All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. RobertMBlevins

    DB Cooper

    I think it's a screwup by the Reno FBI office in their reports. They name TWO chutes, but a reference to a third... Then they say at the end of the report 'that is the end of evidence found on board...' Naming two chutes, but making reference to a THIRD canopy. Then you have a much more detailed, and more organized report on the chutes from Agent John Detlor in Seattle. He lays out exactly who provided what, and how many. The Reno stuff just doesn't make any sense. And why would they reference TWO canopies to what is obviously the SAME container? Until better evidence comes along, I have to go with the Detlor paper. Oh...we have fifteen confirmed apps to go on the camping/search trip now. And Nick B and Darren S have said they are stoked, and coming. I am going to cut it off at 36 apps and hope thirty show up. I can't do BBQ for many more than that number anyway. On Monday, to expedite this whole process, I'm going to load the video directly to the homepage at AB of Seattle and do a comprehensive text pitch to accompany it. That should help fill the rest of the slots. The minute we get to thirty-six I'm pulling the video, the WordPress article, and everything else. When we did the Eclipse Trip, a week prior to the eclipse more than a hundred people suddenly decided they wanted to go. It was totally crazy. I'm trying to avoid all that this time.
  3. dudeman17

    DB Cooper

    It is 100% certain that Hayden would not have a belly pack to go with his bailout backpack. They are not compatible. A sport skydiver uses a sport main parachute that he packs up and uses however many times he jumps. The 'belly pack' is a front-mount reserve, packed by a rigger, in case his main malfunctions. The bailout backpack, packed by a rigger, does not use a front-mount reserve, because it IS a reserve in case the pilot/plane malfunctions.
  4. Today
  5. dudeman17

    DB Cooper

    There is a lot of conflict. But I think the whole thing stems from - Flyjack thinks that the one Hayden got back was not the one they found on the plane. Now you just said, "If two backpacks were found on board..." - but that's not right is it? I thought it was established that one backpack and one front-mount were found on board. So that's where the problem starts. Cooper uses one backpack, it's gone. One backpack is found on board. If that's not the one they gave back to Hayden, that would mean that that rig was never on the plane. A question - The front-mount that was found on board, did they give that one back to whoever it came from? Got any more of those Excedrins?
  6. skow

    ATC vs Freak 3?

    Statistically we all have one boob and one testicle I may be wrong, but I have a feeling that people tend to fly bigger suits so there may not be enough data about smaller ones.
  7. Arghh, I don't know what they were thinking when developing this plugin. We'll take a look at the options and see if there's a way to avoid this (which I'm sure there must be). Will try and get this resolved today. In the meantime we've unlocked your ad.
  8. RobertMBlevins

    DB Cooper

    I think without a solid, upfront explanation on all this from the FBI, there is no way to tell for sure. The Seattle FBI might be a bit slack on some things regarding the Cooper case, but you would think they could settle this one somehow for sure. There is conflicting information going here. Agent Detlor submits a report saying only four total chutes were provided to the hijacker, and only four were delivered to the airport, two of them allegedly by Hayden. Neither of them was a 24' chute, neither of them was a belly pack. If two backpacks were found on board and Cooper jumped with a third backpack, this is also a conflicting bit of evidence. EDIT: Hayden says Cooper jumped with his NB6-contained chute. Or NB8, whichever you believe. One thing we can eliminate, I think, is the idea Hayden would have owned a belly pack. I think that's 99% percent certain he wouldn't have bothered buying one. He wasn't very happy being forced to wear a bailout rig, I can tell you that much from the interview with him. Said 'the damn thing just gets in the way'. (Referring to doing sport flying with rolls, etc while wearing a backpack bailout rig.) So he's definitely not wearing a bailout rig AND a belly pack. No way. I have no answer for this question. To a certain extent, there are two conflicting sources. Who the hell knows what the truth is? I certainly don't.
  9. dudeman17

    DB Cooper

    Robert, I think the part you're not getting about the 5/6 parachute theory is, that not all of them were on the plane. I'm not saying that I subscribe to this theory, indeed I'm just interested in the one he used and how it might affect the success of his jump, but as I understand it... Cooper asks for 4 parachutes. Maybe a couple different agents get on that, I dunno, but perhaps someone gets 2 from Hayden, someone else gets 4 from Cossey or Sky Sports or whoever, but they end up giving Cooper 4 out of the six. The other 2 are no longer in play. It sounds like the one Hayden got back may have been one of those, the other one seems unaccounted for. The part that I question about all of that is, at least 3 of the backpack ones are bailout rigs, certainly the ones they gave him were. The 2 front-mounts are useless from the get-go, regardless that one of them was a dummy, because they don't have harnesses, and don't attach to the bailout ones. I think I speculated on this before, but maybe they did that on purpose - he asks for 4, they give him 4, but 2 of them are unusable, limiting how many other people he may have forced to jump. But they gave him 4, if there were 1 or 2 others, they were never on the plane.
  10. RobertMBlevins

    DB Cooper

    You would have to search further back. Yes, there was a previous thread on Cooper prior to the 2008 entries. It was locked for one reason or another, but it should be back there in the Stone Age somewhere.
  11. RobertMBlevins

    DB Cooper

    Some people have wondered exactly WHAT was in that paper bag Cooper carried. I keep wondering if it was a pair of boots, maybe a few other small items, but there is no way to tell. The former manager at the Ace Hardware in Des Moines, WA was in the Army Reserve at the time of the hijacking, and Gayla Prociv used to work with him back in the late 1990s. His name is Bill Rattie. He claimed to me that he was part of the group called up to do the search near Ariel. He also said he found a single brown loafer and turned it in to his superiors, but heard nothing else about it. This happened some years before I ever heard of KC or Skipp Porteous. Back in 2000, I believe, not long after I met Gayla. I know that isn't much...not expecting people to jump up and down about it. Bill later moved to Hawaii, but neither Gayla or I have heard from him in many years. Can't even be sure he is still there. Goes by Bill but full name is William Rattie. As far as the parachute question, i.e. could there have been FIVE chutes on board, I just don't know what's going on with that. All previous information going back decades has said only four chutes were provided and that one of them was the dummy trainer. So...I just don't know what to say on that. The reports are a bit conflicting in some parts. EDIT: THIS is Bill Rattie's Facebook page. Damn. He hasn't made a post there since frickin' 2012, and I saw I had a message in to him six years ago that he didn't yet answer. I recognize him from his pictures there. How does someone do so much Facebook and then stop seven years ago? LOL. Oh, well. That's him, though. Frankly I'm starting to doubt his story. He said he was barely 18 in 1972, and that would make him about the same age as I am now. Hmm....he might not have been old enough in 1972 to BE in the Army...I will have to check this out further. I was trying to remember how old he looked in 2000, and he COULD have been about my age back then. Maybe. Until I can figure out a way to get hold of him with some pointed questions, his story should be taken with a grain of salt. EDIT: Well...maybe he WAS telling the truth. At least about being in the Army at the time of the hijacking. These places he lived match his history. But there isn't much else on the internet about him, unfortunately. I would have to drop a few bucks on one of those reports you can buy. One source says he's 68 now, the other says 62. Big difference in this case. Thinking back, I'm *fairly* sure we were about the same age when I would see him at the Ace Hardware back in 2000. I don't think he was younger than me.
  12. dudeman17

    DB Cooper

    If they were hi-tops, they'd certainly have a better chance of staying on.
  13. FLYJACK

    DB Cooper

    According to Tina.. brown ankle length pebble grain shoes, not the tie type perhaps ankle boots?
  14. dudeman17

    DB Cooper

    Something else - Supposedly Cooper was wearing loafers, presumably of the dress shoe variety (since he had a suit on). Unless those things were fairly snug, I would expect that they might likely blow off on a 200 mph exit. That means he would be landing and hiking out in his socks. I hope he had feet like Cody Lundin.
  15. FLYJACK

    DB Cooper

    Found another FBI document... Parachutes found on plane FBI doc page 4951 "On the floor directly in front of seat number 18D, the exterior canvas cover for a chest type parachute was observed along with the handle utilized for releasing this parachute. The label on this canvas covering indicated it to be Pack Part Number 4511876B and indicated the date of manufacture to have been October, (year illegible). The flap on this canvas exterior contained a sewn on white label with the notation SSS # 5 and COSS. This flap had also been stenciled with the name JOHNSON. An opened parachute which apparently had been removed from the canvas parachute cover described above was found spread out over seats 17C and 17B. This parachute was of a pink-orange color. On seat 18B, an unopened back type parachute was observed. A card in the pocket of this parachute reflected it to be a Conacol type parachute, number 60-9707 and made by the Pioneer Parachute Company. This card indicated it was last inspected on May 21, 1971." The Pioneer back chute 60-9707 left on the plane does not match the chute Hayden got back from the FBI.. that indicates one of Hayden's chutes was not sent to the plane and Cooper must have jumped with Cossey's chute. 1. MAKE: Pioneer TYPE: 26 ft white ripstop conical, SERIAL NO: 226, DATE OF MFR 9/57 (1957) --- packed by Cossey 5/21/71 (Hayden got this one back) 2. MAKE: Pioneer TYPE: 24 ft white ripstop conical, SERIAL NO: 60-9707, DATE OF MFR: 7/60 (1960) --- packed by Cossey 5/21/71 (This back chute was left on the plane, ID'd by National Guard in Reno)
  16. Skyjeff03

    Small Parachute de France Rig in great conditions!

    do you want to split the AAD?
  17. Razvanescu

    Military ALTITRACK METERS

    Time Left: 29 days and 19 hours

    • FOR SALE
    • USED

    Military Altitrack in METERS 10000m like new!!!! Only 10 jumps. Comes with mounts, software, IR connection, original box, spare battery.

    $800.00

    Brasov - RO

  18. pchapman

    What does 'deep brakes' mean?

    'Deep' is relative to whatever the stall point of the canopy is. Which could be with toggles past full arm extension, or chest level, or whatever applies to you and your arms in that particular harness with that particular canopy. So you can fly with no brakes, shallow brakes, moderate brakes (or medium or whatever term you want), or deep brakes. There's no specific definition (eg, "75-99% of the usable brake range before the first pre-stall rocking"). It's just "a lot of brake, getting closer to the point where you would stall the canopy or have arms fully extended". In deep brakes the canopy will fly a steeper line towards the ground, a steeper descent. The canopy might be dropping vertically faster than in moderate brakes, although possible less than when in no brakes, if it is a ground hungry canopy with a high descent rate in normal flight. It is easier to hit a target on the ground when coming down steeply, rather than skimming by at a shallow angle. Deep brakes is good for that. If too deep, you are getting closer to a stall, and thus susceptible to added danger from turbulence or accidentally stalling the canopy. You also won't have much energy left in the canopy for a flare, which isn't a big issue if doing accuracy with a big canopy onto a soft tuffet. If you do need to descend steeply (e.g., landing into a small field surrounded by trees), but would hit the ground too hard without much flare, you might need to have the room to pick up some speed again (out of deep brakes) before doing a flare with more effect. You might also fly in deep brakes when learning about and practicing approaches to stalls and doing stalls, while up high. Flying in deep brakes is therefore something with some added risk if not done appropriately, and not generally needed for normal flying and landing (excluding the dynamic activity of the flare), but is useful in specific situations.
  19. FLYJACK

    DB Cooper

    28 ft non-steerable, winds were estimated by using/averaging over time the Portland and Salem data. Initially they thought from the W, then SSW but close to 8 PM they were ESE and were shifting to S and SSW. So, like almost everything in this case,,, ???
  20. It's rather interesting that everyone (including my prior posts) are talking primarily about 'death'. We talk about 'deaths per xxx', or how likely you are to die. While that is perfectly understandable, for a couple different reasons, it ignores the injury potential. One of the reasons that injury is often overlooked is the reporting/statistics. Deaths are tracked a lot better, if for no other reasons than they make the news. At least in the US, it's pretty hard for a skydiving death to happen without the government (local & FAA) getting involved. Injuries are different. While many are reported to USPA, many are not. I can think of a lot of serious injuries (hospitalization serious) that never showed up here or in Parachutist. I also know a lot more folks who have suffered serious injury than have been killed. I'd guess that many injuries are 'self inflicted'. Swooping being the most obvious. Don't swoop, you won't misjudge a big turn and pound in. But not all. In addition to the classic 'swoop gone bad' injuries, turbulence or misjudging a 'normal' landing can have a bad outcome. Freefall collisions, bad exits (hitting the door hard enough to break bones), dislocations (primarily shoulders) during RW, that sort of thing. To disregard that risk, to only look at deaths, is to only see part of the total picture.
  21. pms07

    Randy Iverson

    Sad news indeed. Randy kicked me off the Baldwin drop zone back in the mid-'70s but likely I deserved it. Still, we got along well and he welcomed me back a week or two later...
  22. CoolBeans

    What does 'deep brakes' mean?

    What does it mean when skydivers fly in 'deep brakes', especially for accuracy landing? My understanding is that any skydiver can fly normally or fly in 'deep brakes'.
  23. Jyadz

    What does 'deep brakes' mean?

    Deep brakes is when (mainly in BASE) you set your brakes deeper so that when your canopy opens its flying forward at a very slow speed to prevent object strike in the case of an off heading. This is brake setting that comes with your BASE canopy or some people will set up custom deep brakes. Pulling your brakes to knee level is the flare and is not deep breaks. Deep breaks still let the canopy fly forward just slower while the flare is about stalling your canopy. If your in deep breaks and you pull the breaks to your knees (flaring) your just going to have less flare power vs flaring from full flight.
  24. Yesterday
  25. Is it when I hold toggles all the way down, around my knees? Also, especially in base community, I know that some people adjust brakes to be at 'deep brakes' level right after canopy inflation. What happens when they pull the already 'deep brakes' all the way down to knees level?
  26. In answer to "Is skydiving dangerous?" The answer is yes, anyone who says otherwise probably has not considered all the possibilities. You can do everything correct and have perfectly functioning gear, and still die. Are the risks, generally, manageable? Sure. But acknowledging that we participate in a dangerous activity seems like the first step of risk management.
  27. Honest question: Would the fact that the lines are fatter mean that there would be more area of the line acting on the grommet? The line itself may be 'draggier', but the larger surface area contact would also increase drag.
  28. sundevil777

    How long should it take to get on a load?

    You stated that you were looking for a jumpsuit. That sounds like it would likely happen some number of jumps in the future. You mentioned that your pullover and shirt were snug, tight fitting, you asked if it looks like the shirt is loose. That sounds like someone that thinks the problems with wearing a t shirt are related to whether it is loose or not. That doesn't solve the problem, and it is quite reasonable to think that you don't get it, even if you didn't explicitly reject my advice. It is common for newly aspiring jumpers to not at all realize the myriad ways things can go wrong. Those that have been around a long time have accumulated a lot of first hand, and much more anecdotal experience that can keep you from being a statistic. You can see plenty of people jump in t shirts, and of course they usually are ok. You are a novice, and should not be violating this safety practice. I don't care if some DZs let students do it, it is a real risk that is easily avoided. Perhaps some others here on the site will convince me otherwise, I'm open to being convinced, but I don't think it likely. You are past the formative assessment stage. That was when you were a complete newbie. Now everything is most definitely an authentic, summative assessment without the opportunity for re-takes to achieve mastery status. If you are surrounded by lots of old timers (almost everyone is an old timer to you), they may grant you bits of wisdom, and that wisdom may come as they just walk by you doing something and blurt out some advice. That advice may not be delivered with a positive, supportive tone, scaffolded based on your prior knowledge, differentiated for your own learning style, to impart understanding by design. No, it may be possible to be offended by their delivery, but they wouldn't be giving you their advice if they didn't care about you. If it isn't clear why their advice makes sense, then first assume their intent is not to offend, but to help, stop them, thank them for caring and talk about it. I think that in our profile on this site, if you are a student, your "discipline choices" should be limited to just one - staying alive, made more likely by making all efforts to not repeat the bad stuff others did. I do understand how my earlier post can be seen as rude. I apologize for that. I understand how this post can be seen as rude. I don't care about that, I am intentionally being blunt. If you're in Ohio, or if I go through Colorado, we should definitely jump together.
  1. Load more activity