DB Cooper

[FLYJACK 707]

This is interesting...

The parachute card for Hayden's.. Tan civilian rig left in plane.

It is described on the card as..

MAKE.. Pioneer (I confirmed that it is a P2-B-24 civilian, not on card)

TYPE.. 26' - Ripstop Conical (note, no make of canopy listed)

S/N.. 226

Date.. Sept 1957

Packed.. May 21, 1971

Rigger's# 1579638 

by EJ Cossey

The missing chute's card was found in the back chute left behind with the following data in the FBI files.

MAKE.. Pioneer (Described as Olive Drab military, no container model)

TYPE.. 24' Ripstop Conical Steinthal (Canopy manufacturer noted as Steinthal)

S/N.. 60-9707 (60 leading the S/N number is consistent with the year for Steinthal canopies)

Date.. July 1960

Packed.. May 21, 1971

Rigger's# 1579638 

by EJ Cossey

 

Hayden got the two chutes packed by Cossey together on May 21, 1971. This is Hayden's missing back pack rig and the one Cooper used. 

So far, so good..  

The problem was that the missing chute has both Pioneer and Steinthal whereas the found civilian chute only has Pioneer.

Here is why..

both the canopy and container for Hayden's found chute were Pioneer..  whereas the missing Cooper chute was a Pioneer container and Steinthal canopy.. 

I found a similar packing card with the make and model on it, P1-B-24, but only Pioneer written.. Why because it had a Pioneer container and Pioneer canopy..

 

So, the reason Cooper's missing rig has both Pioneer and Steinthal is because the container and canopy are different manufacturers while for Hayden's recovered chute they are the same.

Both of Hayden's rigs were Pioneer containers..  we do not know the model of the container Cooper used, Cossey's description and the missing rig packing card are irreconcilable. Both can't be true.

Edited December 20, 2024 by FLYJACK

[CooperNWO305 151]

14 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

This is interesting...

The parachute card for Hayden's.. Tan civilian rig left in plane.

It is described on the card as..

MAKE.. Pioneer (I confirmed that it is a P2-B-24 civilian, not on card)

TYPE.. 26' - Ripstop Conical (note, no make of canopy listed)

S/N.. 226

Date.. Sept 1957

Packed.. May 21, 1971

Rigger's# 1579638 

by EJ Cossey

The missing chute's card was found in the back chute left behind with the following data in the FBI files.

MAKE.. Pioneer (Described as Olive Drab military, no container model)

TYPE.. 24' Ripstop Conical Steinthal (Canopy manufacturer noted as Steinthal)

S/N.. 60-9707 (60 leading the S/N number is consistent with the year for Steinthal canopies)

Date.. July 1960

Packed.. May 21, 1971

Rigger's# 1579638 

by EJ Cossey

 

Hayden got the two chutes packed by Cossey together on May 21, 1971. This is Hayden's missing back pack rig and the one Cooper used. 

So far, so good..  

The problem was that the missing chute has both Pioneer and Steinthal whereas the found civilian chute only has Pioneer.

Here is why..

both the canopy and container for Hayden's found chute were Pioneer..  whereas the missing Cooper chute was a Pioneer container and Steinthal canopy.. 

I found a similar packing card with the make and model on it, P1-B-24, but only Pioneer written.. Why because it had a Pioneer container and Pioneer canopy..

 

So, the reason Cooper's missing rig has both Pioneer and Steinthal is because the container and canopy are different manufacturers while for Hayden's recovered chute they are the same.

Both of Hayden's rigs were Pioneer containers..  we do not know the model of the container Cooper used, Cossey's description and the missing rig packing card are irreconcilable. Both can't be true.

Would be great to see a PowerPoint slide set with everything in summary. Great work. Pics help a lot and your analysis. 

[FLYJACK 707]

1 hour ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Would be great to see a PowerPoint slide set with everything in summary. Great work. Pics help a lot and your analysis. 

Yes, some of these things get complicated.

The packing card for the missing rig Cooper used vs Cossey. They are incompatible. Both can't be true. The packing card does NOT corroborate Cossey's claim of an NB6. 

That packing card CANNOT be explained away. since Cossey believed his personal Chutes were sent (via Emrich), Cossey was describing his rig not Hayden's.. and that means the FBI was looking for the wrong rig.

 

Packing card for Hayden's missing chute.

MAKE.. Pioneer (Described as Olive Drab military by Hayden, no container model)

TYPE.. 24' Ripstop Conical Steinthal (Canopy manufacturer noted as Steinthal)

S/N.. 60-9707 (60 leading the S/N number is consistent with the year for Steinthal canopies)

Date.. July 1960

Packed.. May 21, 1971

Rigger's# 1579638 

by EJ Cossey

 

 

vs Cossey's description...

MAKE.. Not disclosed at the time, (model NB6 Sage Green military, later Cossey claimed Pioneer NB8)

TYPE.. 28' flat circular (Canopy manufacturer unknown, flat circular is not a conical)

S/N.. (unknown, Cossey claimed he gave the FBI his records, he did not) 

Date.. (unknown, Cossey claimed he gave the FBI his records, he did not)

Packed.. (inferred after the 26th)

Rigger's# (inferred after the 26th) 

by (inferred after the 26th)

 

Up soon Sketch A vs sketch B showdown... and it isn't A....

Edited December 20, 2024 by FLYJACK

[377 22]

“The packing card said conical which is consistent wth a 24'.”

I am especially fond of Navy 26 ft Conicals since one saved my life as a reserve. I’ve never seen a 24 ft military Conical. Do they exist? 
 

377

[Robert99 50]

45 minutes ago, 377 said:

“The packing card said conical which is consistent wth a 24'.”

I am especially fond of Navy 26 ft Conicals since one saved my life as a reserve. I’ve never seen a 24 ft military Conical. Do they exist? 
 

377

No.  

[georger 244]

2 hours ago, 377 said:

“The packing card said conical which is consistent wth a 24'.”

I am especially fond of Navy 26 ft Conicals since one saved my life as a reserve. I’ve never seen a 24 ft military Conical. Do they exist? 
 

377

Years ago, didn't you speculate that Cooper pulled the rip chord while on the stairs - that there would be advantages to doing that? Who would know to do that? Novice vs. experienced sky diver ? Do you still hold to that view ?

How could we know if Cooper pulled off the stairs? Can we ever know ?

Edited December 20, 2024 by georger

[FLYJACK 707]

1 hour ago, 377 said:

“The packing card said conical which is consistent wth a 24'.”

I am especially fond of Navy 26 ft Conicals since one saved my life as a reserve. I’ve never seen a 24 ft military Conical. Do they exist? 
 

377

A few things..

Yes, there are 24' conicals..

 

How do we know that Hayden's missing rig's canopy was military, the container was.

I did find a reference to a Reserve 24 navy conical in the Poynter book.

But, I have not confirmed Steinthal made a 24' conical.. 

Here is a 24 ft military Steinthal.. don't know if it is a conical.

There are references on other DZ forums...

 

Ultimately, "conical" was taken from the packing card Cossey wrote and Cossey claimed it was a "flat circular"..  nothing on that card corroborates Cossey's description.

 

Edited December 20, 2024 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 510]

15 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

 

Ultimately, "conical" was taken from the packing card Cossey wrote and Cossey claimed it was a "flat circular"..  nothing on that card corroborates Cossey's description.

 

Doesn’t corroborate Hayden’s description either though. Why did Hayden say 28 foot as well? And don’t say it’s a conflation with Cossey’s description. Hayden’s description was written while they were still looking for Cossey. 

So if Hayden’s first description of the museum chute matches perfectly with what it actually is, why would his description of the Cooper chute be off? 

As I’ve said, odds are pretty damn high that the 24 foot card is from Cooper’s chute due to the date, but we can’t be 100% sure that something else isn’t at play here. If it was just Cossey saying 28 foot then it would be easier to write off as a faulty memory or a mistake or whatever, but for them both to separately say 28 foot? That at least makes me question that 24 foot packing card’s provenance.

Edited December 20, 2024 by olemisscub

[olemisscub 510]

Something else that bugs me. This detailed recital of the packing cards isn’t from a 302 interview. Presumably this was written directly from the agent looking at the cards. Why, when describing the 24 foot, does he not use “Pioneer” or “canonical” (two things which DO appear on the museum chute card). I’m thinking there is a possibility that there is some confusion/conflation in the Girolamo 302. That seems to be just as logical or likely (especially knowing that these parachute 302’s are wonky as hell) as believing that a packing card would say Steinthal AND Pioneer on it. 

 

Edited December 20, 2024 by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 707]

8 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Doesn’t corroborate Hayden’s description either though. Why did Hayden say 28 foot as well? And don’t say it’s a conflation with Cossey’s description. Hayden’s description was written while they were still looking for Cossey. 

So if Hayden’s first description of the museum chute matches perfectly with what it actually is, why would his description of the Cooper chute be off? 

As I’ve said, odds are pretty damn high that the 24 foot card is from Cooper’s chute due to the date, but we can’t be 100% sure that something else isn’t at play here. If it was just Cossey saying 28 foot then it would be easier to write off as a faulty memory or a mistake or whatever, but for them both to separately say 28 foot? That at least makes me question that 24 foot packing card’s provenance.

Right, 28 is attributed to Hayden..  one item and one time is incompatible with the card. It could be typo/communication error or Hayden misremembered. Hayden didn't have the packing card, he was going by memory. We don't know.

Compare to Cossey, he repeatedly said 28' flat circular.. not an error. Two items and repeated, no error.

What is at play is obvious, Cossey was describing HIS personal rig that he believed was sent to Cooper. NOT HAYDEN's.

Somebody wrote down what was written on the card, they weren't making it up.

and there is nothing on that card to confirm an NB6.

We know that Cossey and card are incompatible,,,

To accept Cossey's description you must accept all of it and reject several items taken from that card.

The only argument...   Cossey filled out that packing card incorrectly and even then it does not corroborate his description,, there is no corroboration for Cossey's NB6 claim anywhere, NONE,, only conflicts and sketchy behaviour like NOT providing records.

This is simple and so obvious..  

I have gone through this so many times,, in a year or two everyone else will see this and agree...  why do I even bother.

 

..

[FLYJACK 707]

14 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Something else that bugs me. This detailed recital of the packing cards isn’t from a 302 interview. Presumably this was written directly from the agent looking at the cards. Why, when describing the 24 foot, does he not use “Pioneer” or “canonical” (two things which DO appear on the museum chute card). I’m thinking there is a possibility that there is some confusion/conflation in the Girolamo 302. That seems to be just as logical or likely (especially knowing that these parachute 302’s are wonky as hell) as believing that a packing card would say Steinthal AND Pioneer on it. 

 

I covered that in my post above..  

https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56036-db-cooper/?do=findComment&comment=5047801

 

Edited December 20, 2024 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 510]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

I covered that in my post above..  

https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/56036-db-cooper/?do=findComment&comment=5047801

 

Yes I saw your post and I still question it. If you can show me a packing card from that era that has TWO manufacturers listed on it, I’d be much more open to the possibility. Packing cards aren’t for the container. They are for the canopy. And yes I know you provided an example of some guy during WWII writing P-2 on a packing card.

Edited December 20, 2024 by olemisscub

[olemisscub 510]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

 

there is no corroboration for Cossey's NB6 claim anywhere, NONE,, only conflicts and sketchy behaviour like NOT providing records.

And there is NOTHING to show that it isn’t! What precludes Cossey from giving Hayden an old NB-6? They were fairly ubiquitous items. NB-6’s and B-4’s were very common. Is it so hard to just say “it could have been an NB-6, I don’t think it was, but there is no way for us to really know at this point.”  

His sketchiness about the records has nothing to do with it being an NB-6 or not. That wouldn’t go in his records. Canopies are what packing cards and records are for. 

If Cossey thought they were HIS OWN then why the heck does he tell the media the day after the hijacking that they came from Hayden? Why does he tell the FBI that he made them for Norman Hayden MULTIPLE times in the file?

Why do you care so much about an obviously false statement that Cossey made over 30 years later? Your entire argument is resting on a statement that we know to be erroneous. 

 

Edited December 20, 2024 by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 707]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

And there is NOTHING to show that it isn’t! What precludes Cossey from giving Hayden an old NB-6? They were fairly ubiquitous items. NB-6’s and B-4’s were very common. Is it so hard to just say “it could have been an NB-6, I don’t think it was, but there is no way for us to really know at this point.”  

His sketchiness about the records has nothing to do with it being an NB-6 or not. That wouldn’t go in his records. Canopies are what packing cards and records are for. 

If Cossey thought they were HIS OWN then why the heck does he tell the media the day after the hijacking that they came from Hayden? Why does he tell the FBI that he made them for Norman Hayden MULTIPLE times in the file?

Why do you care so much about an obviously false statement that Cossey made over 30 years later? Your entire argument is resting on a statement that we know to be erroneous. 

 

 

His records should show the container and identify the canopy.. confirming his claim. He didn't provide them and even claimed he did. That goes to his credibility as this can be a coverup of his error.

It is always possible Hayden got an NB6 but not based on what Cossey claimed. And, extremely unlikely, Hayden said it was the same/similar to his tan rig but olive drab. Other than Cossey's claim there is NO corroboration.

The Hayden claims from Cossey came after he said he was called about the chutes. He had a day to figure out his error. 

Cossey believed Emrich was grabbing his personal chutes,,, 

The entire argument does not rely on Cossey's 30 year old statement. It explains the inconsistency. The argument is the inconsistencies.

Cossey's description and the packing card CANNOT both be true.

Why is this so difficult,, it is so obvious.

 

 

Edited December 21, 2024 by FLYJACK

[dudeman17 340]

6 hours ago, 377 said:

I am especially fond of Navy 26 ft Conicals since one saved my life as a reserve.

Mine too. Those 26' Navy Conicals were a very common reserve canopy. I don't know this for fact, but I'm guessing they were the standard canopy in a NB6.

-----------------

4 hours ago, olemisscub said:

 

This has always bugged me. It describes a Pioneer 26' conical. Then it describes the 24(?) Steinthal, "also an integral part of this chute". That has to be the pilot chute, and a typo '24 foot' rather than 24 inch. There is nothing else in that rig that that could possibly be. Bailout rigs do not have 2 full size canopies in them, but they do have pilot chutes, necessary to deploy them.

-----------------

To anyone other than a rigger or experienced jumper, ALL backpack rigs, bailout reserve or freefall main, are 'similar'. They're just not that complicated - harness, back container, ripcord.

-----------------

Standard issue is that on a bailout rig, the ripcord would be on the left, on a freefall main it would be on the right. Not sure why Gryder's rig would have that ripcord housing loop on the left. For someone converting a bailout rig to a freefall main, the question is about adding the D-rings to the harness for a front reserve. Every part of a reserve system has to be tested and pass FAA TSO standards. That is an involved process that the manufacturer of the harness/container would have to do, and approve the method of adding them. That could have happened, but seems unlikely.

-----------------

Highly unlikely that Cossey would pack Hayden's rigs 'off the books'. Even if Hayden were to be killed crashing his plane and not jumping, everything, including his bailout rig, would be inspected. For Cossey to put his name on an unofficial, non-legal pack job could cost him his rigger's ticket at the least.

[olemisscub 510]

33 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

 

 

The Hayden claims from Cossey came after he said he was called about the chutes. He had a day to figure out his error. 

Cossey believed Emrich was grabbing his personal chutes,,, 

The entire argument does not rely on Cossey's 30 year old statement. It explains the inconsistency. The argument is the inconsistencies.

You keep saying “Cossey said” and “Cossey believed” as if they are statements of fact. Where does he say these things? He says these things in an interview from 32 years later where we KNOW he’s lying. So why are you believing it OTHER than your belief that it helps explains an inconsistency?

[olemisscub 510]

5 minutes ago, dudeman17 said:

 

This has always bugged me. It describes a Pioneer 26' conical. Then it describes the 24(?) Steinthal, "also an integral part of this chute". That has to be the pilot chute, and a typo '24 foot' rather than 24 inch. There is nothing else in that rig that that could possibly be. Bailout rigs do not have 2 full size canopies in them, but they do have pilot chutes, necessary to deploy them.

 

It just really sounds like he’s describing a packing card. Pilot chutes don’t have packing cards, of course. “Also packed by Earl Cossey on 5/21/71” 

You’ll note that at the end of the document he writes packing cards, plural.

[dudeman17 340]

40 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

It just really sounds like he’s describing a packing card. Pilot chutes don’t have packing cards, of course. “Also packed by Earl Cossey on 5/21/71” 

You’ll note that at the end of the document he writes packing cards, plural.

They could be conflating two different chutes in two different rigs on two different cards. It's that "also an integral part of this chute" line that gets me. But they wouldn't know any info about the pilot chute unless they opened the rig and got the info off of the part itself. *Shrug*

[FLYJACK 707]

25 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

You keep saying “Cossey said” and “Cossey believed” as if they are statements of fact. Where does he say these things? He says these things in an interview from 32 years later where we KNOW he’s lying. So why are you believing it OTHER than your belief that it helps explains an inconsistency?

You don't seem to actually grasp the core issue here.

Cossey's description and the packing card are incompatible.. both cannot be true.

Cossey's later statements both reconcile the rig description incompatibility and support the events of the 24th. They aren't the issue. 

That and the following reconcile the incompatibility between the packing card and Cossey's description. 

 

Lets's cover this AGAIN.

Cossey was called at home and asked to lend all 4 chutes,, 2 back, 2 fronts.

He agreed to lend his personal rigs from Issaquah. 

Emrich at Issaquah going to grab all 2 fronts and two backs.

Emrich was called and asked to only send the fronts.

Emrich sent the two fronts via the police.

Cossey was at home and heard about hijacking,,, there goes my chutes...

(How would Cossey know that Hayden's were sent and not his until somebody told him)

Cossey would not know that his chutes were not used and Hayden's were.

He would have legitimately believed his chutes were given to Cooper.

So, when he was first contacted he described HIS personal rig, not Hayden's.

Very soon after he would have figured out his error.

 

This just explains the inconsistencies between Cossey's description, the packing card and Hayden.

It uses FACTS that are corroborated by Cossey's later statements.

 

You don't even need that explanation to understand that both the packing and Cossey's description CANNOT be true.

You still want to use both Cossey and the packing card...  it is logically impossible...

I have reconciled Cossey's error with facts and Cossey's statements, you can't reconcile the errors on the card.

There is some perverse irony that you accept Cossey's uncorroborated and conflicting NB6 claim but reject his other uncorroborated and supported statements. 

 

If you can reconcile within the evidence, some other way, Cossey's description and the packing card let me know.

Otherwise...

I am not interested in wasting any more time repeating myself, I got this right. 

 

[olemisscub 510]

19 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

If you can reconcile within the evidence, some other way, Cossey's description and the packing card let me know.

Otherwise...

I am not interested in wasting any more time repeating myself, I got this right. 

 

And I’ll still be here waiting to see a packing card that has two manufacturers listed on it. 

I would be far more willing to believe your version if Hayden didn’t also say it was a 28 footer. We know his description of the museum chute is very accurate, so why would his Cooper chute description also be off?

[Robert99 50]

6 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Yes I saw your post and I still question it. If you can show me a packing card from that era that has TWO manufacturers listed on it, I’d be much more open to the possibility. Packing cards aren’t for the container. They are for the canopy. And yes I know you provided an example of some guy during WWII writing P-2 on a packing card.

Packing cards are for the ENTIRE RIG, canopy,  container, harness, pilot chute, rip cord, and any attachments.  That "I & R" stands for "Inspect & Repair".  The rigger is responsible for certifying that the entire rig is airworthy.

[olemisscub 510]

9 minutes ago, Robert99 said:

Packing cards are for the ENTIRE RIG, canopy,  container, harness, pilot chute, rip cord, and any attachments.  That "I & R" stands for "Inspect & Repair".  The rigger is responsible for certifying that the entire rig is airworthy.

Oy vey, I understand this. We’re talking about what is WRITTEN on the packing card. 

[Robert99 50]

1 minute ago, olemisscub said:

Oy vey, I understand this. We’re talking about what is WRITTEN on the packing card. 

As Dudeman17 has already pointed out, there will be just one packing card per rig.  Not a single one for two rigs.  

If one rig has been repacked more times than there are lines on one card to record the packings, then there may be two cards for historical purposes in the pocket, but they would apply to one single rig.

[olemisscub 510]

45 minutes ago, Robert99 said:

As Dudeman17 has already pointed out, there will be just one packing card per rig.  Not a single one for two rigs.  

If one rig has been repacked more times than there are lines on one card to record the packings, then there may be two cards for historical purposes in the pocket, but they would apply to one single rig.

lol, holy smokes. Robert. I OWN three bailout rigs. Two NB-6's and a B-4. I know what packing cards are. I know that each parachute should only have one. I know that each time they are repacked they are filled out by the rigger and certified. I know what they look like. I have a YouTube video showing off a packing card that I have signed by Earl Cossey. Try to keep up :-) 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2024 by olemisscub

[dudeman17 340]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Cossey was called at home and asked to lend all 4 chutes,, 2 back, 2 fronts.

He agreed to lend his personal rigs from Issaquah. ...

Cossey was at home and heard about hijacking,,, there goes my chutes...

(How would Cossey know that Hayden's were sent and not his until somebody told him)

Cossey would not know that his chutes were not used and Hayden's were.

He would have legitimately believed his chutes were given to Cooper.

So, when he was first contacted he described HIS personal rig, not Hayden's.

Another inconsistency is that Cossey says he was contacted later that night after the plane landed in Reno, and when they described the chute left on the plane, he deduced that Cooper took his bailout rig. But they would have described Hayden's rig, which wouldn't match his sport rig? So why didn't he question that?

 

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Emrich was called and asked to only send the fronts.

Is that documented? Is it possible that Emrich did send Cossey's back rigs (but they still gave Hayden's to Cooper)? That might extend the time that Cossey still thinks it's his rigs that were given.

-----------------

1 hour ago, Robert99 said:

Packing cards are for the ENTIRE RIG, canopy,  container, harness, pilot chute, rip cord, and any attachments. ...  The rigger is responsible for certifying that the entire rig is airworthy.

Yes, but olemiss is referring to that the make, model, and serial number written on the card refers to the canopy.

 

1 hour ago, Robert99 said:

That "I & R" stands for "Inspect & Repair".

A nitpick, but I & R stands for Inspect & Repack. Any repairs would be noted separately.