dudeman17

I certainly understand that one. Being in the loading area and boarding the plane with a lightweight student in mid-August ain't comfortable, but if you need the drag you need the drag. Just explore all the clothing options. Military camo pants are baggy and porous. Oversize long sleeve t-shirts can help. I use all these options for AFF, but as Doug pointed out, if you're doing belly RW then you may need to figure out grippers. Also, you may have just wrote that wrong, but to clarify, you'd wear the sweatshirt OVER the jumpsuit (or instead of it) not under it. You're not trying to 'puff out' the suit, you're exposing the bagginess and porousness of the sweatshirt to the air.

Again, that's all very interesting, but it still doesn't explain why it would be necessary to stage the Cooper hijacking. At the time, plenty of scary hijackings were already taking place, including the at-the-time recent PLO ones you mention. If Nixon and Halaby were already implementing their plans to upgrade airport security worldwide, why would they need to stage another hijacking, especially one in which the perpetrator could predictably become something of a folk hero. If anything, that could lessen the public's perception of the urgency for upgraded security.

Regarding jumper34... This is all very fascinating stuff, but I have a few questions. If this was a preplanned inside job with ties all the way up to the president, and extreme covert coverups afterward, what was the purpose of it? It was a blatantly public event. Also - I'm not a researcher in this case, I'm just a curious long time skydiver. My thoughts focus a lot on the logistics of the jump itself. So he jumps with a pilot's bailout rig with a non-steerable canopy. If he opens that thing at 10 grand he's got no influence over where he lands. A chosen LZ? He's literally at the mercy of the winds. And 80 mph uppers? You seem to have much different wind estimates than the other researchers. Earlier I posited a theory whereby his best chance at landing in a chosen LZ might have been to get over it in freefall, then open so low so as to stay there. I mentioned maneuvering over it in freefall, which is doable, but within a very limited range. You'd have to start out with a very accurate 'spot', which is determining exactly when to exit the plane so as to be over the desired LZ. That would require good visibility of the ground from the plane. It was night. I've heard varying reports of the weather, from completely cloudy and rainy, to partially cloudy and drizzly. Does anyone know what the moon was that night? The ratio of moonlight to cloudiness would affect how well he could see the ground and determine his exit point. Also, was there cities, towns, or other features on the ground nearby that would be lit up, giving him a better bearing of exactly where he was exiting the plane?

Before you spend hundreds of dollars and wait months for a custom jumpsuit jacket, or set your seamstress up for hours of exploratory work, try - a sweatshirt. A normal ordinary sweatshirt. The material is very porous, lots of drag. For AFF I've got 3 different sizes. Poke holes in the cuffs to stick your thumbs through and you've got swoop cords. Float for days. Way cheaper than a jumpsuit and you can have it this week.

Not really. If she had a toggle fire, hung toggle upon releasing her brakes, tension knots, broken lines, canopy damage, or whatever, she could be spinning (diving) and cut away, and you'd still be there. The point of the breakoff track is to get away from the other people.

Your track should also be away from her, not underneath her. If she'd had a baglock/streamer and cut away, you'd have been right there. Otherwise, congrats!

Raphael, you should consider the profiles of people trying to give you advice before arguing with them. You've got a couple highly experienced people with instructor ratings trying to up your survival quotient. I agree with everything billvon is trying to tell you. I would add... If he had hit someone, they could both be dead. Even with successful AAD fires. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's seen that happen. That this happened is a learning experience. That you find it funny and argue about it is chilling.

Robert and Dave, would you two please stop bickering? And I'm not looking for an explanation of why you do, just stop. Please. You both seem like fine folks who have done great research into this case, and I enjoy reading those posts. I threw this question out there once, and none of you bit - Have any of you ever made a jump? I wish I could get all you guys out to my drop zone, where my cohorts and I could take you all up on a load. There's something therapeutic about being at altitude, looking out over great distance, getting in the door, grabbing a faceful of wind and flicking out to fly - fly like a ROCK! You all might find yourselves laughing with each other. Heaven forbid...

I am in no way advocating for SP, but I too would like to know why you say that. I've said before that the suit would be no problem. The loafers, more so. You yourself said that Cooper had another bag with him that you speculated might contain better footwear. A pair of goggles would be helpful too. On the other hand, if he was hanging out in the terminal in that red and white jumpsuit, blue helmet, and a pair of French Paraboots, he would have stuck out like a sore thumb.

That's fucking funny.

Are you sure about that? The way I read this statement... ...it's not 100% clear whether they're referring to Cooper's jet. It kind of sounds like they're describing turns made by the chase planes. Could those turns be one of the S turns made by the chase planes to stay behind the jet? If so it might be mentioned to indicate that the chase planes were farther away at the point Cooper is believed to have jumped.

I'll leave it to the dedicated researchers to debate the flight path, the winds, the placard and what-not, but it is discussed how far Cooper may have drifted after exiting the airplane, and there is a factor, from a jumper's perspective, that may affect that, especially if Cooper was an experienced skydiver. And that factor is, how high did he open the parachute. So, IF Cooper was a skydiver... In those days, skydiving was still a fairly 'barnstorming' venture, and the people involved were fairly ballsy. (Add to that the ballsiness of someone willing to hijack an airliner.) It was not uncommon for people to intentionally pull extremely low. 'Ground rush is a gas, but it sure ain't practical.' There were low-pull contests in which two jumpers would face off in freefall and play blackjack with the Reaper. Some people speculate whether Cooper pulled right out the door, at altitude. I would seriously doubt that. It's been mentioned that typical pull altitude is around 2500'. The reasons for that is, one, to give time to deploy a reserve in the event of a malfunction, and two, to give room to maneuver the parachute into the ideal landing spot. Neither of these apply to Cooper because he only has one parachute, a bailout rig that IS a reserve, and it is non-steerable, i.e. non-maneuverable. One of the factors in the success of his jump is exactly where did he land - safely in an open field, or drifting into trees/rocks/a hillside where there is a higher chance of injury, hampering his ability to hike out. So Cooper's best chance at landing safely may have been to maneuver himself in freefall (yes, you can do that) over an open field, then pull so low so as not to drift out of it. So how far did he drift? Possibly not far at all.

So I notice on the news today that it's the 10th anniversary of the deaths of Farrah Fawcett and Micheal Jackson. I remember the day. Farrah died first and it was in the news, then Michael died and of course that was huge news. It didn't take long for the following joke to appear... Farrah Fawcett died. When she got to heaven, God said to her, "Farrah, you were beloved by millions of people, and you fought a valiant fight against your cancer. For that, I'm going to grant you a special wish." Farrah replied, "I just want for all the children to be safe..."

I remember seeing something on tv once where this guy claimed he was at a party a day or two before the money find and someone at the party told him that the money find was going to happen. The guy said he didn't think much of it until he saw it on the news a couple days later. Any one else remember that, or give it any credence?

First I have a question - How high can he get that thing? Now, my answer to your questions. Your dad and the dzo should be able to figure the legalities, BUT... At 22 jumps, you are nowhere NEAR ready to do this. Get AT LEAST a couple hundred jumps, then have local high experienced jumpers that you trust help you with the logistics. Please do not put your father through the trauma of being involved in your death.

I tried to make a joke the other day and got 'serious' responses from the two people I referenced and was hoping to get a chuckle from. It's entirely possible that NONE of the usual suspects are the real Cooper. It's also entirely possible that there are people who do know who the real Cooper is, and they just aren't talking.

So, what are you saying, Robert? That Peter-san (not Sheridan) was Cooper? Faked his own death in Viet Nam a couple years earlier to ensure he'd get away with it? Geez, and I was starting to think that it was George Hamilton.

Robert, I'm having trouble with your recent posts and your blog article. Three security clearance holders and an FBI agent go to a ballgame. One of the SC guys has read your blog and has an interest in the case. He asks the FBI guy about it, and the agent noncommittally nods affirmation to the SC guy's suspicions, apparently comfortable doing so BECAUSE these guys hold clearances. So the next thing this guy does is betray the reason he holds a clearance by emailing a WRITER and blabbing what he's found out. I can kind of follow it that far, because the guy knows you've put a lot of work into it and might like to know that you could be right. But then YOU write a blog article and post here, naming names and showing a picture. You've written several posts expressing disdain that a rigger would yank a reporter's chain, "Almost getting him FIRED!", then you potentially risk the jobs of three clearance holders and an FBI agent, ostensibly for personal vindication. I'm pretty sure that's not consistent.

So what was the rest of it about? Skydiving? Military? Crime? I'd be interested to read it if I could find one at a reasonable price.

A few thoughts.. Regarding the videos posted by Robert and Eric yesterday and the nature of law enforcement agencies. LEA's and the people who work for them are often arrogant and self-superior, and wouldn't imagine that they'd need the public's help in solving cases. When they do ask for the public's help, they are not inviting the public to look over evidence hoping they (the public) find or figure something that they (the LEA) has overlooked; they (LEA) are hoping that someone with specific knowledge will come forward with new evidence. That's the second time you've mentioned that. Actually, Shutter did not make that statement. The reason I bring this up is because your attention to detail was a bit off there, and such errors can solidify in one's mind and affect the way one perceives evidence. I'm not a rigger and I don't know the specifics of older gear. (Although I do know a bit about Navy conicals - my first reserve ride was on one, one that was four years older than I was.) Jerry Baumchen, who posts elsewhere on this site, might know. I was thinking of asking him about that 'other' Steinthal canopy that was ascribed to one of the bailout rigs, whether that might be a pilot chute. Did you see my answers to your PM a while back?

Don't know what the Amboy chute was, but just because it was 34' doesn't necessarily make it a cargo chute. The 35' T-10 is a pretty standard personnel chute that's been around since the 50's and I believe is still in use today. Don't know if it was ever used in bailout rigs (I doubt it because it packs pretty big), but it was used as a main for paratroopers and early sport skydivers. I made several of my first jumps on them.

Don't know anything about the placard other than what I've read on here, but certainly paper/cardboard/thin plastic or whatever it was made from would be more susceptible to damage. Thinking back to that video 377 posted showing the paratroopers exiting, I noticed that when the deployment bags came out of the containers, they were getting blown upwards into the top of the stair channel/bottom of the plane. Something similar might likely happen to the lightweight placard and/or the door it was attached to. Or it could have been damaged after landing over time and whatever it may have been exposed to. A couple questions about the placard that come to mind: 1) How was it attached to the door? If it was a decal, or glued to it, how would it come off in pretty much one piece? 2) Where else could it have come from if not the Cooper plane, either during the crime or the subsequent tests? I can't imagine other jetliners cruising along with the rear stair door open, for another one to get blown out of.

DC-9's came out in '65

Not sure exactly what you mean, but a person would easily survive a 200mph exit. Fighter pilots eject at much higher speeds.

I saw that on the Airtrash page a couple weeks ago, was saddened. I did some of her student jumps when she went through AFF at Elsinore in the early 90's. Beautiful human being, always bright, cheerful and positive whenever I saw her. And you're right - great, genuine smile. Fly free indeed...