georger 244
Recommended Posts
snowmman 3
QuoteQuotewell, not a jumper strengthens the jump in the Columbia theory, I think.
There's nothing that strongly excludes jumping into the Columbia.
Most other theories have strong "not likely" issues.
The "not likely" issues around jumping into the Columbia aren't that strong.
How? The two have nothing to do with each other
outside of random probability in a scenario where
the jumper has no idea where he is, in the first place?
I'm assuming jumpers have some training that would decrease their likelihood of jumping into the Columbia.
If you're saying jumpers and non-jumpers are equally likely to land in the Columbia, okay. my opinion: no.
I don't need to know the "why" ...just if you threw jumpers up and nonjumpers up, I think the nonjumpers would more likely end in the Columbia.
Orange1 0
QuoteI'm assuming jumpers have some training that would decrease their likelihood of jumping into the Columbia.
If you're saying jumpers and non-jumpers are equally likely to land in the Columbia, okay. my opinion: no.
I don't need to know the "why" ...just if you threw jumpers up and nonjumpers up, I think the nonjumpers would more likely end in the Columbia.
Jumpers have training that shows them how to steer a parachute and how to find a suitable landing area. If they get thrown out at night and can't see what is below them - especially if they have not jumped where they planned - I can't necessarily see anything that would make a difference between where jumpers and (previous) non-jumpers would land.
We discussed visibility before. As I recall, consensus was that the river would have been hard to identify from above.
Amazon, others with night jumps in non-civilian DZ areas... any comments - would the river have been clear to a jumper under the weather conditions listed?
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.
snowmman 3
QuoteQuoteI'm assuming jumpers have some training that would decrease their likelihood of jumping into the Columbia.
If you're saying jumpers and non-jumpers are equally likely to land in the Columbia, okay. my opinion: no.
I don't need to know the "why" ...just if you threw jumpers up and nonjumpers up, I think the nonjumpers would more likely end in the Columbia.
Jumpers have training that shows them how to steer a parachute and how to find a suitable landing area. If they get thrown out at night and can't see what is below them - especially if they have not jumped where they planned - I can't necessarily see anything that would make a difference between where jumpers and (previous) non-jumpers would land.
We discussed visibility before. As I recall, consensus was that the river would have been hard to identify from above.
Amazon, others with night jumps in non-civilian DZ areas... any comments - would the river have been clear to a jumper under the weather conditions listed?
So the only feedback is from your eyes and steering?
What about pre-planning: i.e. I know there's a big river near Portland. Make sure you jump before or after Portland. Not near it. Rivers are bad.
Wouldn't that reflect training I could use, even if I only suspected where Portland was?
Or do jumpers not think like that?
Orange1 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm assuming jumpers have some training that would decrease their likelihood of jumping into the Columbia.
If you're saying jumpers and non-jumpers are equally likely to land in the Columbia, okay. my opinion: no.
I don't need to know the "why" ...just if you threw jumpers up and nonjumpers up, I think the nonjumpers would more likely end in the Columbia.
Jumpers have training that shows them how to steer a parachute and how to find a suitable landing area. If they get thrown out at night and can't see what is below them - especially if they have not jumped where they planned - I can't necessarily see anything that would make a difference between where jumpers and (previous) non-jumpers would land.
We discussed visibility before. As I recall, consensus was that the river would have been hard to identify from above.
Amazon, others with night jumps in non-civilian DZ areas... any comments - would the river have been clear to a jumper under the weather conditions listed?
So the only feedback is from your eyes and steering?
What about pre-planning: i.e. I know there's a big river near Portland. Make sure you jump before or after Portland. Not near it. Rivers are bad.
Wouldn't that reflect training I could use, even if I only suspected where Portland was?
Or do jumpers not think like that?
Well, most civilian jumpers are trained to jump at a DZ and know where the outs are. I'm sure US rules are the same as here, where are you only allowed to do a night jump at a DZ if you have already jumped it during the day. All very different to Cooper's jump which is why I asked Amazon etc to talk about non-civilian night jumps.
I'm not sure how much 'before' or 'after' Portland (or wherever) you would know is right given unknown wind drift factors, exact spot etc. You've already seen here how you can drift for miles, especially if Cooper opened on exit. Remember that discussion?
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.
snowmman 3
I guess we're way out on the speculation curve anyhow.
If for instance, Ckret and FBI were right about Cooper wanting to jump earlier, then maybe a panicked "time to jump" decision masks any information we could glean or deduce from "where".
But of course, if we believe Ckret and FBI about Cooper wanting to jump earlier, what does that tell us?
If for instance, Ckret and FBI were right about Cooper wanting to jump earlier, then maybe a panicked "time to jump" decision masks any information we could glean or deduce from "where".
But of course, if we believe Ckret and FBI about Cooper wanting to jump earlier, what does that tell us?
377 22
I keep thnking Ckret has some key piece of info that the FBI is not disclosing.
He appeared to rule out Snow's candidate very fast with no significant further investigation.
That "loadmaster" part has always seemed too specific to me to be pure speculation.
They'd be pretty dumb not to hold back a few key pieces of evidence that they could use to rule out self confessed wannnabes etc.
377
He appeared to rule out Snow's candidate very fast with no significant further investigation.
That "loadmaster" part has always seemed too specific to me to be pure speculation.
They'd be pretty dumb not to hold back a few key pieces of evidence that they could use to rule out self confessed wannnabes etc.
377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
377 22
Back when I trained in 68 they showed us what lines to cut to make a stock canopy steerable. They (4 lines) were colored near the riser connections on my reserve, even though it was civilian rigger modifed with a T slot cutout and was steerable. Maybe the colors were put on by the Navy?
I doubt if Cooper could see much on the ground, but if he had a knife and was trained like I was, he could have made the C9 steerable by cutting four lines. It wouldn't give it a lot of forward speed but any forward drive and the ability to turn is a HUGE help in avoiding hazards.
377
I doubt if Cooper could see much on the ground, but if he had a knife and was trained like I was, he could have made the C9 steerable by cutting four lines. It wouldn't give it a lot of forward speed but any forward drive and the ability to turn is a HUGE help in avoiding hazards.
377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
Farflung 0
georger,
My assertion about the airspeed, flaps and gear is more in relation to letting the aircrew fly the plane.
Could they make 160 knots good without flaps or gear extended? Yes, but it would not be an optimum solution.
Could you drive a car in fifth gear at 20 MPH or second gear at 50 MPH? Yes to both, but the average driver may find those combinations unusual.
Add to driving 50 MPH while in second gear a destination some 400 miles distant and you have what Cooper was expecting from that 727. Would this be the actions of a person with experience? I'll bet the average driver would consider this scenario as absurd rather than reflective of a person being well versed in motoring.
As you pointed out, if he is experienced he is not taking advantage of this skill. Why use Tina as an intermediary? Put on some gloves and grab that interphone and tell the cockpit crew exactly what you want. 160 knots at 10,000 feet direct Red Bluff via V-23, report on the intercom when overhead Malay and Battle Ground. No need for half a dozen games of telegraph with a notepad and delayed feedback, get rid of those extra touch (failure) points.
While your at it, may as well use the information in the cockpit like the wind direction and velocity at altitude. I know the flight computer would display this info but had no idea a jumper would want such data. By not asking about winds aloft, my lack of jump experience may be shining bright.
My assertion about the airspeed, flaps and gear is more in relation to letting the aircrew fly the plane.
Could they make 160 knots good without flaps or gear extended? Yes, but it would not be an optimum solution.
Could you drive a car in fifth gear at 20 MPH or second gear at 50 MPH? Yes to both, but the average driver may find those combinations unusual.
Add to driving 50 MPH while in second gear a destination some 400 miles distant and you have what Cooper was expecting from that 727. Would this be the actions of a person with experience? I'll bet the average driver would consider this scenario as absurd rather than reflective of a person being well versed in motoring.
As you pointed out, if he is experienced he is not taking advantage of this skill. Why use Tina as an intermediary? Put on some gloves and grab that interphone and tell the cockpit crew exactly what you want. 160 knots at 10,000 feet direct Red Bluff via V-23, report on the intercom when overhead Malay and Battle Ground. No need for half a dozen games of telegraph with a notepad and delayed feedback, get rid of those extra touch (failure) points.
While your at it, may as well use the information in the cockpit like the wind direction and velocity at altitude. I know the flight computer would display this info but had no idea a jumper would want such data. By not asking about winds aloft, my lack of jump experience may be shining bright.
georger 244
QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm assuming jumpers have some training that would decrease their likelihood of jumping into the Columbia.
If you're saying jumpers and non-jumpers are equally likely to land in the Columbia, okay. my opinion: no.
I don't need to know the "why" ...just if you threw jumpers up and nonjumpers up, I think the nonjumpers would more likely end in the Columbia.
Jumpers have training that shows them how to steer a parachute and how to find a suitable landing area. If they get thrown out at night and can't see what is below them - especially if they have not jumped where they planned - I can't necessarily see anything that would make a difference between where jumpers and (previous) non-jumpers would land.
We discussed visibility before. As I recall, consensus was that the river would have been hard to identify from above.
Amazon, others with night jumps in non-civilian DZ areas... any comments - would the river have been clear to a jumper under the weather conditions listed?
So the only feedback is from your eyes and steering?
What about pre-planning: i.e. I know there's a big river near Portland. Make sure you jump before or after Portland. Not near it. Rivers are bad.
Wouldn't that reflect training I could use, even if I only suspected where Portland was?
Or do jumpers not think like that?
Have we thrown out "he didnt know where he was"?
He knew he was at SEA. He knew Tacoma was near
SEA. He knew he might die or be injured. Did he know where the Jack Daniels was!?
georger 244
QuoteI keep thnking Ckret has some key piece of info that the FBI is not disclosing.
He appeared to rule out Snow's candidate very fast with no significant further investigation.
That "loadmaster" part has always seemed too specific to me to be pure speculation.
They'd be pretty dumb not to hold back a few key pieces of evidence that they could use to rule out self confessed wannnabes etc.
377
Look close to home -
Was the French comic sold in Utah!?
Amazon 7
QuoteQuoteI'm assuming jumpers have some training that would decrease their likelihood of jumping into the Columbia.
If you're saying jumpers and non-jumpers are equally likely to land in the Columbia, okay. my opinion: no.
I don't need to know the "why" ...just if you threw jumpers up and nonjumpers up, I think the nonjumpers would more likely end in the Columbia.
Jumpers have training that shows them how to steer a parachute and how to find a suitable landing area. If they get thrown out at night and can't see what is below them - especially if they have not jumped where they planned - I can't necessarily see anything that would make a difference between where jumpers and (previous) non-jumpers would land.
We discussed visibility before. As I recall, consensus was that the river would have been hard to identify from above.
Amazon, others with night jumps in non-civilian DZ areas... any comments - would the river have been clear to a jumper under the weather conditions listed?
ANYWHERE near that area you will see the lights of the towns... the roads... and especially Vancouver and Portland. Even if it was cloudy and raining you would see the lights on the ground and as soon as you are under any cloud layer its very easy to see what kind of area you will be landing in. Under a round.... a cheapo... you are going with the wind where IT wants to take you. If the door was opened near Toutle.. that gives a long window of opportunity over land before you get anywhere near the Columbia.
Rivers... BIG BLACK areas that have no lights other than flashing nav green or red lights denoting the channel... and perhaps the lights of a few boats on the river. I have a hell of a lot of water landings.. and anyone with any water training will be getting rid of the canopy if they land in the water. Even if he did land in it.. did not release the canopy and drown..... the body WILL be floating up quite soon. No body ever found along the river... leads me to surmise he did not land in the water and drown.
Amazon 7
QuoteI'm not sure how much 'before' or 'after' Portland (or wherever) you would know is right given unknown wind drift factors, exact spot etc. You've already seen here how you can drift for miles, especially if Cooper opened on exit. Remember that discussion?
Wind drift even if he opened off the step is just not going to take him very far. A safe bet for a man with exit weight of 200 pounds on a C-9 would be around 20FPS.. would give you about 8 minutes MAX under canopy.
georger 244
Quotegeorger,
My assertion about the airspeed, flaps and gear is more in relation to letting the aircrew fly the plane.
Could they make 160 knots good without flaps or gear extended? Yes, but it would not be an optimum solution.
Could you drive a car in fifth gear at 20 MPH or second gear at 50 MPH? Yes to both, but the average driver may find those combinations unusual.
Add to driving 50 MPH while in second gear a destination some 400 miles distant and you have what Cooper was expecting from that 727. Would this be the actions of a person with experience? I'll bet the average driver would consider this scenario as absurd rather than reflective of a person being well versed in motoring.
[Im going to reply to this then come back later, before internet services go out again today -
we have a blizzard here with 60mph winds ...'
Sluggo did some fine fuel consumption calcs
very early, based on transcript info for different periods throughout the flight. Sluggo came up short
on fuel to make Reno with the original settings.
Maybe Sluggo will jump in here
Scott/Rat advised Cooper they could not make it
to Mexico City nonstop so Reno was chosen but
that was iffy in terms of fuel given the original settings w. gear down. Still they went.
After 8:10-20 they trimmed flap settings, gained
altitude, sped up, and made Reno was gas to spare.
Its all in the transcript.
Cooper never asked once about fuel consumption
nor did his original requests account for it .
Orange1 0
QuoteThey'd be pretty dumb not to hold back a few key pieces of evidence that they could use to rule out self confessed wannnabes etc.
377
or proxy-confessed wannabes like Weber and Gosset?!
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.
snowmman 3
377 pondered whether something about the FBI and what evidence they might have, could be gleaned from their actions.
Examine this:
Larry Carr put the Dan Cooper comic book thing out there all over the place, just based on a whim and a prayer as far as I can see.
Was that decision based on anything more? compared to the probable random guessing about loadmaster?
My belief is that people's thinking on this is constantly skewed by a belief that the FBI's actions represent something "informed".
I think it's much better to just assume the FBI's actions were random and misinformed and should be ignored.
There's nothing about the FBI's actions, as gleaned from news reports, that suggests I should pay attention to them.
Think about the interview Bruce did with the FBI agent that was actually at the money find, and his comments about pieces found.
I really think Ckret thought the only stuff found was the 3 bundles. Ckret didn't have a clue about the other pieces found later, as far as I can tell.
You can extend this to the flight map, and Himmelsbach comments that seemed blissfully unaware of such key data.
(edit) Another example: there were a couple of suspects examined whose age was just way wrong. How come?
Examine this:
Larry Carr put the Dan Cooper comic book thing out there all over the place, just based on a whim and a prayer as far as I can see.
Was that decision based on anything more? compared to the probable random guessing about loadmaster?
My belief is that people's thinking on this is constantly skewed by a belief that the FBI's actions represent something "informed".
I think it's much better to just assume the FBI's actions were random and misinformed and should be ignored.
There's nothing about the FBI's actions, as gleaned from news reports, that suggests I should pay attention to them.
Think about the interview Bruce did with the FBI agent that was actually at the money find, and his comments about pieces found.
I really think Ckret thought the only stuff found was the 3 bundles. Ckret didn't have a clue about the other pieces found later, as far as I can tell.
You can extend this to the flight map, and Himmelsbach comments that seemed blissfully unaware of such key data.
(edit) Another example: there were a couple of suspects examined whose age was just way wrong. How come?
snowmman 3
amazon said " No body ever found along the river... leads me to surmise he did not land in the water and drown. "
Amazon: I posted a couple of cases of drownings in the Columbia, in that area, (including one around the time period) where the body was never found.
One was an plane. Textronix executive and his girlfriend.
The claims of "the body would be found" are not accurate.
Amazon: I posted a couple of cases of drownings in the Columbia, in that area, (including one around the time period) where the body was never found.
One was an plane. Textronix executive and his girlfriend.
The claims of "the body would be found" are not accurate.
snowmman 3
Note that since the FBI has not investigated me, I am guilty of no crimes.
Additional evidence: I have not been banned.
(edit) Additional evidence: Jo Weber said I was not rude or insulting. That, and a promise from the Dalai Lama of: "when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness."
So I got that going for me, which is nice.
Additional evidence: I have not been banned.
(edit) Additional evidence: Jo Weber said I was not rude or insulting. That, and a promise from the Dalai Lama of: "when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness."
So I got that going for me, which is nice.
snowmman 3
Farflung said "By not asking about winds aloft, my lack of jump experience may be shining bright."
Why ask about winds aloft? I mean if you don't jump they're going to shoot you.
You gotta jump. It's not like the winds are going to dramatically change, or you've got hours to fly around looking for good wind.
If you gotta go no matter what, you gotta go.
What are you going to do if you don't like the wind? Pray to Snowmman?
Stay on the plane and give the interview to newsmen after LE arrests you? ... "Hey, the winds were just a little too much for safety, but next time I'll pull it off. I'm not going to risk my personal safety just to hijack a plane".
Why ask about winds aloft? I mean if you don't jump they're going to shoot you.
You gotta jump. It's not like the winds are going to dramatically change, or you've got hours to fly around looking for good wind.
If you gotta go no matter what, you gotta go.
What are you going to do if you don't like the wind? Pray to Snowmman?
Stay on the plane and give the interview to newsmen after LE arrests you? ... "Hey, the winds were just a little too much for safety, but next time I'll pull it off. I'm not going to risk my personal safety just to hijack a plane".
Amazon 7
Quoteamazon said " No body ever found along the river... leads me to surmise he did not land in the water and drown. "
Amazon: I posted a couple of cases of drownings in the Columbia, in that area, (including one around the time period) where the body was never found.
One was an plane. Textronix executive and his girlfriend.
The claims of "the body would be found" are not accurate.
People dissappear for many reasons.
snowmman 3
QuoteQuoteamazon said " No body ever found along the river... leads me to surmise he did not land in the water and drown. "
Amazon: I posted a couple of cases of drownings in the Columbia, in that area, (including one around the time period) where the body was never found.
One was an plane. Textronix executive and his girlfriend.
The claims of "the body would be found" are not accurate.
People dissappear for many reasons.
Everyone falls back on sounding like Jo when they have no data.
If you're saying you have data that proves all drowning victims in that area in the '70s were found, just show it. (edit) or anything that suggests the ones that weren't found, maybe didn't drown, but just "disappeared".
Otherwise you're just B.S.ing, which is fine. But, it means you can't complain when others B.S.
(edit) If you're implying that that Textronix executive, for example, didn't drown, well, now you're really in the conspiracy camp with Jo.
(edit) The Jack Murdock case I posted about (among others)
here
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3679874;search_string=tektronix;#3679874
Amazon 7
QuoteQuoteQuoteamazon said " No body ever found along the river... leads me to surmise he did not land in the water and drown. "
Amazon: I posted a couple of cases of drownings in the Columbia, in that area, (including one around the time period) where the body was never found.
One was an plane. Textronix executive and his girlfriend.
The claims of "the body would be found" are not accurate.
People dissappear for many reasons.
Everyone falls back on sounding like Jo when they have no data.
If you're saying you have data that proves all drowning victims in that area in the '70s were found, just show it.
Otherwise you're just B.S.ing, which is fine. But, it means you can't complain when others B.S.
I did a quick google search and did not find it... But if the plane is found with no bodies.. I would say they got out.. the Columbia is not all that big in the Portland Area. If someone wants to dissappear.. for whatever reason.. not too hard to do. I used to fly out of Scappoose all the time in the Aero Club C-172 Although there are easier ways to fake a death...
snowmman 3
I added a link to my original posting, just above
Tektronix. Jack Murdock. (Miller's Cove is right by Caterpillar Island, right? (if memory serves))
There was also a plane crash in Sauvie Island we discussed where the bodie apparently wasn't found.
and some suicide jumpers.
We also discussed a news report where fire or police chief was quoted saying suicide jumper bodies are routinely brought up when the big boats come into the Williamette..i.e. they stay down there until something displaces them. (they just got some around the fleet week or whatever they call it)
Tektronix. Jack Murdock. (Miller's Cove is right by Caterpillar Island, right? (if memory serves))
There was also a plane crash in Sauvie Island we discussed where the bodie apparently wasn't found.
and some suicide jumpers.
We also discussed a news report where fire or police chief was quoted saying suicide jumper bodies are routinely brought up when the big boats come into the Williamette..i.e. they stay down there until something displaces them. (they just got some around the fleet week or whatever they call it)
snowmman 3
there was another posting I made about suicide jumpers that showed how far up the Columbia a body went before being discovered by fisherman. (a recent jumper off I-5)
I think it was all the way to Longview. (which is halfway to the ocean)
Surprising.
Main point: people who think "they just know" what happens when a body goes into the Columbia, especially back in 1971, are just guessing.
I think it was all the way to Longview. (which is halfway to the ocean)
Surprising.
Main point: people who think "they just know" what happens when a body goes into the Columbia, especially back in 1971, are just guessing.
send his dna to Larry or to me!
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites