio tapes from ca. 1955 that are in perfect and playable condition. I have some from the 1970's that are more gum that tape, others from the same era, stored in the same box, that are fine. I can even see significant differences between lots (production batches) of good grade tape of the same version and brand.

So you might luck out.

377

georger · « **Reply #2423 on:** December 15, 2016, 12:09:58 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I agree with Georger about the importance of the aircraft to company comms which were distinct from the aircraft to FAA ATC comms.

As for the longevity of mag tape recordings, it is a crap shoot. I have some tapes from 1968 that are playable. They have lost the high frequencies which give them a muddy sound, but you can easily understand what the singers are saying. Many tapes from that era are unplayable due to ferric oxide delamination from the underlying plastic tape. Some of the old tapes have visibly flaking oxide layers, other old tapes look like new. If you Google magnetic tape recording longevity, the consensus seems to be that 30 years is the longest you can expect, but I have proof that that limit can be exceeded.

One guy posted this:
#6
Old 09-17-2009, 03:20 PM
Musicat Musicat is online now
Charter Member

Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 19,079
The age of the tape is less relevant than you may think. The storage and original chemical composition is more important. If you stored it at room temp, that's not bad for starters.

I have audio tapes from ca. 1955 that are in perfect and playable condition. I have some from the 1970's that are more gum that tape, others from the same era, stored in the same box, that are fine. I can even see significant differences between lots (production batches) of good grade tape of the same version and brand.

So you might luck out.

377

JT said there were duplicates of the tapes made. He claimed to have seen one set being stored at an AF base out east?

There might be digital copies of the tapes somebody made? Or maybe not. I sometimes get the impression the FBI put this case on the shelf years ago and did nothing with it until .... Larry Carr?

MeyerLouie · « **Reply #2424 on:** December 16, 2016, 03:48:53 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The idea of a plant will last as long as the suspects surround the case. no matter what comes into play about them they will continue to try and prove that suspect. even when the witnesses have seen these suspects. a plant makes there suspect thrive. a plant proves Cooper made it. they go hand in hand.

IMO, Cooper would have had to of known about Tina bar, the erosion, the amount of people who visited the beach. it just doesn't make sense. how could he have known the money would be found, or that it could weaken his trail? the money would have to be found early in the investigation to throw them off his trail. how do you bury something thinking that? they have never been on his trail. how would he have known they would turn the money in, and not keep it? that almost happened! nothing adds up. if the intention was for the money to be found, why wasn't it protected? the "master plan" didn't include this?

Christiansen, Weber, Rackstraw, and many others all rely on a plant. it's a must, a need. don't tell me Tina has never seen these people, or the passengers...what dark hole do they think these people live in. it's as ridiculous as the plant.

Bingo. You want to understand the plant theories, just look at who is pushing them. The shard field, at least for me, eliminates the already highly unlikely plant.

The money was probably going to be found eventually. If not by the Ingrams, then by someone else on a different day building a different fire. How many fires had been built at Tena Bar? It was an amazing find. But I don't know how unlikely of a find it ultimately was.

I'd love to hear the plant theory that explains the shard field.

Is the most popular explanation for the shard field that those bills were shredded in the dredge machine and then spit out onto the beach (in fragments)? Or is the more popular theory that those bills were loose (no longer bundled together) and they therefore were decomposed by the elements much more rapidly than the three bundles that were tied together (and possibly sifted their way down further in the sand)?

Also, was the shard field directly underneath the three bundles that Ingram found? Or off to the side?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Did the Fazio's do more dredging at Tina Bar, beyond 1974? I tried to talk to one of the Fazio brothers about this matter, but I was unlucky on my last few trips to Tina Bar -- either the Fazio's were not there or the place had just closed up for the day. I was under the impression they did. I do know the beach erosion has been significant over the years. I think a Tina Bar local who frequented the beach quite often told me that the Fazio's wanted to stay ahead of the erosion as much as they could -- in protecting and preserving their land base as best they could. So, they contracted out some dredging off and on over the years. I may be wrong, but that's what I was told. If this is true, it might help explain how the money shards got below the 3 packets.

How about this scenario: Say the dredge caught the money bag at the bottom of the Columbia River in 1974. Most of the money bag got torn to shreds, but some of the bag stayed in tact, with the three bundles still together and protected by remnants of parachute chord and canvas bag. In addition, some of the money fragments, or shards, got thrown up on the beach by the dredge as well -- some distance away from the 3 intact money packets. The bulldozer spreads the sand out on the beach, thereby spreading the money shards out further, but not dislodging the three bundles partially bounded by canvas and parachute chord. The Fazio's order more dredging over the years, several layers of sand get piled on top of the shards and intact bundles. At a later date, as the bulldozer spreads out the sand on the beach, a bit of a sand hole develops, right above where the money shards are. The bulldozer, or backhoe, scoops up a load of sand to fill the hole and get the ground level again. That scoop happens to have the 3 money packets, still intact. They go unnoticed as the sand hole is filled.

And that's how the money packets end up above the money shards -- by multiple dredgings and spreadings of the sand at Tina Bar. Eventually though, the erosion takes over and wins out. Enough sands finally erodes away so that the money packets are just inches from being exposed. A little boy comes along at the exact right time, brushes away some sand on the beach, and presto -- the money packets appear! By this time the canvas and parachute chord that held the 3 bundles together have dislodged or disintegrated. Only the 3 bundles remain, together.

Meyer

Shutter · « **Reply #2425 on:** December 16, 2016, 08:52:14 AM »

The dredging only occurred one time from 1971 -1980. they have dredged many times after the money find and prior to 1971. they even have there own dredge now.

It's possible they piled the sand further down the beach for spreading. that makes more sense than trying to spread it over a long distance from one area. this could explain the lack of a lot of bills or fragments showing up, but they did check a lot of other area's. now, we also have the Fazio's, or the FBI claiming the sand was only spread 50 yards in each direction? this doesn't make sense since so much sand was placed on the beach, and the of course we have Palmer identifying the dredge layer past the 50 yard mark.

I tried to get the Learning channel to do a test with a dredge and a bag of money, but finding a dredge to fit the needs was not as easy as one thinks, so it got trashed. I'm not sold that it would destroy all the bills. I'm guessing some would escape, and I'm just not sure what the pump would do to the bag. we know for a fact that objects can get through the pump, but these were metal objects, 60 feet of chain, welding tanks, cannon balls etc.

I'm still wondering if they used the rubber bands to bundle multiple bundles vs single. this is not uncommon. now, to confuse things more, I think it was Tina stating that they had bank type bands on the bundles?

The FBI sometimes described the bills as a "wad, or clump" this could be consistent with pushing the sand causing the wet bills to compact, or clump, but doesn't explain them remaining together as one unless they were stuck together for several years. then you must question what the rubber bands would do going through the dredge. pieces of the bills shredded would also be in the mix while spreading the sand.

NMIwrecks (a diver) explained that water would be a preservative, and would not destroy the bills. this is not paper, so it wouldn't of dissolved. if the bag was wrapped tight it should of turned them into a brick (speculation) IMO.

I was really looking forward to proving, or debunking the dredge theory, but sadly this didn't happen. things need to be eliminated to try and help figure out what exactly happened with the money found on Tbar.

georger · « **Reply #2426 on:** December 16, 2016, 01:54:49 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The idea of a plant will last as long as the suspects surround the case. no matter what comes into play about them they will continue to try and prove that suspect. even when the witnesses have seen these suspects. a plant makes there suspect thrive. a plant proves Cooper made it. they go hand in hand.

IMO, Cooper would have had to of known about Tina bar, the erosion, the amount of people who visited the beach. it just doesn't make sense. how could he have known the money would be found, or that it could weaken his trail? the money would have to be found early in the investigation to throw them off his trail. how do you bury something thinking that? they have never been on his trail. how would he have known they would turn the money in, and not keep it? that almost happened! nothing adds up. if the intention was for the money to be found, why wasn't it protected? the "master plan" didn't include this?

Christiansen, Weber, Rackstraw, and many others all rely on a plant. it's a must, a need. don't tell me Tina has never seen these people, or the passengers...what dark hole do they think these people live in. it's as ridiculous as the plant.

Bingo. You want to understand the plant theories, just look at who is pushing them. The shard field, at least for me, eliminates the already highly unlikely plant.

The money was probably going to be found eventually. If not by the Ingrams, then by someone else on a different day building a different fire. How many fires had been built at Tena Bar? It was an amazing find. But I don't know how unlikely of a find it ultimately was.

I'd love to hear the plant theory that explains the shard field.

Is the most popular explanation for the shard field that those bills were shredded in the dredge machine and then spit out onto the beach (in fragments)? Or is the more popular theory that those bills were loose (no longer bundled together) and they therefore were decomposed by the elements much more rapidly than the three bundles that were tied together (and possibly sifted their way down further in the sand)?

Also, was the shard field directly underneath the three bundles that Ingram found? Or off to the side?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Did the Fazio's do more dredging at Tina Bar, beyond 1974? I tried to talk to one of the Fazio brothers about this matter, but I was unlucky on my last few trips to Tina Bar -- either the Fazio's were not there or the place had just closed up for the day. I was under the impression they did. I do know the beach erosion has been significant over the years. I think a Tina Bar local who frequented the beach quite often told me that the Fazio's wanted to stay ahead of the erosion as much as they could -- in protecting and preserving their land base as best they could. So, they contracted out some dredging off and on over the years. I may be wrong, but that's what I was told. If this is true, it might help explain how the money shards got below the 3 packets.

How about this scenario: Say the dredge caught the money bag at the bottom of the Columbia River in 1974. Most of the money bag got torn to shreds, but some of the bag stayed in tact, with the three bundles still together and protected by remnants of parachute chord and canvas bag. In addition, some of the money fragments, or shards, got thrown up on the beach by the dredge as well -- some distance away from the 3 intact money packets. The bulldozer spreads the sand out on the beach, thereby spreading the money shards out further, but not dislodging the three bundles partially bounded by canvas and parachute chord. The Fazio's order more dredging over the years, several layers of sand get piled on top of the shards and intact bundles. At a later date, as the bulldozer spreads out the sand on the beach, a bit of a sand hole develops, right above where the money shards are. The bulldozer, or backhoe, scoops up a load of sand to fill the hole and get the ground level again. That scoop happens to have the 3 money packets, still intact. They go unnoticed as the sand hole is filled.

And that's how the money packets end up above the money shards -- by multiple dredgings and spreadings of the sand at Tina Bar. Eventually though, the erosion takes over and wins out. Enough sands finally erodes away so that the money packets are just inches from being exposed. A little boy comes along at the exact right time, brushes away some sand on the beach, and presto -- the money packets appear! By this time the canvas and parachute chord that held the 3 bundles together have dislodged or disintegrated. Only the 3 bundles remain, together.

Meyer

Only one documented dredging event between 1971-1980 and that was in 74.

Tom's objection to the dredging theory is the dredging spoils and money find are separated by 200 yards.

But, the money find (pieces and Ingram bundles) are all down stream of the northern dredging spoil site, 1974. Dredging spoils are viscous and always spread out with much material flowing back into the river. After settling the new material was spread out by tractors. Then (and here is the red flag), there were 'eleven' (11) high water events over 12 feet between May of 1975 and Feb of 1980 which affected Tina Bar with erosion and sand movement in a south-to-north direction. Each of those high water events moves sand around (south to north direction at Tina Bar) and also alters the sand strata configuration. So, there was ample time and opportunity for pieces of money and even bundles to be moved north-to-south within say 200 yards of the original dredge dump site with each of those money movements leaving money in slightly different strata (from surface to say 2-3 ft deep) over time. It is that kind of scenario that could fit the data, with the northern 1974 dump site being the source.

Palmer ignored the high water events between 1971-1980 and 1974-1980 and said the last high water events between 1979-1980 were solely responsible, and he identified only one of those events as being the sole mover of the money onto Tina Bar! But, Palmer also basically ignored the pieces of money being found at 2-3 feet depth, right under his nose right next to where he himself is working in his trench, in the KIRO video! Palmer refers to 'fragments' being found in his report but he doesn't assign these pieces any significance.

It's my understanding that when Palmer then published his conclusions several FBI agents who had been there and seen fragments being pulled from deeper depths, challenged Palmer's finding. Palmer had no answer! Then Palmer was forced to back off his single water event theory and said 'well maybe it took longer for the money to arrive maybe as much as two years' - which blew his whole single event Washougal Theory! Now Tom comes around and says Palmer miss-identified strata was also!

The key to this for me is the dates of the strata which yielded money fragments vs the Ingram bundles. I think we are looking at different strata with different dates due to different hydrological events over time ... stretching back to 1974 or 1971. It is also significant to me that the Ingram bundles and the deeper pieces are "all" down stream (north) of the 1974 dredging pile. No Cooper money has ever been found at any other place at Tina Bar. I tend to believe this is something more than coincidence. And it is very clear this contradiction forced Palmer to back off his 'single water event' theory when questioned by FBI agents at the scene; that is documented in the FBI Palmer report but it got little publicity then or now. Palmer backing off his single-event theory at all is very significant and basically nullified his Washougal Theory completely. It's all there in the FBI's Summary Palmer Report.

377 · « **Reply #2427 on:** December 16, 2016, 02:04:27 PM »

Good post G. Sound logic.

377

georger · « **Reply #2428 on:** December 16, 2016, 02:16:35 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Good post G. Sound logic.

377

These FBI guys following Palmer around at Tina Bar weren't stupid! They really were looking for facts and reasons that would explain the Ingram find. At the end I think they were perplexed and a bit confused and frustrated. You can see and hear that frustration in the KIRO video. Even the reporter was left hanging... puzzled ... no firm conclusions. The center of the problem was Palmer's insistence this was a "single event" situation. ... with the source the Washougal. To some of the guys on the scene you might as well have said Pluto or Mars, as Washougal. It was a lot to swallow! And finally several of the agents just stood up and said so ... and Palmer backed up without anything satisfying or conclusive in response! And we sit here with this controversy to this day..

I will leave it there for now.

Thanks.

Shutter · « **Reply #2429 on:** December 16, 2016, 02:58:06 PM »

it's sounds like you are implying the high waters brought the money, but how did the frags get to different levels, or depths?

Poll

How did the money arrive on Tena Bar

Author Topic: Tena Bar Money Find (Read 1797444 times)

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Shutter

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

377

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Shutter

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

sailshaw

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

377

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

MeyerLouie

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Shutter

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

377

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

georger

Re: Tina Bar Money Find

Shutter

Re: Tina Bar Money Find