DB Cooper

[FLYJACK 697]

"Dan Cooper" was at Boeing Field...

[FLYJACK 697]

What if Palmer misidentified a pre NORJAK dredge layer as the 1974 dredge layer...

The money was above the layer so he concluded the money arrived after 1974..

Maybe it was actually a pre Norjak dredge layer below the money and the 1974 dredging was put on top of the money but eroded by 1980...  just a thought.

 

The exact money find spot. 

TBAR Sept 19, 1971

 

July 5, 1970.. "beach material"

 

June 6 1972  "flood"

August 10 1972

[FLYJACK 697]

More Cosseyness....

Claimed he still had his packing records in 2008,,  YIKES

Why didn't he give the serial number to the FBI??? He told the FBI he gave them all his records.

Also, says the NB6 was the Cadillac,,,  why would Hayden have one Cadillac just to meet regs.. 

Doesn't mention moving the handle to the other side.

https://www.seattlepi.com/seattlenews/article/unlikely-fbi-has-found-cooper-s-chute-says-man-1268323.php

"I would recognize the stitching on the parachute," said Cossey, who believes he got the parachute in the 1960s and still has the serial number in old log books.

"Choosing from the parachutes he had was like choosing whether to take a Cadillac or a Volkswagen to California," Cossey said of Cooper. "The one he didn't use was padded and very good. The one he used would cut you in the crotch area when the parachute opened. ... It would have worked, but it wasn't the best choice."

Cossey said that if Cooper jumped in a suit and low-cut shoes, as described in FBI reports, the ripcord on the NB6 container would have been covered by his coat, and any experienced sky diver would know to wear footgear for rugged terrain.

Edited December 17, 2024 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 510]

19 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

 

All white canopy is not a hard fact.

I'll agree with you on that. Although it probably was white because of its size. I asked Meltzer if a 24 footer would be more likely to be white than multicolored and he responded "VERY much more likely. Very very very."

[olemisscub 510]

 

[FLYJACK 697]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

 

Gryder's is a B-4 harness and B-12 container..  they originally came that way

Obviously not matching Cossey's.. neither is Gryder's 1943 Hayes non-riptstop canopy..

but maybe McCoy obtained it (if it was his) as a prop for his school Cooper research project, makes sense.

[FLYJACK 697]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

I'll agree with you on that. Although it probably was white because of its size. I asked Meltzer if a 24 footer would be more likely to be white than multicolored and he responded "VERY much more likely. Very very very."

All white is more common in 24'... an orange and white 24' Pioneer,, not Steinthal 

 

[georger 244]

NEW - DIATOMS ON TENA BAR MONEY:

To my mind, the bottom line is that, with a reasonable degree of probability, all six of the Tena Bar genera are present throughout the year in the Columbia River, albeit with much smaller populations in winter. Therefore, I think that the presence of these genera on the $20 bill does not exclude an encounter between the diatom shells and the bill at any date between November 24, 1971 and February 10, 1980.

https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/2500530.Robert_H_Edwards/blog

G - ps: these diatoms still cannot be dated to a specific year. Specialists consulted have no idea what year these diatoms and the Cooper money came into contact. That information would be crucial to have so far as a Cooper Money timeline is concerned. 

Edited December 17, 2024 by georger

[olemisscub 510]

4 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

All white is more common in 24'... an orange and white 24' Pioneer,, not Steinthal 

 

I mean, no one is saying they don't exist lol. Just that it's more likely to be white.

It seems like many of the orange and white canopies brought to Cossey were weather/research balloons, which I believe are usually orange and white. 

This was the case with the canopy found by Vern Goheen when he was flying his plane over Clark County and spotted one. Vortexy that he would have found a possible Cooper canopy being that it was he and Robert McClellan who were flying the "mystery planes" over La Center the day before the hijacking. 

[olemisscub 510]

4 hours ago, georger said:

NEW - DIATOMS ON TENA BAR MONEY:

To my mind, the bottom line is that, with a reasonable degree of probability, all six of the Tena Bar genera are present throughout the year in the Columbia River, albeit with much smaller populations in winter. Therefore, I think that the presence of these genera on the $20 bill does not exclude an encounter between the diatom shells and the bill at any date between November 24, 1971 and February 10, 1980.

https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/2500530.Robert_H_Edwards/blog

G - ps: these diatoms still cannot be dated to a specific year. Specialists consulted have no idea what year these diatoms and the Cooper money came into contact. That information would be crucial to have so far as a Cooper Money timeline is concerned. 

I'm planning on buying a Cooper $20 at some point and I'm 100% going to sacrifice a piece of it for Tom to do some more testing on. The fact that we're basing all of our info off a single piece from a single $20 makes me uneasy. Same thing with the tie. I know Tom tested a Boeing man's tie as a control, but I'd like to see a lot of ties looked at. 

[olemisscub 510]

5 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

 

prop

*cough*

[olemisscub 510]

5 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Gryder's is a B-4 harness and B-12 container..  they originally came that way

But not with the ripcord and ripcord housing loop being on opposite sides from each other. That was altered by someone who didn't know what they were doing. 

[FLYJACK 697]

2 hours ago, olemisscub said:

But not with the ripcord and ripcord housing loop being on opposite sides from each other. That was altered by someone who didn't know what they were doing. 

yes, of course.. stitching looks sketchy,,,  the B-4 harness gets confused with the B-4 container, unrelated. The B-12 came with the B-4 harness.

I actually found two B-12's that had the handles swapped to the other side. So, not rare.

The one on left is an 3 pin version, the one on the right is a 4 pin, matches Gryder's,, the loop wasn't moved, they added one to the other side when they moved the handle.

[FLYJACK 697]

2 hours ago, olemisscub said:

I'm planning on buying a Cooper $20 at some point and I'm 100% going to sacrifice a piece of it for Tom to do some more testing on. The fact that we're basing all of our info off a single piece from a single $20 makes me uneasy. Same thing with the tie. I know Tom tested a Boeing man's tie as a control, but I'd like to see a lot of ties looked at. 

Yup, small sample size but another issue, 4 tests were done on the money,, which bills?

[FLYJACK 697]

Cossey lied to the FBI about his records...

Cossey claimed NB6 was a "flat circular" and not modified.. (Gryder)

The packing card for the missing chute is conical, NOT flat circular. 

Edited December 18, 2024 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 697]

Cossey claimed he was called the night of the hijacking, the 24th.. this is not confirmed.

Cossey was interviewed by the FBI in person on the 26th, he acknowledges the back chutes were for aerobatics.

This file was sent out at 4:25 PM on the 25th. The missing chest reserve is described in detail, that had to come from Cossey it was his rig. Who else could have known that detail. Not Emrich, he gave them the dummy chute so he wouldn't know the rigs details. These details would only be known by the owner or if the chute was opened. Cossey must have talked to the FBI before this file was sent.

Also, the missing back chute here was described as Olive Drab and Tan cotton harness.. Cossey claimed Sage Green Nylon container and harness.

 

[olemisscub 510]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

Cossey claimed he was called the night of the hijacking, the 24th.. this is not confirmed.

Cossey was interviewed by the FBI in person on the 26th, he acknowledges the back chutes were for aerobatics.

This file was sent out at 4:25 PM on the 25th. The missing chest reserve is described in detail, that had to come from Cossey it was his rig. Who else could have known that detail. Not Emrich, he gave them the dummy chute so he wouldn't know the rigs details. These details would only be known by the owner or if the chute was opened. Cossey must have talked to the FBI before this file was sent.

Also, the missing back chute here was described as Olive Drab and Tan cotton harness.. Cossey claimed Sage Green Nylon container and harness.

 

I’m still wondering why you think he’s talking about his own chute and not Hayden’s. Because I don’t think we have any actual reason to think that Hayden wasn’t given an NB-6. Cossey could indeed be describing his own rig and that still wouldn’t negate the likelihood that Hayden was given an NB-6. Cossey said he made Hayden’s chute from Navy surplus. That rings true. There would have been more of those cheaply laying around than anything else because Mark explained that in the late 60’s and early 70’s all the people sporterizing the bailout rigs started using AF rigs. He said they rarely used the Navy chutes because of the chest strap sliding up and down. They were concerned that the harness would start to get frayed and wear out from repeated abuse each jump. Mark says it was rare to see anyone with those harnesses. So it’s not unlikely at all that Hayden had an NB-6 since Cossey would have given him something that was undesirable for his skydiving clients and thus cheap to part with.

And honestly I don’t think the container really matters anyways since it would just be metal parts at this point (we’re grownups and know that Cooper’s chute won’t be found in a box in amazing condition). It’s the canopy itself that would survive and is what may still be found one day and so we need to know for certain what size the damn thing was.
 

Why do Cossey AND Hayden say 28 footer separately? Are they really both wrong? Isn’t it possible, though improbable, that back on May 21st that card erroneously ended up in the museum chute’s packing card slot? You can fit more than one card in those slots. They aren’t crazy tight. My AF rig showed up with an additional packing card in it that was blank. So you can definitely put two in there without any trouble. Could this be a brain fart by someone instead of both Cossey AND Hayden being wrong on canopy size?

Because all of our criticisms about the canopy are based on the 100% truth that the packing card came from Cooper’s chute. I don’t think we should be at 100% acceptance of that. It’s probably from his chute, but we can’t know for a total certainty without further evidence. Be super nice if Earl’s family has his log books. Although I get the sense Earl did this stuff for Hayden off the books or maybe just got lazy since he figured these chutes probably weren’t going to ever be used and that he simply didn’t spend the time to write them in his logbook. 

Edited December 18, 2024 by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 697]

12 hours ago, olemisscub said:

I’m still wondering why you think he’s talking about his own chute and not Hayden’s. Because I don’t think we have any actual reason to think that Hayden wasn’t given an NB-6. Cossey could indeed be describing his own rig and that still wouldn’t negate the likelihood that Hayden was given an NB-6. Cossey said he made Hayden’s chute from Navy surplus. That rings true. There would have been more of those cheaply laying around than anything else because Mark explained that in the late 60’s and early 70’s all the people sporterizing the bailout rigs started using AF rigs. He said they rarely used the Navy chutes because of the chest strap sliding up and down. They were concerned that the harness would start to get frayed and wear out from repeated abuse each jump. Mark says it was rare to see anyone with those harnesses. So it’s not unlikely at all that Hayden had an NB-6 since Cossey would have given him something that was undesirable for his skydiving clients and thus cheap to part with.

And honestly I don’t think the container really matters anyways since it would just be metal parts at this point (we’re grownups and know that Cooper’s chute won’t be found in a box in amazing condition). It’s the canopy itself that would survive and is what may still be found one day and so we need to know for certain what size the damn thing was.
 

Why do Cossey AND Hayden say 28 footer separately? Are they really both wrong? Isn’t it possible, though improbable, that back on May 21st that card erroneously ended up in the museum chute’s packing card slot? You can fit more than one card in those slots. They aren’t crazy tight. My AF rig showed up with an additional packing card in it that was blank. So you can definitely put two in there without any trouble. Could this be a brain fart by someone instead of both Cossey AND Hayden being wrong on canopy size?

Because all of our criticisms about the canopy are based on the 100% truth that the packing card came from Cooper’s chute. I don’t think we should be at 100% acceptance of that. It’s probably from his chute, but we can’t know for a total certainty without further evidence. Be super nice if Earl’s family has his log books. Although I get the sense Earl did this stuff for Hayden off the books or maybe just got lazy since he figured these chutes probably weren’t going to ever be used and that he simply didn’t spend the time to write them in his logbook. 

Cossey is the only source for the NB6/8 description, there is no corroboration, only conflicts.

The burden of proof is on the affirmative, not negation. Prove it was an NB6/8, not it wasn't.

Cossey has told many conflicting stories, you can't just ignore the lies, misinformation and inconsistencies but accept this one aspect. That would never fly with a witness.

 

Cossey's description in the FBI files conflicts with Hayden's. 

Cossey's description conflicts with the missing chute packing card.

Cossey never supplied his packing records, lied to the FBI about it and later claimed he did have the records.

Cossey lied to the FBI. Lied by omission and about his records.

Cossey lied to active FBI agent Carr.

Cossey changes the description form NB6 to NB8,,, why, it wasn't modified.

Cossey would have learned of his error within a day or two but never corrected his error. Lied by omission.

He knew by the 26th for that in person FBI interview but must have talked to the FBI prior, Cossey claimed he was called the evening of the 24th.. a file on the 25th describes the front reserves in detail, that had to come form Cossey. Cossey must have talked to somebody between the evening of the 24th and late afternoon 25th.

Cossey was contacted and agreed to lend all 4 of his chutes, Emrich was grabbing all 4 from Issaquah including 2 backs but was contacted and told to send only the fronts,, Cossey was not aware that Hayden's back chutes were sent instead of his. During the hijacking he thought those were his back chutes used by Cooper. Emrich didn't know about Hayden only that he had sent two fronts.

Cossey claimed he was called the evening of the 24th, the back chute found was described and he described his NB6,, how can this be if he didn't even know about Hayden's chutes being sent. 

Cossey's later stories revealed his belief that he thought they were his two personal back chutes, the NB8 bailout (Cossey was a pilot) and a B-4 freefall). Neither match Hayden's. Cossey was telling us what he believed at the time of the hijacking.

Hayden's returned back chute was completely different from Cossey's NB6 description.. Hayden said they were the same, the tan one was a civilian version early 1940's, the Olive Drab a military version by colour of the same type. Unlikely Hayden would have two completely different bailout rigs, they would be a matching pair.

Hayden never met Cossey, he bought the chutes at a surplus store and the store arranged for them to be packed. Everyone assumed Cossey owned them prior to Hayden but there is no proof, we don't know.

Mark M's experience had no bearing on the identity of Hayden's missing chute.

The 28' thing, that is odd but Cossey claimed a flat circular which is consistent with a 28'. The packing card said conical which is consistent wth a 24'. The FBI file seems to attribute 28 to Hayden, that could be an error/typo, or it may be a conflation with Cossey's early description. The 302's have errors and conflations. They are facts, they are investigative notes.

 

 

Ultimately, Cossey and the missing chute packing card are incompatible, both can't be true and the totality of evidence supports the packing card not Cossey by a long shot.

COMBINING the inconsistencies from Cossey, the fact that he never provided his packing records and the evidence that he believed his personal chutes were taken from Issaquah that evening and sent to Cooper WITH the details on the missing chute packing card it is overwhelmingly clear what happened..

There is really no way to dismiss that packing card as not belonging to the missing chute. It was signed by Cossey on the same date as Hayden's remaining one. AND where did it come from. It had to be Hayden's missing chute.

To accept Cossey's NB8 claim you must reject that packing card. You need corroboration that it was an NB8 and proof that the packing card is wrong. I can't see any way to do that.

I am 100% on this unless there is new information.

and agreed ultimately it doesn't really help us solve the case now.

It only means they were looking for the wrong chute, it/parts might have been found but rejected. The premise to the argument that Cooper died because nothing was found is false. We don't know.

and Cossey screwed everyone and may have undermined the solving of this case long ago.

Cooper just picked the newer chute. There is nothing else to read into the chute selection.

 

and Gryder's rig does not match Cossey's or Hayden's...

 

 

Edited December 18, 2024 by FLYJACK

[Robert99 50]

20 hours ago, olemisscub said:

But not with the ripcord and ripcord housing loop being on opposite sides from each other. That was altered by someone who didn't know what they were doing. 

Riggers don't know what they are doing?  You need to take a couple of aspirins, get a good night's sleep, and get an emergency appointment with your shrink in the morning!

Download and read (!) the FAA publication on the knowledge requirements, testing requirements, and required equipment for riggers and master riggers.

Any rigger who has seen a picture of the WSHM's Hayden parachute will know that it is not an NB-6 or an NB-8.

If Cossey owned an NB-6/NB-8 he would use it when flying the jump aircraft which was probably a four place Cessna which did not have seats designed for pilots wearing parachutes. 

I speak from personal experience about the NB-6 which was quite thin when packed because of the unique construction of the conical canopy and a couple of other factors.  It was rated as having the same descent rate as a flat 28 foot canopy parachute.   

Edited December 18, 2024 by Robert99

[olemisscub 510]

3 hours ago, Robert99 said:

Riggers don't know what they are doing?  You need to take a couple of aspirins, get a good night's sleep, and get an emergency appointment with your shrink in the morning!

Download and read (!) the FAA publication on the knowledge requirements, testing requirements, and required equipment for riggers and master riggers.

Any rigger who has seen a picture of the WSHM's Hayden parachute will know that it is not an NB-6 or an NB-8.

If Cossey owned an NB-6/NB-8 he would use it when flying the jump aircraft which was probably a four place Cessna which did not have seats designed for pilots wearing parachutes. 

I speak from personal experience about the NB-6 which was quite thin when packed because of the unique construction of the conical canopy and a couple of other factors.  It was rated as having the same descent rate as a flat 28 foot canopy parachute.   

Robert, we're talking about DAN GRYDER'S phony parachute, not the museum chute. 

I think you are the one who needs to get a good nights sleep!

And you don't have to tell me about your personal experience with NB-6's. I own TWO of them, including the replica created for Richard Tosaw by Earl Cossey. 

[The Cooper Vortex 100]

New episode out now! DB Cooper Falsehoods Fly, with my good friend Ryan Burns. 

https://www.podbean.com/eas/pb-xw2v4-1778eb1

Enjoy!

[olemisscub 510]

3 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

 

 

 

Cossey is the only source for the NB6/8 description, there is no corroboration, only conflicts.

What conflict does an NB6 have with anything? What about the 1960 packing card negates it being an NB6?

The burden of proof is on the affirmative, not negation. Prove it was an NB6/8, not it wasn't.

You have that completely backwards. You are the one making the accusation that it ISN'T what is in the case evidence. That burden is on you. 

Cossey has told many conflicting stories, you can't just ignore the lies, misinformation and inconsistencies but accept this one aspect. That would never fly with a witness.

I've explained my Cossey litmus test. I've not discovered him telling a known falsehood until the 1976 article where he talks about the chute left on the plane being a prized possession or some such. Five years into it the case was certainly the "DB Cooper case". In the days after the hijacking, he had no reason to be embellishing anything. And he's consistent as far as I can tell.  

Cossey's description in the FBI files conflicts with Hayden's. 

How?

Cossey's description conflicts with the missing chute packing card.

So does Hayden's

Cossey never supplied his packing records, lied to the FBI about it and later claimed he did have the records.

This is problematic, certainly. 

Cossey changes the description form NB6 to NB8,,, why, it wasn't modified.

I don't care what Cossey said after 1976.

Cossey would have learned of his error within a day or two but never corrected his error. Lied by omission.

There is nothing in the case files nor in the early media reports to suggest that he was called on the night of the 24th. You're basing that on his bullshit stories from later years.

He knew by the 26th for that in person FBI interview but must have talked to the FBI prior, Cossey claimed he was called the evening of the 24th.. a file on the 25th describes the front reserves in detail, that had to come form Cossey. Cossey must have talked to somebody between the evening of the 24th and late afternoon 25th.

What file is this? 

Cossey claimed he was called the evening of the 24th, the back chute found was described and he described his NB6,, how can this be if he didn't even know about Hayden's chutes being sent. 

Cossey's later stories revealed his belief that he thought they were his two personal back chutes, the NB8 bailout (Cossey was a pilot) and a B-4 freefall). Neither match Hayden's. Cossey was telling us what he believed at the time of the hijacking.

Cossey's later stories are all known bullshit. So why are you relying on them to inform your opinions about the truth? Ignore everything that dude said after 1976 and your head won't be spinning so much. If you ignore everything Cossey said after that 1976 article, then everything checks out between the FBI Files from 1971 and what he told the media in 1971. 

Hayden said they were the same, the tan one was a civilian version early 1940's, the Olive Drab a military version by colour of the same type. Unlikely Hayden would have two completely different bailout rigs, they would be a matching pair.

Why is it unlikely? A matching pair? Why do you think that? They don't come in pairs like a set of cufflinks. C'mon now. Cossey said they were assembled out of crap he had lying around. Why would Cossey have a matching pair of rare WWII parachute packs just laying around? That's not realistic. 

The 28' thing, that is odd but Cossey claimed a flat circular which is consistent with a 28'. The packing card said conical which is consistent wth a 24'. The FBI file seems to attribute 28 to Hayden, that could be an error/typo, or it may be a conflation with Cossey's early description. The 302's have errors and conflations. They are facts, they are investigative notes.

Hayden says it was a 28 footer way before they got in touch with Cossey. And Hayden doesn't say they were the same. If they were the same, he'd have said so. He seemed to think they were different because he described them differently....so I mean...they weren't the same in his mind. Why use the term "military back pack" to describe the OD one and not also the tan one? NB-6's "look" military. That's why. 

 

To accept Cossey's NB8 claim you must reject that packing card. You need corroboration that it was an NB8 and proof that the packing card is wrong. I can't see any way to do that.

For one thing, I'm accepting his NB6 claim from 1971, not anything about an NB8 from 2003+. Cossey doesn't call it an NB-8 until 2003. And again, I don't care what Cossey after 1976. He's totally untrustworthy after that point. Being notable in the Cooper case had gone to his head by that point.

Once more, I have to ask, what about that packing card tells you it wasn't an NB-6? The packing card does NOT negate an NB-6 or a B-4 or P-2-24 or whatever. Packing cards are about the canopies, not the containers. 

 

[FLYJACK 697]

3 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Cossey is the only source for the NB6/8 description, there is no corroboration, only conflicts.

What conflict does an NB6 have with anything? What about the 1960 packing card negates it being an NB6?

The burden of proof is on the affirmative, not negation. Prove it was an NB6/8, not it wasn't.

You have that completely backwards. You are the one making the accusation that it ISN'T what is in the case evidence. That burden is on you. 

There is no corroboration on that packing card.. the canopy size is wrong, the type is wrong and very unlikely a 24' conical is in an NB6 and since Cossey was clear for years from 1971 that it was a 28' flat circular.. it can't be according to the packing card.. That card is incompatible with Cossey's description. This is just a FACT.

I don't have it backwards, the burden of proof is provide evidence to demonstrate a claim is valid.. The NB6 is ONLY a claim made by Cossey... the burden is not proving a claim if false. Cossey never provided proof when he could have and there is no corroboration. None.

Cossey was consistent from 1971, that isn't the same as being factual. Your self imposed capricious and arbitrary litmus test is irrelevant. A trick to exclude info you don't want considered. 

Cossey's description was sage green nylon container and sage green nylon harness, Hayden was olive drab container tan cloth harness... NB6's are Sage green and don't conflate colour fade today with a 15 year old chute in 1971. 

I have always said he claimed he was called the evening of the 24th, it is not confirmed, that doesn't mean it didn't happen and I am not relying on that. Besides, you don't know it didn't happen. Since the FBI sent out a detailed description on the afternoon of the 25th with the chest reserve that only Cossey or somebody who had opened the chute would know then we know Cossey was called sometime between the evening of the 24th and mid 25th, before he met with the FBI in-person on the 26th and appears aware of Hayden's chutes being sent. 

Ironic, that you reject Cossey's claim that he was called that evening but you accept his claim of an NB6, neither is corroborated. 

What file is this?.. I posted it and another FBI file regarding the missing front chute description before the 26th.

Cossey's later stories indicate exactly what he believed, that HIS personal chutes were used this is corroborated by Emrich. He just never corrected his error. How do you know everything from Cossey "checks out" from 1971, there is nothing to corroborate his claim. "Checks out" does not equal true. You can say he was consistent, that doesn't mean what he said was true. Those are not the same. 

I think you have conflated consistent with true...  not the same thing.

Cossey's story changed after the FBI case died down and pressure was long gone, he was lying by omission in 1971. Later, he just said what he believed the evening of the 24th. 

If you are getting a set of bailout chutes for a plane you don't want them to be completely different with one difficult to use. You want two similar, simple and interchangeable.. 

Strawman.. "Why would Cossey just have a pair of WW2 parachute packs just laying around" what makes you think he did and why are you asking me a red herring question. Hayden got them from a surplus store and they got Cossey to pack them. 

Hayden meant the same type, the Olive Drab was the military version and the Tan P2 was the civilian version, very simple, consistent and doesn't confirm an NB6, otherwise the same but different model numbers. The 302's are full of errors, conflations and miscommunications,, the only single outlier in all this is the 28' attributed to Hayden.

Strangely, you keep calling the chutes rare as if true or means anything. Hayden did get a P2, the other one was not a P2, it was similar but the military version.. There were many of these era containers that were virtually identical with different model numbers. Probably really cheap.

Cossey and the packing card are incompatible. 

So, can't be both. It isn't a Chinese food menu, you can't pick and choose only the things you like. A 28' flat circular is incompatible with a 24' conical.. Sage Green is not Olive Drab. Cossey believed his personal chutes were grabbed from Issaquah by Emrich. It all fits..  

If you choose Cossey's description you must accept all of it and the packing card must be discarded... and vice versa. You can't accept part of Cossey's description and reject the incompatible part.. it all gets tossed unless you have some corroboration. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Robert99 50]

6 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Robert, we're talking about DAN GRYDER'S phony parachute, not the museum chute. 

I think you are the one who needs to get a good nights sleep!

And you don't have to tell me about your personal experience with NB-6's. I own TWO of them, including the replica created for Richard Tosaw by Earl Cossey. 

OleMiss, you don't seem to understand that both of Hayden's parachutes are being discussed here plus Gruder's.

If you actually have an NB-6 rig, open it up and take a look at the construction of the risers and canopy.  Then you should be able to understand why it can be packed in a small container.

After doing the above, you should also be able to understand why the NB-6 cost about two or three times the amount that a regular 28 foot flat canopy parachute costs.

Why would Hayden want one parachute that cost X dollars, such as the museum parachute, and one that would cost 2X or 3X times as much?

 Further, why are you so obsessed with claiming that an NB-6 was involved in the hijacking?

Still further, Chaucer related a while back that someone was going to produce a new analysis of the flight path using some statistical methods.  How did that turn out and is it online anywhere?

[FLYJACK 697]

No, as I have said many times Hayden's tan chute left in the plane is a P2-B-24. It is a CIVILIAN model sold to the public though some military pilots did use it. It goes back to about 1939 and is NOT a military rig.

We know Hayden's missing chute taken by Cooper was military because it was olive drab.

Edited December 19, 2024 by FLYJACK