DB Cooper

[377 22]

Quote

Even if Duane knew WA like the back of his hand
that still does not prove Cooper was Duane, so what
has any of this to do with Cooper?

It amazes me that Jo can't see this glaring lack in causal connections and holes in her logic. She really truly does not see it. There is a stuck logic gate or relay. I used to think if I just reasoned with her she'd see the faults in her logic. No way.

She takes an absence of a proved negative as a positive and that's just the beginning. It drives me nuts but I am learning to just accept it and accept Jo even with her wild claiming and total lack of evidence.

377

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[Farflung 0]

Those red flashing lights on radio towers make quite the beacon in rural areas. It may seem logical to consider such units for navigation of some type.

Unlike their maritime counterparts, the flash or pulse sequence is not tied to any identification code. Bennett Peak flashes once every 4 seconds where Mount Eagle flashes every 6 seconds. The reason being, they are not for navigation but collision avoidance.

Secondly collision avoidance and navigation lighting in aviation are mutually exclusive. In order for a tower to obtain a permit for construction they must get approval from the FAA and validate the structure will not be a hazard to flight prior to construction.

In order to form a more perfect union the FAA also governs the type of lighting mounted on obstacles. Among the many parameters specified is the horizontal beamwidth. An omni-directional light would waste a great deal of power by lighting the structures wall or propagating skyward where aircraft are well clear of the hazard. Generally speaking, the horizontal beamwidth is oriented at zero to plus eight degrees in width.

This makes for a more focused and intense beam if you were flying towards the hazard and at an altitude which could facilitate a collision.

Conversely, at altitude, the light beam suppression would make it difficult to see from an overhead perspective. This combined with a lack of identification features and a way to triangulate if one could identify them render their value as aids to navigation as extremely limited if not valueless.

A far more precise method would be through the use of TOT (time over target) by controlling airspeed, limiting nav leg distance and using a watch.

If there was lighting used for identification, the various airports with HIRL, sequence flashers and strobes would make for a better solution as these are large, in the path of aviation and designed for aircraft to see at altitude.

[happythoughts 0]

Info previously posted:

Quote

"The weather: Ceiling of 5,000 feet, broken clouds at 3,500, scattered clouds at 1,500. Winds of 12 to 14 knots, light rain showers."

It seems that there were 3 layers of clouds and some
light rain.

Someone with pilot experience should throw in a guess
as to the value of any ground lights for identifying a location (while going 200mph).

[snowmman 3]

Quote

Quote

Georger intoned "The Internet as you describe it wont even be here
in another ten years, ..... or less! And corporations
and advertisers are spending billions/trillions accomodating to that fact, as I write. "

I'm supposed to care about industry and advertisers?
why?

Be nice if they fail. Change is good.

Problem is: They won't fail!

So you're wrong Georger.

The thing to worry about, is loss of individualism..i.e. globalization.

Declare war!

(edit) What you're really worried about is the lower value of self-perceived experts.

Experts were never really as expert as they told us they were.

That's the problem!

You're the primary user. Blah blah blah blah blah

I love it when people use something [internet] to complain about something [internet]

It's the classic old fart complaint.

Everything is broken! It was better in my day!
Anything new is worse and I know because XYZ!

If the internet is broke, georger, stop using it.

Your automobile, and airplanes, are more broke than the internet.

Or the US economy!

Actually, the problem is that the US doesn't matter for the internet. That's probably your real complaint. You quoted stats for the areas that don't matter.

(why did you pick those stats? Why not other stats?)

[snowmman 3]

Farflung said "In order for a tower to obtain a permit for construction they must get approval from the FAA and validate the structure will not be a hazard to flight prior to construction."

If you're not in the protected airspace around a airport or heliport, you can go to 200' above ground without painting or lights.

(at least currently)

You don't need to get approval from FAA for all towers.
FAA doesn't have jurisdiction over radio towers (in US). FCC does. FCC requires FAA notification for towers over 200' or in the protected airspace.

Local jurisdictions have various building codes or permit systems that may come into play.

(edit) some details for close to airports (as of 2002)
http://copyrightroyalties.com/TT0502.pdf

[Sluggo_Monster 0]

1969912 said:

Quote

Larch Mountain (~3.4K foot) had antenna tower on it in 1980, and the tower had lights. I climbed it at the time to add an antenna while working for Vel Communications in Vancouver. IIRC, the Clark County SO repeaters were located there. It's ~10 miles E of Orchards.

The 1954 Camas 15 min. map [attached] shows a lookout tower. I do not know if it had lights on it or not. 1954 was the most recent map in 1971.

The most recent Larch Mountain 7.5 min map (I don’t know the year and I’m too lazy to look it up) [also attached], shows no lookout tower but some radio towers. They surely have lights.



[Addendum]:
Okay… I got un-lazy the Larch Mountain Map is from 1984 (Provisional Edition)

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

[snowmman 3]

Well now we have some useful posts!

1) Here's a photo of Larch Mountain taken from Washougal in 2003

a bunch more nice pictures (probably used some serious lens action since they look way too close?)

2) View of the Columbia River Valley and Mount Adams from Larch Mountain, Oregon. Image taken October 11, 2004.

3) Mount Rainier, Washington, from Larch Mountain, Oregon. Image taken October 11, 2004.

4) Mount St. Helens, Washington, from Larch Mountain, Oregon. Steam and ash are visible from the crater and drifting east. Image taken October 11, 2004.

5) Mount Adams, Washington, from Larch Mountain, Oregon. Image taken October 11, 2004.

6) Mount Hood, Oregon, from Larch Mountain, Oregon. Image taken August 3, 2008

7) Mount Jefferson, Oregon, from Larch Mountain, Oregon. Image taken October 11, 2004.

[snowmman 3]

4.5 Mbytes but kind of fun.
The actual engineering drawings used to build the 1940 tower there
(bolted timbers)

http://www.fs.fed.us/database/acad/lt/LT_MTHOOD_Larch_MTN_Lookout_Tower_1940.pdf

looks like it was 100' tall? pretty impressive back then.

[snowmman 3]

[snowmman 3]

Jo will like this.

This is a picture of Duane working near a side camp near Larch Mountain around 1942.
from http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ohq/107.4/davis.html

COs at Camp 21 line up to be loaded onto trucks and transported to their work for the Forest Service. Other Camp 21 COs worked from a side camp on Larch Mountain.

Lewis & Clark College Special Collections, Blocher D62

It was common to wear black ties and white shirts while using a shovel then. See photo.

[snowmman 3]

from http://www.flickr.com/photos/victorvonsalza/3955676122/

nice photo. Even georger will appreciate the stars

city lights seem relatively close.

[snowmman 3]

(edit) using the lat/long attached a sat photo (overhead) of the tower from 2005. There is a shadow, so you can guess the height
Looks like two towers (confirming the snow picture above?)

Current Larch Mountain tower might only be 43M tall?

might not need lights? (<200 ft)

http://www.city-data.com/towers/other-Camas-Washington.html

STATION, Larch Mtn 10.13 Mi Nne (Lat: 45.717056 Lon: -122.295639), Overall height: 42.7 m, Call Sign: WNTH364
Assigned Frequencies : 953.150 MHz
Grant Date: 10/24/2000, Expiration Date: 06/01/2010

Larch Mountain, Larch Mountain (Lat: 45.716778 Lon: -122.295639), Type: Tower, Structure height: 42.7 m, Call Sign: WQAJ467
Assigned Frequencies : 6950.00 MHz
Grant Date: 06/14/2004, Expiration Date: 02/01/2015, Certifier: Guy H Kerr

Larch Mtn., WA, 10 Miles North Of Camas, Wa (Lat: 45.717056 Lon: -122.295639), Type: Tower, Structure height: 43 m, Call Sign: WQCJ353
Assigned Frequencies : 932.925 MHz, 933.025 MHz, 934.725 MHz
Grant Date: 03/16/2005, Expiration Date: 03/16/2015, Certifier: Brian Miner

[snowmman 3]

I posted the engineering drawings for the 1940 tower.
Here is more detail. It remained until 1976

there was another tower from 1915-1923

Beautiful photos of both attached, and the 1940's tower in 1964
You can see the 1945 picture matches the engineering drawings (the cabin on top was not in the engineering drawings, although I suspect that was a standard design, and might be on the site I posted)

The 1915 tower built on trees is freaking amazing!

from
http://www.firelookout.com/or/larchmtn.html
LARCH MOUNTAIN LOOKOUT
R.I.P. 1915-1923; 1940's-1976
Established in 1914 with a platform and cab atop two 90' fir trees, a 90' steel tower and a ground house replaced it in 1923. In the 1940's, a 100' treated timber L-4 tower was built with a tourist observation deck below the cab. The structure was removed in 1976.

Apparently when it was removed, one of the workers found a twenty dollar bill stuffed in a timber joint (between the steel plate and wood).

[snowmman 3]

Nice day photo, you can see the trees well

not sure of the year. maybe 2008, so wouldn't be from a tower?
from http://travel.webshots.com/photo/2880636350011412446hBEzTQ

Duane Weber could tell you everything about this area, sing you a song, buy a drink, and ..

(edit) interestingly, this may be in the same direction as the night sky photo above. It may be the most scenic direction? (i'm looking at the two volcanos for orientation. and probable city lights)

[georger 244]

Quote

Those red flashing lights on radio towers make quite the beacon in rural areas. It may seem logical to consider such units for navigation of some type.

Unlike their maritime counterparts, the flash or pulse sequence is not tied to any identification code. Bennett Peak flashes once every 4 seconds where Mount Eagle flashes every 6 seconds. The reason being, they are not for navigation but collision avoidance.

Secondly collision avoidance and navigation lighting in aviation are mutually exclusive. In order for a tower to obtain a permit for construction they must get approval from the FAA and validate the structure will not be a hazard to flight prior to construction.

In order to form a more perfect union the FAA also governs the type of lighting mounted on obstacles. Among the many parameters specified is the horizontal beamwidth. An omni-directional light would waste a great deal of power by lighting the structures wall or propagating skyward where aircraft are well clear of the hazard. Generally speaking, the horizontal beamwidth is oriented at zero to plus eight degrees in width.

This makes for a more focused and intense beam if you were flying towards the hazard and at an altitude which could facilitate a collision.

Conversely, at altitude, the light beam suppression would make it difficult to see from an overhead perspective. This combined with a lack of identification features and a way to triangulate if one could identify them render their value as aids to navigation as extremely limited if not valueless.

Exactly. So they would be hard to see from above
at 10k feet? I almost posted about this but Im golad
I didnt. You have the facts and facts are what counts - Great Job.

This could account for why Sluggo has never seen/
noticed these tower lights from the air?

Now if Duane was as SMART and INFORMED AS jO
CLAIMS HE WAS, WHY DIDNT HE KNOW THIS?

Once again Jo is trapped by her own petard.

[georger 244]

Quote

Farflung said "In order for a tower to obtain a permit for construction they must get approval from the FAA and validate the structure will not be a hazard to flight prior to construction."

If you're not in the protected airspace around a airport or heliport, you can go to 200' above ground without painting or lights.

(at least currently)

You don't need to get approval from FAA for all towers.
FAA doesn't have jurisdiction over radio towers (in US). FCC does. FCC requires FAA notification for towers over 200' or in the protected airspace.

Local jurisdictions have various building codes or permit systems that may come into play.

(edit) some details for close to airports (as of 2002)
http://copyrightroyalties.com/TT0502.pdf

all theoretical -

just try erecting a tower 100ft or higher and see what
happens!

Do you consult and rely on the Internet to buy Charmin?

[skyjack71 0]

Below MY CLEAN UP of Georgers nast insulting post:

Dear Jo:
Thanks for your listing of towers and lights. We will now apply that to the real Cooper case.

Keep up the good work!

Georger

Georger if you are so smart and so rich why do you take so much pleasure out of demeaning women. After I cleaned out all of your insults your post was half decent.

Why can't you be a nice man?
Since you are working with a writer then I imagine you will apply all of the towers and lights to another suspect. What is your investment in the Cooper saga besides being an old hard ass with time on his hands. Since you are supposed to be so RICH it definitely would not be money.

Are you not capable of normal relationships and giving credit to others when due without throwing in insults? You are NOT a nice man.

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[snowmman 3]

Quote

Quote

Farflung said "In order for a tower to obtain a permit for construction they must get approval from the FAA and validate the structure will not be a hazard to flight prior to construction."

If you're not in the protected airspace around a airport or heliport, you can go to 200' above ground without painting or lights.

(at least currently)

You don't need to get approval from FAA for all towers.
FAA doesn't have jurisdiction over radio towers (in US). FCC does. FCC requires FAA notification for towers over 200' or in the protected airspace.

Local jurisdictions have various building codes or permit systems that may come into play.

(edit) some details for close to airports (as of 2002)
http://copyrightroyalties.com/TT0502.pdf

all theoretical -

just try erecting a tower 100ft or higher and see what
happens!

Do you consult and rely on the Internet to buy Charmin?

Hi Georger, your post is a good example of a dumbass.

So you're telling me you've erected 100' towers? 25g guyed I expect? Let's hear the details.

Another reference for the dumbass known as Georger.
http://books.google.com/books?id=EcbjKvhgPLsC&pg=PT56&lpg=PT56&dq=arrl+200%27+tower&source=bl&ots=0H-EP5uVJl&sig=i0dmtmAFkHWIm3tkLJ8Zr49B7Fo&hl=en&ei=-n1BS6vHDoLosQPiopTBBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=&f=false

[snowmman 3]

Quote

Quote

Those red flashing lights on radio towers make quite the beacon in rural areas. It may seem logical to consider such units for navigation of some type.

Unlike their maritime counterparts, the flash or pulse sequence is not tied to any identification code. Bennett Peak flashes once every 4 seconds where Mount Eagle flashes every 6 seconds. The reason being, they are not for navigation but collision avoidance.

Secondly collision avoidance and navigation lighting in aviation are mutually exclusive. In order for a tower to obtain a permit for construction they must get approval from the FAA and validate the structure will not be a hazard to flight prior to construction.

In order to form a more perfect union the FAA also governs the type of lighting mounted on obstacles. Among the many parameters specified is the horizontal beamwidth. An omni-directional light would waste a great deal of power by lighting the structures wall or propagating skyward where aircraft are well clear of the hazard. Generally speaking, the horizontal beamwidth is oriented at zero to plus eight degrees in width.

This makes for a more focused and intense beam if you were flying towards the hazard and at an altitude which could facilitate a collision.

Conversely, at altitude, the light beam suppression would make it difficult to see from an overhead perspective. This combined with a lack of identification features and a way to triangulate if one could identify them render their value as aids to navigation as extremely limited if not valueless.

Exactly. So they would be hard to see from above
at 10k feet? I almost posted about this but Im golad
I didnt. You have the facts and facts are what counts - Great Job.

This could account for why Sluggo has never seen/
noticed these tower lights from the air?

Now if Duane was as SMART and INFORMED AS jO
CLAIMS HE WAS, WHY DIDNT HE KNOW THIS?

Once again Jo is trapped by her own petard.

What friggin tower lights are people talking about? Has anyone posted a picture of a tower with lights along the path we're discussing?

Is someone saying there were lights on the Larch Mtn towers?
I'm not even sure the current 43M (141 ft) towers have lights?

Do they?

(edit) OH! I get it..You two guys are still talking about Jo Weber.

Yes of course Duane Weber was Cooper after all.

It's so funny, you guys love Jo Weber.

[georger 244]

Quote

Below MY CLEAN UP of Georgers nast insulting post:

Dear Jo:
Thanks for your listing of towers and lights. We will now apply that to the real Cooper case.

Keep up the good work!

Georger

Georger if you are so smart and so rich why do you take so much pleasure out of demeaning women. After I cleaned out all of your insults your post was half decent.

Why can't you be a nice man?
Since you are working with a writer then I imagine you will apply all of the towers and lights to another suspect. What is your investment in the Cooper saga besides being an old hard ass with time on his hands. Since you are supposed to be so RICH it definitely would not be money.

Are you not capable of normal relationships and giving credit to others when due without throwing in insults? You are NOT a nice man.

attached -

[snowmman 3]

"For 'tis the sport to have the enginer / Hoist with his owne petar"


Cooper was an ADD engineer. This may have relevance.

[georger 244]

Hi Georger, your post is a good example of a dumbass.

So you're telling me you've erected 100' towers? 25g guyed I expect? Let's hear the details.

[georger 244]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Those red flashing lights on radio towers make quite the beacon in rural areas. It may seem logical to consider such units for navigation of some type.

Unlike their maritime counterparts, the flash or pulse sequence is not tied to any identification code. Bennett Peak flashes once every 4 seconds where Mount Eagle flashes every 6 seconds. The reason being, they are not for navigation but collision avoidance.

Secondly collision avoidance and navigation lighting in aviation are mutually exclusive. In order for a tower to obtain a permit for construction they must get approval from the FAA and validate the structure will not be a hazard to flight prior to construction.

In order to form a more perfect union the FAA also governs the type of lighting mounted on obstacles. Among the many parameters specified is the horizontal beamwidth. An omni-directional light would waste a great deal of power by lighting the structures wall or propagating skyward where aircraft are well clear of the hazard. Generally speaking, the horizontal beamwidth is oriented at zero to plus eight degrees in width.

This makes for a more focused and intense beam if you were flying towards the hazard and at an altitude which could facilitate a collision.

Conversely, at altitude, the light beam suppression would make it difficult to see from an overhead perspective. This combined with a lack of identification features and a way to triangulate if one could identify them render their value as aids to navigation as extremely limited if not valueless.

Exactly. So they would be hard to see from above
at 10k feet? I almost posted about this but Im golad
I didnt. You have the facts and facts are what counts - Great Job.

This could account for why Sluggo has never seen/
noticed these tower lights from the air?

Now if Duane was as SMART and INFORMED AS jO
CLAIMS HE WAS, WHY DIDNT HE KNOW THIS?

Once again Jo is trapped by her own petard.

What friggin tower lights are people talking about? Has anyone posted a picture of a tower with lights along the path we're discussing?

Is someone saying there were lights on the Larch Mtn towers?
I'm not even sure the current 43M (141 ft) towers have lights?

Do they?

(edit) OH! I get it..You two guys are still talking about Jo Weber.

Yes of course Duane Weber was Cooper after all.

It's so funny, you guys love Jo Weber.

uhhhhhhh, Jo is saying so - read her posts?
now who'se the dumbass?

[snowmman 3]

Quote

not me personally but the family has - tallest structure in one county ... had to have FAA approval
from the first blueprint. But that was clear back in
the 60s ...

Grow up Potato Boy!

Hi Dumbass.
The story of your life.
You do nothing, but you know people who have done something.
Like your Tosaw shit.

I can talk about towers. I have two 80' towers (including mast) and just poured the base for another 60'-er.

So I can't talk about towers unless I know someone who knows someone who put up a 100' tower?

You know the problem with the internet Georger? Look in the mirror.

[georger 244]

Quote

Quote

not me personally but the family has - tallest structure in one county ... had to have FAA approval
from the first blueprint. But that was clear back in
the 60s ...

Grow up Potato Boy!

Hi Dumbass.
The story of your life.
You do nothing, but you know people who have done something.
Like your Tosaw shit.

I can talk about towers. I have two 80' towers (including mast) and just poured the base for another 60'-er.

So I can't talk about towers unless I know someone who knows someone who put up a 100' tower?

You know the problem with the internet Georger? Look in the mirror.

Your towers are hobby towers. Guy up the road from me has 12 towers - antenna farm. So? What's ur point, Pudknocker? Im talking about commercial grade towers but screw towers - buildings are what matters. Ever seen some of the large grain elevators
in Nebraska? I could put all of your fucking towers in one silo. and you too!