11 11
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

too short? - ckret would rule him out on physicals (as he did christiansen)
immediate first questions that spring to mind: was he ever considered a suspect by the FBI, and if so did he have an alibi? is there any evidence he was in the WA area around the time of the hijack?
then we can get into motivation: he seemed very succesful from your description - why do this? (if it was a political motive - that seems to not have worked becaue no awareness was raised of any related issues?)
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

too short? - ckret would rule him out on physicals (as he did christiansen)
immediate first questions that spring to mind: was he ever considered a suspect by the FBI, and if so did he have an alibi? is there any evidence he was in the WA area around the time of the hijack?
then we can get into motivation: he seemed very successful from your description - why do this? (if it was a political motive - that seems to not have worked becaue no awareness was raised of any related issues?)



Hi Orange1.
Not really serious about Serling.
But note:
I played it straight. All details are true.
I got into looking at it when we were talking about psychological motivation. I happened on the letter the FAA sent out in 1971 about "The Doomsday Flight" and just followed the Serling angle for fun. Interesting how he has jump experience, an interesting facial sort-of match, the suit/tie. etc.

I was thinking about things that might have motivated skyjackers in 1971...movies, tv, newspapers.

What it shows is that it's relatively easy to cherry pick from the details of a person's life, and make them "fit" Cooper.

The "goodness of fit" is more a reflection of people's biases, I think.

I found another hijack ransom attempt in 1971 (attached) also. The guy was a nut..but NYC motorcycle cop. I laughed to myself because I've read the myth that Cooper was the first US extortion hijack. He wasn't.

I do have two questions:
1) Why do people think the 727 choice wasn't just coincidence? (what data?)
2) Why do people think Cooper's motivations were any different than the other hijackers? He could have been a slight nutcase.

(edit) added article about "The Doomsday Flight" from 8/10/71

(edit) I've talked about odd juxtapositions in newspapers before. "The Doomsday Flight" and a real hijack extortion are juxtapositioned here on the same page 5/30/71 (attached)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Not really serious about Serling.



I didn't think you were, but I was compelled to respond to be consistent with my previous posts ;)

Quote

What it shows is that it's relatively easy to cherry pick from the details of a person's life, and make them "fit" Cooper.



Agreed entirely... which is why the burden of proof (legally too) is to prove that someone did it, not that someone didn't do it. (I presume you are not going to ask us now to prove that Serling wasn't Cooper....:))

Quote

I do have two questions:
1) Why do people think the 727 choice wasn't just coincidence? (what data?)
2) Why do people think Cooper's motivations were any different than the other hijackers? He could have been a slight nutcase.



to (1) I am assuming because he knew the stairs could be opened in flight, even if he didn't seem to have all the details around that (i.e. that you couldn't take off like that). re (2)... you mean "some" people. I'm perfectly open to the suggestion that Cooper was a slight nutcase, although I think the $200K would have been a pretty good motivation too. (Of course in that case it makes no sense that Cooper would leave it buried in a bucket or in a safety deposit box and therefore to all intents and purposes come out with nothing for all that risk...)
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
snowmman,

Quote

1) Why do people think the 727 choice wasn't just coincidence? (what data?)



You asked this (or something like it) before. I didn’t understand exactly what you were asking, so I just figured someone would chime in.

I don’t know for sure, but I believe in 1971 the Boeing-727 was the only aircraft flying commercial routes with a T-Tail/Rear fuselage mounted engine configuration. If I’m wrong, I’m sure I’ll be corrected. With other configurations, you possibly could have opened forward and aft passenger doors in flight while unpressurized, but I doubt it. If you could get them open, the exit would be risky due to HIWCS (Human Interference with Control Surfaces) :)
If you are thinking that Cooper thought he could just hop on any jet and jump from it, and just lucked out on getting one on which it was possible. I can’t address that.

That puts us back to the “How can we know his mind?” discussion.

All I can say from a data standpoint is:

He knew the plane had an “Aft Airstair.”
He knew it could be opened in flight.
He knew the plane needed to be un-pressurized.

OR

He thought the plane had an “Aft Airstair.”
He thought it could be opened in flight.
He thought the plane need to be un-pressurized.

…And was right on all three counts.

Proving, “the 727 choice wasn't just coincidence” is proving a negative hypothesis, isn’t it?

Or, am I still not understanding what you are asking?

Cheers,

Sluggo_Monster

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the replies guys. As I'm sure you understand, I'm just trying to stir our collective thinking on this stuff.
Anytime we're stuck in a set of assumptions, it's good to revisit "why are we thinking this way?".

I've also been playing with the idea of why the Cooper story stuck in the American subconscious and how that affects the way we think about "facts".

1) In my view, jet airplane technology is inherently unsafe technology. I'm intrigued by how unsafe technologies get embraced by societies. Cars, computers etc. It's a combination of individual embrace and passions, plus economics: corporations pursuing profit. (edit) also military connection in jet case. A lot of elements/desires/passions come together, and millions are spent trying to make the unsafe technology safe. There's no good or bad judgment, it's just what we humans do. (Cooper exploited an unsafe aspect)

Jet airliners were relatively new technology in 1971. So there's a technology aspect to the Cooper story. Parachutes, while an older technology, were coming into a broader public exposure in the '70s also. So that's another technology contribution.

2) There has to be an everyman aspect to it. The average Joe Blow has to be able to conceive of pulling it off.

3) Money makes "motivation" simple, something everyone can relate to.

4) Drama. It has to be have a dramatic aspect, that exposes a weakness in the everyday interactions of people and maybe societies. My bias is that the drama is not in the act of stepping off the stairway into the night, but of combining all of the above aspects, whether by chance or plan, in the context of the 1971 stew.

5) (edit) The inherent violence has to be indirect..i.e. deniable. (for the common man embrace aspect).

So in the grand tradition of Rod Serling narratives, I've modified my previous shuttle hijack story.

The shuttle is most vulnerable to hijack when it's being transported on the back of a 747. So the story is that it's hijacked then. And where is it flown to: North Korea of course, who in their paranoia is convinced it's an attack and immediately threatens to launch a nuclear device.

And that's the standoff. The demand is for a $1 billion ransom, as the 747 inches closer and closer to North Korea. With NK threatening to launch.

The FBI, convinced they can track the transfer of such a large sum, okays it. But the second part of the plan is that computer/banking technology is exploited, so that it is possible, for the first time, to wire transfer $1 billion and get away with it.

Combine that with not getting caught, and it's a modern day Cooper story.

(edit) almost forgot: the escape from the 747 is by parachute in the Pacific, landing on an atoll somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


I don’t know for sure, but I believe in 1971 the Boeing-727 was the only aircraft flying commercial routes with a T-Tail/Rear fuselage mounted engine configuration. If I’m wrong, I’m sure I’ll be corrected. With other configurations, you possibly could have opened forward and aft passenger doors in flight while unpressurized, but I doubt it. If you could get them open, the exit would be risky due to HIWCS (Human Interference with Control Surfaces) :)



I'm confused Sluggo. On the one hand, you say you've read everything, but you seem to not have read my posts about the successful jump from a DC-9 (LaPoint 1/20/1972). You don't believe the myth that 727 was "the only one possible" right? I had even posted the news article... The myth is especially broken when we include non-US, like the BAC-111 (also posted pic of that).

I posted the MD-88 rear stairway photo because my understanding is that the MD- series was derived from the DC-9? (which is why they were sometimes called DC-9-88 or whatever?...although I'm guessing a little there). I couldn't find an actual DC-9 ventral stair photo.

Did people not believe the DC-9 story or ???

(edit)
Quote

If you are thinking that Cooper thought he could just hop on any jet and jump from it, and just lucked out on getting one on which it was possible.


I'm exploring that. Which is why I posted the likely stable of planes Northwest had in 1971. I'll know more when I get my 1971 timetable.

And you saw the people with apparent parachute plans that were on 707's and DC-8's right? How do you explain that? (they're the opposite: bad choices). Just because most future successful jumps mirrored the 727 choice, doesn't mean the first 727 choice was planned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
POSTED BEFORE PREVIOUS POST WAS EDITED

snowmman,

How right you are!

I said:
Quote

If I’m wrong, I’m sure I’ll be corrected.



The BAC-111, MD-80 series (see below) and Boeing 727 all fit the category of:

Quote

T-Tail/Rear fuselage mounted engine configuration



The purpose of that paragraph was to determine if your question was about the configuration of the A/C or about Cooper’s understanding of which aircraft would give him that configuration.

So are you trying to say (in the form of a question):

Would Cooper have attempted an exit if the A/C had NOT been a 727?

I guess you and I just think differently (correction: I know you and I think differently). You use the term “myth that a Boeing-727 was the only one”. I don’t see the relationship. If I buy into (your term) “the myth…..” Then, Cooper jumped from a 727. If I don’t buy into “ the myth….” Then Cooper jumped from a 727. So what does the myth (or lack thereof) have to do with whether or not he knew he could jump?

I’m not arguing, or being hard-headed, I really just don’t understand what you are saying (or asking). I’ve watched you develop some really well thought out scenarios over the last few months, so I pay attention to what you say. It’s just, this time, I’m not “getting it.”

Sluggo_Monster

The DC-9 Family:
The DC-9 was followed in subsequent modified forms by the MD-80, MD-90 and Boeing 717.
MD-80 Variants were MD-81 MD-82/-88 MD-83 MD-87.

as thus:

MD-81 = (DC-9-81)
MD-82 = (DC-9-82)
MD-83 = (DC-9-83)
MD-87 = (DC-9-87)
MD-88 = An MD-82 with updated glass cockpit of the MD-87.
MD-90-30 = A stretched variant with updated glass cockpit and two V2500 engines, also Extended Range (ER) version as the MD-90-30ER.
MD-95 = Replacement for the earlier DC-9-30, built as the Boeing 717.

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Two observations...

clicky

A jet exit has been done as a side door exit, on May 25, 2000, out of an Airbus A330-301. However, there were "equipment issues" because the hijacker made his own stuff.

His exit was less than stellar because it involved the placement of the flight attendant's foot on his butt.

Obviously, homemade equipment is less than reliable. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I don’t know for sure, but I believe in 1971 the Boeing-727 was the only aircraft flying commercial routes with a T-Tail/Rear fuselage mounted engine configuration. If I’m wrong, I’m sure I’ll be corrected.



Although there is no date of manufacture listed for Perris' DC-9, the two with "N" numbers right after it were manufactured in 1969

http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/mmsinqSQL.asp?mmstxt=302205A

And yes, I have personal knowledge that it is possible to jump from 127NK.
"Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there."

"Your statement answered your question."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Two observations...

clicky

A jet exit has been done as a side door exit, on May 25, 2000, out of an Airbus A330-301. However, there were "equipment issues" because the hijacker made his own stuff.

His exit was less than stellar because it involved the placement of the flight attendant's foot on his butt.

Obviously, homemade equipment is less than reliable. ;)



good one happythoughts.
I always wondered about the description of the hijacker on the ground. The news articles had said he was hard to find because there was just one hand sticking out of the ground. I didn't realize it was mud, so maybe that explains it.

I also didn't realize they helped push him out.

(edit) I also didn't realize it was a side door exit. that's amazing. (well not so amazing if you're just nuts). How did they get the door open? Do they open in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've scanned newspapers from 11/25/71 to 11/30/71 again, and the quote that the 727 was the only commercial airliner that you could safely jump from, came from a Boeing spokesman. Apparently this was John Wheeler. Makes sense. He was thinking about just Boeing planes, apparently.

I think it fed the public consciousness of "meticulously planned". Just like the idea that it was the first US extortion attempt. (It wasn't).

I also noticed that an estimated bailout time of 8:13 was already reported on 11/26/71...with a quote saying it was based on slight changes in altitude from the flight recorder. (edit) don't know if this was really the oscillations, or not. This made them concentrate search around Woodland.

So they seemed to have gotten stuck on a bailout time very quickly. The drop test wasn't till next year, and it didn't modify the estimated bailout time?

Also interesting is that 11/26/71, some initially reported Cooper's demands as 10,000 ft, wheels down and flaps down. They didn't note the degree of flaps. But then some reported the 15 degree thing.

(edit)
I found one article where on 11/26/71 they used the phrase "one of the few commercial aircraft models with an exit under its extreme rear, under the tail"
So maybe it was also some bad reporting or someone misheard Wheeler. In any case, some news articles started reporting that the 727 was the only one safely possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


I don’t know for sure, but I believe in 1971 the Boeing-727 was the only aircraft flying commercial routes with a T-Tail/Rear fuselage mounted engine configuration. If I’m wrong, I’m sure I’ll be corrected. With other configurations, you possibly could have opened forward and aft passenger doors in flight while unpressurized, but I doubt it. If you could get them open, the exit would be risky due to HIWCS (Human Interference with Control Surfaces) :)



I'm confused Sluggo. On the one hand, you say you've read everything, but you seem to not have read my posts about the successful jump from a DC-9 (LaPoint 1/20/1972). You don't believe the myth that 727 was "the only one possible" right? I had even posted the news article... The myth is especially broken when we include non-US, like the BAC-111 (also posted pic of that).

I posted the MD-88 rear stairway photo because my understanding is that the MD- series was derived from the DC-9? (which is why they were sometimes called DC-9-88 or whatever?...although I'm guessing a little there). I couldn't find an actual DC-9 ventral stair photo.

Did people not believe the DC-9 story or ???

(edit)
Quote

If you are thinking that Cooper thought he could just hop on any jet and jump from it, and just lucked out on getting one on which it was possible.


I'm exploring that. Which is why I posted the likely stable of planes Northwest had in 1971. I'll know more when I get my 1971 timetable.

And you saw the people with apparent parachute plans that were on 707's and DC-8's right? How do you explain that? (they're the opposite: bad choices). Just because most future successful jumps mirrored the 727 choice, doesn't mean the first 727 choice was planned.



REPLY> I wonder how many of these hijackers tested the route or the plane prior to hijacking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I also noticed that an estimated bailout time of 8:13 was already reported on 11/26/71...with a quote saying it was based on slight changes in altitude from the flight recorder. (edit) don't know if this was really the oscillations, or not. This made them concentrate search around Woodland.



snowmman,

This is just MY opinion and I have very little evidence (except the transcript):

Ckret, Please compare my statement to the interview(s) with Rataczak.


The instrument that Rataczak was monitoring (when referring to “oscillations”) was the “Cabin Altitude Rate of Change” gauge. I am of the belief this instrument is on the First Officer’s Panel. Sometimes aviation gauges are a little strange. What this gauge monitors is the delta of air pressure in the passenger cabin expressed in altitude (low pressure = high altitude). So it would not have shown the cabin altitude, but the delta in cabin altitude. This is not the same as the “pressure bump” felt in their ears and later (after the fact) recorded as the jump point.

Also, In my opinion:

The media, print and television, most often get technical details wrong. I know this to be true in the Nuclear/Atomic Energy field, so I am assuming it is true in the aviation field. I’m not implying malevolence, it’s just they aren’t very careful about technical details. The term “Flight Recorder” might mean the “Black Box(es)” or it might just be a reference to the “Cabin Altitude Rate of Change” gauge.

As I have said in the past, I’m no expert on Flight Data Recorders, but I do not think the ones in use in 1971 would have recorder Cabin Altitude Delta on the 10 – 15 channels available.

I have attached a text file and four images from my resident 727 expert (Benson, aka Captain Hedges). I had to split the images out of the text so I could post it all.

Thanks,

Sluggo_Monster

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All,

I was just looking at the text I posted above. Look at this:


Pneumatic Control System

It is a little long in the tooth now, but it is still around and in use on a great number of aircraft, mostly 100's. Affectionately know as steam driven". There are two control panels, again at the flight engineers panel. One for automatic control and one for manual mode. You set these by markings on the instrument and it is then entirely controlled by sensed pressures and venturi's.

It's basic, but robust, though pressure bumps are quite a common feature of this system.


Hmmmmmmm! Odd term (“pressure bump”).

Thanks,

Sluggo_Monster

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ckret

How much “time in type” (specifically Boeing-727-151) did Scott, Rataczak, and Anderson have at the time of the hijacking?

Hmmmmmmm! Odd term (“pressure bump”).


Anybody else,

If N467US had a Pneumatic Control System, what would the “Cabin Alt Delta” gauge read when unpressurized and flying straight and level at 10,000 ft. MSL? (Guru312? 377? Quade? Mr.Nuke? or anybody else with aviation experience?)

Is anybody thinking what I’m thinking?

I would love to hear from the skydiver(s) from about 8 months ago who said; "The jump wouldn't have caused oscillations in the gauge (or plane) and the door slam wouldn't have caused a pressure change (if un-pressurized). Or something to that effect.

Thanks,

Sluggo_Monster

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



Anybody else,

If N467US had a Pneumatic Control System, what would the “Cabin Alt Delta” gauge read when unpressurized and flying straight and level at 10,000 ft. MSL? (Guru312? 377? Quade? Mr.Nuke? or anybody else with aviation experience?)

Is anybody thinking what I’m thinking?


It should be reading zero. And yes I am thinking what you are thinking as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't have aviation experience to comment on what the gauges would show but I guess based on physics even in an unpressurised cabin due to the venturi effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venturi_effect
there would be a delta shown.

As far as the pressure bumps again I don't know how sensitive the human ear is to pressure change in feet or the guage but at lower speeds (~100knots) in a DC3 or Casa 212 (largest planes I have jumped) there was no detectable pressure delta but you could definately hear the "whoosh" of other jumpers entering the airstream.
Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
snowmman and georger,

I would like to ask a GREAT BIG favor of the two of you. Would you please research the occurrences of contraband being hidden in graves (intra-coffin and extra-coffin). Hidden in coffins (as in to smuggle) doesn’t count. I mean hiding something in graves in a cemetery.

In the event you find some cases, do that thing you two do, and try to access the likelihood that Cooper could have done that. Reference THIS POST.

There are 21 cemeteries within 16.7 Statute miles of the BTG VORTAC. There are three that are of great interest to me, they are Bethel Cemetery, Elim Cemetery, in the town of Brush Prairie and Brush Prairie Cemetery just south of the town. (Yes, there is some bias here, but I’ll do some other likely LZs if anyone ask). [See BTG VOR LZ Cemetery.jpg(this gives the bearing and distance from the BTG VOR and the coordinates) and BTG VOR LZ Cemetery GE.jpg.] I just can’t think of a better place to hide something, if you know there will be ground searchers coming behind you.

If you want to see them in Google Earth open [Washington Cemetery Waypoints.kml].

Ckret,

In a post on 06/12/2008 you said:

Quote

The orders the night of the jump came like this, in fact I think it was used in a movie.....

"What I want out of each and every one of you is a hard target search of every gas station, residence, warehouse, farmhouse, henhouse, outhouse, and dog house in that area."

So yes every avenue was searched.

Lots of bones turn up when hikers go into the woods around here. Very strange and wonderful place. No bones recovered so far can be related to the Cooper Caper.



Well, I have to ask… were any fresh graves looked into (no pun intended)?



Thanks all,

Sluggo_Monster

EDIT: Added [Cemetery Search.jpg] topographic map.

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Ckret

How much “time in type” (specifically Boeing-727-151) did Scott, Rataczak, and Anderson have at the time of the hijacking?

Hmmmmmmm! Odd term (“pressure bump”).


Anybody else,

If N467US had a Pneumatic Control System, what would the “Cabin Alt Delta” gauge read when unpressurized and flying straight and level at 10,000 ft. MSL? (Guru312? 377? Quade? Mr.Nuke? or anybody else with aviation experience?)

Is anybody thinking what I’m thinking?

I would love to hear from the skydiver(s) from about 8 months ago who said; "The jump wouldn't have caused oscillations in the gauge (or plane) and the door slam wouldn't have caused a pressure change (if un-pressurized). Or something to that effect.

Thanks,

Sluggo_Monster



Sluggo,

The cabin differential gauge should average zero with an open door.

I have a cabin pressure differential gauge from a DC 8. It has two hose ports, static (atmospheric) and cabin. I have attached hoses and fooled around with it in a moving car, one hose in and one outside. You can get venturi induced differences of a few hundred feet at moderate speeds. What drives it bonkers and gives wild swings is when I roll down both rear windows and create some sort of acoustic resonance that gives BIG equally spaced pressure bumps which continue until I roll up a window.

When I jumped the DC 9-21, I could hear and feel (in my ear) a mild but very preceivable whoosh-thump pressure event each time a jumper exited. I am sure it would be visible on a sensitive cabin pressure sensing instrument. I'll leave it to the aero engineers to explain the origin of the bump, but it DEFINITELY was there. You could count exiting jumpers blindfolded just by counting thumps.

So Sluggo, what are you getting at with the questions about gear, flaps and cabin dP/dt?

And graveyards? That's not where I'd bury anything were I Cooper. Wouldn't an obscured dig in the woods be FAR less likely to raise questions?

The door slam on the 727 did cause a pressure bump in the FBI tests. Are you questioning the reported results?

I just wish we had the ATC radar tapes. If you asked most radar scope jockeys without a DZ in their area whether an exiting jumper could be painted, they'd say no way. If that was the mindset during the investigation, they might not have thought to look very closely at the recorded echos from the 727 flight path.

377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Wow...anyone thought about doing a brief on the sum total of these posts so its comprehensible?



Sure, here goes:

Nobody knows who Cooper is/was or even exactly where he jumped.

We engage in endless speculation about the forgoing.

Jo Weber thinks her late husband Duane was Cooper, but most on the forum disagree.

Quade is the adult in charge of the forum and raps our knuckles when we get mean to each other.

Ckret is a real FBI agent and wants to solve the case with our help. Cooper is almost a hobby for him pursued only in spare moments. His day job involves catching bank robbers.

We get off topic sometimes. We squabble too...but there is a base of mutual respect and collegiality.

There. I just saved you a LOT of reading.

37.7



377, now thats funny, i don't care who you are.

All,

Been busy and have had to put Cooper to the side for a while. Sluggo, I'll call you when I get a chance to go over your questions. Hopefully (if everything goes right on my end) in several weeks we should have some interesting discoveries as it relates to the money thanks to Georger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
377:
Current policy seems to be that tapes around hijacks are only required by the FAA to be retained for 3 years. It does say a release is required though after 3 years to return tapes to service. Not sure what policy was in play in 1971...maybe none? see page 89 of http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/at_orders/media/Basic7210.3V.pdf

It mentions "System Safety and Procedures" as an FAA group to contact for the release? they might be the right contact for historical hijack tapes? Not sure if that's a real group though.

Also: A great document for FAA history is
the FAA Historical Chronology 1926-1996.
http://www.faa.gov/about/media/b-chron.pdf

It has good data on what type of hijacking occured when. (download it (big) and search using "hijacking" in adobe reader)
Interestingly it perpetuates the myth that Cooper was the first in a series of extortion hijacks (he wasn't)
(page 162).

One interesting thing I found had to do with various agreements over time, as to who has jurisdiction depending on where the plane is during a hijacking (ground, air etc). It varies between pilot, FAA and FBI.

During the time of the Cooper hijack, the existing agreement was that FBI had jurisdication while the plane was on the ground, with pilot at all other times, although FAA recommendations to him took precedence.

This changed in '74, to give the FAA jurisdiction from the time the doors closed, to the first door open for disembarking. They did agree that all parties would work together.

An agreement in Dec. '71 gave the pilot the responsibility for signaling whether the plane should be disabled or stormed.

So Cooper's hijack was during a period where they had not yet fully settled on procedural details of handling a hijack. (page 152)

I've seen some hijack reports where the hijacker passed the note before the plane took off. FBI would have jurisdiction at that time, so while I initially thought it would be a good plan (get chutes/money as soon as possible)...it's obviously a bad plan because the FBI get to decide what to do...So Cooper's plan of staying in the air until everything's ready on the ground, was really a great idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hopefully (if everything goes right on my end) in several weeks we should have some interesting discoveries as it relates to the money thanks to Georger.



wow...I've been looking at the little crumbs georger gave about his "client" that talked about project skyhook and parachuting.

Any of you whackos out there that track UFOs as well as JFK assassination plots should have had light bulbs going off: WS-119L WS-461L
Finally: we have a Roswell connection on this thread!

The weird thing, is the georger mixed up a lot of things that don't seem to go together...like the recovery by plane. As far as I can tell, those recoveries were always unmanned payloads.

Now if georger was talking to people who were in the pre-astronaut program, parachuting from the balloons derived from Project Skyhook. (the camera recon stuff)...then it's probably a pretty short list of names for the possible client. It ain't Attinger.

It probably was connected to Wright-Patterson AFB in Ohio?

Possible names
George Post
Harry Collins

But that all was in late '50s...so georger probably was just looking at someone's resume that included this stuff from the late '50s?

Or maybe georger was just bullshitting us?

The book "The Pre-Astronauts" has a lot of pages searchable on Google.

http://books.google.com/books?id=1QS38bu9iTwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22The+Pre-Astronauts%22&sig=ACfU3U3H61sTQgFq8V288U_kS5Ud0dpOhg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
377,

Don’t read more into my questions than is there. I am looking into some things, but they may not be obvious.

Quote

I have attached hoses and fooled around with it in a moving car, one hose in and one outside.


Well, that shows you really are a techno-geek. You can entertain yourself for hours with an old pressure gauge, a couple of hoses, and driving around in circles in the car. I don’t know whether to pity you or envy you. It takes a few boxes of Tupperware, a $99 radio receiver and a $17.8 Billion satellite system to entertain me. (By walking around in circles in the woods.)

Quote

So Sluggo, what are you getting at with the questions about gear, flaps and cabin dP/dt?


The issues are not related. Gear? More in a minute. Flaps? Only tangentially related to the gear issue. dP/dt? I just thought it strange that the jump point locus is based on a behavior that Benson says is inherent in the system. More should be known before drawing conclusions.

Quote

Wouldn't an obscured dig in the woods be FAR less likely to raise questions?

Not just no, but HELL NO! A (ground) search crew would be looking for a shallow dig site where he would have “lightened his load” in every sense of the word. I believe (I not sure, and I know I’ll be corrected if I am wrong) McCoy buried his chute and it was quickly found because they were looking for disturbed surface (which includes “unnatural covering”). A fresh grave is an expected dig site and it’s easy to find (markers in the vicinity, not necessarily on the fresh grave). At least twice, I have hid a geocache (never buried) and had a great deal of difficulty finding it.

Quote

Are you questioning the reported results?


No, just the term “pressure bump” and how many things can cause one.

Quote

If that was the mindset during the investigation, they might not have thought to look very closely at the recorded echos from the 727 flight path.


Mindset is a georger/snowmman thing, but I agree with you whole heartedly. In my “something simple, but overlooked” quest, I guess mindset is the real issue.

Now Back to the landing gear thing:
Since aviation savvy and non-savvy alike read this, I’ll split the description between technical and non-technical. If anyone doesn’t understand, I’ll be glad to amplify it or you can consult any beginner pilot manual.

Flaps increase lift. Increased lift ALWAYS is accompanied by drag (called parasite drag). The increase in lift when lowering flaps causes the stall speed to get lower. Stall speed is the speed that the airflow on the wings will stop making lift (the plane falls out of the sky). Lower stall speed is a good thing if you want to fly slowly and not fall out of the sky. The more flaps (higher degrees) the slower the plane can fly. But you also have to add power to overcome the parasite drag.

While lift is ALWAYS accompanied by drag, drag is not always accompanied by lift. When you put the gear down (except is some special cases) you increase drag. The only thing you can do to keep the plane from slowing with the increased drag is to add more power. Adding more power uses more fuel.

Here is a transcript from an interview with Rataczak:
“He had given us the following demands:
The aircraft would be flown at 10,000 feet, with the flaps down,
[and] the gear down. And, the demand later came that he wanted the flaps to be put at 15º. He had done some homework or possibly had some flight time… I don’t know…”

Let’s assume Cooper knew something about flight dynamics. At the minimum, he used the proper terminology. If he wanted the plane to fly slow, he would have said “flaps down,” possibly he would have said “flaps to 15º.” If he wanted to go even slower he would have said “flaps to 30º.” But instead he said “flaps AND gear down.” Lowering the gear did not increase lift and lower stall speed. It did however cause an enormous FUEL BURN RATE. So high, in fact, that at one time there was doubt they would make RNO.

So why would Cooper want them to fly in a configuration that burned excessive fuel? OKAY THIS IS SLUGGO TALKING, you know what my pet theory is… here it comes… To keep them from taking Victor-27.

The weakest part of my “forced them to V-23” argument was that V-27 didn’t add all that much distance (as opposed to V-23).

So, have I drawn the curve, THEN plotted the points? Or, have I plotted the points and then drawn the curve? Can anyone suggest another reason he specified “gear down?”

I am (as always) open for criticism.

Thanks for your patience,

Sluggo_Monster

Web Page
Blog
NORJAK Forum

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.

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.

11 11