10 10
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

(edited)

Six years since Bruce posted that article...and boy was I WRONG in my comment about it. I said this:

Quote

'It probably wasn’t Cooper-related. Burglaries in the area, etc. The cops will get to the bottom of this in a quick-fast New York hurry, once they finish gathering the evidence...'

Unfortunately, my confidence in the cops turned out to be overrated. A few weeks after the murder, KOMO Channel 4 TV News did a short bit, reading a statement about the King County Sheriffs' Office, the department responsible for solving the case. The newscaster said:

Quote

"The Justice Department in Seattle claims today that the KCSO has a poor record in solving major crimes..." 

I never forgot that, even though it only took a few seconds of the entire evening broadcast. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Continental pilot 4 minutes behind 305 reported two important things...

The plane was on V-23... > no alternate flight path.

and

The wind was 160-170 degrees, that is exactly what I have been saying. The FBI wind data was an estimate based on an average between Eugene and Portland and over an hour timeframe...  A 160-170 degree wind would put the Placard exactly where it was found if 305 was on the FBI path.. (if the Placard even came from 305)

 

The plane was flying at 166 degrees straight into the wind.

 

The takeaway is Cooper may have landed slightly West of the flight path.

 

EDIT: Follow up investigation suggests he may have been just in front of Norjak.

flightfollow305a.jpeg.d7b428ab6b7f4bd745abc3e91dcb55c3.jpeg

 

flightfollow305b.jpeg.f8fc777de274eed65c63aab3bee444f6.jpeg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem here is nobody gave anything close to these speeds. if he calculated. it's in error. 80 knots would be severe at 14,000. small craft warnings would be in effect and warnings of severe winds aloft. this would be hurricane conditions. all aircraft tune in to weather frequencies that give them specific details on weather on the ground and aloft. 

 

From the aircraft, we can not directly measure the wind speed, but must compute the wind speed from the ground speed and airspeed. Wind speed is the vector difference between the airspeed and the ground speed. ... If the measured airspeed is greater than the observed ground speed, the wind speed is positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
1 hour ago, mrshutter45 said:

The problem here is nobody gave anything close to these speeds. if he calculated. it's in error. 80 knots would be severe at 14,000. small craft warnings would be in effect and warnings of severe winds aloft. this would be hurricane conditions. all aircraft tune in to weather frequencies that give them specific details on weather on the ground and aloft. 

 

From the aircraft, we can not directly measure the wind speed, but must compute the wind speed from the ground speed and airspeed. Wind speed is the vector difference between the airspeed and the ground speed. ... If the measured airspeed is greater than the observed ground speed, the wind speed is positive.

The wind direction is the take away, at all elevations and estimated speeds.

BTW,,, I have always wondered how that would effect the flight timing and location/jump time.. if the winds were about 160-170 degrees..

Parachute drift would be back along flight path/slightly west..

 

That would put the LZ mostly outside the initial search area.. the orange zone would be spun to about 11 o'clock.

 

20381a.jpg.88b2c08698a707e6600cbb4fb272610b.jpg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Seeing this debate, I decided to call in some experts of my own. 

The question below was sent by me to members of Quora, the question and answer website. The question was posed to thirty-five members who have listed their credentials at Quora in the following categories:

1) Former or retired commercial airline pilots.
2) Former or retired military pilots. 
3) Two retired test pilots.
4) One member of the FAA with an instrument rating license.
5) Former test pilot with Boeing aircraft. 

As I said, the question was sent to a total of 35 Quora members who fit one of the criteria listed above, according to their Quora profiles. Some of them will probably provide answers to the question. 

Quote

'What would be the effect of a commercial jet flying into a headwind of 80 knots at 14,000 feet altitude?'

The question is established by Quora as an article, and then answers from the people who chose to answer the question are listed below it. I will link the article to their answers as they come in. This will probably take a day or two before the answers start appearing. 

EDIT:  Well, that didn't take long. One answer came in within a couple of minutes. I made a comment to it hinting that I was looking more for possible effects on the aircraft, rather than just using more fuel and taking longer to reach their destination. But then I am not a pilot. Two people have answered and neither of them mentioned heavy or dangerous effects on the aircraft. 

If you want to keep track as answers come in, the link to the Quora Question is HERE. I would like to put in a plug for Quora as well. If you have a question about something, and you want REAL experts to chip in their answers, sometimes with pictures where they go into detail for you...Quora is certainly the place to ask. People who answer questions at Quora anonymously, unless they are 'confessions' or something, usually get their answers collapsed and deleted due to Quora's 'real identity' policy. Other members also downvote such answers. 

Although there are a few 'anonymous' users at Quora, the large majority of members use established identities and give their professional or other credentials. These credentials appear below their names when they answer a question, making Quora an extremely legitimate site for Q and A. 

Let's face it, getting an answer from an expert in one field or another (with real names and credentials) is preferable to having your question answered by someone who uses the name 'CatLover 21' for example. B| (Unless it's a cat question I guess)

EDIT: Answers are rolling in...I had to provide my own 'answer' just to explain why the question was being asked. I think five answers already are posted in less than an hour. My personal, non-pilot, non-expert opinion is that if headwinds were actually running anything even close to 80 knots, Flight 305...already running in a 'dirty' configuration...would have stalled right out of the sky. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


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

Seeing this debate, I decided to call in some experts of my own. 

The question below was sent by me to members of Quora, the question and answer website. The question was posed to thirty-five members who have listed their credentials at Quora in the following categories:

1) Former or retired commercial airline pilots.
2) Former or retired military pilots. 
3) Two retired test pilots.
4) One member of the FAA with an instrument rating license.
5) Former test pilot with Boeing aircraft. 

As I said, the question was sent to a total of 35 Quora members who fit one of the criteria listed above, according to their Quora profiles. Some of them will probably provide answers to the question. 

The question is established by Quora as an article, and then answers from the people who chose to answer the question are listed below it. I will link the article to their answers as they come in. This will probably take a day or two before the answers start appearing. 

EDIT:  Well, that didn't take long. One answer came in within a couple of minutes. I made a comment to it hinting that I was looking more for possible effects on the aircraft, rather than just using more fuel and taking longer to reach their destination. But then I am not a pilot. Two people have answered and neither of them mentioned heavy or dangerous effects on the aircraft. 

If you want to keep track as answers come in, the link to the Quora Question is HERE. I would like to put in a plug for Quora as well. If you have a question about something, and you want REAL experts to chip in their answers, sometimes with pictures where they go into detail for you...Quora is certainly the place to ask. People who answer questions at Quora anonymously, unless they are 'confessions' or something, usually get their answers collapsed and deleted due to Quora's 'real identity' policy. Other members also downvote such answers. 

Although there are a few 'anonymous' users at Quora, the large majority of members use established identities and give their professional or other credentials. These credentials appear below their names when they answer a question, making Quora an extremely legitimate site for Q and A. 

Let's face it, getting an answer from an expert in one field or another (with real names and credentials) is preferable to having your question answered by someone who uses the name 'CatLover 21' for example. B| (Unless it's a cat question I guess)

EDIT: Answers are rolling in...I had to provide my own 'answer' just to explain why the question was being asked. I think five answers already are posted in less than an hour. My personal, non-pilot, non-expert opinion is that if headwinds were actually running anything even close to 80 knots, Flight 305...already running in a 'dirty' configuration...would have stalled right out of the sky. 

80 knots was at 14,000 ft not 10,000 ft... He estimated 65 knots at 10,000 ft.. 35 knots surface.

However, the estimated wind speed is not the point.. the wind direction is far more significant. The nearby data indicates the wind was shifting from SSE to SSW around 8 PM... that is consistent with 160 to 170 degree wind. Since, the FBI admits the wind direction was an estimate.. if the winds were 160-170 degrees they got LZ and initial search area wrong. 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
Quote

 

'80 knots was at 14,000 ft not 10,000 ft... He estimated 65 knots at 10,000 ft.. 35 knots surface.

However, the estimated wind speed is not the point.. the wind direction is far more significant. The nearby data indicates the wind was shifting from SSE to SSW around 8 PM... that is consistent with 160 to 170 degree wind. Since, the FBI admits the wind direction was an estimate.. if the winds were 160-170 degrees they got LZ and initial search area wrong...'

 

That may all be true, but you are working with incomplete information here. Jet was flying at three miles a minute. If you can't establish an EXACT time Cooper jumped...well...let's take an example:

Suppose you establish the time that Cooper jumped within a two minute window, and that's being generous.

Skydiver '377' says that even if Cooper pulled the ripcord the moment he jumped, estimated drift from 10,000 feet might be no more than a single mile in any direction. Coupled with a two minute window, this establishes a search area of at least 18 square miles. That doesn't even take into account the added winds some folks are claiming. The PDX report from Weather Underground says the ground level winds were at their lowest they had been all day...maybe five MPH, maybe eight MPH at most...

Toss in some claims of 65 knot winds at a mere 10,000 feet...which is highly unlikely anyway. No one is going to convince me that if ground level winds were almost negligible...that the winds just 10,000 feet up were running at over seventy miles an hour. It just doesn't make any sense.  Ground level winds of forty miles an hour (or about 35 knots) actually make the weather news in Seattle...and no such thing was reported. 

On a strictly personal angle, I was living in the area at the time of the hijacking and helping run a small farm. I can say with complete confidence there was NO STORM on the night of the hijacking. Hardly any wind, just that misty rain crap all day. Nothing else. And then we watched the whole thing on television. Weather Underground, since they use confirmed weather records for their historical data, says the same thing. This claim of excessive wind speed by the (not named) Continental pilot is basically baloney. The FBI record even fails to note whether a follow-up interview was actually done, and whether it was confirmed HE was the pilot four minutes behind 305. Or if there was even a Continental flight four minutes behind that night. (Maybe there was, I don't know that.)

And if this is the first time anyone has heard of a Continental Airlines flight shadowing 305 just four minutes back...why hasn't anyone heard about this until now? Like I said...maybe there was and some of you know this already. As for me, this is the first I have heard of it. 

Now as far as wind direction, the Weather Underground report for PDX 11/24/71 seems to support your statements. I have to say that. I will post it up below. Click on the image to get the full size view. 

 

WeatherPortland11_24_71.jpg

EDIT: Just a late-night reminder that the next Cooper Campout comes to the Olympic Mountains in two weeks. Some folks already signed up to attend, but no one yet who has said they could help with the video camera stuff. Still hoping I get someone for that, otherwise it's the remote control for me. No worries. I heard Bruce Smith is looking for gas money from a recent post he made over at the DB Cooper Forum. If he wants to help with all this, I will pay him for his services, no problem. I might even provide the food and drinks for him. 

I wouldn't hold your breath on Bruce agreeing on that though...B| 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

'80 knots was at 14,000 ft not 10,000 ft... He estimated 65 knots at 10,000 ft.. 35 knots surface.

All were wrong....where is the aviation weather data? that's what you need. ground conditions are different than weather aloft. you don't look for dirt bike trails on a road atlas..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, mrshutter45 said:

All were wrong....where is the aviation weather data? that's what you need. ground conditions are different than weather aloft. you don't look for dirt bike trails on a road atlas..

That is the problem,, there is no wind data for the "LZ" location at exactly 8:09-8:13... the wind data the FBI used to estimate was from far away and AVERAGED over an hour time period. Winds can vary within miles or minutes..

The FBI wind has always been treated as a fact.. it isn't. It is just an estimate, a weak one.

All available data showed wind direction consistent at all levels but increasing speeds at altitude and shifting from SSE to SSW.. close to 8 PM.

Fact is, the wind data the FBI used was an estimate based on Portland and Salem, they admit that in the files. 60-110 miles away?? That is ridiculous.  The wind in Seattle was SSE.. Toledo S..

If that FBI estimate was wrong and the wind was actually 160-170 degrees at jump time/location, they got the parachute drift direction wrong and initially searched the wrong area.

With 160-170 degree winds the LZ "cone" would be back along the flight path and slightly west. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
1 hour ago, mrshutter45 said:

All were wrong....where is the aviation weather data? that's what you need. ground conditions are different than weather aloft. you don't look for dirt bike trails on a road atlas..

Well, you probably aren't going to get that kind of data from back in 1971. Main point was that if ground winds were negligible at the time of Cooper's jump, it's doubtful they were blowing 70 MPH at 10,000 feet. In any case, that would be one heck of a headwind for a jet already flying at close to stall speed. 

And I still would like to know if Bruce Smith needs that gas money. I need a camera person on the 16th, and I'm willing to fix him up in exchange for services. Easier job and much more fun than mowing lawns, for example. B|

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Well, you probably aren't going to get that kind of data from back in 1971. Main point was that if ground winds were negligible at the time of Cooper's jump, it's doubtful they were blowing 70 MPH at 10,000 feet. In any case, that would be one heck of a headwind for a jet already flying at close to stall speed. 

And I still would like to know if Bruce Smith needs that gas money. I need a camera person on the 16th, and I'm willing to fix him up in exchange for services. Easier job and much more fun than mowing lawns, for example. B|

A headwind helps keep a plane up....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Georger fails to recognize that his own statements are in conflict,,, Other evidence is consistent.

It is really irrelevant and the nature of the "sleuthing" process...

Ammerman was clearly ARTCC.

 

The real take away is that a team was watching and directing the chase planes from Seattle Center and an alternate flight path is implausible unless there was a massive conspiracy and coverup which knowingly caused all the resources to search the wrong area.

 

The alternate flight path is beyond DEAD. It is a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

RE: Walter Reca.. flight path obviously makes this theory nonsense.

 

But, I found something else interesting..

In an August 2008 FBI agent Larry Carr gave an interview with Steve Rinehart of K-Talk Salt Lake City. A caller named "Carl" called in and asked some interesting questions.

That caller Carl sounds exactly like Carl Lauren, video below.
 

 

 

Carl's evidence for Reca was audio tapes with Reca in 2008/2009 exactly when he was "researching" the case. Note the questions?? Carl is formulating a narrative.. if he had been discussing RECA as Cooper for many years, why did he get so much wrong in 2008, because RECA was not Cooper and Carl was shaping the narrative in 2008.

 

@ 22:25 voice in audio, transcript below

http://www.washingtonhistory.org/collections/item.aspx?irn=121232&record=40
 

SR: We have some callers. I want to continue asking you questions of my own, but let’s try to fit a couple of them in here, as we go.

LC: Sure.
SR: We got Carl on the Salt Lake county line. Carl, you’re on the air with Agent Carr.

Carl: Yeah, hi. The FBI put on the newspapers the composite drawings. Now, are these pretty accurate in terms of the people who actually came in contact with the hijacker?

LC: Yeah, you know everyone that came in contact with that gentleman in the interview with a sketch artist. They went about their process, developing all of the parameters of the individual’s face. They went back and constructed these sketches and then they were sent back out to the field. Each person looked them over. The three stewardesses involved

looked them over, and there were some changes made to the original one. Once the stewardesses gave the thumbs up that this is the best representation, and that’s what was put out to the public.

Carl: Okay, and then these thousands of suspects you developed, did they fit the basic description then?

LC: Well, you know, a lot of them were ruled out basically on the physical descriptors of who D.B. Cooper was. Not necessarily the sketch, but basically the physical parameters; the dark complexion, or the olive skin complexion. Well, if your suspect’s fair skinned, and even if they weren’t solely ruled out on that, that’s one tick. Yeah okay, I guess if this person, if they were 5’7, as opposed to what was reported as 5’10 to 6’1, there’s another tick, that hey maybe this isn’t the right person. If they had blue eyes... Well, we’re pretty sure D.B. Cooper had brown eyes. So, you know, rule that off. Yeah, you know, a lot of the suspects were ruled because they didn’t fit the physical criteria.

Carl: Yeah, I mean, since the FBI, they have this belief that the man may’ve been killed in the jump or when he hit the ground. Did the FBI conduct a search among the missing person reports?

LC: Well you look at the databases back then, you know, long before the time of the computer, it was easier to connect the dots as far as missing persons go. So there was, of course, an effort at the missing persons database, but it just simply didn’t really exist back in that point of time. You know, it would’ve individual sheriff departments that would’ve collected the data, and someone had to do that. I couldn’t even guess how many sheriff’s departments there are in the United States, but I would imagine is was well into the thousands.

Carl: Yeah, you know, is it possible when the hijacker got on the plane he would’ve changed his appearance? Like wearing a wig or maybe wearing these thick soled shoes so, you know, it’d make it appear that he might be taller, or maybe colored his hair a different color. Is that at all possible?

LC: All that is possible, but when you look at how much time, especially Tina Mucklow, spent, the hijacker, shoulder-to-shoulder with him... You know, you can try these experiments yourself. Go ahead and put some makeup on your skin, if you’re fair skinned, and put enough on to swarthy, and then have someone sit next to you. You’re going to see that makeup, it’s going to be pancaked on to you. Same thing with a wig, it looked very unnatural, especially during 1971. So if someone’s wearing a wig, it’s going to be very noticeable.

Carl: What seat was he sitting in before he, you know, hijacked the plane?

LC: He was sitting in the very back, and I don’t have the file in front of me so...

Carl: Was he sitting next to somebody else with whom he had a conversation?

LC: No, he was sitting all by himself in a row of three. And, you know, ultimately, "Flow Chapner" sat by him originally, and Tina Mucklow the rest of the flight.

Carl: What type of firearm did he have? LC: No firearm.
SR: And a grenade.

LC: No grenade. He had opened up his briefcase and there was either dynamite or road flares in there.

Carl: Yeah, well interesting case. I wish you good luck Agent Carr.

SR: Carl, thanks for the call. We appreciate it.

Carl: Yeah, thank you. Goodbye.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Although there are a few 'anonymous' users at Quora, the large majority of members use established identities and give their professional or other credentials. These credentials appear below their names when they answer a question, making Quora an extremely legitimate site for Q and A. 

Let's face it, getting an answer from an expert in one field or another (with real names and credentials) is preferable to having your question answered by someone who uses the name 'CatLover 21' for example. B| (Unless it's a cat question I guess)

I can certainly see this point. And if someone is hiding behind anonymity and obviously trolling, then they can certainly be discounted. But the other side of the argument, and the one I run with is this:

I'm an extremely private person. I don't do facebook, twitter, instagram, or any of that social media stuff. The stuff people put on there, to me, to my life, what I'm up to is nobody's business but who I'm doing it with.  I come on this site because I'm a skydiver. I read this thread because I've always been fascinated with the Cooper case. If I post a thought or an opinion, I'll usually state the reasons why I think it. If someone wants to disagree with me and state the reasons why, I'm all ears (eyes?). Does my name really make a difference? Indeed, if I did state my name, most of you wouldn't know who I am anyway, so what's the difference? I can tell you my experience. I've been jumping for over 40 years, almost 30 of those as an active, rated instructor. I've made thousands upon thousands upon thousands of jumps. Jump pretty much every week, made 16 last weekend, pretty typical for this time of year. I've jumped out of and off of a wide variety of things, into a wide variety of places. So I think I know parachuting fairly well. Again, I'm willing to state and discuss the reasoning behind my opinions, so does the spelling of my name really matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
20 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

My personal, non-pilot, non-expert opinion is that if headwinds were actually running anything even close to 80 knots, Flight 305...already running in a 'dirty' configuration...would have stalled right out of the sky. 

I don't think so.

I'm not a pilot either, but I've got a pretty good grasp of aerodynamics. If the pilots at Quora state differently, I'll stand corrected, but...

You can look up Bernoulli's law or whatever, but the operative issue is airflow over the wings, not ground speed. Take it to a theoretical extreme: If a jetliner will fly at 300, it'll fly. If it were flying into a headwind of 400, then it might have a groundspeed of 100 backwards, but if there's 300 airflow going over the wings, then it's flying.

We fly in turboprops, which are much less powerful than jets. We occasionally get uppers of 50-60 at altitude. It affects the spot and how much time given between groups on exit, but the plane flies just fine.

Edited by dudeman17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Skydiver '377' says that even if Cooper pulled the ripcord the moment he jumped, estimated drift from 10,000 feet might be no more than a single mile in any direction.

I once had a round reserve zapped on exit. Intricate 4-way exit from a DC-3, my reserve ripcord got snagged by someone else's container, so I ended up under a low-performance round reserve at 12,500'. I don't remember what the winds were, but I landed about a mile, mile and a half away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question. How exactly did those airstairs work? I know their intended use on the ground, they lower to the ground and people go up or down them into or out of the plane. But when they were lowered in flight, would they hydraulically lower into a fixed position, or would they hang loose and move up and down with the varying airflow, factored by their weight? The reason why I ask this is, there's an integral part of this case that's never made sense to me. And that's the idea that the pilots would 'feel' it when Cooper jumped. I fly in much smaller, lighter, less powerful planes than a jetliner, and when one person jumps, you don't feel it. It's not like you're sitting on the edge of a springboard when somebody launches off it into a Triple-Lindy. Now, if those stairs floated up and down freely, and were light enough, so that when Cooper ventured out on them they lowered with his weight, then recoiled back up when he left, then I could see the pilots feeling that. But if they were in a relatively fixed position, then not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
25 minutes ago, dudeman17 said:

I have a question. How exactly did those airstairs work? I know their intended use on the ground, they lower to the ground and people go up or down them into or out of the plane. But when they were lowered in flight, would they hydraulically lower into a fixed position, or would they hang loose and move up and down with the varying airflow, factored by their weight? The reason why I ask this is, there's an integral part of this case that's never made sense to me. And that's the idea that the pilots would 'feel' it when Cooper jumped. I fly in much smaller, lighter, less powerful planes than a jetliner, and when one person jumps, you don't feel it. It's not like you're sitting on the edge of a springboard when somebody launches off it into a Triple-Lindy. Now, if those stairs floated up and down freely, and were light enough, so that when Cooper ventured out on them they lowered with his weight, then recoiled back up when he left, then I could see the pilots feeling that. But if they were in a relatively fixed position, then not so much.

Drops by gravity, wind held them up but Cooper's weight helped push them down. When Cooper jumped the wind pushed them back up.

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Note:  The job offer to Bruce Smith was a joke. He already turned down $16,000 from a movie company to work with me, some of that would have paid up front. So...I know he wouldn't come along on a campout to do camera work for a couple of hundred bucks... B|

Flyjack says in part:  
 

Quote

"In an August 2008 FBI agent Larry Carr gave an interview with Steve Rinehart of K-Talk Salt Lake City..."

Did you hear the part where Carr says that everyone gave up the search for the bills within a few months? The interview can be found at the D.B. Cooper entry at Wikipedia, down near the bottom of the page. 

Flyjack:  I don't care if you go anonymous on the username...at least you aren't sniping at people all the time from behind a rock. Others in Cooperland do that sometimes. Once in a while on certain websites, I go by the name XoXSciFiGuy...so it's cool.

Dudeman 17 says in part:

Quote

'We fly in turboprops, which are much less powerful than jets. We occasionally get uppers of 50-60 at altitude. It affects the spot and how much time given between groups on exit, but the plane flies just fine...'

Yeah...that was my main question. I'm not a pilot either...I was wondering if the headwinds were strong enough, would the jet have started to stall? Apparently not. Okay, thanks. 

Change of Plans Regarding August Campout-Created Videos on Cooper: 

We've decided to do TWO separate videos on the subject of Eric Ulis. The first is the short video, a comedy bit more or less (SEE: DB Cooper meets Saturday Night Live) about his deleted videos, and a second, more extensive one regarding Eric's general history with the case, as well as the subject of the recent article at Quora.

I may do a third, a sort-of 'update' video about the upcoming picture, at least what I am allowed to say about that. Over the last few months, we've been getting a fair number of emails with the same theme:  "When are you going to do ANOTHER video?" is a common question. I figure if we do two or three, that will satisfy people for a while. 

I did do a video in June at the Oregon campout, but two guys with literally coolers full of re-loaded ammunition  (completely crazy) were up at a shooting pit about 150 yards up the road, and totally ruined the audio on our video. They were banging away from about noon on Video Day until after 6PM. I like target shooting as much as the next guy...but they were ridiculous. I estimated they reached a thousand rounds in a couple of hours...and they were just getting started. I have NEVER heard so much ammo fired off in a single day since I was in the Army, no joke. When I reviewed the video after I returned to the Seattle area...I deleted it. How did we know they used re-loaded ammo? Because when Tom and I went up there after they had gone...we could not find one single piece of new brass on the ground anywhere. Just a few old ones from long ago. They policed up every bit of brass after they were done. 

See the picture below to find out where this happened. 

mainsitemap.jpg

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

The tie:  

There are semi horizontal lines (as worn) of "particles" on the tie...

These aren't random but suggest a sideways wiping... it looks consistent with Cooper using the tie to wipe prints from the plane. Most of the particles were used in the 727 (inc CP TI), some of the particles may have been picked up in the plane if Cooper used the tie to wipe prints from surfaces.

I can't see how you would get those "line" patterns so high above the tie "clip/pin/tack" on the tie during normal wearing/use. Those lines look like a series of rub/wipes.. at a similar semi-horizontal angle..  and none vertical..

 

 

Tie-Composite1-enhanceda.jpg

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

The tie:  

There are semi horizontal lines (as worn) of "particles" on the tie...

These aren't random but suggest a sideways wiping... it looks consistent with Cooper using the tie to wipe prints from the plane. Most of the particles were used in the 727 (inc CP TI), some of the particles may have been picked up in the plane if Cooper used the tie to wipe prints from surfaces.

I can't see how you would get those "line" patterns so high above the tie "clip/pin/tack" on the tie during normal wearing/use. Those lines look like a series of rub/wipes.. at a similar semi-horizontal angle..  and none vertical..

 

 

Tie-Composite1-enhanceda.jpg

One of the most irresponsible and dishonest Cooper characters continues to undermine the advancement of this case by lying.. to discredit others.

I wrote "some of the particles may have been picked up in the plane if Cooper used the tie to wipe prints from surfaces"

NOT "So, he says, particles on the tie probably all came from the plane"

 

Never, ever trust anything this guy says.. 

 

Georgerlie.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this were the case. no prints would be found. you need to verify things like this before even posting them since none of us have a background in science or forensics. the plane has been cleaned hundreds of times. I seriously doubt that's where the particles came from. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mrshutter45 said:

If this were the case. no prints would be found. you need to verify things like this before even posting them since none of us have a background in science or forensics. the plane has been cleaned hundreds of times. I seriously doubt that's where the particles came from. 

Not true, at all.

The prints have never been confirmed to be from Cooper and he may not have wiped everything (if he did use the tie to wipe prints).

My statement is 100% accurate. If anyone can actually read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's free!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
10 10