dudeman17

I'm not sure about that... Some of those round reserves were steerable. They wouldn't maneuver quite as well as a main, but they did have control. And I don't know if the info on the packing card would have told him whether or not it was. The reserves are smaller, a bit higher rate of descent, but if he was trained and had a good PLF, Parachute Landing Fall, a specific way to land and absorb the impact, he might have thought he'd be ok.

Well I thought I answered that in my post above the one you quoted. It depends on his experience, if any... And it wouldn't take opening it, the packed rig would be apparent. Mains are generally bulkier than bailout rigs, the container design is often a bit different, on mains the ripcord is usually on the right side whereas on bailout rigs they're usually on the left, mains have the D-rings, bailout rigs don't, mains don't have seals or packing cards... The NWA or FBI people procuring the rigs probably don't have any idea about the differences, they're just grabbing what they can get. When they tell Emrick they've got the backs, he probably knows they've got bailout rigs, but he probably doesn't say anything lest they ask him for more. Which again, might explain the dummy reserve. There's no way in hell Emrick doesn't know that training aid from a real one.

Oh geez. pa deleted I'd hate to guess whether your eyes are red or brown. I am not 'incredibly angry' about anything. Nothing on this site is important enough to me to piss me off. It's more like opening the newspaper to the comics page. I am somewhat fascinated by the insistent dishonesty among many people these days, and it's sometimes amusing to give them guff about it and watch them double down and triple down on their lies. It's also amusing on a skydive forum site how many people have far more posts than jumps. One of you knows what you did. The other, well sadly it seems you actually believe your own balderdash. Oh well, carry on.

No it is not. If you had made a notation it would still be there and clearly it is not. And it never was, as evidenced by Wendy's observation. And you did not just edit out the problematic statement. You changed the statement and worded it and left it as I described. That's not what I 'believe', that is objective fact. And here you are lying about it again. If your credibility means nothing to you, I guess that's good to know. Thank you for sharing.

I know this is old, but I've been otherwise occupied for a while. And I could not care less about the original topic. But I had to laugh - In keeping with the thread theme of misleading and deceptive... No, no there was not. But don't take my word for it... If there was a problematic statement in my post, I believe the normal action would have been for you to remove that part, and make just such a notation - "Edited by [moderator] for [reasons]", which would still be there. But that is not what you did. At a time when you had yet to show yourself, when it was unclear if you were even aware that the site was back, you anonymously entered my post and changed a sentence, the effect of which was to essentially make the same personal attack against me, and word it in such a way and leave it so as to appear that I had written it that way myself. That was underhanded. And when I called you on that, you lied about it and issued me a warning, whatever that means. That's some honest and ethical moderating, mr.von. Who moderates you?

If that is true then that raises interesting questions. Cossey definitely knows the difference between mains and bailout rigs. If he tells them to call Boeing Field he knows that they're going to get bailout rigs and not mains. Is it possible that they discussed it and figured that if they gave Cooper bailout rigs that it might discourage him from actually jumping? It could explain why the dummy reserve was given. It would make the most sense to give him student rigs.

Would they know the difference between a main and a bailout rig? An experienced skydiver or jump pilot would definitely know the difference. A military paratrooper would probably / should know. A military aircrew might know, depending on what kind of training they received and how much interest they had. A private pilot with experience in the type of flying that requires a bailout rig might know, again how much training and interest. A total whuffo probably not but maybe. That's hard to say. My thought is that by that time he was committed. Was he going to complain and ask for better chutes? How long would that take? He was already concerned about time? And still being on the plane when it landed in Reno meant certain capture (or worse). My guess is that regardless of his experience or what he knew, he made do with what they gave him. A couple side notes: Some reserve type round canopies are steerable. But you'd have to be familiar with it, especially the four line release type. If his overcoat was the typical knee length type and he kept it on, it would be awkward getting the leg straps on right. Doable, but awkward.

Well if you're still the moderators then so be it. But like I said, that's an objective opinion, not an attack. And he's grown boy, I'm sure he can handle it and will have an equally snarky reply. If you disagree, then give me a warning or whatever you do. But to anonymously change a line in my post without noting it, which changes the meaning and tenor of my post and leaves it as though that is what I said, that is underhanded and you know it. Rest assured, I am done with this topic and this thread. (previous post edited) There, better? And if you want to delete these last four posts (after #26), that's fine with me.

Whoever took it upon themselves to anonymously edit my above post can take a flying flip at a rolling donut. Seriously, take your censorship and blow it out your hind side. Whoever put this site back up made no announcements, and the other used-to-be moderators don't even seem aware that it is here. So just because they did not change the settings does not give you the right to slanderously manipulate my post to your bias. What I said is not a personal attack, but an objective observation and my opinion. If yours differs, say so in your own words under your own name. Do not alter my post again.

That's pretty convoluted, son. Your goalposts move faster than the ones on the undersea football field. At this point it is apparent that you are too intentionally dishonest to converse with. Think what you wanna think because you're gonna anyhow.

Thanks for the heads up. This has become apparent.

And the hole you dig gets deeper. I'm not the one being misleading and deceptive. You said... and Which implies that it is 'nutso' and 'utterly insane' to consider such things as possible. And in the very post you deny saying it, you said it again... I suppose you could call that an opinion, but it sounds pretty absolute. Indeed, the whole purpose of the OP and your defending it is to denigrate the guy for considering it possible. That you would say that is face-palmed, head-shaken boggling. The article itself gives his evidence, and I have stated other evidence that is in the public record. Once again, to be clear, none of this means that I believe in space aliens or alien space craft. But there is enough evidence to at least consider the possibility. I never said that the guy was telling the truth. I just said that the OP was misleading, which it is. You, you're just lying.

I don't know what rock you've been under, but it is no secret that the government has been studying this issue for decades. In more recent years, congressional hearings with whistleblower testimony on the subject have been public and televised. The military has publicly released reports complete with video footage taken by fighter pilots of strange things flying around, including orb-like things flying at high speeds over the ocean and dipping in and out of the water. The government says they don't know what these things are. I don't know what they are and neither do you. Again, none of this means that I believe in space aliens. I'm content to leave it at I don't know, because I Don't Know. You are free to form your own opinions, even your own hopes. But if you think that you can define the answer by sheer force of will, you are deluding yourself. The tone of the OP post is not supported by it's own linked article. It is refuted by it. Therefore the tone of the OP statement is not only misleading, it is outright deceptive.

I'm not saying that I believe in the UFO stuff - I wouldn't know. Indeed, it seems that a lot of people want to decide for themselves what is true for such things, while I've always been comfortable with the idea that there are things I don't know. The original post was worded... My curiosity piqued, I read the linked article, where I found... This led me to conclude that the original post was misleading, so I asked about it. That's it.

So who's in this new History Channel program on Tuesday, 'Hunting History with Steve Rinella', 'The Final Hunt for D. B. Cooper'?