Forums: Skydiving: Skydiving History & Trivia:
DB Cooper

 

First page Previous page 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 2226 Next page Last page  View All

377  (F 666)

Mar 2, 2008, 8:14 AM
Post #276 of 55650 (45465 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dumstuntzz] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
"there is no way of knowing it is parchute cord without an analysis"....I DISAGREE. parachute cord (Or in the case of either a 26' navy conical or a 28'military canopy, 550 lb nylon type3 suspension line) is fairly distinctive . it is a woven outer sheath with 7 inner strands ,one of which is colored . these colors identify the manufacturer,each having their own distinctive combination of colors. if you have a piece of 550 cord on that knife and the color code matches the color code on the chute left behind, then you have a somewhat tenuous link to the hijacking.

Jo,

See any woven fabric or colored strand in the cord material?

377


Orange1  (B 2638)

Mar 2, 2008, 12:19 PM
Post #277 of 55650 (45444 views)
Shortcut
Re: [377] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
"there is no way of knowing it is parchute cord without an analysis"....I DISAGREE. parachute cord (Or in the case of either a 26' navy conical or a 28'military canopy, 550 lb nylon type3 suspension line) is fairly distinctive . it is a woven outer sheath with 7 inner strands ,one of which is colored . these colors identify the manufacturer,each having their own distinctive combination of colors. if you have a piece of 550 cord on that knife and the color code matches the color code on the chute left behind, then you have a somewhat tenuous link to the hijacking.

Jo,

See any woven fabric or colored strand in the cord material?

377

Yeah, i'd say more than a tenuous link - if it is a match it's probably the most convincing (only real) piece of actual evidence so far.


Sluggo_Monster

Mar 2, 2008, 5:51 PM
Post #278 of 55650 (45415 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Orange1] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

Jo and all,

In 2001 and 2002 I was the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) for a company called KeyMaster Technologies (http://www.keymastertech.com/). They manufacture XRF (X-Ray Fluorescence) analyzers that are used in the anti-counterfeiting industry (product counterfeiting not money counterfeiting). Their analyzers can match any fibers on the knife with the ones left on the plane. Also, they can identify traces of metal from the knife on the cords that were cut. The Interagency Forensics Laboratory or FBI Forensics Laboratory (whatever it’s called now) was one of KeyMaster’s customers. So, the analysis can be done. There are other private labs that can do the same analysis and it is not a very expensive test.

Sluggo_Monster


Erroll

Mar 2, 2008, 8:45 PM
Post #279 of 55650 (45387 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Sluggo_Monster] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Their analyzers can match any fibers on the knife with the ones left on the plane. Also, they can identify traces of metal from the knife on the cords that were cut.


Quote:
....and then taking the piece of cord out with a pair of tweezers (which I have done and then put it back in place). This would have to be done infront witnesses so the FBI could never cry - foul.

Given the above qoute, I doubt that anyone would bother.


377  (F 666)

Mar 2, 2008, 9:52 PM
Post #280 of 55650 (45380 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Erroll] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Their analyzers can match any fibers on the knife with the ones left on the plane. Also, they can identify traces of metal from the knife on the cords that were cut.


Quote:
....and then taking the piece of cord out with a pair of tweezers (which I have done and then put it back in place). This would have to be done infront witnesses so the FBI could never cry - foul.

Given the above qoute, I doubt that anyone would bother.

Although you could never convict Duane on evidence that had been handled like that, I'd give Jo the benefit of the doubt if the cord remnants on the knife matched the cut lines the FBI has. Jo, any woven stuff or colored ID thread?

I tried cutting some surplus shroud line with a pocket knife and it was hard to get anything stuck to the knife, but I don't know what kind of knife Duane had.


skyjack71

Mar 3, 2008, 2:14 AM
Post #281 of 55650 (45366 views)
Shortcut
Re: [377] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Although you could never convict Duane on evidence that had been handled like that, I'd give Jo the benefit of the doubt if the cord remnants on the knife matched the cut lines the FBI has. Jo, any woven stuff or colored ID thread?

I tried cutting some surplus shroud line with a pocket knife and it was hard to get anything stuck to the knife, but I don't know what kind of knife Duane had.

The piece that is in there is small - it is so dirty I cannot see color. I did not dig it back out but it would not be as wide as I think the cord is - it would be like one of the strands - but this strand is made up of more than one piece twined around. The fragment is about 1/4 in long. This was a fairly large knife with open space - but all the same it was a pocket knife - but more than a pocket knife - frankly I don't know what kind of knife it is - I never saw one like it.

Before I offer to let the FBI cut cord with the different knives I had to see if any of them matched the cut cords - but they weren't interested. Since they have their compromised DNA on a tie that the stewardess never said he was wearing - they are not going to do a darn thing.


QUESTION:
In a court of law - if the chain of possession on DNA items from a single crime was compromised - resulting in the loss of the most valued DNA evidence would that not throw out the DNA for the one item that they maintained possession of. There was an FBI agent who maintained that McCoy was Cooper and claimed to have shown the tie and "tac" to his family and was told it belonged to McCoy. By the way the widow did not live in WA. so his FBI agent would have had to have possession of the evidence.

This FBI agent and his writer were sued by Mrs. McCoy and they settled out of court. The tie was the main contentions of the lawsuit besides claiming the the wife aided her husband.

This was an unscrupulous FBI agent - if he could write a book with untruths - could he not have taken the cigarette butts and have swapped out the tie.

Now - what if this FBI agent also took the cigarette butts - ??????? There is just too much at stake - he wants to go down in history as the man who killed Cooper. Please note that Agent CARR has never mentioned the butts in the media.


skyjack71

Mar 3, 2008, 2:28 AM
Post #282 of 55650 (45362 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Sluggo_Monster] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In 2001 and 2002 I was the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) for a company called KeyMaster Technologies (http://www.keymastertech.com/). They manufacture XRF (X-Ray Fluorescence) analyzers that are used in the anti-counterfeiting industry (product counterfeiting not money counterfeiting). Their analyzers can match any fibers on the knife with the ones left on the plane. Also, they can identify traces of metal from the knife on the cords that were cut. The Interagency Forensics Laboratory or FBI Forensics Laboratory (whatever it’s called now) was one of KeyMaster’s customers. So, the analysis can be done. There are other private labs that can do the same analysis and it is not a very expensive test.

PROBLEM: The FBI isn't going to provide the chute cord for analysis...against the knife. There are several knifes but this one got my attention. First time I had looked at them since I got the DNA ready for the FBI in March of 2003 - I had asked about the knives at that time and then again to Carr in the last few months. They are hanging out there on that darn tie - and I do mean hanging.


Guru312  (C 6814)

Mar 3, 2008, 9:59 AM
Post #283 of 55650 (45312 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Sluggo_Monster] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
That’s why I’m trying to build a data base of “facts”...

And thanks for your effort. This mystery needs as many facts as it can get. What I'm going to relate below is not a "fact" it’s speculation. But the presented material may change our perspective on a few things. If nothing else, it creates a much larger “Drop Zone” for DB’s possible landing point. More correctly, it creates a much larger possible DZ for the money bag’s landing point. Allow me to explain...

About three weeks ago I sent an email to the owner of a company which has been in the business of manufacturing bank bags for over one hundred years. I asked him in my email if the SeaFirst bank, being in the continually wet NorthWest, would have had purchased water proof canvas bags.

After three weeks time, I got no reply. I figured he thought my questions too bizarre to be worthy of a response. Much to my delight, he sent this response:

You recently wrote concerning a money bag that may have been used in a hijacking by DB Cooper.
I would be happy to talk with you about this if you will give me a call.


NOTE: The gentlemen asked that I not use his name and not identify his company but he was quite willing to answer all of my questions and discuss the issue with that provision of anonymity. I agreed reluctantly to not identify him or to mention of his company.

Almost as good as getting his email was the fact that he supplied an 800 number in the email and his company paid for our 50 minute telephone call! I told him that after waiting three weeks for a response I really didn't expect to hear from him. He said, "After more than 35 years what's another few weeks?" I laughed and liked him immediately after that comment.

He told me that he remembers the hijacking and all fuss from back then. He and his friends talked about it often. He was so interested in my questions that he took the time to look back through his company records and found sales records showing sales to the "Seattle First National Bank" but the oldest records he could find were for the late '70s and early 80s.

Also, he indicated that in 1971, no bank bag manufacturers made truly waterproof canvas bags. During the 70s and prior his company sold "treated" bags, which he called "water repellent", but they were not truly waterproof as bags made today actually are.

So, DB wasn't given a true water proof bag.

I called the bag manufacturer because of my hypothesis: I'm assuming that DB lost the bag either when exiting, because of the violent turbulence from the 200 MPH speed and the dirty aerodynamic configuration of the plane, or that he lost the bag during opening shock.

I’m assuming that he lost the bag because of the difficulty he would have had trying to tie the bag onto his body or the harness. I don’t think he, or any other person working alone, could have tied it sufficiently.

So, I'm assuming that the bag itself was tied closed very well but he had considerable difficulty getting it tied to himself.

I tried to get into DB's mind. While in there, I determined that he would be overly 'protective' of the money. After all, that's what the whole gig was about: the money. He tied the bag of money with one of the two the roughly 14 foot lengths of suspension line. He'd tie the bag as absolutely tight as he possibly could with many turns around the bag and thus making the bag and the money into a very tight package. That tight package would have voids within because of the multiple packs of money. The voids would hold air for some unknown time and allow the “package” to float for a considerable time.

The bank bag manufacturer thought the bag tied tightly as described would float for hours, probably even days, until becoming waterlogged and finally slipping beneath the surface and then slowly sinking deeper into the water...but being carried ever farther downstream.

Even after the bag finally became submerged it would still be intact. It could bang along the stream/river bottoms for years. It could get stuck in debris, branches or between rocks. But it would still be intact and move further downstream with flooding…only to get stuck again…and then to continue on its way downstream.

After many years, the bag would finally tear open from the canvas rotting…maybe only a hole big enough for a few pack of money to get out…maybe the whole bag would eventually unload into the water from turbulence. Never the less, somewhere, potentially VERY far downstream from where the bag originally entered a tributary of the Columbia, a pack of money ended up on a bank of the Columbia and was found years later by young Mr. Ingram.

The bag manufacturer asked me if the money found was in “money sleeves” or wrapped with rubber bands. I told him rubber bands and asked what significance that was. His answer was that money sleeves were made of paper strips and held with glue. He said the glue would be dissolved very quickly; rubber bands could hold money for years—if not subjected to direct sunlight which caused rather rapid degrading of the rubber. [The sun sure dried lots of rubber bands when I was jumping.] He said rubber bands in water could last a very long time.

He thought that money wrapped with rubber bands and contained within a canvas bag and wrapped with parachute cord could last in tact for many years.

Of all the possible ways the money could have ended up where it did, the above seems to be one of the best explanations.

Therefore, Cooper’s point of exit could be anywhere within the web of tributaries leading to the point of the found money on the bank of the Columbia River.

This area is probably hundreds, if not a few thousand, square miles of territory. Protected money, wet or not, will last a very long time if there is not physical abrasion of the money.

Given all of the above, even if totally plausible and even if totally correct and representative of what actually happened, the next question must be asked.

“So what?”


(This post was edited by Guru312 on Mar 3, 2008, 11:59 AM)


Orange1  (B 2638)

Mar 3, 2008, 9:59 AM
Post #284 of 55650 (45312 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
PROBLEM: The FBI isn't going to provide the chute cord for analysis...against the knife.

Have you asked them? It doesn't sound like it. From Carr's responses in the previous thread it seemed he was very open to any real evidence (as opposed to theories and conjecture). This could be the one thing so far to prove your case, so why are you so reluctant to even ask them?


Orange1  (B 2638)

Mar 3, 2008, 10:11 AM
Post #285 of 55650 (45307 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Guru312] money bag [In reply to] Can't Post

now that was a very interesting contribution...


377  (F 666)

Mar 3, 2008, 10:19 AM
Post #286 of 55650 (45303 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Guru312] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

Good work Guru! You really dug deep on that one. Wouldn't the money get abraided very quickly once out of the bag and tumbling downstream? How far could it go and still arrive in the condition found?

I was thinking about the discrepancies Sluggo has found in evidence regarding exit point. Isn't it more likely that the crew would correctly recall the place rather than the exact time? They'd feel the bump, look out the window and that visual memory of location (Portland suburbs) would likely remain. Think about your own memory of big events. For my generation it was the Kennedy asassination. Everyone remembers exactly WHERE they were when they first heard the news, but few remember the exact time. There is still uncertainty about time: delays in radio comms, time synch between plane and ground, possible confusion between time of reporting and time of occurence. One of the pilots was reported to be concerned that the FBI searched the wrong area based on his memory of where the plane was when they felt the pressure bump. Is that a FACT OR MYTH? Am I missing something?


azdiver  (A License)

Mar 3, 2008, 3:10 PM
Post #287 of 55650 (45255 views)
Shortcut
Re: [377] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

? would they be able to see the ground at night in bad weather. been up there at night and if your in the middle of nowhere with no lights on the ground its pretty black, at least to me it is.


azdiver  (A License)

Mar 3, 2008, 3:14 PM
Post #288 of 55650 (45254 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

could you post a pic? lots of riggers on this site and they could tell better than anyone else could.


Sluggo_Monster

Mar 4, 2008, 1:58 PM
Post #289 of 55650 (45173 views)
Shortcut
Re: [377] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

All,

I have some (what I consider to be) great news!

With 377’s help, I have hooked-up with “a B-727 Jockey” who has been very helpful to me. In a few days I will have some calculations that may be interesting.

I am trying to convince him to join us at this forum. I hope he does.

More later, and thanks 377,

Sluggo_Monster


skyjack71

Mar 4, 2008, 5:56 PM
Post #290 of 55650 (45143 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Orange1] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Have you asked them? It doesn't sound like it. From Carr's responses in the previous thread it seemed he was very open to any real evidence (as opposed to theories and conjecture). This could be the one thing so far to prove your case, so why are you so reluctant to even ask them?

I did ask - what am I supposed to do - BEG?


skyjack71

Mar 4, 2008, 6:31 PM
Post #291 of 55650 (45137 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Sluggo_Monster] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I am trying to convince him to join us at this forum. I hope he does.
Sluggo_Monster

I hope he gets the correct information to work with.

The FBI and NWA concluded that the actual jump occurred between 8:10 and 8:12 ---nine miles from the closest tributary and yet, you want to extend that time just because money was found in the Columbia...you are changing FACTS to fit the finding of money 8 yrs later..

These FACTs were found thru 3 months of simulations and calculation with 3 crew members - you are contending that the crew was incorrect in their time. These 3 crew members had the incident fresh in their mind and with a much deeper understanding of the facts.

Others are altering the time line in order to put the money in the Columbia. Duh! So the three crew members where idiots flying a 727 and unable to read a watch. I don't think so

The money - experts have concluded due to the condition of the money that it washed onto the shore line within a yr. of it being found.

The condition of the money means it was protect for most of those 8 yrs - just how much protection do you think a canvas bag would have provided in the Columbia under currents - the opening was not secured enough to last for 8 yrs in that water - THINK - just how was Cooper going to make a secure container out of a canvas bag on board a plane with an adrenaline rush that would hold for 8 yrs in the bottom of the Columbia. Maybe - the package did survive the jump and the impact of landing with enough protect to float several miles -- not likely. Basically impossible.

Bad New Bear - Once paper is soaked with water it sinks...do a test with 10,000 bills in a canvas bag (they did not repel water in 1971). Be sure to make a secure tether for that bag or 10,000 bills are gone if you put them in the Columbia or a contributary that would flow into the Columbia.


(This post was edited by skyjack71 on Mar 4, 2008, 6:35 PM)


skyjack71

Mar 4, 2008, 7:15 PM
Post #292 of 55650 (45119 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Guru312] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

 
In reply to:
it’s speculation. But the presented material may change our perspective on a few things. If nothing else, it creates a much larger “Drop Zone” for DB’s possible landing point. More correctly, it creates a much larger possible DZ for the money bag’s landing point. Allow me to explain...

Check the email I posted about the time and decide for yourself if you want to contest what the crew said after the crime - we are not talking about when it was recorded.

In reply to:
I asked him in my email if the SeaFirst bank, being in the continually wet NorthWest, would have had purchased water proof canvas bags.

Not in 1971 - but then I didn't have the actual supply source ... I also described a bag that I had seen in 1990 ... canvas (lightweight canvas) having a tweedy effect from flecks in it of a darker color. Not white, but grayish to a white wheat - age had something to do with the bag's color. I was unable to open it fully because he was coming back to the van.

It was longer than it was wide with black printing - I did get a glance of the printing - not enough to swear to anyone what it said. I have since been told what it was so anything I might remember at this date is forever influence on the imprint. I gave my description to the FBI prior to my having ever been told more about the container...and this is what I told them...12 yrs ago.

In reply to:
Also, he indicated that in 1971, no bank bag manufacturers made truly waterproof canvas bags During the 70s and prior his company sold "treated" bags, which he called "water repellent", but they were not truly waterproof as bags made today actually are.

So, DB wasn't given a true water proof bag.

The only repellency needed was to transport the bag from the bank to the truck for deliver to and from stores and other locations.

In reply to:
I don’t think he, or any other person working alone, could have tied it sufficiently.

Just what I said in a prior post.

In reply to:
I tried to get into DB's mind. While in there, I determined that he would be overly 'protective' of the money. After all, that's what the whole gig was about: the money. He tied the bag of money with one of the two the roughly 14 foot lengths of suspension line. He'd tie the bag as absolutely tight as he possibly could with many turns around the bag and thus making the bag and the money into a very tight package. That tight package would have voids within because of the multiple packs of money. The voids would hold air for some unknown time and allow the “package” to float for a considerable time.

Guru - are you sure you aren't Cooper? But, considering the fabric and the money it would not have floated for any length of time without being seen - by fishermen or someone. Test it!



In reply to:
After many years, the bag would finally tear open from the canvas rotting…

It has already been proven that the money was in a protect location for 7 yrs - banging around in a canvas bag in the river - I seriously doubt that even you could make a package that secure under the circumstances Cooper had - remember there was NO CLOSURE on this bag.

In reply to:
Therefore, Cooper’s point of exit could be anywhere within the web of tributaries leading to the point of the found money on the bank of the Columbia River.

Only if you seriously alter the time lines given by the crew - and that is altering FACTS big time.

In reply to:
Given all of the above, even if totally plausible and even if totally correct and representative of what actually happened, the next question must be asked.

“So what?”

Bernie - that is how I am beginning to feel - except I say "Oh, What the Hell - I know who Cooper was so why bother!" Bernie where were you on Nov 24 1971?


Orange1  (B 2638)

Mar 5, 2008, 8:26 AM
Post #293 of 55650 (45070 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

The condition of the money means it was protect for most of those 8 yrs - just how much protection do you think a canvas bag would have provided in the Columbia under currents - the opening was not secured enough to last for 8 yrs in that water - THINK - just how was Cooper going to make a secure container out of a canvas bag on board a plane with an adrenaline rush that would hold for 8 yrs in the bottom of the Columbia.

Jo, you really cannot know how secure the opening was made - but anyway - your argument is also an effective argument for not making the bag secure enough to survive either exit or opening shock. With respect, you've never jumped - i don't think you can possibly appreciate the forces involved with these things - and I am only talking from normal jumps. Guys who have jumped jets & rounds have posted repeatedly about exit speeds and opening shock. The currents in the river are nowhere near as fast as those.


skyjack71

Mar 8, 2008, 1:06 AM
Post #294 of 55650 (44941 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Orange1] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Jo, you really cannot know how secure the opening was made - but anyway - your argument is also an effective argument for not making the bag secure enough to survive either exit or opening shock. With respect, you've never jumped - i don't think you can possibly appreciate the forces involved with these things - and I am only talking from normal jumps. Guys who have jumped jets & rounds have posted repeatedly about exit speeds and opening shock. The currents in the river are nowhere near as fast as those.

Of course I have never jumped - but it is a catch 22.
He tied knots to secure the bag, but didn't tie knots to secure the bag to himself....not very likely...

The wind force would have been for how many seconds? If you contend that the bag went into a contributary or into the Columbia - you have a lot of elements wearing away at this canvas bag tied with ropes for several yrs...that canvas was not that thick.

Besides it has already been stated by experts that the money was not in the water for all of those yrs before it was found. That it did have a certain amount of protection...and the soil surrounding the find in 1980 indicated that the money had not been there for 8 yrs - it was determined to be less than a yr. Guess who was there in 1979?

This is a no win situation for you or me.

I keep thinking about the size of that bag not being as large as everyone has believed...due to the size of the bag alone...what - one square foot compacted and tied up. How much wind force would that be on exit? I know you guys jump and hold on to each others hands - how hard is that? Would you compare holding onto the bag the same as holding on to another human being?

I guess I am just an idiot - but I think it is do-able.
I know it waS do-able because he did it.


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Mar 8, 2008, 6:54 AM
Post #295 of 55650 (44922 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
This is a no win situation for you or me.

You could have stopped right there. It's one of the most correct statements made in either this or the other thread.


Albert18

Mar 8, 2008, 9:06 AM
Post #296 of 55650 (44909 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
I guess I am just an idiot - but I think it is do-able.

Well McCoy did it and he said it was a piece of cake.

A bullet killed McCoy, not the ground.


ltdiver  (D 20506)

Mar 8, 2008, 10:30 AM
Post #297 of 55650 (44900 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I know you guys jump and hold on to each others hands - how hard is that? Would you compare holding onto the bag the same as holding on to another human being?

Maintaining grips (hand holds, you called it) is doable from a slow moving plane like we normally jump from. It's near to impossible from the JET. Alot of us have tried (from the DC-9). Very few have succeeded. The force from a JET is just too strong to maintain a grip on anything.

ltdiver


ltdiver  (D 20506)

Mar 8, 2008, 10:44 AM
Post #298 of 55650 (44890 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Take This Plane To Mexico [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I keep thinking about the size of that bag not being as large as everyone has believed...due to the size of the bag alone...what - one square foot compacted and tied up.

Post #719 from the previous thread. Ckret gives the size of the bag, which is a bit larger than that.

ltdiver


SafecrackingPLF

Mar 9, 2008, 11:50 AM
Post #299 of 55650 (44821 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ltdiver] Speculators DOOMED [In reply to] Can't Post

Bad news. I'm back.

First, my sincere apologies to everyone. I take full responsibilty for getting the old thread locked down. If Jim Hooper happens to read this (which I doubt), my sincere apologies to him, and to everyone. I mean that 100%, I was out of line.

Having said that, the speculation that has permeated this forum since Ckret was kicked off was enough to make me squeamish. I think the reason is because people don't really read and take the time to work through the posts. As such, we're left with one group arguing conjecture verses others who are working with the actual FBI file or in using actual data. You must have some common ground to avoid endless speculation.

Let's assume for a moment that the money bag was a parachute. Effectively, that's what the "he lost the money mid air" crowd wants to say.
The first question would be:
How long would a bag of money act like a parachute?
Second question would be:
How much drag would this parachute produce at the exit speed?

I can answer one of the questions. But first, I must dispel the misunderstanding regarding the size of the bag. ltdiver referenced a post in the prior thread where Ckret said the bag was the approximate size of a small toddler. ltdiver failed to show the post where Ckret gave an actual dimension of the bag... 12x12x9.

However, these dimensions were based on descriptions, and I'm not sure there wasn't a typo. Perhaps Ckret will come back and shed some light on this. I have asked him to clarify these dimensions privately.

We may not know how big the bag was, but we know how big 10,000 bills would be. Depending on the condition of the bills and the tightness of the rubberbands, the average volume of the money would be about 26,600 cubic centimeters. If the money was in great shape and the bands were tight, it would be slightly less than this and vice versa.

The dimensions would be about 19.5 cm by 31 cm by 44 cm if the bills were stacked 12x9 according to the description. The height would be about 17 or 18 inches tall. That means if you were to take your stacks of cash and arrange them 3 stacks by 2 stacks and then make a pile. Based on the description, this is my best guess as to how the money was arranged.

Your biggest surface is roughly 12 inches by 17 inches. It's about 1.4 square feet.
The exit speed was about 170 knots.

If we pretend the bag of money were a parachute that was deployed prior to the jump, the surface area combined with the wind speed would produce a force equal to 174.38 pounds.

This would be the maximum force we could expect from the bag of money upon exit. This force would only be attainable if Cooper were grounded and the bag of money behaved like a parachute. This isn't reality, and therefore, the force of wind produced by the bag of money would be dramatically less than 174 pounds.

The next question is how long would the force of wind act against Cooper?
I can't answer this, but I can tell you that if the bag of money produced that much force on Cooper, it would "pull" him because he has no grounding, he's in mid air.

The 170 knots was produced by the plane, and since both the bag and Cooper are no longer on the plane, deceleration through air friction would occur rapidly. We've discussed this at length on the old thread.. .Cooper would decelerate horizontally as he accelerates vertically.
The vertical force of the bag against Cooper would be neglible from a poundage standpoint.

The obvious question to ask yourself is if 174 pounds maximum and very momentary force would be enough to snap the suspension line or the knots that Cooper tied on the bag or his waist.

Because this force would at the most be a fraction of a second, I stand by my contention that the bag would not come loose from Cooper's waist.

Organe1 properly stated that we do not know how secure the bag was. Either on exit or on chute deployment, the line surrounding the bag of money may have come loose. The problem with this thinking is that if the bag of money comes loose with nothing to secure it, the money would have went everywhere and would not explain the find in 1980. We can debate this at length if you wish.

We're then left with the line around Cooper's waist failing in some way. This is the catch 22 that skyjack71 mentioned. You have to assume that Cooper could secure the bag very well, but that he could not adequately secure the bag to his waist to withstand a fraction of a second worth of force equaling 174 pounds. Even if Cooper used a simple double knot, this force would not be enough to break the knot or the line. At the very least, it would pull down towards his ankles, and I'm guessing since Cooper made his make-shift belt with the bag drooping at a full 22 pounds, that he made sure the belt was secure enough to stay up and not slide off his waist.

Keep in mind, we're talking about a fraction of a second.

Because Cooper is not grounded, this "force" would pull Cooper, and once it pulls Cooper, the force would diminish. This would be almost instananeous. We're literally talking about a fraction of a second.

Organe1 said that we do not know how well the bag was tied. That's true, but we do know one very important fact...

The bag was not airtight.

Upon entering the water, the bag would allow water to soak through the fabric and through the top (because it's not airtight). As the money absorbs the water, the bag would become heavier, which would push the bag further into the water, which would then force air out of the bag. This process would be slow at first and would accelerate exponentially through time.

The reason we need to know what type of bag this was is because I'm going to test the float time of of 10,000 bills in a similar bag. Before I do such a test, I need to know the approximate size and style of the bag.

Shortly after being timed-out from the board, I performed a float test on one stack of bills.

I took 100 bills and threw them into water. The water was fresh, and the properties of the water were deemed to be close enough to those of creeks or LaCamas lake. I used 2 rubber bands on the money. The more compressed the money is, the longer it can float (due to air being trapped).

The test lasted 10 minutes, 25 seconds.

I can tell you that a stack of money floats less than 11 minutes. The next question will be how long the money bag could float. My hypothesis is that it would float longer, but would not float more than a few hours. If you're to believe that Cooper lost the money mid-air, then you're also to believe that the money landed near a tributary that fed LaCamas lake. Once in LaCamas lake, it would have to float indefinitely until it drifted far enough to reach the southern most point of LaCamas where it might flow over some rocks and enter the Washougal river where it would then go into the Columbia and drift 20 miles to where it was found.

If you believe Cooper lost the money mid-air, you also believe the calculated timeline that the FBI and NWA came up with was completely off. You also believe the flight path itself was significantly east to put the plane directly above the tributary zone. You then have to believe that Cooper could secure the bag really well, but could not secure the line around his waist very well at all. You must then believe the force of exit wind was enough to rip the bag from Cooper's waist. You then have to believe the bag was capable of floating in these waterways, not for hours, not even for days, but for years!

The money washed up to where it was found less than a year before it was found.

If I calculate the time from the crime to one year before it was found, it spans more than 7 years.

That means we need to measure the float time of the bag in years and not in minutes. That's quite a big leap.

That is, unless you believe the FBI really messed up in their "less than a year" calculation.


(This post was edited by SafecrackingPLF on Mar 9, 2008, 12:04 PM)


Orange1  (B 2638)

Mar 9, 2008, 1:20 PM
Post #300 of 55650 (44799 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SafecrackingPLF] Speculators DOOMED [In reply to] Can't Post

All i was trying to do was point out what seemed to me to be an anomaly in logic - the theory that the bag was tied tight enough to stay on cooper, not get blown open etc but somehow that's not tight enough for other things. I think there is a serious misunderstanding among non-jumpers about exit forces especialy from a jet, though all the posts by people who have jumped from jets get conveniently ignored by those whose theories it doesn't suit. And the arguments about "time" before deceleration or opening being short just doesn't wash, that's like saying a bullet can't do damage because it only has a fraction of a second to hit you. It's all it needs.

Exploring a theory in detail is interesting but it still doesn't make it any more than a theory. For example, unless I missed something in your argument, you do not seem to allow for the fact that a bag lost in midair did not necessarily then immediately go into the water but only near it in some protected spot, with some other event much later seeing it get into the water - then all the tests/calcs about how long it floats don't really mean much.


First page Previous page 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 2226 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Skydiving History & Trivia

 


Search for (options)