dudeman17

8 hours ago, NickDG said:

There's no way [we will] ever see legal... jumping in Yosemite... unless we throw enough money at it. This has to be a federal court case, that we win, which causes a federal judge to order the NPS to allow jumping. There is no other way.

That's it right there. Ask and ask and ask and they're just going to say no, and then what. A way lotta years ago a couple of us looked into the ACLU and other similar groups and got no results because we don't represent very many people or some cause. I even handed a videotape and a letter to Gerry Spence once at a book signing, but no response. I think the process is, you apply for a permit and get denied, you appeal that and get denied again, then you can sue above them for a court order. But that would be prohibitively expensive. It would literally take someone like Tom Cruise or Red Bull who would have the interest, the funds, and the platform to make it happen.

I may have posted this story before but I am reminded of it again. Many years ago when I was jumping at Taft, somebody had a cutaway and their canopy came down next to a road. Some local guy driving by saw it, stopped, looked around and tentatively lifted the canopy up to see if there was a body underneath it. When he saw that there wasn't, he gathered it up and brought it back to the airport. His curiosity got the better of him, and he went up on a tandem that day. He liked it, and came back a few days later for AFF. Long story short, he became a regular jumper, and even a TI!

It's not like you're 25, trying to be one of the cool kids with a tight rig getting ready for the next freefly or angle jump that ends with a swoop. You're an older jumper getting back into the sport you clearly still love, wanting to have some fun in your golden years. You'll look far more cool in the loading area with a big grin and a maybe slightly larger rig, than you would lurking around with a cast on your leg.

I can think of a scenario where a larger rig may cause an issue, and that is if you decide to revive one of your old favorites and start a ten-man speed star team. A larger rig doesn't really fit into the tight line-up required. But hey, that's your ready excuse to insist that you have to go last! Ha!

22 hours ago, SCS422 said:

I'm torn between container size and canopy size

1 hour ago, SCS422 said:

but don't think I can get it into a Infinity I-33

Why are you fixated on that container size? Did you already buy that? If so, why did you do that before deciding on your canopy?

Container size is cosmetic, vanity. Canopy size and performance is safety, survival. Choose wisely.

On 8/17/2024 at 2:17 AM, plom said:

I've been told I would be able to downsize after 15 more jumps.

It's not just the number of jumps, it's how you perform on them and where your skill set is when you complete them. Don't be in a hurry.

2 hours ago, wmw999 said:

it’s OK to question your instructors, because...  Instructors generally have the right answer for that student

Yes, but that's better done live at the dz with instructors who are familiar with the student. Hopefully the OP has or will do that as well.

2 hours ago, wmw999 said:

that’s better than going ahead and doing something stupid because you thought you knew better...  [or]  don’t feel comfortable asking questions.

For such people, bowling comes to mind.

What happened to Lyle Murphy, the OP? I thought he was going to post the vid?

On 7/29/2024 at 5:49 PM, SelfmadeDiesel said:

if John [Vincent] is still alive

I don't think he is. I'm kind of hesitant to post this because I don't remember the details, I think it's in a thread somewhere on blinc magazine. If I remember this right, I think he fell on hard times and ended up homeless with drug/alcohol problems. I think he was involved in a DUI accident where some girl died. And I think he ended up passing away, I'm not sure exactly what from but I think it was related to his substance abuse.

.

7 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

...the E(X)itus team.  As I recall, they all used SST's.

That seems to be evidenced by the top photo in Nancy's post #18 above. Ten-man speed stars out of a '3. I miss that.

7 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Ah, the old days.

Indeed.

-----------------

I'm still curious how the milk carton got the better of him.

4 hours ago, olemisscub said:

The truth is an absolute defense against slander. Is what Blevins said true or not?

Haha, I thought the lawyer in you might cite that. Obviously I was making a joke, but I would be curious your legal opinion on the manner by which Blevins obtained the invoice. I don't buy that he intended to pay the bill, even if small. He may have, but I'd guess that his whole motive was to obtain a document that is essentially none of his business.

Aww geez. Let's see...  The museum should sue Ulis for payment of the bill. Ulis should sue Blevins for invasion of privacy and public slander. The museum should sue Blevins for fraudulently obtaining the invoice. Ulis should sue the museum for sending the invoice to Blevins. Can Blevins sue anybody? Anyway, this should all happen on Judge Judy so we can all watch, munch popcorn, and laugh.

So who's the new suspect? (I'm not on f-book, so I can't read about it there.)

I remember when this happened. We got a laugh out of it because it was warranted. Vincent was being a media hound, and burned a few sites. Definitely post the video.

23 hours ago, georger said:

Congrats! Wow!

I'm guessing that you just mistakenly clicked 'quote' on the wrong post, but congratulate Nick, not me, haha!

(And my apology to you was for the 'social media' type post.)

1 hour ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

Yesterday I became one of only 33 non licensed skydivers in the world to have jumped a passenger jet.

Congratulations! Looks like you did a great job and had fun. Good on ya, dude! That guy right behind you in the exit lineup is Scott Smith, a longtime jumper. He's done some Hollywood stuff, and and was involved in training David Blaine for that balloon thing he did a while back.

Again, congrats!!

1 hour ago, Nicholas Broughton said:

Blue skies! 

Black Death!

-----------------

(Apologies to georger)

Call the office at Perris. Someone there likely has a contact for him, and would probably forward your contact to him.

My first post was simply about photos, looking for potential new suspects. Georger has added the idea of much more information, which is fine. But...

9 hours ago, Oli Vers said:

I think you keep forgetting that the internet wasn't around at that time and there won't be much metadata floating around for AI to parse through.

Again, I understand your point. My supposition (guess?) is that there are a lot of old photos (and information) that have been uploaded to the internet.

2 hours ago, Oli Vers said:

In order to do that, someone has to upload a ton of photos from the 60' and 80' to the internet and put some references up along with them.
Don't forget the internet as you know it, did not exist until the late 90'

I get that, but I'm guessing that there are a lot of old photos on the internet on various historical archive type sites?

2 hours ago, georger said:

an AI search of the facts and people on Earth in 1971 could lead or get close to who Cooper was, and a name?

I'm not all that tech savvy, I don't know if this is even possible, but if it is, I've wondered if someone fed an AI program all of the sketches and descriptions and told it to scour the internet for matching photos taken between '60 and '80, if it might come up with viable suspects to investigate?

I'm picturing the scene in the original 'Planet of the Apes' when Charlton Heston tosses the paper airplane.

13 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Yes, she got into it while dating Jim Hancock.

Do you know if she made more than one jump, how many, did she get past static-line and into freefall?

7 hours ago, Cola said:

Think of the intention in asking for 2 sets.Why?...   He was never going to take a stew with him - that's stupidity. I dont think it was a ruse when he asked for 2 sets I think it was more for optionality and inspection.

Sure, it's all speculation...  I have speculated that he may have asked for two sets so that they wouldn't tamper with them for fear that he might make someone else jump with him. I agree that there would be no reason for him to actually do that, but my thought is that just introducing the possibility that he might, might make it less likely that they would tamper with them.

6 hours ago, Cola said:

is there a standard for the number of lines on chutes from this era? If I were a rigger would expect that 80% or 90%+ of front chute canopy's would have a set standard of say 24 shroud lines? Is there much variance across canopy's for the number of shroud lines in that era. 

I'm not sure about that.

6 hours ago, Cola said:

If they noticed 2 lines missing what are the chances they would have further verified each of the lines to see that it was indeed only 2 missing and not  3 or 4 or 5 lines missing.

Those chutes are pretty basic. Whoever stretched it out to inspect it, any cut/missing lines would be readily apparent.

As for how many lines he cut, how long is that, would he have enough or run out...? My thought is that he cut what he needed. If he had needed more, he would have just cut more?

10 hours ago, Cola said:

He's taking on huge risk not cutting the chutes on the ground at all and just accepting them as is. Cutting open the chutes is mitigating risk of the unknown through inspection. trackers, holes, cut lines?

Cutting them open? Yikes! But as for opening them at all to inspect them, considering the spring-loaded pilot chutes and all (on the back chutes), unless he was a rigger and/or knew what he was doing and had at least some basic rigging tools, it would be unlikely that he could get them re-closed properly. So opening them would have rendered them unusable.

-----------------

13 hours ago, olemisscub said:

As for Alice, she had actually been skydiving before the Cooper hijacking. Would be interesting to know what she actually said to Cooper about the parachutes.

Really? I hadn't heard that before. In those days they didn't have tandems, where people can go make a one-time jump and treat it like a carnival ride. Anyone making even one jump had to train through the first jump course, and make a solo static-line jump, where they would be responsible for everything, dealing with their opening, possible malfunction / reserve ride, reading the winds, flying the canopy pattern and landing. That's ballsy, Alice!

On 6/4/2024 at 6:55 AM, Cola said:

My take on the chute 302-s is that I have seen more of a reliance on validating or invalidating chutes found along V-23  based on the descriptive detail and Cossey himself ruling these out. What I have not picked up on in the 302's is an invalidation by serial number first then Cossey as a secondary confirmation. It seems to be the procedure that  when a chute comes in they look at against their descriptive detail, which appears to be wish washy, then they check with Cossey for a final visual review and determination.

Correct me if I wrong but I believe the thorn in FlyJacks side was the wish washy-ness of the descriptive detail and reliability of the chute evidence.I believe FLY held onto the possibility that the agency may have indeed collected Cooper's chute at one time but mistakenly/unknowingly ruled it out because they relied on Cossey, whom FLY doubted on accuracy.

I think you're right about this. There is a lot of weird things about the chute info. The FBI seemed to rely primarily on Cossey and his descriptions. But Cossey's descriptions were of his own personal chutes that he initially claimed were given. I think one was a sport main and the other was one of his pilot bailout rigs, the one with the possibly re-positioned ripcord routing. He initially claimed that those were given to Cooper. He was mistaken, but he never seemed to correct that mistake. So some of the found chutes were discounted because they did not match his descriptions. But whether he actually gave those to the FBI or not, SURELY someone at the FBI knew that those were NOT the ones given to Cooper, that he had been given Hayden's chutes instead. Why the FBI never caught on to that is a mystery. As for checking the serial numbers - the found chutes, they never found any harness/containers, right? All they found were canopies? On canopies, the serial numbers are on data panels that are stamped on in ink. In normal use, where the canopy spends most of it's life packed in the container, those data panels are fine. But if that canopy is left out in the woods or floating in a river, where it's exposed to sunlight, moisture, and what-not, that data panel would probably fade away over time. So even if someone knew to look for it, it may not be readable, if visible at all.

6 hours ago, Cola said:

maybe someone will come across that one day

The harness, container, and canopy would each have a label with the model and serial numbers. Those numbers should also be recorded in the rigger's rigging log book and on the packing card. Whether they all actually are on the card would depend on the thoroughness of the rigger. The canopy info should certainly be.

I'm not an expert on the 302's or the specific information flow in this case. But the following is what I seem to remember from reading it here.

The 'lost in the mail' info you refer to refers to Cossey's log book info. Supposedly Cossey claimed to have provided copies of it, but the FBI doesn't seem to have it. The cards were both on the plane. I don't remember if the full info on the harness/containers were on them, but the canopy info, including serial numbers, were. I think the NB6 container has been debunked. That would have been Cossey's personal rig that he originally had claimed to provide, but he may not have. I think the two back chutes actually provided to Cooper were determined to be Norm Hayden's bailout rigs, which were older containers that had had newer harnesses installed.

You should be able to find all this info in Flyjack's posts in this very thread.

1 hour ago, Cola said:

Not that I have much confidence in someone finding the Back chute, but if it happens what is the possibility of some portion of this seal still being affixed to the chute?

Anyone with Rigging experience able to comment on the occurrences and condition of lead rigger seals from the 70's being present during a subsequent repacking. How likley were you to see portions of a riggers seal during a repacking? 

A quick google search will show you images of those seals. Basically it's an easily breakable piece of thread that is looped around the end of the last ripcord pin just past the closing loop (or cone) then wrapped around the base of that pin, it ends up being a loop. The thread passes through the small lead thing that is crimped onto the thread similar to a small fishing weight crimped onto a fishing line. When the ripcord is pulled, the thread breaks. The lead seal might fall off completely, but it might stay attached to the ripcord by the piece of thread wrapped around the base of the pin. If Cooper no-pull bounced, the seal is probably still there. If he pulled, he most likely tossed the ripcord, and it would be nowhere near wherever the rig ended up. If someone found the ripcord, the seal might still be on it. Reserves (and pilot emergency rigs) have to be inspected and repacked at regular time intervals, and usually they have not been used. The seal would still be there, but it would break when the container was opened. The rigger would throw away the old seal and replace it with a new one when he was done with the repack. If the chute was actually used in-air, whether the seal was ever seen again would mostly depend on whether the jumper kept the ripcord. Student skydivers are taught to toss them, experienced jumpers usually try to keep them. A pilot doing an emergency bailout would likely toss it.

2 hours ago, Cola said:

The serial numbers for the chutes were finger quotes "lost in the mail".

I thought the serial numbers were known. Both of the packing cards were left on the plane. Flyjack posted the numbers many times.