DB Cooper

[FLYJACK 776]

51 minutes ago, Kamkisky said:

The photos and sketches on record would very very difficult to get around. Besides those, the behavioral differences. I’ll take one…the denominations. Cooper had just jumped with 200k in twenties. He knows the size and weight of a large money ask for jumping out of a plane. I don’t see how he gets that mixed up for a second jump. He’d have been very clear from the start and would have recognized any variation immediately, not after take off. There are several other behavioral incongruities. 

This s great example for why I avoid discussing Hahneman.. 

You have an opinion and are now searching for confirmation using assumptions..

No, he did not get the denominations mixed up,, they gave him the wrong denominations but he said he really returned to delay the flight to ensure a night jump.

and the FBI was messing with him,, that didn't happen to Cooper,, circumstances were different, there are also some false reports in the news..

Tina said about Cooper..

he was not nervous he was rather nice other than he wanted certain things to be done he never tried to harm myself and although he was impatient a few times he was never cruel or nasty or impolite..

 

Rogers,, (Hahneman's stew) said

 

Behaviour sounds very similar...

 

[FLYJACK 776]

7 minutes ago, DWeber said:

Agreed. 

I don’t think anyone has ever asked you this but do you look into other suspects that come up in the 302s? There are some really promising ones that eventually get eliminated. I often wonder if there was some sort of error by the FBI that eliminated the real Cooper. 

Not much, I see them but none are compelling,,, I am focussing on Hahneman as far as suspects and looking at other case evidence.. 

[Kamkisky 13]

21 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

This s great example for why I avoid discussing Hahneman.. 

You have an opinion and are now searching for confirmation using assumptions..

No, he did not get the denominations mixed up,, they gave him the wrong denominations but he said he really returned to delay the flight to ensure a night jump.

and the FBI was messing with him,, that didn't happen to Cooper,, circumstances were different, there are also some false reports in the news..

Tina said about Cooper..

he was not nervous he was rather nice other than he wanted certain things to be done he never tried to harm myself and although he was impatient a few times he was never cruel or nasty or impolite..

 

Rogers,, (Hahneman's stew) said

 

Behaviour sounds very similar...

 

What denominations did he ask for? 
 

H had a political motive. Would you agree? 

[CooperNWO305 159]

14 hours ago, Kamkisky said:

I’m just noting that until evidence is available on the record -that is available for public scrutiny- it’s easily discountable. It doesn’t count. Show it or be ready to be discounted. That’s how it works, right? 

It’s discountable or doesn’t count? Two different things. 
 

Would you discount all the research on tie particles that has not been shared yet? How about Ryan’s book? What about Pat’s contact with Alice? What about William Smith’s daughter who says she has all this info that rules him out? (And don’t say it’s not the family’s job to defend. That’s a whole other issue). 
 

How about someone like Tom who waits to publish in a journal? 
 

What is the timeline to hold onto information? Is it a year? 5 years? Until it gets to production as a film, or in the newspaper?

 

[FLYJACK 776]

 

38 minutes ago, Kamkisky said:

What denominations did he ask for? 
 

H had a political motive. Would you agree? 

very large bills.. a combination to include 1000's ,, he got lower bills,, it wasn't his error they didn't give him what he demanded. But that is irrelevant because he said that wasn't the real reason he returned..

As for motive,, that isn't clear, there is some evidence for political and for personal.. maybe both.. but it has not been confirmed.

 

[FLYJACK 776]

The red/amber "aft airstair" light does not mean the stairs are opened..

The crew saw the red light on about 7:42..

Tina saw the red light come on just after 8:00..

The red light came on twice.

The red light comes on when the lever is moved from the uplock detent,, it goes out when the lever is returned to the uplock detent. It does not indicate the lever is pushed forward or the  stairs are open.

The green "aft airstair" light comes on when the stairs are fully down and locked.. this never happened in NORJAK.

For the red light to come on twice Cooper must have moved the lever from the uplock position about 7:42 then returned to the uplock and then moved again about 8:00...

The red light above it is the rear cabin door indicator which was open..

Edited Thursday at 01:31 PM by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 552]

4 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

The red/amber "aft airstair" light does not mean the stairs are opened..

The crew saw the red light on about 7:42..

Tina saw the red light come on just after 8:00..

The red light came on twice.

The red light comes on when the lever is moved from the uplock detent,, it goes out when the lever is returned to the uplock detent. It does not indicate the lever is pushed forward or the  stairs are open.

The green "aft airstair" light comes on when the stairs are fully down and locked.. this never happened in NORJAK.

For the red light to come on twice Cooper must have moved the lever from the uplock position about 7:42 then returned to the uplock and then moved again about 8:00...

The red light above it is the rear cabin door indicator which was open..

 

The problem is that your theory that the light came on a second time is derived from a reliance on the accuracy of Tina's memory from a week later during her Philly interview. I don't think any conclusions or even inferences should be derived from her statement given that her timing is clearly off from the very start. So this is fruit of the poisonous tree. It seems obvious to me that she's just relating the standard sequence of events as we all understand them but her memory of when these things occurred is off. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Thursday at 05:35 PM by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 776]

38 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

The problem is that your theory that the light came on a second time is derived from a reliance on the accuracy of Tina's memory from a week later during her Philly interview. I don't think any conclusions or even inferences should be derived from her statement given that her timing is clearly off from the very start. So this is fruit of the poisonous tree. It seems obvious to me that she's just relating the standard sequence of events as we all understand them but her memory of when these things occurred is off. 

 

The fact is she said see saw the light come on after the call from Cooper.. 

That trumps her time estimation.. and makes it irrelevant.

Your argument is the equivalent of.. A women said it took her 15 minutes to drive her red car to work.. it actually took 25 minutes therefore she didn't actually drive a red car to work..

Fact is she said she saw the red light come on after the crew had reported it being on.. no way around that.. I thought she could have possibly mistaken another light coming on..  but who knows.

It makes sense in the context of Cooper struggling with the airstairs.

 

Edited Thursday at 06:13 PM by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 552]

30 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

The fact is she said see saw the light come on after the call from Cooper.. 

 

Fair enough. Anderson says the same thing. So if there were two light incidents, then they happened in pretty short succession.

 

 

There may actually be some additional evidence of this in the NWA notes. Why would they write that the light was on during back to back timestamps unless the light had gone off in between the communications? 

 

So it appears that Cooper unlocked them (first light), realized they weren't dropping far enough, then raised them back up (light goes off), called to complain, plane slows down, then he unlocks them again (second light). 

Edited Thursday at 06:43 PM by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 776]

22 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Fair enough. Anderson says the same thing. So if there were two light incidents, then they happened in pretty short succession.

 

 

There may actually be some additional evidence of this in the NWA notes. Why would they write that the light was on during back to back timestamps unless the light had gone off in between the communications? 

 

So it appears that Cooper unlocked them (first light), realized they weren't dropping far enough, then raised them back up (light goes off), called to complain, plane slows down, then he unlocks them again (second light). 

 

I just think the two lights is most likely accurate. It fits with Cooper struggling with stairs at a relatively low speed vs Mac..

If he operated them correctly the first time they should have dropped some.. if he tried again the speed would not have had a material effect on the drop.. the only variable is Cooper.. and his operation of the lever.

[olemisscub 552]

1 minute ago, FLYJACK said:

 

I just think the two lights is most likely accurate. It fits with Cooper struggling with stairs at a relatively low speed vs Mac..

If he operated them correctly the first time they should have dropped some.. if he tried again the speed would not have had a material effect on the drop.. the only variable is Cooper.. and his operation of the lever.

It's possible that it wasn't so much the speed that was causing Cooper an issue at first, but the angle. They were still in their climb during his first attempt, which would have certainly pushed the airstream harder up against the stairs. In response to Cooper they not only slowed down but stopped climbing and leveled the plane off at 7,000 feet. 

[FLYJACK 776]

2 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

It's possible that it wasn't so much the speed that was causing Cooper an issue at first, but the angle. They were still in their climb during his first attempt, which would have certainly pushed the airstream harder up against the stairs. In response to Cooper they not only slowed down but stopped climbing and leveled the plane off at 7,000 feet. 

Angle would have very little impact.

Before Cooper jumped they had sped up to about 170k at 8:00,, so the earlier slowdown had no impact.

[FLYJACK 776]

Gunther was contacted by a "Clara"..

"Clara" confirms the first "Cooper" existed.

Therefore,, Gunther was contacted by two people, one claiming to be Cooper..

 

How do we prove it was or wasn't Cooper??

Since Clara's story contains fabrications, we can't dismiss "Cooper" because of those..

I seems Clara's motive wasn't money but to publicize that Cooper was dead and was a really a good guy...   that is not the motivation of a scammer.

[olemisscub 552]

2 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

 

I seems Clara's motive wasn't money but to publicize that Cooper was dead and was a really a good guy...   that is not the motivation of a scammer.

I’m not convinced on that origin of the happy birthday thing. That could’ve been an unrelated thing that he later spun into his narrative to try and lend the story credibility. A clever ex post facto trick on his part would be my guess. 

My current bet would be that he was indeed contacted by somebody (as the 302 suggests) and the whole thing amounted to nothing and fizzled out, but then he gained inspiration from it and pivoted into creating a fictional account. The entire plot of the book just seems highly unrealistic and highly literary and dramatic. The concept of Cooper finding his true love while he is injured from the hijacking is a bit too much for me to swallow. It’s too corny to be real.  

 

Edited Thursday at 09:48 PM by olemisscub

[FLYJACK 776]

25 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

I’m not convinced on that origin of the happy birthday thing. That could’ve been an unrelated thing that he later spun into his narrative to try and lend the story credibility. 

My current bet would be that he was indeed contacted by somebody (as the 302 suggests) and the whole thing amounted to nothing and fizzled out, but then he gained inspiration from it and pivoted into creating a fictional account. The entire plot of the book just seems highly unrealistic and highly literary and dramatic. The concept of Cooper finding his true love while he is injured from the hijacking is a bit too much for me to swallow. It’s too corny to be real.  

 

Most people fail to understand the context of the book.. and dismiss it because of the errors..

The book is not a true account of the hijacking.. he admits he is just telling Clara's story told to him.. It is so obviously false Gunther wouldn't make it up.

The plot or narrative is what he experienced, he never claimed it was true..

Clara's story is obviously not true.. 

IMO, Clara was just conveying a made up story,, her motivation was to publicize Cooper's death via Gunther which probably wasn't true and characterize him as a good guy..

What other motive would Clara have.. she was real..

 

My working theory,, obviously can't prove it but the first "Cooper" wanted money.. then disappeared. 10 years later that "Cooper" and a female associate "Clara" re-contacted Cooper with a story for the purpose of using Gunther to publicize the "Cooper died" narrative even pursuing  contact Himmelsbach with that letter.

It is clear that was the agenda,, the story is made up or mostly. Gunther said she was telling her story from notes..

Edited Thursday at 10:24 PM by FLYJACK

[CooperNWO305 159]

4 hours ago, olemisscub said:

A clever ex post facto trick on his part would be my guess. 

Like going back to a 10 year old newspaper? Possible but is it probable?

As for the love affair. Yes, it’s corny. Too corny to believe. But you’re using an all or nothing fallacy. All must be false or all must be true. Throwing the baby out with the bath water. 
 

So who writes the letter to Himmelsbach? 
 

[Robert99 62]

7 hours ago, olemisscub said:

It's possible that it wasn't so much the speed that was causing Cooper an issue at first, but the angle. They were still in their climb during his first attempt, which would have certainly pushed the airstream harder up against the stairs. In response to Cooper they not only slowed down but stopped climbing and leveled the plane off at 7,000 feet. 

No.  With the flap geometry staying the same, the only thing that controls the airflow at the aft stairs is the airspeed.  For the same airspeed, it doesn't matter if the aircraft is flying level or climbing.

[FLYJACK 776]

16 minutes ago, CooperNWO305 said:

Like going back to a 10 year old newspaper? Possible but is it probable?

As for the love affair. Yes, it’s corny. Too corny to believe. But you’re using an all or nothing fallacy. All must be false or all must be true. Throwing the baby out with the bath water. 
 

So who writes the letter to Himmelsbach? 
 

I can't see Gunther taking that risk to make up the Cooper part then he would have to make up Clara parts to match.. He was still in contact with Himmelsbach...

If we assume for the sake of argument that it was Cooper and a female accomplice,, 

"Clara" would not tell a true story...  she couldn't..  they needed to conceal their identities.. Clara's story is a fabrication if they were legit or scammers.

I still can't see another motive for Clara..  other than claiming Cooper died.. 

What motive is there... 

Doesn't seem like something a scammer would do..  

 

 

[FLYJACK 776]

40 minutes ago, Robert99 said:

No.  With the flap geometry staying the same, the only thing that controls the airflow at the aft stairs is the airspeed.  For the same airspeed, it doesn't matter if the aircraft is flying level or climbing.

Robert,, I am still convinced that the airstairs dropping with Cooper at the end would slow the plane at least some.. acting as a 10ft x 3ft flap...

The stair did drop enough for a man to stand at the end.. according to the test.

Wouldn't that cause the plane to slow some...  that is a lot of added drag during flaps down.

It wasn't this far open/down...

Edited Friday at 03:46 AM by FLYJACK

[olemisscub 552]

1 hour ago, CooperNWO305 said:

 

So who writes the letter to Himmelsbach? 
 

Max or someone associated with his book efforts. It would be a crime to pull a hoax on the FBI, but to send something that isn’t true to a retired FBI agent is another story.

Sending a letter to Himmelsbach that you ALSO conveniently happen to publish in your book is likely another example of doing things to establish faux-credibility, same as finding something from 10 years ago and using it to your advantage. 

C’mon, there’s a lot of kabuki theater going on with Gunther. A metric ton of it. 

 

Edited Friday at 04:23 AM by olemisscub

[olemisscub 552]

1 hour ago, Robert99 said:

No.  With the flap geometry staying the same, the only thing that controls the airflow at the aft stairs is the airspeed.  For the same airspeed, it doesn't matter if the aircraft is flying level or climbing.

good info. Then I wonder why they decided to level off at 7000 once he called to the cockpit. Maybe to give him more stable footing or something?

[dudeman17 356]

Apparently my civilian side was overriding. I learned something and I stand corrected.

 

On 7/29/2025 at 9:07 AM, FLYJACK said:

I found a military T-10 main with a packing card data pocket??

 

You did. It occurred to me that an instructor I used to work with was a military rigger in the 80's and 90's, so I asked him about it. The military documents, double documents, and over-documents everything they do. Not only do they keep log books in their lofts of everything they do, including main pack jobs, as I surmised the other day, but indeed military mains do have packing cards.

[dudeman17 356]

9 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Gunther was contacted by two people, one claiming to be Cooper..

...Clara's motive was... to publicize that Cooper was dead

 

What is the timeline on this? When (what year) was Gunther contacted by 'Cooper'? According to Clara, when did Cooper die?

[FLYJACK 776]

9 hours ago, dudeman17 said:

Apparently my civilian side was overriding. I learned something and I stand corrected.

 

 

You did. It occurred to me that an instructor I used to work with was a military rigger in the 80's and 90's, so I asked him about it. The military documents, double documents, and over-documents everything they do. Not only do they keep log books in their lofts of everything they do, including main pack jobs, as I surmised the other day, but indeed military mains do have packing cards.

Thanks,, that is a big deal..

It supports Cooper being military checking the cards,, and (likely) not knowing they were bailout rigs..

Edited Friday at 02:21 PM by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 776]

9 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Max or someone associated with his book efforts. It would be a crime to pull a hoax on the FBI, but to send something that isn’t true to a retired FBI agent is another story.

Sending a letter to Himmelsbach that you ALSO conveniently happen to publish in your book is likely another example of doing things to establish faux-credibility, same as finding something from 10 years ago and using it to your advantage. 

C’mon, there’s a lot of kabuki theater going on with Gunther. A metric ton of it. 

 

You have zero evidence for any of that... nothing. It is completely made up..

Anything is possible but that is a low probability.

It is highly probable that he was contacted by somebody claiming to be Cooper..

 

If you take that position based on an assumption -- the initial contact never existed then you close the intellectual inquiry that it may have been the real Cooper. Not that it is but you have close that possibility not based on a fact but an assumption.

 

He mentioned others who were also contacted. That supports a real contact.

 

 

 

Edited Friday at 01:45 PM by FLYJACK