47 47
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

No,

Bank straps are a given to disintegrate quickly,, the rubber bands held the packets together and lasted much longer.

Yes, I know. Everyone knows.*

 

 



*Except the guy who runs the FB group, who was pushing the idea that they are the same thing as rubber bands and always have been and always will be, and when someone says "bank straps," they are really saying "rubber bands."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Math of Insects said:

Yes, I know. Everyone knows.*

 

 



*Except the guy who runs the FB group, who was pushing the idea that they are the same thing as rubber bands and always have been and always will be, and when someone says "bank straps," they are really saying "rubber bands."

I am not on Facebook, so the reference is lost...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2023 at 11:34 AM, FLYJACK said:

I think I have the first code...

Have been working on the second code 7698QA2753...

The first code type matches the letter, the second one was typed on a different typewriter. Two typewriters??

The letter was typed out then copied and the codes were added, presumably 4 letters with distinct codes, we only have the two codes, the other two are unknown or not sent to the FBI.

 

The code resembles a MGRS coordinate.. found one that matches a location in Laos.. ( Los Angeles)

might just be a coincidence.,, 

any ideas for that second code..

 

dbcooperlett2ax.jpg.3c84d8297b74bfcb49aa8e40c8afed62.jpg

Hey Fly, it makes a lot of sense that the codes were intended for authenticating future communication. That element itself adds some intrigue that the letter could be from the hijacker because...why would someone go through the trouble?  And I guess the answer/counter to that is that there are crazies and scammers out there who do these types of things for reasons I can't understand.

What leads you to believe that the codes may also have some type of hidden information identifying the hijacker ?  

I find several letters interesting, letter 5 and 6 as well as a letter that came out in the 302s in the last few years where it is written by a supposed friend of the hijacker who details that the hijacker was terminally ill, and passed away after traveling the world.

Unfortunately, none of the letters ever contained undeniable proof that it was indeed from the hijacker.  The same seems to go for the Gunther communications.  All he had to do was provide some detail that only the hijacker would know...."tell Tina thanks for lighting my cigarettes"...something like that.  

Letter 6 came close with the line:
"(And please tell the lackey cops D.B. Cooper is not my real name).”

But even this stops a little short, i.e. he could have signed the letter "Dan" or something like that. 

And that's my biggest doubt about the letters, once you make the decision (which is ill advised) to communicate post crime to either law enforcement or the media, why go half way so to speak by not offering 100% proof that it is really from the hijacker. If the codes your looking at provide some type of proof, that would be a huge game changer in the case.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
2 hours ago, JAGdb said:

Hey Fly, it makes a lot of sense that the codes were intended for authenticating future communication. That element itself adds some intrigue that the letter could be from the hijacker because...why would someone go through the trouble?  And I guess the answer/counter to that is that there are crazies and scammers out there who do these types of things for reasons I can't understand.

What leads you to believe that the codes may also have some type of hidden information identifying the hijacker ?  

I find several letters interesting, letter 5 and 6 as well as a letter that came out in the 302s in the last few years where it is written by a supposed friend of the hijacker who details that the hijacker was terminally ill, and passed away after traveling the world.

Unfortunately, none of the letters ever contained undeniable proof that it was indeed from the hijacker.  The same seems to go for the Gunther communications.  All he had to do was provide some detail that only the hijacker would know...."tell Tina thanks for lighting my cigarettes"...something like that.  

Letter 6 came close with the line:
"(And please tell the lackey cops D.B. Cooper is not my real name).”

But even this stops a little short, i.e. he could have signed the letter "Dan" or something like that. 

And that's my biggest doubt about the letters, once you make the decision (which is ill advised) to communicate post crime to either law enforcement or the media, why go half way so to speak by not offering 100% proof that it is really from the hijacker. If the codes your looking at provide some type of proof, that would be a huge game changer in the case.

 

 

Interesting stuff there,, the caveat is of course we can't prove the source of any of the letter's but several of them are unique and IMO may be from the hijacker or an associate.

For the coded letter, the FBI files note that they also have the unique code for the Seattle letter but they don't reveal it. The codes are to uniquely identify the sender later, to claim credit or extort money, if not the real Cooper the only reason a hoaxer would use unique codes would be to extort money somehow.. but communication never continued for some reason. Similar to Gunther, Cooper/hoaxer dropped off..

The codes had to be something the sender would know or remember, not an intentional imbedding of their identification. I just found an obscure match to the first code, it could be random but the odds are massive, the second one looks like an MGRS code which matches a location in Laos which is close phonetically to Los Angeles.. a long shot but still working on that one.

The hand written letter(s) about Cooper dying was the one I got un-redacted and it is amazing.. I believe it was written by the "Carla" who contacted Gunther.. either Cooper/associate or the hoaxers.. that letter matches the tone and purpose of Carla's communication with Gunther. To claim Cooper was dead and he was really a good guy.. that doesn't sound like something a hoaxer would write, it sounds like a close advocate for the real Cooper.

The Jacksonville letter is one that I think is very interesting as well and might be Cooper, I found some things in the letter that are very interesting.

I can't reveal the stuff I found yet.. I am trying to put together a comprehensive report.

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try to clarify my theory for Cooper's "going to Mexico" demands..

Cooper dictated his "going to Mexico" demands to Tina, she wrote them down on a pay sheet.. then she relayed those notes to the crew via the telephone/interphone.

In an interview Tina recalled from memory the demands.... she is paraphrasing..

2011342949_ScreenShot2023-03-12at8_21_45AM.png.c45d167d084e12fe88249bcee0132a01.png

Tina left out the rear stairs..

Here the crew comm noted the aft stairs were to be lowered after takeoff.. Cooper's initial demand was airstairs lowered in flight, he later changed it during Reno negotiations with the crew..

276611120_ScreenShot2023-03-12at8_18_45AM.png.0e2232458d60490536620dd1d7ed5a22.png

 

My theory is that Cooper wanted the plane to fly dirty flaps down/gear down after the rear stairs were lowered in flight not the entire flight.. but it was not understood and conveyed accurately via Tina and the Captain.

If for example Cooper actually wanted "stairs lowered after takeoff and gear down - flaps down" then the plane would have had the range to make Mexico. It has never made sense that Cooper knew about planes, he knew about fuelling procedures, knew about the configuration but got the range wrong.. He believed the plane could make it to Mexico non-stop, that was no ruse. The most likely way for that error to occur would be if his demand was slightly miscommunicated and he wanted gear down/flaps down after stairs lowered in flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

The FBI discussed making a profile sketch of Cooper,, they should have the front perspective sketches are so limiting...

look at these oddball profiles..

 

 

Indeed. There's a 302 where Bill requests that they make one. Would be nice to see what Cooper's nose profile might have been and what type of turkey gobble he was remembering. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
3 minutes ago, Robert99 said:

This William Wayne Walker lived in Washington state.  The William Wayne Walker who posted as Sluggo lived in Southeast Alabama.  Are you sure these are the same person?

sadly, yes

 

 

 

37990f89-6495-4d80-8007-2c7bb1c6228a.jpg

Edited by olemisscub

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

I had a former Portland Agent check the Washougal pages out - here are his comments:

          OK, here’s what I get from the attached documents:

          They are all teletypes – because they require immediate investigation on a priority matter. Notice that they are informational, but are not detailed information or direct quotes from the source, so they are not 302’s. A 302 will have the form number on it, with a space at the bottom that will have the initials of the person who typed it, and the Agent who dictated it. Depending on the Agent, many of us would identify ourselves in the first paragraph so that the reader, (US Atty, court etc.) would know who was writing it. A 302 will only pertain to information observed by the Agent, or the results of an interview. That restriction makes them suitable to be introduced into court as evidence. They will not contain directions or leads for another office/location. A cover letter, similar to the teletypes would be sent with the 302.

          The first teletype (attachment) is from Portland to Seattle and to Cleveland. It’s basic purpose is to find out who these CB guys are. So Seattle is directed to go to the sawmill at Auburn and find out who is bringing in 20 loads from the Washougal area. Cleveland is directed to contact the owner of the radio call letters who lives in Ohio.

          Cleveland responds back by teletype and basically says the CB guy doesn’t know what the hell they are talking about because he hasn’t even been to Montana since the distant past. One must conclude that the original source overheard the call letters incorrectly, or that the person being overheard fraudulently used the letters of someone else to avoid paying the license fee.

          Your attachments didn’t contain the results or reply from Seattle. If Seattle obtained additional information, they would write another message to the Agents serving Washougal ( The Vancouver WA resident agency), and direct them to interview the log truck driver. Portland would probably not even be given a copy of that communication unless there was more required in Portland. The way the communication system was set up, they tried to avoid excess paper and communications to file. If it didn’t concern an outside office or require additional work there, they weren’t included.

          This is typical of the frustrating dead ends, and ultimately useless  effort that goes in to major investigations. You open a can of worms, and what crawls out isn’t even worms. So you have to clear the air of the static and focus only on your original intent or you get lost and overwhelmed with irrelevant information. I’m confident that issue was resolved, but the result would most likely be confined to the Seattle Office, possibly with copies to FBIHQ in Wash D.C.

          By the way, the initials at the bottom of the page of the T Types would be the supervisor who signed out the teletype. At that time, all priority matters, because they were suppose to require the receiving agents to drop everything and cover the lead immediately, had to be approved by a squad supervisor. I hope this clears up some of the questions.

          Regards,

 

vvv sml D.B. Cooper Part 42 of 42-290.JPG

Edited by georger
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We assume that because something was in the FBI files and looked at by the FBI that is was resolved..

It is a good assumption but not always accurate... the FBI didn't realize they had both of Hayden's back chute packing cards and were unable to actually read the cards properly mixing up the descriptors for the data..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
4 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

We assume that because something was in the FBI files and looked at by the FBI that is was resolved..

It is a good assumption but not always accurate... the FBI didn't realize they had both of Hayden's back chute packing cards and were unable to actually read the cards properly mixing up the descriptors for the data..

In the above, a discussion about Cooper $20 dollar bills being found (in the Washougal!) is being discussed openly over CB radio - with a potential wide CB audience ! A full year before Cooper money is found at Tina Bar in February 1980. Somebody in the Portland office was made aware and informed the Seattle office who investigated ?  Either the alleged conversations over CB radio took place as reported, or they didn't ! Why would anybody be talking about this in April 1979?  Why would the subject even come up by whom? It's one helluva a coincidence if nothing else. Is Himmelsbach the author of this 'coincidence' ?    

Were the Ingrams cb'ers? People at Wilhelm trucking in Portland were. Cb radio in those days was a network with some broadcasting on 11 meters at 1500 watts with stacked yagi arrays. It was common for people broadcast internationally on 11 meters, despite FCC restrictions. Cooper himself said his bomb was electronic and might be set off by radio transmissions... 'just so you are aware'! CB radio was everywhere with a very wide daily audience. Anyone using CB radio knew that. An audience was all but guaranteed.  

The venerable Tempo-One.

index.jpg

Edited by georger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2023 at 12:10 PM, FLYJACK said:

We assume that because something was in the FBI files and looked at by the FBI that is was resolved..

It is a good assumption but not always accurate... the FBI didn't realize they had both of Hayden's back chute packing cards and were unable to actually read the cards properly mixing up the descriptors for the data..

There are plenty of baffling things in the Cooper case, but this packing cards thing is near the top. 

We've got the Air Force sergeant identifying it by the July 1960 card and saying it's 24 foot. He apparently finds this card in "a pocket on this parachute", which sounds like the pocket where those cards go on the NB-6.

Then you've got the official description from evidence claiming that it is the 1957 26 footer. Following that you have the "integral part" line. So which one did Hayden get back that is in the museum? The 1960 24 footer or the 1957 26 footer?

sarge.png

gear.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
58 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

There are plenty of baffling things in the Cooper case, but this packing cards thing is near the top. 

We've got the Air Force sergeant identifying it by the July 1960 card and saying it's 24 foot. He apparently finds this card in "a pocket on this parachute", which sounds like the pocket where those cards go on the NB-6.

Then you've got the official description from evidence claiming that it is the 1957 26 footer. Following that you have the "integral part" line. So which one did Hayden get back that is in the museum? The 1960 24 footer or the 1957 26 footer?

sarge.png

gear.png

Hayden got back the 26 ft SN 226 Sept 1957 back chute in 1975,,, now at the museum

The July 1960 SN 60-9707 card is for Hayden's other back chute found on the plane in the pocket of chute SN 226 and most certainly belongs to the chute Cooper used..

So, Cooper chose the newer chute and Cossey's description was false..

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

Hayden got back the 26 ft SN 226 Sept 1957 back chute in 1975,,, now at the museum

The July 1960 SN 60-9707 card is for Hayden's other back chute found on the plane in the pocket of chute SN 226 and most certainly belongs to the chute Cooper used..

So, Cooper chose the newer chute and Cossey's description was false..

As has previously been explained here a number of times, the parachute in the WSHM is NOT a 26-foot conical parachute. It does NOT have a single component that can be identified as being a part of a 26-foot conical rig.

Hayden has stated that his parachutes were similar or identical.  The WSHM parachute appears to have been assembled from a grab bag of military surplus parachute components that were never part of one particular rig.

If you want to see what a 26-foot conical parachute looks like, go to Sluggo's site on Shutter's web page and take a look at his pictures of one.  Sluggo's pictures are identical to a genuine 26-foot conical parachute that I owned in 1971 just a few months before the hijacking.

Basically, everything that Cossey claimed about the parachutes involved in the hijacking is nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
4 hours ago, Robert99 said:

As has previously been explained here a number of times, the parachute in the WSHM is NOT a 26-foot conical parachute. It does NOT have a single component that can be identified as being a part of a 26-foot conical rig.

Hayden has stated that his parachutes were similar or identical.  The WSHM parachute appears to have been assembled from a grab bag of military surplus parachute components that were never part of one particular rig.

If you want to see what a 26-foot conical parachute looks like, go to Sluggo's site on Shutter's web page and take a look at his pictures of one.  Sluggo's pictures are identical to a genuine 26-foot conical parachute that I owned in 1971 just a few months before the hijacking.

Basically, everything that Cossey claimed about the parachutes involved in the hijacking is nonsense.

Wrong,,

The chute is a 26' according to its packing card.. it was also repacked after Hayden got it back.

The container is a Pioneer P2-B-24...  So, the container is a 24'

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
8 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Wrong,,

The chute is a 26' according to its packing card.. it was also repacked after Hayden got it back.

The container is a Pioneer P2-B-24...  So, the container is a 24'

Flyjack, you are wrong!  Have you ever seen a 26-foot conical parachute?  I have owned one, used it in flight, and seen ever stitch in it.

There are several things unique about the 26-foot conical parachute rig.  Do you know what they are?

The canopy in the WSHM parachute is a standard 28-foot canopy.  There is nothing unique about that rig.

Edited by Robert99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The designation of " 26' " or " 24' " refers to the size of the canopy inside the container. People casually use the term 'parachute' to refer to either the canopy, the container, or the whole rig. In the "P2-B-24" designation for the container, the '24' might refer to the size of canopy it's intended for, it might not. Usually a few sizes of canopy will fit into a particular container. It's rigger's discretion of what canopy can be put into a container as long as it fits, unless otherwise specified by the manufacturer.

 

8 hours ago, Robert99 said:

As has previously been explained here a number of times, the parachute in the WSHM is NOT a 26-foot conical parachute. It does NOT have a single component that can be identified as being a part of a 26-foot conical rig.

When you have said this before, weren't you referring to the NB-6/8 containers, not the 26' canopy?

 

8 hours ago, Robert99 said:

The WSHM parachute appears to have been assembled from a grab bag of military surplus parachute components that were never part of one particular rig.

Not necessarily. It does not appear to be a complete 'Frankenstein rig'. It's simply an older container that has had a newer harness put on at some point, not an unusual repair. Whatever canopy is in it is whatever it is.

 

10 hours ago, olemisscub said:

So which one did Hayden get back that is in the museum?

Some time ago Shutter was going to look into this. I suggested he contact Skydive Kapowsin, the major DZ in that area, to find a suitable rigger. He ended up in contact with Jeff Farrington, the DZ owner, whose whole family are jumpers. It was Jeff and his son Andy who did the re-creation jump in that last History Channel(?) program that Bruce was in. The pandemic hit and the museum was closed for a while. Shutter got otherwise occupied. Bruce was going to take that over, but he's since retired from the case. If someone wanted to follow that up, I'd suggest contact the museum and Jeff at Kapowsin, and see if they're still willing to make that happen. Jeff has been around a long time, and has the credentials, ratings, and experience that the museum would want for someone to handle that rig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Robert99 said:

There are several things unique about the 26-foot conical parachute rig.

Again, '26' conical' and '28' canopy' are the canopies themselves, not the container. As with 377, my first reserve ride was a 26' conical, mine deployed out of a Wonderhog container.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
1 hour ago, Robert99 said:

Flyjack, you are wrong!  Have you ever seen a 26-foot conical parachute?  I have owned one, used it in flight, and seen ever stitch in it.

There are several things unique about the 26-foot conical parachute rig.  Do you know what they are?

The canopy in the WSHM parachute is a standard 28-foot canopy.  There is nothing unique about that rig.

No, I am not...

What I said is 100% accurate.

The P2-B-24 container was made in the early 40's and originally came with a silk chute.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

When people these days try to shove photos in front of the Stews for identification, they need to keep this 302 from April 1976 in mind:

flocantrecognize.png

Yes, there is another document from 1976 in which the FBI admit the witnesses and evidence is not good enough and that only the co-operation of "Cooper" could bring a prosecution..

The only thing that has changed since 1976 is DNA tech...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

47 47