FLYJACK

Who cares.. my posts are boring.. You guys discuss your crazy stuff yourselves... not interested.

Good grief... what a disaster.

If my post are boring then put me on ignore.. I am tired of insults and stupid ideas from ignorant people...

Anybody that believes.. South is a path Cooper knew they could ONLY take V23 Hayden's bailout rigs were steerable.. Is not a serious person.. and a waste of time.

Liar...

You agreed with him.. I explained "path" and it isn't something that even needs to be explained.. if you don't know what a path is in this case,, just go do something else. There are designated airways,, several options to go to Reno,, but the plane did not have to take an airway.. This was an emergency situation, not an airliner taking a typical route... So, dozens and dozens options... and the one they chose is arguably the worst going over populated areas.. The argument that cooper gave no route instructions or confirmed because he knew they could only take the one they did is completely absurd, because it isn't true.. The crew seriously discussed taking a coastal route to Reno.. Did Cooper have a compass,, no evidence for that,, possible I guess. In the dark, windy, overcast night with a non-steerable bailout rig Cooper did not have any precision. Cossey said they were not steerable, they were old and cheap rigs for Hayden's stunt plane to meet regs, he said he would never have used them.. I searched for steerable bailout rigs from the 60's and found one which was clearly labelled "steerable".. Cooper's bailout rig was not steerable. It was a 24' Steinthal according to the packing card. Cooper could have had up to potentially a 6 mile LZ... that is 113 sq miles...

Sorry,, Nicky but you just don't understand my position... or how an hypothesis is used to advance knowledge. I figured out the parachute cards, not the FBI.. I did that by noticing something in the files that just did not make sense and created a theory. I kept testing it against the evidence until it was was adjusted into its final form... My first theory wasn't perfect but it evolved. I did the same thing with rubber banded bundles... and got trashed for it.. those guys tried to get me kicked off Shutters site for it... Now, everybody has that position,, except Georger... Theories advance knowledge through a process of testing them against facts or evidence.. they are not statements of fact. My theory is really good because it fits in all the evidence and it resolves some questioned issues.. that does not make it true. When you are or somebody creates an assumption and uses it to dismiss a theory that undermines the process prematurely... You critique with facts or evidence,, that gets us closer to the truth... I am really good at this... I find things that don't make sense and form a theory to explain them within the evidence... from there the theory can be adjusted or rejected based on facts... not assumptions. Clearly, there are poor assumptions and good assumptions, not all are equal. The thing that never made sense was how Cooper got the range wrong... he had aviation and fuelling knowledge. He 100% believed the plane could make it to Mexico... The crew misunderstanding his flaps/gear down demand is not something that would be shown in the files.. Everybody claimed he was just trying to get the plane heading South,, that makes no sense at all.. He must have believed it because the demand would have to be rejected.. Once you understand Cooper believed the plane could make Mex to refuel everything changes... These theories are part of the process that moves us closer to the truth.. I haven't heard any other theory that explains all this within the evidence...

There are actually very few 100% facts in this case.... it is hearsay, witness perception or logical inference.. You only advance knowledge with theories... rare to find new evidence though I did actually... but rejecting theories with assumptions is low level thinking,,, and detrimental to advancing the case.. People confuse a theory with a claim of fact....

Like I already said we don't know what transpired between the crew and Cooper regarding the range,,, you assume to know.. you don't.. and this is a theory, like an hypothesis it is tested with facts and evidence not your assumptions and feelings, you and other low level thinkers fail to understand that. What you think Cooper would have done is completely irrelevant yet you use it. and not falsifying a theory doesn't make it true.. This is basic logic stuff..... it is above some of you. But this is the best theory that covers everything,, this is it or something very close.. My track record in this case for theories that later become proven or accepted is stellar... advancement always starts with a theory,,,

He didn't push back on the stairs lowered on takeoff, he relented.. that supports my theory,,, and there is actually no evidence that he knew a 727 could take off with stairs lowered... it still isn't clear if that came from the crew or Cooper... Then you make up some bizarre false equivalency to justify your own assumption... a circular mess.. "Cooper would have spoken up" that isn't evidence, you don't know what he was thinking. He caved on many other issues he could have pushed back on,,, that IS EVIDENCE and indicates his behaviour. To reject this you need evidence... not guesses..

That isn't the reason, that is a factor.. He didn't push back on several things he could have but didn't. Cooper had some aviation knowledge/experience and in that environment people respect pilots.... His initial demand was no landing in US, Mexico was OK to refuel,,, So, he knew there had to be a refuelling stop and thought Mexico was safer than the US.. maybe he was right maybe not.. He was not fearing a refuelling stop, he was fearing a landing in the US and the opportunity for US authorities to storm the plane.. Right or wrong he felt less secure. So, stopping in the US vs Mex for fuel isn't a big deal.. except for the opportunity to storm the plane. With a real/fake bomb he was dead if they stormed the plane in Reno.. We do not know what the discussion was about the range between Cooper and the crew,,, but at some point Cooper just decided he can jump with the money before Reno.. IMO, because he thought it was a setup... that is why he rejected other airports.. If his plan the entire time was to jump blind in the PNW there was no reason to reject other airports.. and no they don't take the coast. You guys are nitpicking with assumptions not evidence.. I can't think of any better theory that fits the evidence and explains some of these things,, like range error and lack of path/directions from Cooper... changing demands,, rejection of airports.. You guys have presented no better theories that covers everything so well.....

This is complete speculation on my part,, but there is one aspect I didn't make clear... Say he initially boarded a plane in Chicago or someplace East.. heading to Portland and aborted... the plane lands normally in Portland.. If he hijacked it that doesn't mean would have landed in Portland to obtain the money.. He could have redirected it elsewhere to Phoenix or whatever to obtain the money... theoretically, if he hijacked a plane going to Portland, it didn't have to land in Portland for the ransom..

It is impossible to know that.... there could be many explanations. For my theory the plane would have made it made it to Mexico to refuel even from Seattle. I have guessed... This is complete speculation and not the only possible explanation. 305 was not his first target,,, he boarded a 727 flying West toward Portland and aborted,,, landed in Portland, never left the airport saw 305 and took it... Why... He had the Skychef matches, suggesting he may have taken an earlier flight or was at another airport previously. They never found any trace of him before the airport,, no taxi, hotel etc. Cooper was wary about Sky Marshals.. He was possibly from the midwest.. (East) He was not dressed for a PNW jump... There is no evidence flight 305 was "unique" to his plan.. (other than a 727) This might partly explain the range issue.. if he was to hijack a previous flight and land elsewhere, the distance to Mex could have been less. There is no evidence 305 was Cooper's only or primary target. and where did he make the bomb...

Go back to the basic demand... Cooper said going to Mex City can land anywhere in Mex for fuel but not in US.. Mex is well within the 727 range. Cooper must have believed the plane could make it to Mex to refuel when he made that demand.. because it was impossible and would have been rejected. Cooper would not make a demand he knew was unachievable and had to be rejected. So, Cooper believed the range was possible but it wasn't then we have only two possibilities. It was not a ruse or attempt to get the plane flying South,, 1 - Cooper was mistaken in his belief.. He somehow got the range wrong flying dirty from takeoff. or 2 - Cooper's flying dirty demand was misunderstood. He meant flying dirty when stairs lowered inflight. We can't know which one for certain.. but the evidence suggests 2. Cooper had aviation knowledge (flaps, flight plan) and knew refuelling procedures,, somebody with that knowledge would understand drag effect on range.. If he had aviation experience he would have had respect for the crew and it still took some convincing for Cooper to accept the need to refuel... IMO, he believed they were setting him up to storm the plane when it landed,, which is why he kept rejecting airports.. Finally, agreed to Reno knowing he would just jump as soon as feasible. Since his ultimate goal was to escape with the money he saw the opportunity to jump early and took it..

Why would he not reject the wrong money bag.. Why would he not reject the wrong chutes. We can't know what is in his head and why he did things... but he had a pattern of adapting rather than pushing back.... He did change his airstair demand.. His primary goal was to obtain the money and escape by parachute.. he apparently he did that..

He wasn't gaslit, you don't actually understand the term, you used it incorrectly before..... like you don't understand path... Gaslighting is psychological manipulation. The crew was sincere.. The crew thought he wanted the plane to fly dirty from takeoff, there is a passage in the files where they are trying to figure out the configuration he wanted. Clearly, the plane could not make Mexico flying dirty so the crew began to negotiate a US fuel stop with Cooper..

Think of this in two stages.. First, the crew believed Cooper wanted the flaps and gear down the entire flight.. making the range too short to make Mexico to refuel.. My theory is that Cooper's demand was misunderstood and he wanted the flaps down and gear down when the stairs were lowered inflight,, his demands went to Tina then Tina relayed it to the crew, a version of "telephone". One word could change meaning.. for example flaps down gear down when the stairs lowered,,, flaps down gear down and the stairs lowered... This is my theory not a fact.. If they didn't go gear down flaps down from takeoff the plane could make Mexico to refuel per Cooper's demand... Second,, when Reno was in play Cooper changed his demands and agreed to stairs lowered on takeoff.. they talked him out of it and he tried to lower them right away.. So, the plane would then fly gear down flaps down from takeoff... 10,000 feet was to remain unpressurized..

That position is irrational, it does not fit the evidence.. it is falsifiable.

The dialogue between the crew and Cooper isn't clear about why the limited range.. Like I said Cooper had a pattern,, he didn't push back on the money bag or parachutes either... there is no evidence he knew they misunderstood his configuration. Jumping before landing in Reno isn't a random choice, he just felt he had to jump before Reno, he didn't want the plane landing in the US for a reason,, This is speculation but maybe he thought the range issue and Reno was a setup and they were going to storm the plane on the ground.. we don't know what was in his head. Remember, he had a bomb if fake he was dead, if real he was dead if they stormed the plane. He felt his better option was to just jump as soon as feasible and wherever the plane was.. This is the best theory I can come up with, if anybody can do better go for it..

The problem some of you guys are having is clear.. A theory or hypothesis is presented to explain something,, it has to contain assumptions or it would be a fact already.. It gets tested against evidence.. not more assumptions, you can make up anything out of thin air... like Cooper landed 20 miles away from his jump buried the money next to a River the night of the hijacking then returned months later and dropped a bundle.. Assumptions need to be plausible, likely and fit in the evidence. The better a theory fits within the evidence and explains some unexplained issues the better it is,, Your theories and variations of Cooper's LZ jump do not fit the evidence and rely on poor assumptions. There is no indication Cooper was dumb, ignorant or incompetent.. He made three similar decisions.. He did not reject the wrong rigs.. he adapted He did not reject the wrong money bag.. he adapted He did not reject the refuelling in the US.. he adapted

All made up assumptions,, no facts.. it isn't a valid set of answers.. you can make up any wild speculation for any scenario.. that doesn't make a good theory or plausible. Mexico demand... You are making a guess with zero evidence. This idea has been around so long in this case it has become almost a fact,,, it isn't, it is just made up. The range.. You have this messed up, He demanded Mex City as a target but the plane could land in Mex to refuel not in the US... then you make a poor assumption that Cooper was dumb about range... Cooper either got the range wrong or his demand was misunderstood,, He must have believed the plane could have made it to Mexico because the demand would have been rejected.. He demonstrated aviation and refuelling knowledge so he was not dumb,, most likely his demand was misunderstood and he did not intend for the plane to fly dirty from takeoff initially. Confirm a Path... He did not confirm a path or have an expectation to see the terrain or ground... The plane could have taken many path's to Reno,, Cooper's LZ was Ad Hoc,, You assume again with no evidence that he was "ignorant".. Jumping Blind... this is a disaster,, He had no expectation to fly the path to Portland. In fact Portland was the worst path going over a populated area.. Seems your explanation for these things is Cooper must have been dumb or ignorant.. and NO it is not simpler,, it doesn't fit the evidence and claiming Cooper was dumb/ignorant is made up.. Mine is.. His first plan was to give specific path instructions in the air and jump somewhere south of the US border. His fly dirty demand was slightly misunderstood going through Tina and crew.. limiting range. A US stop was being negotiated and he rejected large airports because he was still considering being on the plane. When Reno was settled on to refuel.. He decided to wing it and just jump before the plane landed in Reno and jumped blind.. His ultimate LZ was Ad Hoc.. that is one of reasons this case has been so difficult. Really simple.

He could have said it to Soderlind or during that dead air time.. I realize there is no proof but I believe Rat is the last person to lie or exaggerate. I just can't see him make that up completely... he must have said it or something close..

Cooper was not dumb.. his original plan was not to just jump randomly in the PNW blindly... It only tells us one thing,, his original plan was different.. that original plan is debatable,,, but my theory fits the evidence and explains things that don't make sense otherwise.. Why he demanded Mexico. Why he got the range wrong. Why he rejected large airports and changed his demands. Why he did not indicate or confirm a path. Why he jumped random and blind in the PNW. My theory is the best I can think of.... Can anybody think of a better one?? Go for it..