Robert99

Has your book been published? If so, where is it listed? I haven't found anything resembling such a book.

Thanks for the information. Since the hijacking occurred 34 years after the Earhart flight, I doubt if old D.B. had access to these reports. I have never seen the two linked sources before, didn't know that any Army Air Corps personnel were involved, or that a Navy Admiral was on the scene at Howland. And I have plenty of information on that flight. Some of the information that I have contradicts the information in the linked sources. Here are a couple of examples plus some other information. 1. Noonan was also a licensed pilot and reportedly held the same rating as Earhart except for the Instrument Rating. 2. Reportedly, the Ontario did not even have a radio. So it wasn't really involved in the flight. 3. There is nothing in the linked sources or elsewhere to my knowledge that even remotely suggests Earhart tried to go to another location. It was do or die for Howland. 4. Putnam, Earhart's husband, was at the Navy/Coast Guard headquarters in San Francisco. When the Itasca left Howland to search for Earhart, the ship wanted to go to the Northeast but the powers in San Francisco insisted that they go to the Northwest. 5. One of the notes in the Cooper report mentions the Bureau of Air Commerce. The Chief of that organization was a fellow whose last name was "Vidal" (I can't remember his first name right off) and he was the father of writer Gore Vidal. The senior Vidal and Amelia were reportedly lovers despite her being married. This topic was briefly touched on in the Earhart movie that starred Hilary Swank.

What is the source for the claim that an "army air corps officer" was on Howland Island awaiting Earhart's arrival? I have never seen anything to suggest that the Army Air Corps had anything to do with Earhart's flight. The only military services involved were the US Coast Guard and the US Navy. No mention whatsoever of the Army.

Madson's stories, regardless of the number, are nothing but bullshit. EDIT: I was busy elsewhere, and still am, and did miss the switch. I am going through the posts since January 1st and should be caught up in a couple of days. Here are a couple of things that FlyJack and I do agree on. The jump time was 8:11 PM PST and the jump was nowhere near Orchards. Also, there is no believable evidence that an NB-6 parachute was involved in the hijacking. In fact, just ignoring everything that Cossey said will greatly simplify understanding the parachute situation. More as time permits.

Tina's story about the match books is probably completely true. In the 1971 time frame, Skychef provided meal service for numerous airlines (probably most of them) and included cigarettes (a small pack of four) and a small book of matches with each meal. Skychef undoubtedly provided their airline customers with plenty of those matches for anyone who needed a match. Somewhere a few years ago, if my memory is correct, Tina indicated that Cooper's original small book of matches was from a small school that advertised such things as GED courses and similar things. It was basically a mail in type school that advertised extensively on small match books similar to the Skychef match books. I don't remember exactly when smoking was stopped on the airlines but it was probably in the mid-1970s.

In the 1950s era, I am fairly sure the repack interval was 60 days for everything except maybe a "chair" parachute which may have had a longer repack interval. Somewhere in the 1960s or so (basically the time frame that the new para-commanders came on the scene), and as newly designed and manufactured civilian parachutes started hitting the market for emergency parachutes usage, studies were made of the required repack intervals and those intervals were increased in several steps. The repack interval for modern civilian emergency parachutes may be as long as 6 months at the present time.

OleMiss, THERE WAS NO NB-6 PARACHUTE INVOLVED IN THE COOPER HIJACKING! That is the whole story right there! Just ignore everything that Cossey claimed! Why are you so obsessed with this?

FlyJack, thanks for the information. The T-28A was indeed in civilian hands in the 1960s and was fully acrobatic. When it was used in military pilot training by the USAF and Navy I believe it was the second military aircraft that the trainees would encounter. I don't remember what the initial aircraft the USAF trainees encountered but I think it was the Beech T-34 that the Navy trainees flew. The T-28A could accommodate both seat and backpack parachutes and didn't need a thin backpack such as the NB-6 or NB-8. This is another reason why there was no point in Hayden paying two or three times as much for an NB-6 as he paid for the parachute that is now at the WSHM. I knew a fellow who owned a T-28A in the early 1960s but never got a ride in it. While in the military, I did get some flying time as a passenger in the DeHavilland beaver. Thanks again.

Does anyone know what type of aerobatic aircraft Hayden owned?

Let's not make a federal case out of this but take a look at the card in FlyJack's post #63951. The heading for the column where "I & R" is listed is "Repairs and : or Remarks". The word repack is not mentioned but is undoubtedly included in the "I & R" service.

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.

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.

No.

OleMiss, you don't seem to understand that both of Hayden's parachutes are being discussed here plus Gruder's. If you actually have an NB-6 rig, open it up and take a look at the construction of the risers and canopy. Then you should be able to understand why it can be packed in a small container. After doing the above, you should also be able to understand why the NB-6 cost about two or three times the amount that a regular 28 foot flat canopy parachute costs. Why would Hayden want one parachute that cost X dollars, such as the museum parachute, and one that would cost 2X or 3X times as much? Further, why are you so obsessed with claiming that an NB-6 was involved in the hijacking? Still further, Chaucer related a while back that someone was going to produce a new analysis of the flight path using some statistical methods. How did that turn out and is it online anywhere?

Riggers don't know what they are doing? You need to take a couple of aspirins, get a good night's sleep, and get an emergency appointment with your shrink in the morning! Download and read (!) the FAA publication on the knowledge requirements, testing requirements, and required equipment for riggers and master riggers. Any rigger who has seen a picture of the WSHM's Hayden parachute will know that it is not an NB-6 or an NB-8. If Cossey owned an NB-6/NB-8 he would use it when flying the jump aircraft which was probably a four place Cessna which did not have seats designed for pilots wearing parachutes. I speak from personal experience about the NB-6 which was quite thin when packed because of the unique construction of the conical canopy and a couple of other factors. It was rated as having the same descent rate as a flat 28 foot canopy parachute.