1
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by haggarknew on September 17, 2023, 11:30:25 AM » Thanks for posting! Very interesting, especially the part about "John".
Recent Posts
2
DB Cooper / Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Last post by Chaucer on September 15, 2023, 02:49:49 AM »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.
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.
3
DB Cooper / Re: Tena Bar Money Find
« Last post by Shutter on August 08, 2023, 09:14:36 PM »Hey dudeman, all is as well as it can be, I guess..
The main objective is to verify the chute. the DNA, not so sure since so many have handled the chute in the past and touch DNA is tricky on time frames due to how it was stored over the years (temps) along with it's travels etc. everything is worth a shot..
I haven't heard back from them so I will call them tomorrow and see if I can get the ball rolling..I can only hope they agree to allow this to happen..this could also be documented in the display...
Lets see what happens....
Shutter
The main objective is to verify the chute. the DNA, not so sure since so many have handled the chute in the past and touch DNA is tricky on time frames due to how it was stored over the years (temps) along with it's travels etc. everything is worth a shot..
I haven't heard back from them so I will call them tomorrow and see if I can get the ball rolling..I can only hope they agree to allow this to happen..this could also be documented in the display...
Lets see what happens....
Shutter
4
DB Cooper / Re: Tena Bar Money Find
« Last post by dudeman17 on August 08, 2023, 07:39:16 PM »Good to see a post from you Shutter, I hope everything is well with you. Thanks for clearing up the guest/bot issue. I was wondering about the sudden rise in interest, but my post was somewhat in jest, as I believe R99's response was. As for the museum chute, as I'm sure you've read over at dz, Flyjack makes an argument that that chute should not be handled until it could be tested for DNA, as Cooper likely handled it. I think that argument has merit, not sure how or if that could be arranged.
5
DB Cooper / Re: Tena Bar Money Find
« Last post by Shutter on August 06, 2023, 01:16:50 PM »Let me clear a few things up...the home page guest views is probably around 99% spambots, they try to intrude into webforums to start a new thread with some sort of advertising or even a virus..the bots are typically from Russia and China. they will have similar IP's constantly trying to join the forum. I have a simple step that stops them by asking a simple question while trying to register..
WSHS parachute...I contacted the museum during the pandemic and discussed the problems with the parachute and the need to have it opened for clarification purposes...I was told at the time that a new office manager was coming in and it would be up to her to give any permission to open the chute..I tried several months later but they were still closed.
I will try and contact them again an see if they will agree to allow the chute to be opened. I have a rigger out of Seattle that will travel to WSHS and do the repack. Bruce Smith was going to be there to document and take pics but he's gone so someone needs to step up and take his place....
Shutter
WSHS parachute...I contacted the museum during the pandemic and discussed the problems with the parachute and the need to have it opened for clarification purposes...I was told at the time that a new office manager was coming in and it would be up to her to give any permission to open the chute..I tried several months later but they were still closed.
I will try and contact them again an see if they will agree to allow the chute to be opened. I have a rigger out of Seattle that will travel to WSHS and do the repack. Bruce Smith was going to be there to document and take pics but he's gone so someone needs to step up and take his place....
Shutter
6
DB Cooper / Re: Tena Bar Money Find
« Last post by DBfan57 on August 06, 2023, 10:07:50 AM »I agree that the case is unsolvable. I do not think there is enough physical evidence to tie to a single suspect. The tie particles MAY limit the pool of people Cooper could be, but I simply do not think (in the absence of DNA) that we will ever get an answer beyond a reasonable doubt.I also hope that there are still people here to discuss the case. I prefer this site as well. I enjoy the discussions at the Dropzone forum. I haven't been on the FB site. ( not sure I would be welcome 😂 lol )Why wouldn't you be welcome? We have over 3500 members there. All opinions and backgrounds welcome, including yours.
That said, I also wish this forum had more activity. Not sure why it has fallen off...
I confess this is my first visit in quite some time, I think some people, myself included, find that this case is very close to being, unsolvable. The final act that sealed it was the loss of the cigarette butts. DNA is a very powerful tool in crime and forensics. There can only be a few possible smoking guns to come about here. And they are highly unlikely. I see a new Zodiac video on YouTube. That one likely is more solvable? I saw your plane post. Nice. The 727.
That said, I have busied myself with other aspects of the case. I have done a deep dive into the evolution of the dropzone along with the communications that night. I've also spent a lot of time speaking to experts in regards to Tena Bar in an effort to bust some of the commonly believed myths.
At this point, the Cooper case it more of a thought exercise rather than an effort to identify a particular suspect.
As far as not as many people posting here as in the past, I think the FB group has sucked a lot of the oxygen out of the room. Unlike the DZ, there isn't anywhere near the level of toxicity and unlike here, anyone is welcome to join and contribute. I think the Vortex is evolving and expanding and I'm not sure some of the older generation of Cooper researchers can adapt. It's friendlier, less contentious, less competitive, and more collaborative than a decade ago.
This isn't my site, obviously. It's Shutter's. But I would like to see this forum evolve into a place where it's an "experts only" forum. Where the most experienced, knowledgeable, and respected Cooper researchers can come and discuss the case and collaborate. Just my two cents.
How do you really classify one as a true expert in this area? And who knows where the smoking gun could come from if it is ever solved, lets say by more of the money being found somewhere. As much a longshot as any "expert" solving this. I would like to see a seperate thread or area to discuss other cases. Like JFK and Jack the Ripper lets say. Those two are likely the only two bigger than the Cooper case. Closure will never likely come in any of them.
7
DB Cooper / Re: General Questions About The Case
« Last post by Chaucer on July 11, 2023, 12:29:07 PM »All,This is Tom's original post about the radiosonde data.
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
Here is his last sentence for emphasis:
Nov 24 looks pretty consistent all the way down but seems to be more southerly than we had estimated.
If you believe the theory that the ground winds were consistent with the winds aloft is baseless, perhaps you should take it up with Tom.
Also, I know the winds aloft were measured by the balloons. You keep trying to pick a fight over things we agree with. As unbelievable as it may be to you, you are not the only one who understands this stuff.
Rather than trying to be confrontational, condescending, and argumentative, perhaps you should cooperate and collaborate in good faith.
This isn't a contest on who is smarter or who gets the right answer first. It's about everyone working together to find the truth. That's why I share the information that I find with everyone rather than working alone in the dark. It's also why I am comfortable admitting when I am wrong or when I don't know something and asking for help. I don't have all the answers. Spoiler alert: neither do you. Maybe all of us together can change that.
8
DB Cooper / Re: General Questions About The Case
« Last post by Robert99 on July 11, 2023, 11:14:29 AM »I feel like I'm being gaslighted.Also, here is the weather data from the most recent Vault release. This comes from the U.S. Weather Bureau which is now known as the National Weather Service. The data indicates the wind shifting (in Portland) from out of the southeast to out of the west to out of the south-southwest over the course of 2 or 3 hours.Here is the post along with the link. At no point did I claim that they were winds aloft, yet you fail to recognize that Tom's winds aloft data was from GROUND to 12,000 feet.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Chaucer, Tom Kaye's "winds aloft data was from GROUND to 12,000 feet" is exactly what I have been telling you. The NOAA balloon data was the sole source of measured data used in predicting the winds aloft that the FAA issued for pilot planning purposes. Except for the measured NOAA balloon data and what was measured at ground level and reported in the hourly sequences reports, everything else was a prediction.
The winds aloft were measured by the balloons from ground level up and we do not need to go above 10,000 feet above sea level here since that is as high as the airliner went in the WA and OR areas.
This is what I have been telling YOU. Why are you trying to argue with me about it?
My point is that that NOAA data from Tom shows that the ground winds and winds aloft were fairly consistent with one another. Therefore, one could conclude that if we know the ground winds, the winds aloft would not be much different. The caveat is that the NOAA data provided by Tom comes from reporting areas dozens about miles away from any reasonable jump spot. So, the data is of the winds aloft is merely estimates and extrapolations.
Chaucer, you seem to be unable to understand that the winds aloft were MEASURED by the balloon data.
Also, your theory that the winds aloft will be in the same direction as the surface winds is baseless. To disprove your theory, all you have to do is check the surface winds for several locations near where you live and those surface winds will probably be in completely different directions.
The FAA's publication, "Aviation Weather", is available free and online for anyone who wants to gain some knowledge of the subject.
9
DB Cooper / Re: General Questions About The Case
« Last post by Chaucer on July 11, 2023, 12:39:20 AM »I feel like I'm being gaslighted.Also, here is the weather data from the most recent Vault release. This comes from the U.S. Weather Bureau which is now known as the National Weather Service. The data indicates the wind shifting (in Portland) from out of the southeast to out of the west to out of the south-southwest over the course of 2 or 3 hours.Here is the post along with the link. At no point did I claim that they were winds aloft, yet you fail to recognize that Tom's winds aloft data was from GROUND to 12,000 feet.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Chaucer, Tom Kaye's "winds aloft data was from GROUND to 12,000 feet" is exactly what I have been telling you. The NOAA balloon data was the sole source of measured data used in predicting the winds aloft that the FAA issued for pilot planning purposes. Except for the measured NOAA balloon data and what was measured at ground level and reported in the hourly sequences reports, everything else was a prediction.
The winds aloft were measured by the balloons from ground level up and we do not need to go above 10,000 feet above sea level here since that is as high as the airliner went in the WA and OR areas.
This is what I have been telling YOU. Why are you trying to argue with me about it?
My point is that that NOAA data from Tom shows that the ground winds and winds aloft were fairly consistent with one another. Therefore, one could conclude that if we know the ground winds, the winds aloft would not be much different. The caveat is that the NOAA data provided by Tom comes from reporting areas dozens about miles away from any reasonable jump spot. So, the data is of the winds aloft is merely estimates and extrapolations.
10
DB Cooper / Re: General Questions About The Case
« Last post by Robert99 on July 10, 2023, 11:36:23 PM »Also, here is the weather data from the most recent Vault release. This comes from the U.S. Weather Bureau which is now known as the National Weather Service. The data indicates the wind shifting (in Portland) from out of the southeast to out of the west to out of the south-southwest over the course of 2 or 3 hours.Here is the post along with the link. At no point did I claim that they were winds aloft, yet you fail to recognize that Tom's winds aloft data was from GROUND to 12,000 feet.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Chaucer, Tom Kaye's "winds aloft data was from GROUND to 12,000 feet" is exactly what I have been telling you. The NOAA balloon data was the sole source of measured data used in predicting the winds aloft that the FAA issued for pilot planning purposes. Except for the measured NOAA balloon data and what was measured at ground level and reported in the hourly sequences reports, everything else was a prediction.
The winds aloft were measured by the balloons from ground level up and we do not need to go above 10,000 feet above sea level here since that is as high as the airliner went in the WA and OR areas.