DB Cooper

[Chaucer 103]

Couple things:

The stairs, while not fully deployed, descended 20 degrees. This is what would cause the pitch up. They didn't have to be fully deployed to cause the change in pitch. Are you suggesting that the stairs, while 90% deployed, would not cause a change in pitch, but a 100% deployment would cause a noticeable pitch? Also, a change in pitch wouldn't be detected on the FDR. 

Second, they were flying dirty. They were bouncing around in the clouds. Rat would have had to make multiple adjustments while hand flying. Why would one "little bob" be recorded? It wouldn't. For the reasons I have already delineated. 

Lastly, I have no doubt the plane was being hand flown. I am just not convinced Rat was the one flying it.

We know Rat reported the oscillations because it's reported in the FBI files that it was the "co-pilot" who reported it, and we know he reported the pressure bump because he says so in his own statement. 

However, in flying there is the Pilot Flying (PF)  and the Pilot Monitoring (PM). The PF is responsible for flying the aircraft. The PM is responsible for monitoring the gauges and working the radio. If Rat was flying, he would not be talking on the radio to both NWA and ATC.  If he was communicating with ATC and NWA, he would not be flying. If Rat is to be believed, he was hand flying a hijacked aircraft while simultaneously monitoring the gauges and talking on the radio to NWA and ATC. Presumably, Capt. Scott was taking a nap or perhaps enjoying a bologna on rye. 

To underscore the idea that it was Scott flying and not Rat, you have Andy Anderson's own statement in which he says: 

"What we noticed was the pattern of the oscillations was continuing, and there was a very minor disruption of the slipstream. Scott said at first he wasn't feeling anything for sure, then a little later he though there was more drag and the nose was deviating a little."

To me that sounds a lot like Scott was at the controls. 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

16 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

Couple things:

The stairs, while not fully deployed, descended 20 degrees. This is what would cause the pitch up. They didn't have to be fully deployed to cause the change in pitch. Are you suggesting that the stairs, while 90% deployed, would not cause a change in pitch, but a 100% deployment would cause a noticeable pitch? Also, a change in pitch wouldn't be detected on the FDR. 

Second, they were flying dirty. They were bouncing around in the clouds. Rat would have had to make multiple adjustments while hand flying. Why would one "little bob" be recorded? It wouldn't. For the reasons I have already delineated. 

Lastly, I have no doubt the plane was being hand flown. I am just not convinced Rat was the one flying it.

We know Rat reported the oscillations because it's reported in the FBI files that it was the "co-pilot" who reported it, and we know he reported the pressure bump because he says so in his own statement. 

However, in flying there is the Pilot Flying (PF)  and the Pilot Monitoring (PM). The PF is responsible for flying the aircraft. The PM is responsible for monitoring the gauges and working the radio. If Rat was flying, he would not be talking on the radio to both NWA and ATC.  If he was communicating with ATC and NWA, he would not be flying. If Rat is to be believed, he was hand flying a hijacked aircraft while simultaneously monitoring the gauges and talking on the radio to NWA and ATC. Presumably, Capt. Scott was taking a nap or perhaps enjoying a bologna on rye. 

To underscore the idea that it was Scott flying and not Rat, you have Andy Anderson's own statement in which he says: 

"What we noticed was the pattern of the oscillations was continuing, and there was a very minor disruption of the slipstream. Scott said at first he wasn't feeling anything for sure, then a little later he though there was more drag and the nose was deviating a little."

To me that sounds a lot like Scott was at the controls. 

Remember, Cooper couldn't get the stairs down and Rataczak had to slow the plane,,

After the lever was pushed.. they didn't drop for two reasons.. they were being held up by wind and they weren't operated properly by Cooper via the lever.. There is a gravity drop and a hydraulic assist mode.. We assume he only used the gravity drop because the light went on but he complained he was having trouble.. the stairs would not have opened or just barely.. 

I am saying that the stairs were at best 10% deployed if that.. until Cooper went down to the end at 8:09/10...  that caused the pitch which caused Rataczak to adjust.

I don't know if a change in pitch alone is detected on the FDR,, it may be due to a corresponding change in altitude or an adjustment by Rataczak.. 

But the argument discrediting only one little bob while bouncing around being hand flown doesn't make sense..  Why only one, if it was on autopilot you have the same issue.. we were told of that one because of the timing.

Clearly, the "little bob" on the FDR is too vague for us to draw conclusions about its origin. Soderlind doesn't tell us what parameter the " little bob" was, he falsely assumed it was an adjustment by the autopilot, that tells me that the same "bob" would occur if a pilot adjusts.

We do know that it did occur at 8:09/10 right before Cooper's presumed jump and the plane was being hand flown.. for all we know there may have been other's earlier,, or just this one was unique somehow. IMO, Soderlind picked it out for the timing..

As for Scott, aren't there two controls but one designated pilot.... he would have had his hands on the controls as well.

I think it is a really big lift to discredit Rataczak... and convict him of lying. You need more proof.

People do make memory errors and embellishments over time but hand flying the plane vs auto or Scott and telling ATC  "he took leave of us" are not typical memory errors but serious lies.. that isn't Rataczak..

Based on my analysis, I am 90% confident on this scenario and I haven't seen any evidence that changes that.. nobody has to agree with me. If there is some more evidence I will evaluate it.

We have a 1 mile and 1 minute room for error in that map...

IMO, that is as close as we can get to the jump time scenario.

[Chaucer 103]

We'll agree to disagree. I'll leave it at that. 

[georger 197]

3 hours ago, Chaucer said:

We'll agree to disagree. I'll leave it at that. 

Good to see people hashing things out - in a friendly productive manner!  

Edited August 31, 2023 by georger

[Chaucer 103]

Would appear that while the rest of the military uses the Military Grid Reference System, the U.S. Air Force uses GEOREF. This would explain why the SAGE coordinates would be communicated this way. 

[FLYJACK 654]

18 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

Would appear that while the rest of the military uses the Military Grid Reference System, the U.S. Air Force uses GEOREF. This would explain why the SAGE coordinates would be communicated this way. 

Sage doesn't use GEOREF as a primary system, it tracks flying objects.. in 3 dimensional space.. extremely accurate.

GEOREF is a ground locating system with only lat/long... 2 dimensions on ground and less accurate.

So, the Sage data had to be converted to GEOREF (ground) at some point to mark a map.

 

 

https://code7700.com/pdfs/usaf/afm_51-40_navigation.pdf

https://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/FST-2_for_SAGE_p156-Ogletree.pdf

https://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/CasteelSageRecollections.html

 

[Chaucer 103]

Yes, that's my point. SAGE utilized it's own coded language, but when Spangler took that printed information, he would have, as an airman,  translated it into GEOREF not MGRS. 

[FLYJACK 654]

59 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

Yes, that's my point. SAGE utilized it's own coded language, but when Spangler took that printed information, he would have, as an airman,  translated it into GEOREF not MGRS. 

Right,

Spangler did it manually with an error of 1 mile, then later a computer was used with an accuracy of 0.5 mile..

 

[FLYJACK 654]

19 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Rataczak said he was hand flying the plane..  and he felt Cooper and the plane pitch slightly. Soderlind said the "little bob" wouldn't be felt on autopilot.. The point is it was on the FDR,, that was most likely when Cooper was at the bottom of the stairs as extended as they could be. Rataczak adjusted the pitch.

In 1996, Rataszak said he told ATC the hijacker took leave.. didn't mention shrimp boats but he did indicate that he thought cooper might have jumped aka "took leave". "Shrimp boats" could have been an embellishment but he has said he told ATC Cooper took leave.

There is a newspaper article from even earlier that uses "took leave" phrase as well.

I take his comment about not marking the location as they didn't mark the location themselves...

 

1996.. I have no reason to doubt this.

 

 

EDIT<<<

Here Nov 26 1971...

hijacker "took leave" of us 25 miles north of here (Portland)

I should clarify, this video was in a 1996 news broadcast..

The clip of Rataczak was undated and could have been from earlier, he retired in 1999.

His wife passed away last November..

http://pcnflightwest.blogspot.com/2022/11/judy-rataczak-wife-of-nwa-capt-bill.html

[Chaucer 103]

Very little question that Rat used the phrase "took leave of us", but he almost certainly did not say it to air traffic control to pinpoint a jump spot/time. 

By the way, I found the the SAGE radar tech who was controlling the T-33 prior the hijacking at McChord. This is what he had to say:

He was working on Weapons Team 1-1 at 25NR McChord. He was running 3 on 1 mission with Oregon National Guard, but had to hand off the T-33 to join the hijack mission. The three F-101s pilots were shocked that the T-33 was diverted to a higher priority mission. Doesn't remember much else because his attention was focused on the three F-101s that did not have a target. He was sitting next to the radar guy who was running the F-106 chase jets, but doesn't remember the guy's name or much else about that night. 

He said he couldn't recall anything else and politely asked not to be contacted again. Out of respect for his privacy, I will not share his name publicly. 

[FLYJACK 654]

This was 1996..

Rataczak was flying and contacted ATC...

There was a gap in the ATC transcripts due to the frequency error.

[Chaucer 103]

Sorry, not buying it.

First, this is 25 years after the fact. 

Second, it's a media report.

Third, the only source for this anecdote is Rataczak. Doesn't appear a single time in any of the thousands of source documents released so far.

Finally, and most importantly, it stands in direct contrast to his initial statement to the FBI on the night of the hijacking:

Now, giving Rat the benefit of the doubt, it's possible that this report was made to NWA Flight Ops on the company frequency, but there's no record of this. 

[FLYJACK 654]

11 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

Sorry, not buying it.

First, this is 25 years after the fact. 

Second, it's a media report.

Third, the only source for this anecdote is Rataczak. Doesn't appear a single time in any of the thousands of source documents released so far.

Finally, and most importantly, it stands in direct contrast to his initial statement to the FBI on the night of the hijacking:

Now, giving Rat the benefit of the doubt, it's possible that this report was made to NWA Flight Ops on the company frequency, but there's no record of this. 

The date doesn't make it false.

Rataczak is quoted..  He re-iterated in the (1996) video and later. So, it is 100% not a media error.

The FBI 302 is the strongest evidence against however it is not Ratazcak speaking but an agent taking notes then having them written up later..  essentially hearsay.

He could have been referring to the crew pinpointing their location at the time of the bump/oscillation.. not ATC marking it.

[Chaucer 103]

2 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

The date doesn't make it false.

Rataczak is quoted..  He re-iterated in the (1996) video and later. So, it is 100% not a media error.

The FBI 302 is the strongest evidence against however it is not Ratazcak speaking but an agent taking notes then having them written up later..  essentially hearsay.

He could have been referring to the crew pinpointing their location at the time of the bump/oscillation.. not ATC marking it.

I'm inclined to believe his initial statement to the FBI over a news article 25 years later.

If this statement was made, it was almost certainly not made to air traffic control. One look at the ATC transcripts show that the only communication between 305 and ATC was frequency changes, altitude checks, and altimeter reports. Talking to ATC about "our friend taking leave of us" and "shrimp boats" is completely out of pocket. 

Also, let's not overlook the fact that the crew seemed totally uncertain about whether Cooper was still on the aircraft. Scott is on record in multiple news articles stating that they didn't know the hijacker had left until they checked the plane in Reno. The comms also never hint that the crew believed Cooper had jumped.

Again, I think this anecdote is merely Rataczak embellishing the story. Not calling him a liar or a fraud. Just an old pilot exaggerating details of an "war story". 

At the end of the day, I think we sharply disagree on the fundamentals of the details of the events between 8:10 and 8:10. Nothing is going to bridge that gap, so it's not worth arguing about. 

[FLYJACK 654]

1 minute ago, Chaucer said:

I'm inclined to believe his initial statement to the FBI over a news article 25 years later.

If this statement was made, it was almost certainly not made to air traffic control. One look at the ATC transcripts show that the only communication between 305 and ATC was frequency changes, altitude checks, and altimeter reports. Talking to ATC about "our friend taking leave of us" and "shrimp boats" is completely out of pocket. 

Also, let's not overlook the fact that the crew seemed totally uncertain about whether Cooper was still on the aircraft. Scott is on record in multiple news articles stating that they didn't know the hijacker had left until they checked the plane in Reno. The comms also never hint that the crew believed Cooper had jumped.

Again, I think this anecdote is merely Rataczak embellishing the story. Not calling him a liar or a fraud. Just an old pilot exaggerating details of an "war story". 

At the end of the day, I think we sharply disagree on the fundamentals of the details of the events between 8:10 and 8:10. Nothing is going to bridge that gap, so it's not worth arguing about. 

Not really an argument,,, a discussion.

This is the nature of this crazy case, we have overwhelming uncertainties, actually very few hard facts..

We all evaluate the information through our own experiences, history and logic to make sense of it..  that is why I said I am at 90% confidence,, 

Hearing different views and info can make your own view stronger or change it..

This is my evaluation,, if Rataczak did or didn't ask ATC to mark their radar,,, the timeline would be the same. It isn't pertinent.

I believe Cooper jumped between the Lewis R and roughly Battleground with the highest probability right in between,, diminishing as you go north or south.

[Robert99 37]

3 hours ago, Chaucer said:

I'm inclined to believe his initial statement to the FBI over a news article 25 years later.

If this statement was made, it was almost certainly not made to air traffic control. One look at the ATC transcripts show that the only communication between 305 and ATC was frequency changes, altitude checks, and altimeter reports. Talking to ATC about "our friend taking leave of us" and "shrimp boats" is completely out of pocket. 

Also, let's not overlook the fact that the crew seemed totally uncertain about whether Cooper was still on the aircraft. Scott is on record in multiple news articles stating that they didn't know the hijacker had left until they checked the plane in Reno. The comms also never hint that the crew believed Cooper had jumped.

Again, I think this anecdote is merely Rataczak embellishing the story. Not calling him a liar or a fraud. Just an old pilot exaggerating details of an "war story". 

At the end of the day, I think we sharply disagree on the fundamentals of the details of the events between 8:10 and 8:10. Nothing is going to bridge that gap, so it's not worth arguing about. 

FlyJack is correct.  Rataczak's statement was simply redacted from the Seattle ATC radio transcripts.

Also, the flight crew had been instructed before takeoff from Seattle to flash their lights for a period of time to alert the chase aircraft that Cooper had jumped.  This statement is amplified elsewhere.

Further, Rataczak apparently didn't know the exact location of the airliner when Cooper jumped, or he could have passed the information to ATC himself by simply looking at his VORs and DMEs.  This suggests that the airliner was not flying directly to or from a VOR station and thus was not on V-23 at the time of the jump.

Edited August 31, 2023 by Robert99

[Chaucer 103]

Just now, FLYJACK said:

Not really an argument,,, a discussion.

This is the nature of this crazy case, we have overwhelming uncertainties, actually very few hard facts..

We all evaluate the information through our own experiences, history and logic to make sense of it..  that is why I said I am at 90% confidence,, 

Hearing different views and info can make your own view stronger or change it..

This is my evaluation,, if Rataczak did or didn't ask ATC to mark their radar,,, the timeline would be the same. It isn't pertinent.

I believe Cooper jumped between the Lewis R and roughly Battleground with the highest probability right in between,, diminishing as you go north or south.

It ultimately comes down to timing. 

We know a report of oscillations in the cabin rate of climb indicator was made at 8:11. Those oscillations continued for an unknown length of time and concluded with a pressure bump. There was then another unknown amount of time that passed before the report of the bump was made.

So, we have:

Report of oscillations: 8:11

Delay: ?

Bump: ?

Delay: Rataczak - "shortly thereafter".; Anderson "not sure, two minutes seems right"

Report of bump: ?

The other critical question is where is the report of the bump? Both Rataczak and Anderson state that Rataczak reported the pressure bump to NWA Flight Ops. For some reason, no record of that report exists in either the Harrison notes nor the teletype.

 

[FLYJACK 654]

6 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

It ultimately comes down to timing. 

We know a report of oscillations in the cabin rate of climb indicator was made at 8:11. Those oscillations continued for an unknown length of time and concluded with a pressure bump. There was then another unknown amount of time that passed before the report of the bump was made.

So, we have:

Report of oscillations: 8:11

Delay: ?

Bump: ?

Delay: Rataczak - "shortly thereafter".; Anderson "not sure, two minutes seems right"

Report of bump: ?

The other critical question is where is the report of the bump? Both Rataczak and Anderson state that Rataczak reported the pressure bump to NWA Flight Ops. For some reason, no record of that report exists in either the Harrison notes nor the teletype.

 

Those times are not precise,, they are obviously rounded or concatenated to the minute and from different recording sources/methods..

The oscillation reports range from 8:10-8:13... 

The timestamp is after the event is experienced and communicated.

So, you have a slight error in the reporting times and a 1 minute error on the map,, this compounds the timing error.

Oscillations were pressure fluctuations visually seen by the rapid increase in needle movement on the gauge,, the bump was felt during an extreme pressure fluctuation. The time was brief.

Other pilots with 727 jumpers also felt the pressure bump.

Soderlind was contacted (5-10 min later) while 305 was in the suburbs of Portland according to Rataczak. Soderlind was taking notes the entire time but we don't have them.

So, now put the 8:09/10 FDR "little bob" in context.. if that was Rataczak correcting due to the pitch caused by Cooper now at the bottom of the stairs,,

Cooper jumps in under 2-3 minutes..

 

 

 

[Chaucer 103]

4 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

Those times are not precise,, they are obviously rounded or concatenated to the minute and from different recording sources/methods..

The oscillation reports range from 8:10-8:13... 

The timestamp is after the event is experienced and communicated.

So, you have a slight error in the reporting times and a 1 minute error on the map,, this compounds the timing error.

Oscillations were pressure fluctuations visually seen by the rapid increase in needle movement on the gauge,, the bump was felt during an extreme pressure fluctuation. The time was brief.

Other pilots with 727 jumpers also felt the pressure bump.

Soderlind was contacted (5-10 min later) while 305 was in the suburbs of Portland according to Rataczak. Soderlind was taking notes the entire time but we don't have them.

So, now put the 8:09/10 FDR "little bob" in context.. if that was Rataczak correcting due to the pitch caused by Cooper now at the bottom of the stairs,,

Cooper jumps in under 2-3 minutes..

 

 

 

The report of the oscillations is precise because of the notation at the bottom: "time correlation", "careful playback". 8:11 is solid for the report of oscillations. We do not know how long the oscillations lasted though.

Soderlind was contacted shortly after the bump, but we do not know how long. That report of the pressure bump does not exist anywhere. The question is why? I think I have an answer, but I don't have enough information to confirm. 

 

[FLYJACK 654]

30 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

The report of the oscillations is precise because of the notation at the bottom: "time correlation", "careful playback". 8:11 is solid for the report of oscillations. We do not know how long the oscillations lasted though.

Soderlind was contacted shortly after the bump, but we do not know how long. That report of the pressure bump does not exist anywhere. The question is why? I think I have an answer, but I don't have enough information to confirm. 

 

Precise to the minute time on that particular tape, not seconds...  and the time may not be exactly correct. Comparing these timestamps is like herding cats.. they use different devices and recording methods, they are not synchronized with each other. 

How do you get an oscillation report at 8:10.. the timing device isn't precisely set or rounding to the minute.

No way any of these times can be taken as "precise" to actual world atomic clock time.

Ratazcak said he contacted Soderlind in the suburbs of Portland.. 5-10 minutes after the oscillations/bump..

 

[Chaucer 103]

37 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

Precise to the minute time on that particular tape, not seconds...  and the time may not be exactly correct. Comparing these timestamps is like herding cats.. they use different devices and recording methods, they are not synchronized with each other. 

How do you get an oscillation report at 8:10.. the timing device isn't precisely set or rounding to the minute.

No way any of these times can be taken as "precise" to actual world atomic clock time.

Ratazcak said he contacted Soderlind in the suburbs of Portland.. 5-10 minutes after the oscillations/bump..

 

Well, sure. There's a difference between 8:11:10 and 8:11:50, so there is some play. 

Where do you get 5 to 10 minutes after bump? Rat says 5 to 10 minutes after last contact (8:05)

[FLYJACK 654]

25 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

Well, sure. There's a difference between 8:11:10 and 8:11:50, so there is some play. 

Where do you get 5 to 10 minutes after bump? Rat says 5 to 10 minutes after last contact (8:05)

More than that, there is no baseline for the time on that tape.. that time is precise to the minute to that particular tape but how precise is the tape time.

Rataszcak was explaining the time Cooper departed and that Cooper jumped between two parameters.. 

The last contact with Cooper at 8:05 and the Soderlind call 5 or 10 minutes later.. (8:10 - 8:15) in the suburbs of Portland. The exact time would be recorded in the company log...  they had not yet reached Portland..

[Chaucer 103]

The wording of that 302 is baffling. Doesn't make sense for Rat to use the call to Soderlind as a reference. All other FBI documentation use last contact at 8:05 as the reference, not the phone call.

Either way, this points to a larger question. Where is the pressure bump report in the "company log"?

[FLYJACK 654]

27 minutes ago, Chaucer said:

The wording of that 302 is baffling. Doesn't make sense for Rat to use the call to Soderlind as a reference. All other FBI documentation use last contact at 8:05 as the reference, not the phone call.

Either way, this points to a larger question. Where is the pressure bump report in the "company log"?

To pinpoint Cooper's jump, Rataczak is using a parameter between the last contact at 8:05 and the call to Soderlind. 5-10 minutes later in the suburbs of Portland.

The call to Soderlind was after the jump and he believed time stamped so it does make sense as a parameter.

I think the company log he is referring to is his comms patch to Soderlind at NWA,, we don't have that log but we know Soderlind was listening in and taking notes.

8:05 plus 10 minutes = 8:15,, that is the suburbs of Portland.

 

Edited August 31, 2023 by FLYJACK

[Chaucer 103]

20 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

To pinpoint Cooper's jump, Rataczak is using a parameter between the last contact at 8:05 and the call to Soderlind. 5-10 minutes later in the suburbs of Portland.

The call to Soderlind was after the jump and he believed time stamped so it does make sense as a parameter.

I think the company log he is referring to is his comms patch to Soderlind at NWA,, we don't have that log but we know Soderlind was listening in and taking notes.

8:05 plus 10 minutes = 8:15,, that is the suburbs of Portland.

 

Sorry, again, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't read it that way at all. The jump occurred 5 to 10 minutes after last contact at 8:05 when the plane was in the suburbs of Portland. At 8:15 =/- a minute they are over Vancouver.  The call to Soderlind has to be shortly after that. 

This lines up with all other FBI documents on the matter and matches the crew descriptions of where they were when the jump occurred.