DB Cooper

[olemisscub 521]

What in the world….Come on, Doc! 

https://x.com/drbobedwards1/status/1891967792745795974?s=46&t=v6IVB5UOGWvDOSAlnUpnxQ

[FLYJACK 727]

14 hours ago, olemisscub said:

What in the world….Come on, Doc! 

https://x.com/drbobedwards1/status/1891967792745795974?s=46&t=v6IVB5UOGWvDOSAlnUpnxQ

Doc, Doc, Doc...

I am compiling all this stiff right now...

The Boeing test did not have a person on the stairs or jumping.. they only lowered the stairs. They wouldn't have open very far with no weight on them, no pitch, bump, oscillations.

This can't be compared to a jumper.. their weight pushing stairs down and releasing.

Rataczak was told to expect a pitch and there was..

 

 

The 8:09 little bob on the FDR was Cooper getting to the bottom of the stairs, maximizing drag with his weight opening the stairs.. the stairs were opened earlier but not opened as far with much less drag and no pitch.

Pitch was caused by Cooper at the bottom of stairs not when stairs cracked open earlier.

 

The FDR mark indicates Cooper was at the bottom at 8:09, no later marks. If this mark was not Cooper maximizing drag then what was it and wouldn't there be another mark later.

The only question is how long was he at the bottom of stairs from 8:09 before jumping....  causing the physical bump.

expect a slight pitch..

Edited February 19 by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 521]

31 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

 

The Boeing test did not have a person on the stairs or jumping.. they only lowered the stairs.

 

yes, this is just so basic. It's apples to oranges. The Boeing test is not really relevant. Hell, I think the only reason the Boeing test is even in the FBI files at all is because they did a cursory investigation of all of the participants. 

[georger 248]

On 2/19/2025 at 11:11 AM, olemisscub said:

yes, this is just so basic. It's apples to oranges. The Boeing test is not really relevant. Hell, I think the only reason the Boeing test is even in the FBI files at all is because they did a cursory investigation of all of the participants. 

None of the participants had your view! I can guarantee that.

The whole reason for the test was to try to duplicate and clarify what the 305 crew experienced during the time period Cooper may have jumped in. Basic science. All of the participants were experts in their fields! The test can hardly be dismissed as a  'cursory investigation' -  of all of the participants!

The idea that Cooper walked out on the stairs, tested the stairs, and finally jumped without leaving any telltale sign, is impossible. Anyone claiming that might as well claim intervention by the HolyTrinity!

In fact, the test revealed information which very likely has still not been fully articulated, by socalled researchers. Hominid and I batted that back and forth with Hom being an articulate source of  raising new questions no forum was debating .... this is just one of the reasons why Hominid was such a treasure! I think Hominid would be smiling and laughing just treading your comments!  Sending out a few provocative emails to peoples late boxes! 

 

Edited February 21 by georger

[FLYJACK 727]

1 hour ago, georger said:

None of the participants had your view! I can guarantee that.

The whole reason for the test was to try to duplicate and clarify what the 305 crew experienced during the time period Cooper may have jumped in. Basic science. All of the participants were experts in their fields! The test can hardly be dismissed as a  'cursory investigation' -  of all of the participants!

The idea that Cooper walked out on the stairs, tested the stairs, and finally jumped without leaving any telltale sign, is impossible. Anyone claiming that might as well claim intervention by the HolyTrinity!

In fact, the test revealed information which very likely has still not been fully articulated, by socalled researchers. Hominid and I batted that back and forth with Hom being an articulate source of  raising new questions no forum was debating .... this is just one of the reasons why Hominid was such a treasure! I think Hominid would be smiling and laughing just treading your comments!  Sending out a few provocative emails to peoples late boxes! 

 

G, the reference was the other test, the Boeing test in the 60's when they only opened the airstairs in flight...  no weight, not the sled test.

[georger 248]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

G, the reference was the other test, the Boeing test in the 60's when they only opened the airstairs in flight...  no weight, not the sled test.

OK, well I didnt read the context  ......... crap! age catching up with me! Thanks FJ..   been a rough week .......  all the other excuses! ..............  

Edited February 21 by georger

[CooperNWO305 155]

When was Cooper’s green/pink whatever color bag first spotted? Was it by Nancy House when he came out of the lav? Anyone else make reference to it?

[olemisscub 521]

2 hours ago, CooperNWO305 said:

When was Cooper’s green/pink whatever color bag first spotted? Was it by Nancy House when he came out of the lav? Anyone else make reference to it?

Bill would have probably seen it first. In his 302 he makes reference to seeing it. He was moved up to the front by the time Nancy saw Cooper coming out of the lav. Unclear when Tina would have seen it first, but it shows up near the end of her 302, so possibly she didn’t see it til later on. No one else is recorded seeing it other than those three. 
 

 

Edited February 21 by olemisscub

[olemisscub 521]

15 hours ago, georger said:

 

 

FWIW, I've ID'd everyone in this photo for my book. Some mistakes in that one that you posted. 

 

Edited February 21 by olemisscub

[CooperNWO305 155]

10 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Bill would have probably seen it first. In his 302 he makes reference to seeing it. He was moved up to the front by the time Nancy saw Cooper coming out of the lav. Unclear when Tina would have seen it first, but it shows up near the end of her 302, so possibly she didn’t see it til later on. No one else is recorded seeing it other than those three. 
 

 

It sounds cooler that he boarded with an attache case versus “He boarded with an attache case and a shopping bag from Publix”. 

[georger 248]

4 hours ago, olemisscub said:

FWIW, I've ID'd everyone in this photo for my book. Some mistakes in that one that you posted. 

 

Thanks!

[FLYJACK 727]

Cooper was wearing a skinny tie and small collared shirt, both out of style..

However, his suit had wide lapels.. in style, just barely.. 

Most of the 50's and 60's suits were small lapel's.. Cooper's suit was either a year old or from the 40's/early 50's..

In the 50's besides small lapel's suits became patterned, more colourful and textured... 60's were small lapel.

 

 Most likely it was old,, late 40's era and not nearly new.

[olemisscub 521]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

Cooper was wearing a skinny tie and small collared shirt, both out of style..

However, his suit had wide lapels.. in style, just barely.. 

Most of the 50's and 60's suits were small lapel's.. Cooper's suit was either a year old or from the 40's/early 50's..

In the 50's besides small lapel's suits became patterned, more colourful and textured... 60's were small lapel.

 

 Most likely it was old,, late 40's era and not nearly new.

My question would be this: How was Gregory able to see how wide the lapels of his suit jacket were whilst Cooper was wearing an overcoat? And Gregory doesn't even mention an overcoat, yet seemingly goes into great detail about Cooper's clothing. So I'm not quite sure what to make of that. 

[FLYJACK 727]

A single breasted overcoat unbuttoned worn loosely should expose the suit lapel's.. Some overcoats are worn with arms not in sleeves..  just over the shoulders..

Sitting in a plane, how would he have worn it?? loose, over shoulders??

But we don't know enough about that overcoat/topcoat/raincoat,,, did he ever remove it, did he put on the chute with an overcoat on??  

[olemisscub 521]

7 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

A single breasted overcoat unbuttoned worn loosely should expose the suit lapel's.. Some overcoats are worn with arms not in sleeves..  just over the shoulders..

Sitting in a plane, how would he have worn it?? loose, over shoulders??

But we don't know enough about that overcoat/topcoat/raincoat,,, did he ever remove it, did he put on the chute with an overcoat on??  

Seems like Tina would have mentioned him taking his overcoat off if he did. But maybe not. I guess if you are sitting a certain way it would expose the lapels, particularly if you are slouching. Odd that Gregory doesn't mention the overcoat though.  

 

[FLYJACK 727]

No, Gregory was not the obnoxious drunk...

Ryan us using wild speculation and misunderstanding the evidence.

Gregory sat in the aisle seat, he said he believed row 18 but it was likely 16 and alone in that row... not 17.

but, he never moved up when the passengers were asked. Mitchell said the drunk moved up.

Further, the key passengers were interviewed that night, they would have noticed a drunk..

No, Gregory was not the drunk. Ryan doesn't know what he is talking about and misleading everyone again. The evidence shows Gregory was not the drunk...

Edited February 28 by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 727]

FBI.. 5'8" height is not sufficient to eliminate a suspect.

 

FBI searched Elsinore records from 5'8"

[olemisscub 521]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

No, Gregory was not the obnoxious drunk...

Ryan us using wild speculation and misunderstanding the evidence.

Gregory sat in the aisle seat, he said he believed row 18 but it was likely 16 and alone in that row... not 17.

but, he never moved up when the passengers were asked. Mitchell said the drunk moved up.

Further, the key passengers were interviewed that night, they would have noticed a drunk..

No, Gregory was not the drunk. Ryan doesn't know what he is talking about and misleading everyone again. The evidence shows Gregory was not the drunk...

I'm not completely convinced Gregory was in 17 (more likely Spreckel was in 17C or 16C) for the same reason you are saying. If Gregory didn't move up when the passengers asked, then he's not in 16 either. It appears that everyone behind row 14 was asked to move up if Flo went and stood at row 15. They said they moved the closest four rows up. So he's not in 17 or 16, and we know for damn sure he wasn't in 18. So the closest he was sitting is row 15. 

Nevertheless, what other "elderly" man was sitting anywhere near Bill? And perhaps he was no longer drunk by the time they landed. Saying he had to go pee isn't evidence that he was still drunk.

If it wasn't for Bill saying "elderly", I might still stick with Labisonniere. His 302 sounds a bit more drunk and off than Gregory's. 

And it's only "wild speculation" when you disagree with it. It's deduction. Wild speculation is inventing out of whole cloth a Cossey statement to the FBI that never happened because you want your own invented narrative on something to work. 

[FLYJACK 727]

9 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

I'm not completely convinced Gregory was in 17 (more likely Spreckel was in 17C or 16C) for the same reason you are saying. If Gregory didn't move up when the passengers asked, then he's not in 16 either. It appears that everyone behind row 14 was asked to move up if Flo went and stood at row 15. They said they moved the closest four rows up. So he's not in 17 or 16, and we know for damn sure he wasn't in 18. So the closest he was sitting is row 15. 

Nevertheless, what other "elderly" man was sitting anywhere near Bill? And perhaps he was no longer drunk by the time they landed. Saying he had to go pee isn't evidence that he was still drunk.

If it wasn't for Bill saying "elderly", I might still stick with Labisonniere. His 302 sounds a bit more drunk and off than Gregory's. 

And it's only "wild speculation" when you disagree with it. It's deduction. Wild speculation is inventing out of whole cloth a Cossey statement to the FBI that never happened because you want your own invented narrative on something to work. 

Cossey said he was contacted,,,  he had to have been before his in person meeting with the FBI.. We don't have the exact time/day but it had to have been before that meeting..  Cossey didn't just show up at the FBI office. You always make this error.. you assume that if something is NOT in the FBI files it didn't happen... 

But Gregory was not the drunk... I believe he was in row 16 aisle seat..  the FBI would have noticed if he was the drunk.

It is not deductive reasoning when you have the facts wrongs.

 

[olemisscub 521]

13 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

you assume that if something is NOT in the FBI files it didn't happen... 

 

Yes, I prefer actual data. 

[olemisscub 521]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

FBI.. 5'8" height is not sufficient to eliminate a suspect.

 

It's still a hell of an outlier. 5'8 for Cooper seems unlikely. 

[olemisscub 521]

26 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

I believe he was in row 16 aisle seat..

 

Couldn't have been. Three rows ahead of the hijacker were moved. Five passengers relocated. Flo stood by at Row 15. He'd have been behind Flo. Doesn't work. 

[FLYJACK 727]

18 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Yes, I prefer actual data. 

Sure, everybody prefer's..  but absence of evidence is NOT evidence..

Many times you claim something ISN'T true or CANNOT be true because it isn't in the files and would be if true.. 

This is not rational. I notice it is a recurring flaw in your logic.

[olemisscub 521]

9 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

but absence of evidence is NOT evidence..

 

this is literally what you did with your fictional Cossey statement. 

[FLYJACK 727]

22 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

It's still a hell of an outlier. 5'8 for Cooper seems unlikely. 

Williams and Lysne are just not reliable. They were not aware of the hijacker and said they not sure they could recognize him if seen again.

The Cooper case has a small sample size.. these are recall estimates, nobody measured Cooper's height.

Four male passengers had Cooper 5'9" - 5'10" seated.. Men are better at sizing up other males that women are. Just because he was seated doesn't mean they were all wrong.

 

The FBI used 5'8" as the lower bound probably because reported heights are not accurate in shoes or boots... self reported heights are almost always low.