Robert99

Pat71, You are a breath of fresh air to this thread. And you will probably discover all to soon how desperately we need fresh air here. Robert Nicholson

Bruce, There is plenty of information on this thread and elsewhere about the 727 operations in Southeast Asia. I think it was a professor from the University of Texas (?) that has written a paper on the subject. That paper is referred to in a number of earlier posts on this thread and can also be located by Goggle. The paper identifies the aircraft by their registration numbers and uses. Your use of the word "jettison" is a bit misleading and the term "dropped by parachute" would be more precise. Basically, "jettison" just means thrown overboard or discarded. And I don't think the commandos would like that. Robert Nicholson

Was there a Whitey Bugler thread somewhere on the Internet to counteract the FBI's information release of last Monday? Obviously not since it got results in less than 72 hours. Perhaps this suggests a problem with the Cooper case that Carr couldn't overcome. Robert Nicholson

Blevins writes: "The only explanation I can figure is that they were buried there purposely. Maybe. Maybe not. Who the hells knows? One problem is the lack of evidence. There is a lot of nothing with that find, and from that you can assume a couple of possibilities, but that is a tough nut to crack." Mr. Blevins, Is it just me or is the above quote actually offered as something other than a lot of double talk? 1. The money is evidence. Other than the evidence left on the airliner and the stair placard, the money is the only evidence. 2. After you have concluded that the money must have been planted there is the only explanation, you dismiss the money find as meaningless, and then you say you can assume a couple of possibilities. Your quote above probably sets logical thinking back at least 1000 years! Robert Nicholson

QuoteRobertMBlevins in cooperation with Skipp Porteous concluded: “2. The money was found just downriver from the park. This is one of the biggest reasons we, think.” Tena (or Tina or Fazio’s) Bar is UPriver from Paradise Point State Park and has been since the dawn of the Precambrian time frame, which supersedes the hijacking by more than three months. Once again, if you chuck something into the drink at Paradise Point State Park it will arrive in the Pacific Ocean after a brief trip DOWN the Columbia River.[/reply ] It is doubtful that Blevins suggestion that the Tena Bar money was a "plant" will pass the smell test either. Mr. Blevins, Haven't you previously stated that no bank was checking for the bills just three months after the hijacking? If the Tena Bar money was suppose to lead the searchers astray, it failed miserably since it wasn't found until more than eight years after the hijacking. If the money was a "plant" it would have been put where it could have been found in short order. And it would have been put in a location that was unrealistic as far as having a connection with Cooper. Tena Bar is not unrealistic. Robert Nicholson

Sailshaw, Now you are back to discussing the book and Cooper candidate that you are pushing. Do you know what you will have on your face when you are proven wrong? Robert Nicholson

Georger, The mountains were really lit up Sunday night after a day of 50+ MPH winds up there. However, yesterday and last night the winds calmned down. The wind forecast for the next two days is only 5 to 10 MPH. Although there was still a lot of smoke in the mountains last night, I could only see two or three areas burning. One of those areas was at the base of the mountains and I think it was a controlled burn as the firefighters tried to "connect" the areas that were burned Sunday, which was a very interesting day here, with areas that were burned by the Fort Huachuca fires on Friday, another very interesting day. There are still some active fires going on this morning on both the notheast and southwest sides of the mountains. But if the winds forecast is correct, the firefighters should be able to make a lot of progress today and tomorrow. Some of the mandatory evacuation areas have been downgraded to pre-evacuation areas. As one whose own neighborhood was probably saved by the firefighters on Friday, I can only say that these guys and gals are doing an excellent job under extremely difficult circumstances. Robert Nicholson

Sailshaw, You originally injected Janet into this to support your own theory that Cooper jumped into a field adjacent to the Portland Airport, then walked over to the airport parking lot, picked up his car, drove off and lived happily ever after. Do you still support your original claims? If you don't write your own posts, then you need to at least have someone read them to you and explain the big words. Robert Nicholson

Sailshaw, Read YOUR own post above. YOU state that the airplane Janet saw was an airplane five minutes behind Cooper's plane. Do you understand that you are saying that the airplane Janet saw, if she saw one at all, was NOT Cooper's plane? In case you haven't become aware of it yet, this thread is, or was, about D. B. Cooper. I don't know if there is a thread on DZ.com about paranormal psychology, but if there is perhaps one of the other people can point you to. And if you don't understand those three or four syllable words, perhaps one of the other people can help you with them. Robert Nicholson

Sailshaw, You don't seem to understand what you are writing. NWA 305 was NEVER at 5000 feet in the Portland area on the flight to Reno. So if you believe Janet's story about seeing someone standing on the rear stairs of an airliner that was below the overcast, it would not be NWA 305. Janet's story about MIB, presumably FBI agents, visiting her and making threats two weeks after she wrote the FBI a letter is probably nonsense as well. The FBI would have to be incompetent to take that long to get out to see her if it was an important matter. The only reason you support Janet's baloney is because you are pushing a specific candidate and need Janet to try to undercut valid informaton. Robert Nicholson

Sailshaw, Do you realize that you are saying that Janet may have seen another airliner flying at 5,000 feet this time that had the rear stairs down and someone standing on those stairs and throwing flares out? Janet's story is nonsense! Robert

Sailshaw, The story put out by "Jannet" is not a "fairytail" (your words). It is pure bullshit! And any number of people on this thread have already explained to you the reasons why that is so. You need to get real yourself. And your vested interest in blasting Blevins book (which I personally have not bothered to read) is because you are pushing another suspect and book. Robert Nicholson

Sailshaw, Since you have your own Campaign For Cooper candidate going full blast, you are not in a position to give Blevins, Jo Weber, or anyone else advice on what to do. A few days ago, you mentioned that your Cooper Candidate did not have an alibi simply because he was in Nepal at the time of the hijacking. You said that he could have flown to the scene of the crime in only one or two days. That reasoning reduces the potential Cooper field of suspects to everyone on the planet. Presumably, you could narrow that down by about 50 percent if you eliminate the females as possible suspects. Way to go! Good work! Robert Nicholson

That's pretty funny Farflung. If you fish from a public pier in California, a license is not required. Thank goodness. I don't understand how Jefferson and the boys remembered the right to bear arms but completely forgot about the right to fish. The rich prefer hunting to fishing, perhaps that explains it. You can't have a bunch of horses, hounds, horns and ridiculous costumes around fishing. The Balloon Boy parents came close to losing custody as unfit parents. I think the court made the right call though. 377 As soon as I saw some news copter video I knew there was no kid in that balloon. I bet the pilots knew it too but why kill a good story? It should have been obvious to the pilots and everyone else that there was no concentrated weight in that balloon based on the way it was oscillating. I suppose Falcon would have weighed at least 30 to 40 pounds. Earlier someone posted that the gas with the most power was helium. Actually, I believe it is hydrogen. However, hydrogen is very flammable, remember the Hindenberg, while helium is not. The Hindenberg was using hydrogen because Germany didn't have a source of helium. Robert Nicholson

Farflung, How can you describe flying saucers as time machines? In fact, in my opinion, flying saucers of the "little green men from Mars" variety are nonsense. When any physical object, including a flying saucer, is near the earth, it must obey earth physical laws. Flying saucers don't. Most of the video of flying saucers that I have seen looks like a man-made object that is being swung around by a fishing pole. Nevertheless, I still have an open mind about time travel. Robert Nicholson

Farflung, Thanks for your reply. The Seattle transcripts are dated on November 25th, 1971 which was Thanksgiving Day, a national holiday. Nevertheless, the controllers still had to work but probably ever senior administrator in the front office took the day off. Hence, the transcripts were probably prepared by one of the most junior clerical staff members at the Seattle Center. Your suggestion about making an effort to "guide everyone to the same conclusion" was done about a year ago and can be viewed on Sluggo's web page. As I understand your remarks, you have not read those specific calculations. Sluggo lists them as "Robert's Calculations". In preparing those calculations, I did everything humanly possible to explain in the simplest language (even to the extent of "dumbing down" things) what was wrong with the Seattle transcripts, how the true airspeed could be determined, how the ground speed could be determined, how the winds aloft could be determined, and what is wrong with the times on the FBI maps. To my own surprise, things such as the ground speed and winds aloft that I derived were reasonably consistent and accurate for the entire flight from Seattle to Reno. I am not interested in such things as posting resumes but some knowledge of who you are writing to (or for) helps to focus the writing in the most meaningful manner. As for the "Robert's Calculations" on Sluggo's web page, feel free to read them if you want to. They have been there for quite a while. But the world won't come to an end if you don't read them. If you do read them and have some comments, please post those comments to this thread on DZ.com. You are free to take exception to what I have written. I am not going to fall over if you have critical comments. On the matter of the flight crew. The airliner had one captain, one co-pilot, and for all practical purposes a second co-pilot. Anderson has three stripes on his sleeve in the pictures that were taken within a couple of days of the hijacking. This means that he was rated as a co-pilot on some NWA aircraft and that could even have been a 727. However, he was acting as a flight engineer on the hi-jacked airliner. The memories of these three pilots should confirm a number of things that can be found in the transcripts. However, if there are disagreements with what Rataczak (the only living member of the flight crew) says and what appears in the transcripts and other sources, I would expect additional questions to be asked to help resolve the matter. I have no use for "one upmanship" type of behavior, but when all is said and done, there should be close agreement on the major points between the flight crew statements and the other information sources. Robert Nicholson

Farflung, You are absolutely correct! While the airliner was told prior to take-off in Seattle to "do whatever you need to do and we will keep people out of your way", the air traffic control tapes for the Seattle Center's sector controllers have an absolute minimum of information. The airliner was cleared for take-off on the ground control frequency and told to go straight to a frequency that bypassed both the tower and departure controllers. The sector controller had some difficulty figuring out where the airliner was but once that was cleared up there was (if you believe the transcripts) little further communication between the airliner and the Seattle Center's sector controllers all the way down to the Fort Jones VORTAC in northern California. Again if you believe the transcripts, basically the only information passed between the airliner and the controllers was altimeter settings and instructions to switch to another sector controller. There is even an 18 minute no transmissions whatsoever gap as the airliner passed through the Portland area (from 8:15PM to 8:33PM). Essentially, everything that would help establish the airliner's position between about the present day Malay intersection (near Toledo) and the Fort Jones VORTAC has been removed from the Seattle Center's transcripts. If you don't believe this, take a look at the Oakland Center's transcripts which includes the hand off from Seattle Center near the Fort Jones VORTAC until the landing in Reno. The Oakland transcripts are real life as it was lived in 1971 and includes the phone conversations between controllers. The Seattle transcripts are not the way it was done in that day and age. The Seattle Center's Chief gave a sworn statement, dated the day after the hijacking, that he was including the complete transcripts in his transmittal to the FBI and nobody had any reason to hide anything at that date. Consequently, it seems obvious that the Seattle transcripts were "sanitized" at a later date and you know who had them at that time. You can read these transcripts for yourself on Sluggo's web page. Robert Nicholson

Sailshaw, Something is definitely getting lost in the translation here. I have NEVER supported a flight path east of Portland. And for that matter, I also don't believe the flight path shown on the FBI charts between approximately the present day Malay intersection (near Toledo) and a point about 23 nautical miles south of the present day Battleground VORTAC is correct either. Since you don't want to reveal your experience as a pilot, I will assume that you are a certificated private pilot with an ASEL rating. If you in fact have that rating, then presumably you had to demonstrate some knowledge of a pilot's computer (Jeppesen or A6B). You presumably know how to calculate true air speed, work wind triangles, determine wind components, determine heading corrections to make good a given ground track, and to determine ground speed among other things. Don't try to blame those charts on Sluggo. They are FBI work products and they should get the "credit" for them. You say that you buy into the time marks on those charts. Why don't you measure the distance between those time marks? If taken literally, the distance between some of those marks means that the airliner flew three nautical miles in one minute and then six nautical miles the next minute. To put it another way, the airliner's ground speed increased from 180 knots one minute to 360 knots during the next minute. Since the airliner was in steady cruising flight, that is not a realistic situation. Also, one minute appears to be missing in that time sequence. Is it really? If so, where did it go? You can calculate the true airspeed of the airliner from information in the radio transcripts. Why don't you do so and then determine the ground speed and wind direction and see how they all fit together. Do you really understand what you are looking at, and what it means, when you read something on a clock or a cockpit instrument? Can an aircraft be two places at once? It's time for you to get your pilot's calculator out and start work. Robert Nicholson

BUT, the change was MADE AFTER the map was done for the 1971 incident. How did you verified what the intentions of the man who did the map? Conjecture and suppositions? How do you know exactly what he was mapping. I tried to read that map on the computer - but I have to have something I can HOLD in my hands. If that map was given to Sluggo - why can't the FBI provide me a hard paper copy of it? It has now become FBI released information so I want to see it and have someone else beside you and Sluggo tell me what that map means. Why did the media report per the map everyone used until 1980? Even after 1980 2 books where published using the OLD flight path the public was aware of and not this NEW one. By the way WHY don't you PICK up the phone and call Ratazak himself? Why use a 3rd party whose interpretation will be to benefit his subject. Now who does NOT do their own research. Yea, you bet I have a hair where it shouldn't be - because I got a lot to do in a short period of time and do not know how I am going to get it done. Sure don't want to die in jail in Seattle if the FBI has me arrested. Remember Carr's threat about my coming to Seattle? Jo, If you had been been paying attention for the past year or two, you would already know that I don't believe the flight paths that are depicted on those FBI charts are accurate in the first place (especially in the Portland area). As far as Blevins e-mail to Rataczak about the flight path in the Portland area, if Rataczak says "east of Portland" I would like to know his basis for making that statement. In the meantime, just take your medications and get a good night's sleep. Things will probably look better tomorrow. Further, add me to you list of critics objecting to your continual reference to a "dumb blonde syndrome". I have a number of relatives that have blonde hair, as well as blue eyes, and they are certainly not dumb. Maybe there is such a syndrome in your family, but there isn't one in mine. Robert Nicholson

Jo, Farflung is pointing out his post #17427, page 698, above. You should take a look at that post and your subsequent comments to it. Also Jo, why can't you view the maps on Sluggo's web page? You have previously stated that you got your first computer about 10 years ago. Unless you bought a used personal computer that uses punched cards, you should be able to view everything on Slugg's site. If you do have a personal computer that uses punched cards, get in touch with some museum. They will probably pay you enough money for it to finance another trip to Portland. Robert Nicholson

ANYONE - Remember this post? Who decided at that time the map should be read this way or that way. A thread decides what the man who did the map was referring to? Was that the same map done in 1971 or a later version after 1980? The FBI just does NOT give out information like that. Jo, Your persecution complex is out in full force today. Neither the FBI, CIA, Bob Knoss, Elvis, Sluggo, or I had anything to do with changing the name of the 1971 era PDX VORTAC to the present day BTG VORTAC. The FAA is the responsible party for making such changes. And based on my decades of experience with the FAA, I haven't seen anything to indicate that it is a sinister organization. And frankly my dear, I doubt if the FAA gives a hoot to hell whether Duane Weber was Cooper or not. But that is your problem. In reality, the name was probably changed to prevent confusion with changes the FAA wanted to make with the nav-aids on the Portland (or PDX) airport. There is now a low powered VOR on the Portland airport that has the "PDX" identifier that used to be used by the one that is now the "BTG" VORTAC. Robert Nicholson

Blevins, Has Rataczak responded to you recent e-mail asking about the flight path through the Portland area? Robert Nicholson

Jo, Sorry to disappoint you but we have been through this before. The airliner always reported it altitude as being 10,000 feet as it passed through the Portland area. The airliner was above several cloud layers and an overcast at that time. Neither Janet or anyone else on the ground saw the airliner. And no one on the airliner saw the ground in the Portland area. In addition, there is absolutely no support for a flight path over or east of the Portland airport. Why bother going east of Portland when the airliner could go west over relatively unsettled ground and take a short cut on its trip to Reno? Anyone who claims a flight path east of Portland needs to review the facts and then explain how everything fits together for such a route. In reality, it doesn't. Perhaps Sailshaw, the pilot, will get out his flight calculator and do some serious number crunching. If he does, then he might change his own mind about an eastern route around Portland. Robert Nicholson Robert: Even the official maps about the Flight put it EAST of Portland (I suppose that depends on what YOU call East of Portland). You must be Mole trying to sway the public and to declare the route made available to the public for 40 yrs is NOT correct. The plane made an Eastward turn up around Battleground - perhaps only slight but enough to put the plan EAST of PDX. Have you actually talked to the co-pilot? If so WHEN? When I spoke with him many yrs ago about the route - it was as I have stated. We spoke less than half dozen times in the last 15 yrs but, I could only ask questions according to landmarks. We only discussed the flight path - twice.....but, I never forgot one word. The flight path was in our 1st conversation and then another conversation within the last 2 yrs. So did YOU actually speak to the Co-Pilot about 10 yrs ago and then again in the last 2 yrs. So Robert you are saying that every newpaper report and tv station reported the flight incorrectly andyou can say 40 yrs later that NOT one of these individual heard or saw what they claimed...40 yrs ago. It was NOT until the money find that anyone suggested a Westwardly route...the FBI wanted to bury Cooper and get all of it behind them. The FBI basically did just that until 1996 when I reported what Duane told me and then because I caught the FBI in lies - I went public in 2000. Since then there have been multiple Cooper Wannabes to crawl out of the closet - fueled by the media and the internet. If you aren't a MOLE for the FBI just who and what is your interest in all of this? Yes, when one categorically states what you stated - then I suspect you of being something other than what you appear to be. Jo, darling. If the "official maps" you refer to are the maps given to Sluggo by the FBI, then you need to take another look at them. They have the airliner going to the PDX VORTAC (which is now the Battleground VORTAC) and then turning to the southwest and passing west of the Portland Airport. In your conversations with the co-pilot, did he specificially state that the flight path was east of Portland? Yes or no! What or who was the source of the stories you mentioned? Could there have been one single source for all those "official" stories? Me an FBI mole? I don't know whether to laugh or cry about that silly suggestion. If you had been paying attention for the past year or two, you would know who I am. If you want to find out more about the FBI's version of the flight path, or other topics mentioned in your post above, you might benefit from a visit to Sluggo's web page. All you have to do is click the "Web Page" link in one of Sluggo's recent posts. Robert Nicholson

Note to Robert 99 There were sitings of that plane below 10K. I live between several bases - and I have been shown by pilots - just how high the planes are that pass over. North and East of the Lewis - the plane did drop in altitude and continued to do so until they approached East of the PDX swinging over toward Cames - they were trying to stay out of populated areas and they had to be clear of the PDX air traffic. ,,which took them right over Troudale Industrial and the airstrip there. (Don't forget the sitings in that area). Maybe it was other aircraft going in and out of PDX...but the 727 had to say above then and out of the way. The siting in the Heisson area definitely were low - 5K to 6K. The clouds where there, but the plane sounded like a plane in trouble it was so low. - thru the layers of clouds they they could see lights above. I told the man the plane was probably higher because the layered cloud coverage - might give one the allusion of the plane being lower. He wouldn't bite on that and said swore it was NOT over 5K (sound and lights) - this is North East of Battleground. Sitings in Hiesson also claim the plane was lower. The sound was NOT that of the chase planes like Himmelsbach tried to tell one of the witnesses - she knew the sound of the small fast crafts versus a 727. I know the difference in the sound coming thru my area. 5 bases and 2 airports not counting all of the small private strips. Jo, Sorry to disappoint you but we have been through this before. The airliner always reported it altitude as being 10,000 feet as it passed through the Portland area. The airliner was above several cloud layers and an overcast at that time. Neither Janet or anyone else on the ground saw the airliner. And no one on the airliner saw the ground in the Portland area. In addition, there is absolutely no support for a flight path over or east of the Portland airport. Why bother going east of Portland when the airliner could go west over relatively unsettled ground and take a short cut on its trip to Reno? Anyone who claims a flight path east of Portland needs to review the facts and then explain how everything fits together for such a route. In reality, it doesn't. Perhaps Sailshaw, the pilot, will get out his flight calculator and do some serious number crunching. If he does, then he might change his own mind about an eastern route around Portland. Robert Nicholson

Sailshaw, You are getting weirder and weirder. The question the crew responded to was not if they could see light bulbs in Portland. It was to the effect if they could see any illumination on the ground or in the clouds that indicated they were in the vicinity of Portland. Several sources report that the crew stated they could not see any lights whatsoever that would indicate they were in the Portland area. They simply did not have a visual indication of Portland when they passed through that area. You state that you are a pilot with night flying experience. Welcome to the club. And since you have made your experience an issue, why don't you elaborate on it for everyone. How much night flying time do you have? Is it in an aircraft with you as pilot in command or is it as a passenger on either a general aviation aircraft or an airliner? Robert Nicholson