georger

Jo that is speculation, seems logical, but still speculation ............. needs confirmation.

My understanding is the doe was photo'ed at the bank with FBI there? The bag now becomes crucial because it relates to the money find. But a million saw this bag, some still living. Its just a matter of asking the right people - - - or remembering to ask after the guy on the other end says: "Hello! Would you like a Big Mac meal today?" The constant assault of advertising throws people off; it was designed to do that just as the BIG MAC shrunk by 50% and the price went up by 200%.

I do the exact same thing in parking lots - but you could drop me in the middle of some wilderness and if I kept helathy I would walk out, easily, with a grin on my face. Cement screws me up!

OK. Now you know how much I know about things here! Thanks for this info -

Im familiar with that document. I have a copy myself. But it still doesnt shed light on the nature of the container, or containers. Perhaps Cooper stuffed money in his pockets and emptied his brief case and used that also after Tina left - nobody knows. I do think its a little funny that the auhor of the above calls Tina, Tina Larsen, not Mucklow. That seems to date the article as post-facto. The nature of the container could have implications for money float time and travel, preservation. If the container had handles then a snag-and-hold scenario becomes more plausable. And if its a Brinks type heavy canvas & leather satchel, that is a very secure environment - very durable with useful chemical markers ... I just dont know.

Except for Safe seeming sure Ckret said "handles" your account is what I have always had, although the idea of a bank security team packing money in an open bag without so much as a drawstring seems odd to me - especially when they definately had and used canvas-leather lockable satchels. Maybe the fancy containers were reserved for hijackers asking a million or more?

Georger those are two good pictures and your idea about the History Detectives - is a great idea. They would concentraate ONLY on the bag and who knows what they might discover along the way. I have heard several different descriptions of that bag from people who should know - and those who interviewed the witnesses and the writers of books who also claim to have spoke with the witnesses and dectectives and what one witness has made claim to. Perhaps it would be a good exercise to mention each by name - then the descriptions they gave of the bags over the yrs. Not to use our own concept of the bag...show them after they make their description, pictures of all possible bags and choosing the one closest. What I have heard 1.Himmelsbach: a. bag with a drawstring. 2.Tosaw Plain grey canvas sack with no zipper, drawstring or any other way to close it. 3. Tina Mucklow (someone needs to reference any statements she made to the media. She was the person who I understood handed the bag to Cooper. 4. Since she was present when Cooper offered money to Tina didn't she also see the bag. It was after the money arrived that the witnesses and part of the crew were released. 5. Unidentified witness Claimed bag was a satchel with a leather handle and this person claimed to have seen the bag. 6. Carr by way of his having access to the file . Did he read that part off and if that this part of the FOIA. Canvass bag with leather handle. 7. Media - useless unless the writer actually interviewed the witness or FBI - (then the statesments would be added to those of that "witness"). 8. Gunter - (he did interview one of the stewardess) - claims canvas Bank bag the size and weight of 2 very large city phone books. It was one of the very early documentaries that stated satchel and it even showed Cooper with a leather and canvas satchel. Flat retangular base, with leather straps and leather handle. The 2 photos that Georger posted are good. The whitish - grainy bag is similar to what I saw, but it seemed like the writing went the other way - but I only opened it part way.. The heavier bag with the closure on it is similar to what one of the witnesses said, but I got the opinion it had a very secure closing on it..from the description given. If we can develope good photos of all kinds of bags it could have been and then show these pictures to a witness - we nail down the bag. This is what the History detective would do. . Questions first - Do you happen to have the post Ckret made about the bag in the locked down thread? How do get into this locked down thread or is that impossible? Both Safe and Guru were referring to that Ckret post which I have never seen ( I wasnt here then). I sure would like to read that post ??? Im going off and chase something else for 30 mins and will be back ...

As you know, I spoke with the president of the company making the bank bags who said that they didn't have records as far back as the Cooper-era. My discussion with him was focused on the possibility of the bag/money staying contained for an extended time. He thought it possible for the bag to stay intact in water or out in the elements of nature for years. The weave/knit of the bag fabric is meant to endure rough treatment. He thought it would take a very long time for the bag to degrade to the point of allowing the money to 'escape'. Yes, Ive read all that. You and Safe were more interested in float time. But beyond 'canvas' you failed to ask the size of the bag or the type... is that about right? So, unknown bag has 'rigorously calculated float time' and potentially could have stayed in tact protecting the money for decades? Maybe even water treated? (bees wax DUCK solution was the usual treatment for heavy canvas back then. You could get the stuiff at any mil surplus store. And Mechanics Illustrated even had a project for building a canvas boat. My cousin built one and had it in the Columbia at Vancouver, in December 1963). So the bank Pres didnt supply any photos and you didnt ask? attached are two bags of different size and type both used at Seafirst - How do you carry 10,000 stacked and bandled $20 bills if in an open unsealed bag ... it must have been a large bag you could grab at the top ? How do you keep $5800 from just dropping or popping out if the bag is tilted and open? Its very rare that a company that makes things doesnt have photos of the things they made. I wonder if Seafirst would still have one of those old bags still around? Somebody keeps track of History somewhere? Should we turn this over to the History Detectives (NPR)? Of course the bag (nature of it) is KEY to "protection of the money". Otherwise we have lose bundles flopping, floating, dancing around all over the place enough to wallpaper a castle, lose in the environment - and nobody ever finds even one bill except for the bundles Ingram (and Denise!) found semi exposed then dug out at Tina Bar.. band remnants still in place. Maybe "protection" was Mother Earth and not 'a bag' afterall? In Ckret's original 'original' he seemed very careful to mentioned 'handled bag' and 'cemented bundles' (cemented by muck). The muck was examined for sand type and other things. Bags and muck. Or maybe just muck. It didnt have to be "in" the water to collect muck, just near the water. I keep trying to image a big white open light duty canvas bag with 10,000 twenties in it sitting in the Washougal of which 2.5 bundles cemented together winds up at Tina Bar, all by hydrology. Thats a little like a 400 lb fat man sqeezing through a door, and exiting 399 lbs lighter squeezing back out through the keyhole. Nahhhh, never happened.

Let me add this - I was not here when Ckret gave his original descriptions of the bag, but Safe and Guru were. In addition I gather the old thread containing those posts was locked down by Quade for some reason? I feel confident Safe and Guru's posts speak reliably for what Ckret originally said. It is inconceivable that themoney would have been transported to the plane in an open unsealed bag! ... to be carried on. all of the crew would know what kind of bag it was. Safe's post #312 occurs after Guru's long post about the bag post #310. People can go back and read that whole section. We also have Tina's description of Cooper "opening" the bag and his shock at seeing all the money. You cant 'open' a bag unless it is 'sealed'.

Georger - at that time I was SO MAD at Ckret (Carr) I couldn't see straight. Im not going to get into all that or take sides, but here is the entirety of Safe's post, blow: If you simply measure the volume of money that tells you the size the bag had to be, which leads to type, which leads to exactly what Ckret and Safe were discussing and the reason they were discussing this - - - SafecrackingPLF Mar 11, 2008, 7:46 AM Post #314 of 15660 (3180 views) Registered: Nov 27, 2007 Posts: 422 Re: [377] This is a generic DB Cooper thread [In reply to] Can't Post Great post. I also saw the I-5 strangler thread. It's most definitely related just because skyjack71 spoke of thread in the knife. Personally, I think it's very low (like less than a percent) probability that Duane would have a knife with parachute line in it, even if he was Cooper, but it's certainly worth looking into. Guru312, My apologies if I took your hypothesis out of context. Let's have the discussion, shall we? Quote He found it unlikely that a bank in the NorthWest wouldn't have a zipper and water repellent to keep the money dry in that rainy invironment for interbank transfer or movement of money outside a bank. There's a big difference between accepting facts from the FBI file, and challenging every one of them. Ckret specifically said "handles with no zipper". If anyone comes along and says otherwise, there should be significant reason other than what they think SeaFirst did. Quote 14 feet of line gives him enough for a few turns around the bag. One length of cord is enough for him to tie a reasonably secure and tight package. It doesn't have to be water proof! What it has to be is securely tied. If you have 14 feet of line, and all you do is wrap it around the bag, you have enough for three wraps and a foot of line to knot it. This is based on using the narrow dimensions, although we can debate if he'd secure it on all six sides (more likely). 17+9+17+9=52 inches is the narrow side. 17+12+17+12=58 inches is the wide side. It's likely he'd tie line around both sides. He would then have slightly less than 5 feet to do something else (tie it around his waist, or wrap it one more time). He cut two lengths of line, not one, so assuming he used one to secure the bag only is certainly a valid thought. I will come back to your "waterproof" idea in a moment. Quote It does not have to float but if he folds the top and cinches the cord around the fold, the bag will float, and keep out water for quite some time. The money bag man thought a bag securely wrapped could last quite a few days. But...it doesn't need to be water tight. It doesn't need to float forever. It needs to stay tied and bang along the river, moved by the current. The bag will float. The bag will still float even if the top isn't cinched. The question is, how long will it float? A bag with no zipper (this does not preclude drawstrings however) will not keep water out no matter how you cinch the top. You didn't mention this in the post, but you're assuming that the top of the bag would not be in the water and the material not able to saturate with water. The fold staying out of the water isn't possible because the large surface of the bag (17 inches) would be the side the bag floats on. If the bag had 17 inches vertically, it would be unstable and wobbly (top heavy) and it would tip to the lower center of gravity. With one of the 17 inch sides being the one the bag is floating on, the seal at the top would be pivotal to determining the rate of air escape. No matter how you shake it, however, the seal itself would not be airtight, and thus, very sinkable. Having excess to fold up implies that the location of the handles aren't attached to the very top edge, otherwise the handles would have been folded under to get the seal you describe. That's certainly a possibility, but we need to know more about the handles or types of handles this bag may have had. I'm fairly sure though that the bag would float with the fold horizontally. This is because the width is only 9 inches, which having the fold vertically when floating would require a 12 inch height. The Bag would tip to one of the 12x17 sides which would force the fold horizontal. While you can say this fold could stay above the waterline, there would be a point where enough water would soak through and weigh the bag down to force the fold underwater. At that point, the bag would be in serious trouble. Quote Then, sometime later, the canvas finally splits open and the packs pour out. One packet finds it way to the river bank for the boy to find...and a few bills make it to eBay. If we assume your hypothesis, the "some time later" is actually about 7 years later. "One" packet is not consistent with the facts. There were three packs that were found. One single pack can only float for 10 minutes and 25 seconds. The bag would need to be within this distance and the pack would need to be completely dry, even after seven years in the elements, including the canvas bag itself floating in water. Therefore, your hypothesis actually requires that the entire bag itself make it's way to the sand bar and get snagged on something. Not to fret though, this was Ckret's hypothesis as well. Yes, a few bills made their way onto eBay, but none of them have actually been sold there to my knowledge (the price was too low). Bernie, you know I was enthusiastic about you contacting the bag supplier. I'm now 100% confident that you and him never discussed makes and models of the likely bag; you knew that I was researching vintage bags for this test. The most important element of this debate is to figure out what bag was used, or the type of bag that was used. I don't disagree with the general crux of your hypothesis, but your hypothesis violates three key pieces of information that have been established: 1. The bag had no zipper 2. The time of the jump was between 8:10-8:12 3. The location of the plane at this time was near Merwin Dam / La Center. Even if everything you say is true, we would still be left with the money floating in LaCamas lake indefinitely. As I stated yesterday, I'm not even sure it's a viable waterway. We need to determine how water escapes from the lake to complete the hypothesis. Otherwise it's beyond speculative. One last thing, if I understand what you're saying, are you telling me that dirty air will have more force of power than straight wind? Are you suggesting that calculating 3 dimensions of force will make the forces themselves greater?

You are absolutely correct. That is what Ckret said. Then an Mar 11/08 SafecrackingPLF stated in post #314: " There's a big difference between accepting facts from the FBI file, and challenging every one of them. Ckret specifically said "handles with no zipper". If anyone comes along and says otherwise, there should be significant reason other than what they think SeaFirst did." In addition the tying off of the bank bag consisted of passing rope 'through the handles' then tied to his waste. I have that description from several sources. I dont have a photo of a comparable bag at my disposal but can provide one later -

The LEFT hand pull question HAS never been answered by anyone. Yes it has. The Left Hand pull was simply a preference and safety measure packer-instructor Cossey used on the chute he personally rigged and used for himself at the skydiving school, said chute then mistakenly sent off to be given to Cooper along with a 'dud' front pack. Snowmman and others have already explained Cossey's Left Hand pull chute. Here is Snowmman's old post below: snowmman Jumps License In sport : : : Jul 20, 2009, 11:13 PM Post #11167 of 15552 (962 views) Copy Shortcut Registered: Mar 30, 2008 Posts: 4093 re: right hand outboard pull [In reply to] Can't Post -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Since 377 replied, maybe it's worth posting the detail in case people don't follow links. I'm really curious if this was what Earl Cossey had done to the rig. I'll post the text and photos from page 434 of (one of)Poynter's book(s). I think if you scroll (at the link), on page 436- it has instructions and closeups for making the mod. Note I'm not sure if later editions of this book, or similar books, dropped the mention of this mod. This was there in 1984. http://books.google.com/...=PA434&lpg=PA434 The Parachute Manual: A Technical Treatise on Aerodynamic Decelerators by Dan Poynter (Paperback - May 1984) page 434 The ripcord is mounted on the left inboard side on emergency parachutes to protect the handle, assuring against accidental activation. While this may be a problem to the pilot, it is not to the sport jumper who is more conscious of, and familiar with, his parachute. The positioning of the ripcord may be a little thing to the experienced jumper but it is an important one to the novice. Many students begin to roll or pitch head down on the pull and this is not only discouraging, it is a terrifying experience. The scared student is now held back and made to repeat the experience over and over again until he either masters the problem or quits. Disappointed in his progression and scared of the activity, he often leaves. The advantages of the outboard pull are many: Stable Pull With the outboard pull, the jumper has less of a tendency to pitch head down since he reduces his upper body drag less and does so for a shorter period of time, i.e. with the cross chest pull, he must pull his upper control surfaces (arms) in further (across his chest) and the pull takes longer since his arms must travel further. The novice's tendency to plunge head down during the pull often increases tension and fear which results in a poorly controlled "snatch" at the ripcord. This only heightens his problems as it increases his fear of the pull. With the right hand arrangement, there is less tendency to roll toward the pull. The novice is in a new element and his choices with the cross chest pull are limted, with both being unsatisfactory. If he places his left arm over his head (to increase upper body drag and, therefore, lessen the forward pitch) while reaching for the ripcord with his right hand, he loses lateral stability, and may roll to one side. If he comes in with a two handed pull, he not only sacrifices lateral stability, he plunges head down as well. Even after the best training, a student may leave one arm out as he reaches for his ripcord. With the cross chest pull, this almost certainly results in a barrel roll, while with the outboard pull, chances are, he will only waver somewhat. The head down plunge is often countered by the experienced jumper by bending his legs at the knees. Few students are even aware of their leg positioning: they don't know if their legs are bent, straight, together or apart because they can neither feel nor see them. As every parachutist knows, instability is a major contribution to malfunctions. But it may not be too clear as to just why. Recent high speed photo coverage of some dummy drops revealed some interesting deployment sequences. The dummy tumbled as it was pushed from the door of a Cessna 180. The container opened and the revolving dummy "launched" the still folded, sleeved canopy into the air. The lines completely unstowed and the locking flap opened BEFORE the sleeve even unfolded. The frame by frame study revealed how simply the assembly might take a hitch upon itself or the canopy might emerge into the airstream in an unusual manner. Needless to say, a stable position leads to orderly deployment which increases reliability. And who should need to have his chances increased more than the student? The outboard mounted ripcord lends itself to an easier pull because the jumper is able to exert more leverage PUSHING AWAY from the shoulder than PULLING ACROSS the chest. Should a two hand pull be required with the right hand outboard pull (not as likely as with the cross pull), the difficulty is not increased since the ripcord is only 1 3/4" farther from body center. (3 pics from page 434. note rh pull3 is the normal cross pull, not the mod) (This post was edited by snowmman on Jul 20, 2009, 11:26 PM) Attachments: rh pull1.jpg (44.4 KB) rh pull2.jpg (38.0 KB) rh pull3.jpg (35.7 KB)

So he's resourceful to a limited degree not exactly indicative of training and experience under stress. Thanks. G.

The only reason I bring the pull up, is because Cossey did. Cossey said the pull on that chute required two distinct movements - out, then up hard. Cossey said without those two distinct and separate movements Cooper would not get the chute open (most likely). It was a chute Cossey had packed for himself left at the jump school. When Cossey found out the chute had been taken he was (visibly) upset (and still is?). This particular chute was NOT one Cossey would have chosen to be sent to the plane. Cossey provided two additional chutes which were reliable (he says). Thanks. G.

Really!? Has Homeland Security been informed? FU Beaver.

I will say this: Snowmman does appear to spend every moment awake riding this forum, as if his life depended on it? When does he feed his kids and dogs and antennas and lastly, his wife!? 377 is a close second but divorced. That's not a judgement, just an observation. Each to his own cave.

Fuck you Robo-Beaver. Amazon can answer or not. The quesation was addressed to her.

With this in mind, would an experienced jumper accept what Cooper received as equipment? How long would you have to look at a harness and reserve to realize they are not compatible? Would you jump with such a configuration and how? Would you do it for a sport jump? Hours had passed from when Cooper passed the note to when he started to receive the equipment and money. After the discovery of less than optimum equipment why didn't he modify or expand his demands? It fits the profile of manic depression and this is exactly what makes it difficult to judge: expert or fool. People then forget all the gray area in between and that is where the theoretical cult activity begins. That is why we are here on a cult website devoted only to the skydiving aspect of the case? This forum is sane and polite compared to most physics discussion forums! Has Snowmmann never told this fact? What is Snowmmann/377 hiding? Snow says: "I never found out whether Hahneman had prior skydiving experience. It's a perplexing question. Was Hahneman whuffo or not whuffo? You can look at his actions, and still not know." Now compare Hahneman to McCoy and fit Cooper into that comparison? They all "skydived" in the end, didn't they. It is nice to have all these experts here who stoutly swear he died or he lived ... or was injured. To resolve this I always go back to Cossey who say simply: "if he got it open he lived". You will find the FBI is very reluctant to talk about Cossey's statement. That fact alone answers 377's question about how much the FBI knows! The FBI does not know how to answer Cossey's statement except to reject it ... with expert testimony like Palmer's. It's like a trial at the Inqusition with one'guy off to the side Cossey/Galileo saying: "he might have survived". Let me digress: Amazon has not addressed the specially packed chute Cossey provided. Neither has Snowmmann in all his comprehensive brilliance brought it up. Cossey's chute is key and one major reason the FBI say's Cooper died. We have other expert testimony on Cossey's hard-pull chute but that testimony is mixed. I for one would like to read what Aamazon thinks about Cossey's chute (the chute Cooper used), specifically. For me Cossey's chute is pivital. $5800+ dollars survived to be found in 1980 at Tina Bar. That is 3+% of the original bundles of 100 bundles ($2000 per bundle). However the found bundles arrived at Tina Bar it appears they arrived in a protected state either very early or after some exchange with time in another protected state, either arriving at the bar very quickly in a protected state from some point more distant, or slowly (with very little stress) from nearby. But the bundles were covered up quickly and protected after arriving at Tina Bar. Top sand finally eroded away to expose the found bundles and a debris field ... and that is that. The debris field was either part of the original deposition scenario or part of a series of erosion and recovering scenarios at Tina Bar; perhaps both scenarios working together over time. Tides were not responsible for the money being deposited at Tina Bar. Tides could be part of an erosion-exposure scenario. The sum total of all forensics on the money to date indicates sediments and sand types consistent with the Columbia basin only, infiltrating the found bundles. The found bundles spent the bulk of their history in the Columbia basin only. This excludes the Washougal, so far. For the record once more: there were a number of dating techniques available in 1980 which could have been used to date both the sediments and the money at Tina Bar. Samples of the money were sent for analysis but so far as I know, dating was not applied. The issue of when the money arrived at Tina Bar could have been settled to within an error factor of only a few months, back in 1980. I have no idea why these techniques were not employed in such an important case. Perhaps it is best to leave these issues untouched, in the context of the present narrow concomitance of this venue dejur.

I wonder how many jumpers recognise that malfunction and its origins nowadays My guess is that Jo's more likely to know the answer than Orange! I have a photograph of a mate being given the Mae West award at the DZ - can't remember what it was for though. thwart - definition of thwart by the Free Online Dictionary ... To prevent the occurrence, realization, or attainment of: They thwarted her plans. 2. To oppose and defeat the efforts, plans, or ambitions of. n. Nautical ...

Snow is fooling around with some sort of post and delete strategy to screw me out of my rightful 666 slot. I just know it. He is also recruiting an Icelandic girl to flirt with the webmaster and make it a slam dunk. I am just learning cheat to win. He's been doing it for decades. I am really behind here. 377 Thats the way Cults go. The knoob gets all the fruit.

Even if people attempt it on another thread, what are the chances that any other thread in this forum can make it to 666 pages? with you and Jo there its guaranteed

The topic is DB Cooper ?

Interestingly I was last night watching a documentary on a flood at a town called Laingsburg in 1981. One river leading into another down to the sea a few hundred km's away would have been the water flow. 72 bodies were never found. During a flood you have other dynamics working like houses and trees and cars and other debris washing along and crushing mangling the bodies or burial under rock or mud. Without those dynamics.. in a river with normal flow its just not common. The amount of fisherman all over the Lower Columbia River going after Salmon , Steelhead, and Sturgeon all fall winter and spring are litterally hundreds of boats a day during the slow periods during the week to many thousands every weekend. those are a LOT of eyes... not to mention all those hooks. Debris does not deposit on Tina Bar without a high water scenario. Buried debris at Tina Bar is exposed during high water scenarios. Dating: Beyond confirming serial numbers, confirming sediment and sand type between the bills of the money, and Palmer identifying strata (1974 dredge layer) at the money location, there was no attempt to date the money or anything else at Tina Bar. The failure to do standard dating and other forensics at the time was a major omission, if it was not done.

Even Ckret seemed confident that the simple answer was not possible, when he seemed to think he needed expert hydrologists to track water flow from inland. Columbia, hydrology, basins, geology, water, tides, etc etc etc ..... and yet railroad tracks used daily in 1971 run right behind Tina Bar back up to the Scotton area a prime DZ if you accept a later timeframe for the drop. During the Manhattan days a set of train tracks ran right into Alomorgodo and out to one of the research facilities and every now and then a bum would get off a train wondering where he was and looking for a free lunch.... in spite of every train being heavily guarded. The bums were always asked: "How did you get here?" even though the answer was obvious. It was a routine question that had to be asked (part of the protocols). The answer is every case was: "I came via the Columbia" !

So Tek was having issues at the time.... Do you know how many times a plane crash has been used for people wishing to escape from their current lifeinto a new one? I notice most of the things you were talking about in there...were about the bodies being FOUND. If someone drowns.. yes they can be down for a while... especially when the water is cold.. but when it does warm up... the swell.. the float.. they wash up. Spring Chinook season can get interesting on the Willamette and the Columbia. You probably know this but it takes a certain temp before body tissues release gas (cell breakdown).. cold water low oxy can preserve things a long time.