snowmman 3
Recommended Posts
georger 256
Is Oxygen more important? This patent is talking about some specific rubbers, but it argues that Oxygen is a primary requirement. (and by removing it, aids preservation)
Short answer YES. Less O2 longer storage life.
More O2 and especially O+ (as in UV situation)
shorter lifetime to the molecular bonds and
the latex begins forming crystals. Literally dries
out, as it were, a reverts to a crystalline state.
You posted the paper preservation article long ago
but it explained the phenominon in water burial.
Cold low oxy water best. Would preserve everything
longer especially if blocks of money are encased in sediment keeping oxygen away.
If we could put Cooper's corpse in the slough even
at the south end of Catapillar Island, I could buy this whole scenario of Tina Bar, and the discovery of remnants 10 years later right at Tina Bar. You would expect exactly that ... or nothing, ie. everything
decayed and washed out into the Columbia and gone.
But! Tosaw etal explored and dragged this whole area immediately after Feb 1980 and found NOTHING. My impression is Tosaw was greatly surprised at this negative result... because he was
connecting Tina Bar with Catapillar Island also.
Is it possible the currents are so stiff at Catapillar
Island that by 1980 only a remnant of cash was
left, and upstream at Tina Bar? That may be what's
going on.
The river bed photos you posted at Catapillar Island
are remarkably clean of debris, to me. Your friend at
Catapillar Island would definately have an opinion
about all of this -
377 22
QuoteThe canopy will act differently in high wind? (I'm thinking of the extreme case of the horizontally deployed canopy out of the 727)
So: the question is: for a C-9 in high wind, does it's descent rate change? Or is it the same as it is in no-wind. Heck if you get some wind blowing up into the chute, I would think you get a lift effect? Has anyone ever felt like they descended slower? (not just talking about horizontal velocity due to wind)
Snow,
From my canopy (and one balloon flight) experience and what I remember from my physics classes there is no difference in canopy performance in high or low winds once the canopy relative speed imparted by freefall or plane exit bleeds off. After that, you cannot tell if you are in zero wind or high wind as the canopy is drifting with the wind. You can see this effect riding in a hot air balloon. You can be in a high wind but there is no wind relative to the balloon. Near terrain you get turbulence and flow gradients that disturb things, but at a high altitude AGL in a steady wind you'd have no differences in canopy performance over a zero wind condition.
If I am wrong, chime in. Pilots frequenly debate a similar question and get pissed off at each other arguing. They argue about whether you lose more altitude (or have a higher stall speed) in a downwind turn than an upwind turn. I say they are the same if you are talking about airpseed, not ground speed.
In thermals or other updrafts you can go up under an inflated canopy. I have done that a few times.
377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
snowmman 3
"The river bed photos you posted at Catapillar Island
are remarkably clean of debris, to me. Your friend at
Catapillar Island would definately have an opinion
about all of this - "
I don't think he labelled each pic exactly on location.
He lived there, so you would think it would be "close"
He did remark on his web page that the Columbia was pretty much the same everywhere in his travels.
So while that's all a little fuzzy, I think it does suggest the photos are representative, at least of the main Columbia area.
We don't have any better info, in any case.
The Caterpillar Slough might be slightly different, since there is hardly any water velocity there?
are remarkably clean of debris, to me. Your friend at
Catapillar Island would definately have an opinion
about all of this - "
I don't think he labelled each pic exactly on location.
He lived there, so you would think it would be "close"
He did remark on his web page that the Columbia was pretty much the same everywhere in his travels.
So while that's all a little fuzzy, I think it does suggest the photos are representative, at least of the main Columbia area.
We don't have any better info, in any case.
The Caterpillar Slough might be slightly different, since there is hardly any water velocity there?
snowmman 3
the money bag may have travelled like neither logs nor sand.
I've read about how bottles collect in eddies. That must mean they travel along the river bottom.
The money bag may have travelled along the relatively clean river bottom.
If so, it's likely it would move in the high velocity channel..(i.e. if it's moving, then it is more likely to be in high velocity)
So that might help point to "why Tena Bar"...you needed a high velocity channel that whacks up against a beach...for the money bag to travel along the bottom. (like bottles, say)
I've read about how bottles collect in eddies. That must mean they travel along the river bottom.
The money bag may have travelled along the relatively clean river bottom.
If so, it's likely it would move in the high velocity channel..(i.e. if it's moving, then it is more likely to be in high velocity)
So that might help point to "why Tena Bar"...you needed a high velocity channel that whacks up against a beach...for the money bag to travel along the bottom. (like bottles, say)
snowmman 3
Sluggo highlighted this a while back from the waymarking site.
georger's questions recently about debris ON Tena Bar just reminded me of it.
Someone supposedly walked on Tena Bar, and took this photo
http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=34aa42a3-7aa7-4874-8d5c-81786362f858
I just looked at it again, and there's some big driftwood on it.
This is the sign and gate photo. I think with the recent GE images, I might be able to identify the location of this sign and gate
http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=f0a705e8-d63a-4600-a4e6-9ae7febe4b12
I think the gate is the center here in Google Maps
i.e. 45.716817,-122.75964
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=45.716817,-122.75964&sll=45.716817,-122.759648&sspn=0.000601,0.000841&gl=us&ie=UTF8&ll=45.716817,-122.75964&spn=0.000601,0.000841&t=h&z=20&iwloc=addr
In fact, I think the bench you can see in the distance in the waymarking Tena Bar sign photo, is visible here in Google maps
(I've got a label near it)
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=45.717104,-122.75969&sll=45.717104,-122.75969&sspn=0.000574,0.000841&gl=us&ie=UTF8&ll=45.717104,-122.75969&spn=0.000574,0.000841&t=h&z=20
georger's questions recently about debris ON Tena Bar just reminded me of it.
Someone supposedly walked on Tena Bar, and took this photo
http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=34aa42a3-7aa7-4874-8d5c-81786362f858
I just looked at it again, and there's some big driftwood on it.
This is the sign and gate photo. I think with the recent GE images, I might be able to identify the location of this sign and gate
http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=f0a705e8-d63a-4600-a4e6-9ae7febe4b12
I think the gate is the center here in Google Maps
i.e. 45.716817,-122.75964
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=45.716817,-122.75964&sll=45.716817,-122.759648&sspn=0.000601,0.000841&gl=us&ie=UTF8&ll=45.716817,-122.75964&spn=0.000601,0.000841&t=h&z=20&iwloc=addr
In fact, I think the bench you can see in the distance in the waymarking Tena Bar sign photo, is visible here in Google maps
(I've got a label near it)
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=45.717104,-122.75969&sll=45.717104,-122.75969&sspn=0.000574,0.000841&gl=us&ie=UTF8&ll=45.717104,-122.75969&spn=0.000574,0.000841&t=h&z=20
That is not how it looked in 2001.
The house was oblong and the front of the house faced the road not the river. The backyard was large had a fence around it.
The parking lot was to the East of the house - at least 100 yds. The parking lot was there about 120 yds from the house - it was gravel - it was a small lot. You walked toward the river in the parking lot and there was a gate. Thru that gate was a roadway or walk way down to the river. From the gate area it was much higher than the river - you could look down at at the tree line and the lower fence. Then past the fence and the tree line several feet away was the river. It was obvious the river had been up to the fence line.
Himmelsbach asked him about a flood and the water. I don't remember the man's answer or if I paid attention. I cannot swear to what the answer was so I won't try.
What I do know is that the picture I just looked at IS not the Fazion home that was there in 2001 and the demographics are different. Remember I was raise on a farm.
The house was oblong and the front of the house faced the road not the river. The backyard was large had a fence around it.
The parking lot was to the East of the house - at least 100 yds. The parking lot was there about 120 yds from the house - it was gravel - it was a small lot. You walked toward the river in the parking lot and there was a gate. Thru that gate was a roadway or walk way down to the river. From the gate area it was much higher than the river - you could look down at at the tree line and the lower fence. Then past the fence and the tree line several feet away was the river. It was obvious the river had been up to the fence line.
Himmelsbach asked him about a flood and the water. I don't remember the man's answer or if I paid attention. I cannot swear to what the answer was so I won't try.
What I do know is that the picture I just looked at IS not the Fazion home that was there in 2001 and the demographics are different. Remember I was raise on a farm.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber
i agree with 377. but if i recall , the canopy cossey supplied in the nb6 was unmodified(?). if that is the case, the canopy will oscillate quite a bit. and that could could affect rate of descent.it could even change the direction the canopy is drifting in to some degree(mostly in VERY lite to no wind conditions)
I give up - this is what Snowmman and Georger were sent here to do - to bury the truth in so much technology that no one would ever see the truth. Those pictures of the Fazion home are not as they appeared in 2001. There were buildings to the East of the parking lot - but back further from the river - there were trucks there.
The road went in front of the Fazio Home - not beside it or behind it.
By infront I mean to the north of it. I did not have a compass with me so I don't know if it was directly North (as I am sure someone will pipe and and say that the river was xx from xx from xx and North of this or that.
A couple of yrs ago a friend went out to the Fazio farm and told me that things had changed a lots.
I have to assume that a new home was constructed since 2001 and that the road has changed. Also that more and new buildings have been built.
If you want to contradict my word use a map made prior to May of 2001.
The road went in front of the Fazio Home - not beside it or behind it.
By infront I mean to the north of it. I did not have a compass with me so I don't know if it was directly North (as I am sure someone will pipe and and say that the river was xx from xx from xx and North of this or that.
A couple of yrs ago a friend went out to the Fazio farm and told me that things had changed a lots.
I have to assume that a new home was constructed since 2001 and that the road has changed. Also that more and new buildings have been built.
If you want to contradict my word use a map made prior to May of 2001.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber
Orange1 0
QuoteI give up - this is what Snowmman and Georger were sent here to do - to bury the truth in so much technology that no one would ever see the truth.
Ah, now we have "technology" included in the Great Conspiracy Theory to Hide The Truth? Does Google Earth know they have been co-opted, do you think?
Jo, I don't know a single person who has looked at something on Google Earth that they know and said it was wrong - but thre are sometimes changes in things depending on when the images were captured. Even down here, our house, our dropzone etc are all there and all accurate. Are you sure you went to the place you think you did? Are you sure your memory is accurate?
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.
georger 256
In the Google Earth photo of my house, you can see my son outside. It's from summer 2007..very recent. And it's correct because you can see things I changed in 2006.
We were saying we should leave a sign on the grass for the google satellites. People are actually doing that, in different places around the world.
We were saying we should leave a sign on the grass for the google satellites. People are actually doing that, in different places around the world.
or a LOST sign on the roof, like one of my sons
had for a while!
If Jo doesnt come with an ID I will email the Fazio photo for id.
georger 256
Quotethe money bag may have travelled like neither logs nor sand.
I've read about how bottles collect in eddies. That must mean they travel along the river bottom.
The money bag may have travelled along the relatively clean river bottom.
If so, it's likely it would move in the high velocity channel..(i.e. if it's moving, then it is more likely to be in high velocity)
So that might help point to "why Tena Bar"...you needed a high velocity channel that whacks up against a beach...for the money bag to travel along the bottom. (like bottles, say)
if the money (in a bag?) rolled up on a beach
something had to restrain it from washing back in ....
I am still completely unclear where on the beachfront the money was. Ckret's penciled circles
are close to the water's edge, just as Denise's
mother said ???
snowmman 3
QuoteQuoteI give up - this is what Snowmman and Georger were sent here to do - to bury the truth in so much technology that no one would ever see the truth.
It is kind of unbelievable that Jo thinks her foggy memory is something people should just believe. I mean my guess at the house might be wrong. There are a lot of buildings there.
But there's no way we're wrong on the location. There is a building up right near the main road, but I don't think that's the "home". It doesn't appear there is a separate address for home vs the Fazio sand operation. Both use 12112 NW Lower River Rd. Vancouver, WA.
Just reviewing everything:
first: what I'm calling a cow feeding area in that field:
Okay looking at the '70 and '74 Ckret photos, the apparent cow feeding area in the field right next to the money find location, isn't there yet. In the '79 photo, it is there.
But the '90 GE image is more clear, and doesn't have it..maybe it was temporary. By 2002 the images are a lot better, and it's obviously a cow feeding station. In fact looking at it again, it almost looks like both fields used for cows near the Columbia, have runoff areas to collect water/waste before it can hit the Columbia?
2) The new building that's just east of this field. It wasn't there in '71.
The 2000 GE image has it.
That new building is the reference point for the money find location. It appeared sometime between 1990 and 2000. It wasn't in the 1990 pic or Ckret's pics.
3) What building is the Fazio home? There's some buildings up farther N by the cow field past the N sand operation. But they're metal roofed, and I don't see any cars there. Don't think that's the home. Unless maybe the actual home is farther up the road and on the other side of the road. There's a house up there.
4) Correlating everything:
We were initially saying the money was found a little more South on the beach, closer to where the channel comes out around caterpillar island.
I revised it up N a bit, just past the sand operation, based on Ckret's photos that had circles in what appeared to be the right place (all 3 photos had circles in close to the same area).
Ckret never ID'ed the circles, I think just cause he didn't know.
But they were very likely the precise money find location.
I had zoomed in and compared all 3 to the current GE and created the montage.
Georger posted that montage again just recently. The metal roofed houses are East of that. The one metal roofed building in the rectangular field is used as a reference. (what I called the "new" building that appeared between 1990 and 2000.)
My ID of the location of the gate and the bench, from the feet on the ground picture of the Tena Bar sign and bench, I think is accurate.
I'm not sure what else I could do.
When you punch "12112 NW Lower River Rd., Vancouver, WA" into google, it gives a location centered in a field just E of the Sand operation driveway. I think that fuzziness is just because it's such a rural location. not as precise address ->lat./long as google typically does.
Okay I'll compare some online geocoders for 12112 NW Lower River Rd, Vancouver, WA
using this site/url
http://stevemorse.org/jcal/latlon.php?cookie=&hidden=&doextra=&time=1233900191647&addr2latlon=1&address=12112+NW+Lower+River+Rd&city=vancouver&state=wa&zip=&country=US&latlon2addr=0&latitude=&longitude=
Google: 45.71353 -122.752697
terraserver: 45.71478000 -122.75654300
The terraserver lat/long is just about dead on, for the driveway off the main road. I attached a snap showing that location.
The google lat/long for that address is off E a bit in the field, as I say.
georger 256
QuoteSluggo highlighted this a while back from the waymarking site.
georger's questions recently about debris ON Tena Bar just reminded me of it.
Someone supposedly walked on Tena Bar, and took this photo
http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=34aa42a3-7aa7-4874-8d5c-81786362f858
I just looked at it again, and there's some big driftwood on it.
This is the sign and gate photo. I think with the recent GE images, I might be able to identify the location of this sign and gate
http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=f0a705e8-d63a-4600-a4e6-9ae7febe4b12
I think the gate is the center here in Google Maps
i.e. 45.716817,-122.75964
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=45.716817,-122.75964&sll=45.716817,-122.759648&sspn=0.000601,0.000841&gl=us&ie=UTF8&ll=45.716817,-122.75964&spn=0.000601,0.000841&t=h&z=20&iwloc=addr
In fact, I think the bench you can see in the distance in the waymarking Tena Bar sign photo, is visible here in Google maps
(I've got a label near it)
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=45.717104,-122.75969&sll=45.717104,-122.75969&sspn=0.000574,0.000841&gl=us&ie=UTF8&ll=45.717104,-122.75969&spn=0.000574,0.000841&t=h&z=20
I cannot get Google up tonight - must be having
problems. You last link to Catapillar provides a
superb all-around view. And a new thought struck.
If in a flood (like a tidal surge) there was significant
outward pressure to the sides of the main channel,
then an object entering the right side flow after the
curve might actually 'bankshot' up against and ride
along the outside shoreline of Catapillar island ...
and be piped by this action right onto Tina Bar. ?
I have focused on the inside channel at Catapilalr Isle before - now Im focusing on the outside edge
as a pressure route to Tina Bar ?
snowmman 3
"I have focused on the inside channel at Catapilalr Isle before - now Im focusing on the outside edge
as a pressure route to Tina Bar ? "
That makes sense. I think I remember seeing nav charts from the '70s, and it was deep right by Tina Bar back then also. Note it's not deep by Caterpillar Island.
What's interesting is that they label the main "channel" as on the west side of the river still in this area. They label the east side of the river "anchorage"
Note where they label the "Morgan Turn"
Maybe that's the key point where the water flow turns.
(attached)
But the depth of the water, so close to shore, must be an indication of high velocity water?
I think that's what's interesting. The water flow just off Tena Bar, is different than the water flow just off Caterpillar Island.
as a pressure route to Tina Bar ? "
That makes sense. I think I remember seeing nav charts from the '70s, and it was deep right by Tina Bar back then also. Note it's not deep by Caterpillar Island.
What's interesting is that they label the main "channel" as on the west side of the river still in this area. They label the east side of the river "anchorage"
Note where they label the "Morgan Turn"
Maybe that's the key point where the water flow turns.
(attached)
But the depth of the water, so close to shore, must be an indication of high velocity water?
I think that's what's interesting. The water flow just off Tena Bar, is different than the water flow just off Caterpillar Island.
So you can look and zoom/pan around without installing GE.
Here's the link, centered on the Fazio house I'm talking about:
http://maps.google.com/maps?&oe=utf-8&ie=UTF8&split=0&gl=us&ei=PomLSbT8FYHwsAOS1MmjBQ&ll=45.716019,-122.757986&spn=0.000697,0.000841&t=h&z=20
(edit) If you pan a little to the SE, you can see he's got a green John Deere tractor? And a lot of sand? trucks there to the N.
(edit) Nice pic of Mt. St. Helens from Vancouver Lake. Didn't realize it looked so big from there! has snow on it in this pic. (even though summer at Vancouver Lake?)
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/3058369
(edit) another view of the floating houses in Caterpillar Slough
(with location on google maps for reference
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/11796597
(edit) a nice panoramic shot showing the scale of vancouver lake with location on google maps for reference
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/1894309
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites