DB Cooper

[Sluggo_Monster 0]

All,

I got to 35 responses on my poll (on my Web Page ) and stalled down.

Maybe I have fewer readers than the stats indicate, or maybe people don’t like “Instructional Fun.” Anyway, I have put up the IDs on the answer page. Go to the poll page and follow the link to the IDs.

Sluggo

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

[snowmman 3]

I have some limited experience in copying radio traffic. I don't think people listen and type 1 minute behind, especially if you're potentially doing XXX corrections...it's too much buffering for the brain between the ears and the fingers.

Ckret can provide testimony from the op that transcribed the traffic, but I would expect it to be near real time...literally only seconds difference between the radio traffic and the TTY entry.

So, if a timestamp appears in the TTY log when you start typing, that would indicate the start of a new bit of Radio Chatter.

Then it would be unknown how long that particular burst of chatter actually took to happen in real life. It could be a 5 minute burst for all we know. The typing could alternate fast/slow/fast/slow until it was all done. It wouldn't have to be constant rate voice/typing transmission..because humans are in the loop...it's not a full machine to machine transmission.


We can say that the Radio Chatter Burst HAS to have been completed before the next time stamp. But that's all we can say, right?

SO: I'm guessing:
The inaccuracy of any event, within an individual entry, is bounded by the next time stamp.

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH 1 MINUTE?

Prove me wrong on this.

[edit] I lost a post. inserting here. The jump zone as we all know depends on the pressure bump. The radar data and transcripts have to be time synchronized for that. I thought there was adjustment because of that? So while an individual log has precision between timestamps, (with unknown factor causing timestamp insertion) we don't know about absolute precision between different logs/radar. Supposedly the '72 map accounted for any adjustments? but we've not heard how far off each were, from one another.

[Orange1 0]

Quote

Georger - I am noting that you are
stating many things as though they are fact. What are you using for a reference for these facts?

Wow. That sounds... well, exactly like what AggieDave was asking you.

I also am a bit tired of these demands for "credentials", especially when people clearly have a very good idea of their subject matter. This is a general forum that we all enjoy (well, most of the time) reading, investigating, finding out and most of us would like all alleys explored. Sure it may have come out of a "book" but that book may well be a textbook or manual for the profession of the person involved. I know Sluggo got irritated at one stage for a particular reason, but I have thought Georger's posts extremely interesting, ditto the interaction between Georger and Snowmman.

Snowmman, btw, agree with your "why would Gosset have stayed in the army" bit - the thought had crossed my mind too - only explanation I could think of was if there was any kind of contract term involved, I am pretty clueless on that front. Otherwise, to my mind it mitigates against him being Cooper. (Although maybe he was and the guilt he felt about it was what drove him to the priesthood later on... ?) Still, I can't see the harm in checking the fingerprints - even to eliminate him, especially perhaps in light of the fact that there is a book forthcoming - would be nice to know if its worth reading

Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

[377 22]

Re: angular resolution of the radar which was painting NWA Cooper flt

If you can get me the dimensions (especially the length) of the radar antenna I can give you a good estimate of angular resolution. Basically, long antennas have better angular resolution than short ones. One reason that you see the big drag adding rotodome antenna on top of the AWACS planes is that they need the long antenna length to get good angular resolution and the dimensions require external mounting.

One big disadvantage of these new tiny (14 inch for X band) radome radar antennas for small boats is that the poor angular resolution will make two distant separate islands which have a narrow passage between them (and are are roughly equidistant from the boat) look like one island with no space in between.

Cooper's flight may have been simultaneously painted by several radars capable of capturing his body echo as he departed from the 727, but there is little hope that raw tapes of unprocessed echo signals still exist. SAGE, which combined inputs from many radars in its network and processed them through a digital computer that have over 70,000 VACUUM TUBES, would have filtered out such a body echo if the 727 had its transponder on, which I am certain it did. When SAGE was tracking an active transponder equipped aircraft, it created a blank window around the plane's echo into which data characters were displayed on the CRT.

One interesting radar tidbit is that when the USAF scooped the Navy by bringing in a B2 for a low level flyby along the SF bay waterfront right befoe a Fleet Week Blue Angels appearance, its echo was clearly painted by many boat radars in the area. Since the USAF spent billions to make this plane stealthy and invisible to radar, eyebrows were raised. The USAF claimed that they flew the B2 in domestic airspace with passive radar reflectors installed so nobody could assess their stealth specs.

In posts long ago we got confirmation that exiting skydivers were not only visible to ATC radar up to at least 60 miles away, but that they could even count the jumpers. It just kills me that radar likely painted Cooper's echo as he left the plane, but that data is long gone.

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[Sluggo_Monster 0]

377,

Ummmmmh...

You mean:
Increase the range, decrease the gain.
Increase the sensitivity, decrease the resolution.

Well! that hardly seems fair.

You and I have truely crossed paths in many of our endeavors,

Sluggo_Monster

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

[snowmman 3]

Orange1:
About Gossett not quitting the military:

I was wondering about Cooper possibly being in the middle of a major mental depression. Clinical. Not seeing anything positive in the future. Then he does the hijack, possibly for some crazy reasons that he rationalizes. Only in the comic books do people do bad things thinking they're evil. Everyone thinks they're good no matter what they do. 90% of America thinks they're average, right?

But then after the hijack, things start going good, and life was not as bleak as he thought. So he stays in his chosen profession. Because he actually likes it when he's not all messed up in the head.

So Gossett may have had more complicated things than a contract steering him to stay in the military.

I've always asked myself: "Well: what the hell do you do if you did the hijack for some crazy reason, was successful, and know that if you spend the money you'll get caught? Hell you throw the money away, never do it again, and don't look back and go on with your life...unless you want to get caught, and then you try doing more crime"

Quote

Snowmman, btw, agree with your "why would Gosset have stayed in the army" bit - the thought had crossed my mind too - only explanation I could think of was if there was any kind of contract term involved, I am pretty clueless on that front.

[377 22]

Quote

377,

Ummmmmh...

You mean:
Increase the range, decrease the gain.
Increase the sensitivity, decrease the resolution.

Well! that hardly seems fair.

You and I have truely crossed paths in many of our endeavors,

Sluggo_Monster

You know what they say about high res radar antenna design: size matters.

And on thermodynamics as applied to anything including circuits which purport to reduce broadband random (incoherent) noise mixed in with a signal:

1. you can't get ahead.

2. you can't break even.

3. Don't even try.

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[Sluggo_Monster 0]

Quote

So, if a timestamp appears in the TTY log when you start typing, that would indicate the start of a new bit of Radio Chatter.

We can say that the Radio Chatter Burst HAS to have been completed before the next time stamp. But that's all we can say, right?

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH 1 MINUTE?

Prove me wrong on this.

snowmman,

WRONG!

The date stamp appears when you hit the ready button (note the date is zulu). The time stamp appears when you hit the send button. At least that’s what I remember from 35 years ago.

Remember, this TTY was not dedicated to the NORJAK activities. What you have in the transcript is a cut and paste job. The roll paper output was pasted (or taped) onto other flat paper and then copied. You can see the margins of each snippet. Other Flight operations transmissions were occurring, thus, slowing down transmission times. That’s why a phone patch was set up.

You don’t believe me? Look at the bottom of page 99. You will see Bozeman Ops reporting Flight 120 “In to Bozeman, MT at 02:09z to 02:13z and out of Bozeman, MT at 02:34z to 02:37z with an Estimated Time of Arrival in Billings, MT at 03:09z And (probably} at 19,000 ft. altitude. On page 102 you will find: Flight 22 reporting that they are at 32,000 ft. at 320 knots with ETA Minneapolis-St. Paul at 04:20z. The temp is -60 deg Celsius The winds are out of 305 deg at 85 knots.

These are the extraneous transmissions that got left in. Think about how many were left out.

1 minute is entirely reasonable.

Sluggo_Monster

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

[Sluggo_Monster 0]

377,

You just broke the hearts of 243 SETI scientists!

They think it's all about noise. (i.e. Noise is Signal, if it's organized.)

Sluggo_Monster

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

[snowmman 3]

The SAGE systems were pretty reliable even with all those vacuum tubes, because they had a second one always ready for hot standby.

They were in use till early '80s, apparently even after ICBM's made them not as useful (not fast enough).

The reliability of little bits of technology is not important, since you can always link "more" of it together to compensate for failure rates.

The important thing is to be able to predict or measure failure rates.

High reliability is useful for bringing down costs.

That's why I don't care about someone's credentials. No one can be predictably 100% correct. Since humans are a part of the real world, the real world is always more complicated than what individuals or small groups can think about. Once you assume anyone can be wrong or intentially lying, then you focus on creating a process that will always give you a solution, as opposed to worrying about the individual pieces, which will always have known or unknown failure rates, regardless of best intentions.

[377 22]

Quote

The SAGE systems were pretty reliable even with all those vacuum tubes, because they had a second one always ready for hot standby.

They were in use till early '80s, apparently even after ICBM's made them not as useful (not fast enough).

The reliability of little bits of technology is not important, since you can always link "more" of it together to compensate for failure rates.

The important thing is to be able to predict or measure failure rates.

High reliability is useful for bringing down costs.

**********************

One SAGE story that I got a big laugh from is that they noticed that failure of a certain processor module did not seem to degrade system performance. Turns out that the module did absolutely nothing. It was part of an early systems design, somehow never got deleted, and made it into production.

Can you imagine the heat generated by 70,000 vacuum tubes? I used to warm a cold room in the winter with a Tektronix 535 scope that had about 40 tubes.

Were ICBM speeds really why SAGE became obsolete? Weren't ICBMs around when SAGE was introduced? I had assumed that maintenance costs and the declining threat of enemy bombers in US airspace doomed SAGE as it aged. I don't think SAGE could even see an ICBM until it got so low as to be unstoppable.

I talked to some old timers who manned a NIKE missile base in Marin County. They almost launched on an unscheduled trans Pacific airliner that had failed to ID itself and continued onward towards the Calif coast. The guy in charge said don't launch even though they had clearance to do it and all checklists had been cleared. He just thought the odds of a single aircraft attacking the US were too damned low. Wish the same guy had been aboard that USN cruiser that launched on the Iranian airliner.

I love vacuum tube technology and am restoring a WW2 military aircraft radio receiver and transmitter for ham band operation. Real radios glow in the dark.

377

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

• Quote

[skyjack71 0]

The time line was stretched to beyond the MAX because others wanted it that way - Talk to or call Radecek and you will get correct info.

This is the one thing no one is doing - not contacting witnesses that are still alive. That Co-pilot knows the times and what equipment was being used and the times if they are relayed or actual time. This was examined by the experts - that made allowances at the time for error and now that time line has gone way beyond reality...just because someone doesn't know how the money got into the Columbia and to support their own stories they have to confuse the facts.

For example - Galen Cook used composites that the FBI had, but he altered the composite and did not do a disclaimer. Therefore the public who is unaware of the alterations accept the composite as the original. He did this for his OWN benefit and not for the BENEFIT of the TRUTH.

Is there not a law about altering a composite or piece of art without a disclaimer? Especially for personal gain.

This is why I needed to know where you got your information and for you to be clear on the ACTUAL flight info and not use something that has gone out of the realm of believablity for the purpose of profit...and to push a suspect.

If you are going to use the pushed time lines - substanciate it yourself by talking to the pilot and not by hearsay or rearranged information...for the purpose of appeasing or gaing favor.

Do not allow yourself to be used.

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[377 22]

Quote

The time line was stretched to beyond the MAX because others wanted it that way - Talk to or call Radecek and you will get correct info.

This is the one thing no one is doing - not contacting witnesses that are still alive. That Co-pilot knows the times and what equipment was being used and the times if they are relayed or actual time. This was examined by the experts - that made allowances at the time for error and now that time line has gone way beyond reality...just because someone doesn't know how the money got into the Columbia and to support their own stories they have to confuse the facts.

For example - Galen Cook used composites that the FBI had, but he altered the composite and did not do a disclaimer. Therefore the public who is unaware of the alterations accept the composite as the original. He did this for his OWN benefit and not for the BENEFIT of the TRUTH.

Is there not a law about altering a composite or piece of art without a disclaimer? Especially for personal gain.

This is why I needed to know where you got your information and for you to be clear on the ACTUAL flight info and not use something that has gone out of the realm of believablity for the purpose of profit...and to push a suspect.

If you are going to use the pushed time lines - substanciate it yourself by talking to the pilot and not by hearsay or rearranged information...for the purpose of appeasing or gaing favor.

Do not allow yourself to be used.

If Galen did covertly alter the sketch then shame on him, but doesn't the altered sketch look pretty similar to the unaltered one? Don't they look like the same person? What am I missing here?

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[snowmman 3]

Quade never asked how I was able to read the forum even while I was banned.

Obviously the "banning" technology is imperfect.

What works as "banning" technology is social interaction or noninteraction. A nice reminder for us all as the world moves forward. It's all about the humans, not the technology.

There's no such thing as superior technology winning a battle. All it provides is a time delay till the "more superior" technology is invented or used.

Now I hope I don't get banned for this post.

[skyjack71 0]

Quote

Yes, I am aware of yours and Sluggo's analyses.
I am up to speed (I think!). I am aware of the work
Sluggo has been doing on a flight path and a timeline. All very excellent work. To my eye all of this work proves there is flexibility in the path and the timeline to put 305 over northern Portland at bailout, without violating any major tenent-in-fact of the case. I believe Sluggo & you (with Ckret's help) have been moving in this direction all along, in any event.

The issue of accuracy vs. flexibility began with Ckret questioning Sluggo about how accurate any time stamp in the transcript could be, whether it was typed TTY or RTTY or radio exchanges, and who and when time values were being assigned to become a part the transcript. At length, you all came to the conclusion and agreed these time stamps are not set in stone but flexible, and probably early. 8:10 can easily become
8:13, 8:13~8:20, and so on. Changing the times changes the position of the plane along its flight path.

This time line has gone out of the realm or reality to support the money in the Ciolumbia and is too far off from what the pilots said and the data read in 1971. Why doesn't someone call Radeczk before he dies. That is the RIGHT thing to do.

Dispute studies but dispute them with FACTS - and there is only one person who can provide those facts alive today. But everyone would rather wait until he dies and continue to debate this till the end of time. - 8:20 is to far off...and not realistic.

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[snowmman 3]

Jo:

did it suddently get real cold down there?

Just kidding. I'm all forum'ed out for the day.

[skyjack71 0]

Quote

If Galen did covertly alter the sketch then shame on him, but doesn't the altered sketch look pretty similar to the unaltered one? Don't they look like the same person? What am I missing here?

Actual composit versus Galens Composite used in Bay Depot

NO, they do not look alike I will post the unaltered orginal below with and without the glasses. I wish I had a good pic of what he published so that a side by side could be done - then you would get the point.

He changed the chin, filled the cheek, change the eyebrows and sutle shading to make it appear to look more like his suspect. These are the most noticeable alteration.

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[Sluggo_Monster 0]

Jo,

Read more carefully… Post more carefully… You are exhibiting the behaviors that you are (often unjustly) being accused of.

This is the photo posted on Coast To Coast AM back in May. (see attached).

The caption reads:
“Galen Cook has provided another photo of the D.B. Cooper suspect (middle top). For comparison, it is pictured next to FBI composite drawings (left and right, modified by C2C listener Kent B.) as well as a photo previously provided by Cook of the Cooper suspect (middle bottom).’ {Emphasis is Sluggo's.}

A much as I dislike Cook and his obvious efforts to increase book sales, he has not been deceitful (at least in this case).

Sluggo_Monster

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

[Ckret 0]

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.

[n467us 0]

OK kids... let's crank up a discussion on something that has always baffled me, and does not involve analyzing how long a $20 bill floats...:

Cooper was in the lavatory during the pit stop for fuel and money... does anybody know:

1) How long was he in the can, and what time?
2) Did the crew have any idea what he did in there?
3) Was there any effort by the crew to haul their butts off the plane and leave him there all by himself?
4) Did he take his "bomb" with him?
5) Did LE process the lavatory for evidene?

Does anybody else find it odd that a hijacker takes time out for a bathroom break?

Ideas? Thoughts?

Hate to say it... but our suspect Mr. Weber had problems with his kidneys...

[Ckret 0]

He was in the bathroom for a "few minutes" whatever that means.

He took his briefcase and bag with him.

He looked no different when he came out; maybe a half pound lighter.

Yes, the bathroom was processed.

The crew did not try to leave the plane, at this time the passengers were still onboard.

[n467us 0]

Thank you Ckret, for a government guy you have a great sense of humor!! "...maybe a half pound lighter"

Guess there is not much mystery to this aspect, but still seems strange... too bad the passengers did not know what was going on, or they may have pulled a "Let's Roll!" and stormed the bathroom.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quade never asked how I was able to read the forum even while I was banned.

On the other hand, I never needed to; I know how the system works. It's not exactly like you're some uber-hacker and this isn't exactly the Pentagon. Most of the Forums, including this one, are available to be read by people without accounts.

Bans keep people from posting on banned accounts. It doesn't prevent you from reading the Forum, nor does it completely prevent anyone from simply making another account, posting and, as you found out, getting banned again.

No. You're not going to get banned again simply for making a post about how the process isn't "perfect". That said, you and others still need to be civil in your postings because doing otherwise will absolutely get that account banned and for second infractions the bans will be much longer if not indefinite.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[377 22]

Quote

Quote

Quade never asked how I was able to read the forum even while I was banned.

On the other hand, I never needed to; I know how the system works. It's not exactly like you're some uber-hacker and this isn't exactly the Pentagon. Most of the Forums, including this one, are available to be read by people without accounts.

Bans keep people from posting on banned accounts. It doesn't prevent you from reading the Forum, nor does it completely prevent anyone from simply making another account, posting and, as you found out, getting banned again.

No. You're not going to get banned again simply for making a post about how the process isn't "perfect". That said, you and others still need to be civil in your postings because doing otherwise will absolutely get that account banned and for second infractions the bans will be much longer if not indefinite.

***************

You are addressing the reformed Snowman who now ranks really high on the dropzone.com courtesy chart. I want to find out what he is taking and have it prescribed to my 15 year old daughter who thinks rude is cool.

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[quade 4]

Quote

You are addressing the reformed Snowman who now ranks really high on the dropzone.com courtesy chart.

And people say bans don't work . . .

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver