georger

Interesting. Fits with other data. Have nevr seen a photo of Bradon. Do you have any. Georger, read my post ...the english translation of the 1968 article by Ted B. Braden. spells it out. (edit) And matches the Plaster version of Braden's history.... But Braden was only in the military for 14 years. So what, 32, in 1968? So only 35 in 1971? roughly. Don't have exact age. I'm assuming he joined up when he was 18. hm..he says he was World War II. 695 freefall jumps. 377: what do you think???? Maybe he's older than I think. (WWII) "Qualification: 101. Airborne division, world war II; The master parachutist, 911 registered jumps, under it 695 in the free case;" Can't be Cooper. Or could he??? (EDIT) GEORGER: SEE WHAT BRUCE POSTED. WAUGH MISSPELLED> PLASTER GOT THE SPELLING RIGHT. Yes I get your points. I just have other data and am not sure who is correct. Theodore (Ted) E/B Bradon/Braden. Cant be two who were SOG at Marble Mountain and our Bradon was definately at Marble Mountain with Waugh. I am willing to go with yours ... I will say this. If this Bradon/Braden lived in AZ in the 80s/90s I may have more to say -

I found that too - not sure its our Bradon. Spelling BRADON ??

Interesting. Fits with other data. Have nevr seen a photo of Bradon. Do you have any. Why.. would there be a RUMOR that Braden/Bradon was DB Cooper? Do all these fellows have a rumor of being Cooper, some Nazi, Ted Bundy, etc? Seems to be a lot of rumors and little substance as these things go. Not sure who in this chain would merit the psychological profiling -

Je ne suis pas vraiment familier avec Montréal ou Allen Memorial Institue. Pourquoi sont vous allant là ? Pouvez-vous expliquer ? Important' : pouvez-vous donner une date pour quand Fazio a vu le champ de fragment ?

nice! Thanks. The period Feb 1-10 shows nothing unusual imo. If you want charts for a certain period let me know -

Quote Attached are tide tables from Feb 1-10 1980 for Vancouver.

There is something in these two photos that doesnt reconcile, in my mind. The excavation photo shows a sharp bend (bulge) at the money site? The aerial photo shows a smooth shoreline (south is up). Did this sharp bulge develop between 79 and 80? I agree the excavation photo appears to be looking downstream ... looks like the end of the sandbar in the distance (top). But again this does not reconcile with the 79 aerial photo? The money site is circled in the 79 aerial photo - If I didnt know better the beach bulge in the excavation photo is reminiscent of the dredging pile (in the same position?) in the 74 aerial photos?

If it was before, wouldn't the Fazios have called the FBI or closed the area and started their own treasure hunt? 377 My thoughts exactly. Lets dont get into that - maybe a can of worms. We just need a date when Fazios made their observation. I agree with Jerry. There were fragments. The only question is when and how much and where? We know they were in the money-pit, because Palmer and a host of others document that. [edit] Now maybe you guys understand where (and why) Ive been coming from all along. Fragments and potential frag-field speak to volume of money and potentially fragments of a container. Because 2 1/2 bundles dont just merrily wash all the way from the Washougal or even part way to Tina Bar and still arrive in one piece with rubber band remnants still in place. The Probability of that is zero. And following Safe's logic the only time the bag of money was still floating or buoyant was when it was new... otherwise we are talking about a dead wet load possibly brought along with other debris (snagged in other debris?) .... mechanics and possibly even direction of deposition are potentially involved if its a large load. Otherwise this money might as well floated down from Heaven! That's how I see this...

I have no particulars about the photo. Its just an old photo I have. It may be a news photo or snap from a news clip. The important thing is Im not even sure it "is" a photo of excavation trenches. It may be an aerial photo of the bar someone used to draw a grid on? For what purpose, I have no idea. The photo is very crude. Somehow the photo doesnt even look like an actual photo of Tina Bar but more like a "depiction" of the bar, someone drew a grid on... perhaps to illustrate the excavation going on at Tina Bar? The source of this photo may be the Seattle PI... I tend to think it is; the photo was grouped in with other PI photos from the same period, including the erroneous PI map of Tina Bar which shows Tina Bar in the wrong place on the Columbia! I actually contacted the PI about the map and got nowhere ... they didnt have the faintest idea where Tina Bar was at the time but were running news articles and photos ... note where PI puts Tina Bar, clear around by the Washougal!

Al told me he saw a lot of shards of Cooper twenties in all kinds of shapes and sizes, discolored and black, and in various states of decomposition. He said many pieces were scattered along the high-tide mark. WHAT IS THE ___ DATE ___ of Fazio's observation? BEFORE OR AFTER INGRAM'S FIND? WE NEED THE DATE!

Theory ..... You keep mentioning the "time frame of Fazios observation"... WHAT IS THE TIME FRAME? MONTH? YEAR? WEEK? BEFORE OR AFTER INGRAMS DISCOVERY? WE NEED THE DATE TO DO ANYTHING.

I am in the same boat with all of this - A 200ft foot field is a good sized field. I am assuming Jerry/Fazio meant parallel to the river. Geometry & depth of the field would relate to the process that created it. I have no problem with discolored bill fragments, even black fragments. In the hard light of day however these colors are not single hues. My opinion is a lot is getting lost in translation. We dont even have the DATE Fazio/Jerry are talking about. I like you am trying to juxtapose this report in terms of other observers, the excavation, reports, etc. Even Palmer reports "fragments" but "in the top layer", not on top of it. So I do not think\ Fragments are in doubt. Here are excavation photos. I see two things at possibly two different stages of the dig. Trenches perpendicular to the river (not sure how many). But also people turning the surface with scoops (shovels), maybe looking for surface artifacts like fragments? I assume these people turning the surface with shovels came BEFOIRE the deep trenches were dug? The work of turning the surface seems compatible with (1) how Ingrams found the money, just below the surface, and (2) the idea of fragments near the surface... One photo shows screening obviously looking for small artifacts... Question: do we know anyone who was on this dig who is still alive to talk about it?

That flow reversal info is interesting, with the phenomena extending a lot further upriver than I expected. 377 The missing tidal element is one of the reasons I couldnt get too excited about the previous posts about hydrology. Snow's flow reversal is a fact and a bit complicated. I believe the pdf speaks of flow reversal effects extending 40km inland! Shipping at Portland has to time departures and arrivals with the tides, if I recall correctly. I have tried to estimate what tides would do to a non-floating container (money). This goes back to Safe's discussion about float times. We might assume a non floating package hung up in some area - could tides lift it. Might push it. But tidal affects move currents around, alter them., as Snow has shown. Pushed, moved, lifted from where to wind up at Tina Bar. Im probably leaving out some important effect. Here again is the tidal chart for 11-24-71. But what we need most right now is the DATE of Fazios/Jerry's report.

Yes, the photos were Corps aerial views given us by Ckret, as I recall. The 9/6/74 photo shows two bulging deposits which I assume are dredge deposits. It would be these piles Fazio spread. (see attached) The circle on these photos was supplied by someone - Ckret? The circle marks the general area where the money surfaced; looks to be very close to a dredge pile if not under the pile. I simply dont know what Tom's current thinking on this is.

Well, the Columbia and its environs are a complex web of interactive elements. This is why its so important to have some idea about where Cooper bailed ... which goes back to the fp. Especially if the money doesn't "blink" a special message.... I came from . . .

I cant speak for what the FBI did or did not do in this case. The technology in 1971 was good. By 1980- it was better. Today it is still better, and more efficient, with a growing body of well trained people. People were already doing multi variant modeling by computer in the 60s. Eg., "Computer Experiments in Fluid Dynamics - Hydrological Modeling" by Harlow & Fromm, Sci Am + Nature, March 1965. Quantico has always been up to date if not ahead of the curve. Quantico has a steady influx and outflow of leading researchers. Ckret posted here that he wants well-reasoned arguments backed up with facts and data. I believe that is his stance and I share that point of view.

I did and I have just addressed it. Good work! Thanks!

Prior, though, in his air-conditioned office Al told me he saw a lot of shards of Cooper twenties in all kinds of shapes and sizes, discolored and black, and in various states of decomposition. He said many pieces were scattered along the high-tide mark. He couldn't say if it was that day's high tide, or the previous night's or the day before, etc. He also said that nothing was buried, that it was all laying on the surface as if it had just washed in. Im going back to Bruce's post above because it is important to the current discussion - We still do not have a DATE for when Fazio is saying he made his observations above. Bruce hasnt given a date. Jerry hasnt given a date. We dont know if Fazio's account applies before, during, or after the Ingrams found the money on Tina Bar. Without a date we are hamstrung, as usual. HAVING A DATE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. Fazio raises the prospect that tides were associated with the appearance of the money at Tina Bar. Specifically, Fazio raises the prospect that a tide brought the money to Tina Bar and distributed it, all in the space of a week or less, when Fazio then says he saw the money and fragments on THE SURFACE AT Tina Bar and "nothing was buried, that it was all laying on the surface ..." Fazio's statement to Bruce is tantamount to testimony. Fazio's statement conflicts directly with Dr. Palmer who says, '... and the upper layer consisted of 6-8 inches of reworked beach sand and it was in this upper layer that the fragments and bundles of money were found'. Palmer says nothing about "fragments on the surface". Palmer says nothing about a 200ft field of fragments on the surface. WHAT DATE DOES FAZIO'S STATEMENT APPLY TO??? Both Palmer and Ingram's statements are very clear that the bundles were brought out from under a upper surface layer of sand, which Palmer measured as being 6-8 inches deep at the money find location. Buried money is not suggestive of tidal deposition alone. Surface money could be the result of tidal "involvement". In any event tide would not be a lone agent of deposition. Fact: There is no such thing as tidal action alone, in the Tina Bar context. There would be tidal action along with current(s). Tides do not nullify currents. It is always a combination of the two. It is just as likely (to me) that rising tide could bring currents to a point on the beach not previously exposed and this combination of factors (tide + currents) eroded a sand layer, potentially resulting in a fragment field with bundles buried deeper below the surface ... just as Ingram found the bundles. A distribution field (if it existed at all) is suggestive of gentle wave/current action, otherwise everything is washed away leaving a clean beach and there would be no fragment field UNLESS the volume of money below the surface eroding is so great as to provide a continuing supply of fragments to the surface, as erosion occurs. Why doesn't any FBi report say anything about tides or a fragment field on the surface? Tidal action is a fact of life on the Columbia at Tina Bar, whether anyone bothered to include it in a report or not. Tides at Tina Bar are a fact of Nature. I have read Snowmman's posts and pdf's on tidal action in the Columbia (and at Vancouver Lake), and Snowmman's reports are 100% accurate. I can back Snowman's reports up with tons of other similar data, from a host of published sources. Snowman is correct is everything he is saying in this matter, so far as I know the literature. The only question about tides is how did they apply or not apply in the Ingram money find at Tina Bar, We need the date Fazio made his observation! We just must have the date. !!!

Tom may never publish, and his work never be released. Are you prepared for that prospect? No problem. It does add to the mystery of his TV appearance then, but hey! that will add to the layers of obfuscation that the next DZ.com thread (in 10 years) has to scrape away! :) Georger lamented: "Do you realise, we dont even have coordinates for where the money actually was! " Tom apparently has them, apparently validated by Ingram and Fazio. Jerry may have gotten them that day. Yes we don't have them. Maybe covert AZ op is needed? Georger measured "This forum is irrelevant and basically an anecdote." Yes, agreed. Hasn't it always been? I will remind everyone that Quantico did its own analysis of the money, clear back in 80. The FBI has had every opportunity to do further testing/ analysis over the years, as methods changed and new questions arose. I will also say, I do believe Tom Kaye has complicated everything, needlessly. I think Tom became the primary complication.

(edit) For instance, from my point of view, the only thing interesting about the thread is the possibility of getting a paintball guy to release information about 38 year old bills the FBI gave him for some reason. That's about as far from skydiving as you can get! Tom may never publish, and his work never be released. Are you prepared for that prospect?

What I find extremely funny about this thread and in fact over the past 2 or 3 thousand posts I would say 99% of the reason for me visiting is to see how seriously people take some random persons word as truth or of serious consequences What really ticks me off is how much I have grown to hate this thread and yet like a crack addict I keep having to come back for more - really wish it was possible to be banned from a singe thread I have come to the conclusion you have to live in Washington to make any real progress in this case. Otherwise, one is a spectator hoping the Cooper Rover will somehow be sent to the places and topics that truly matter, and most of the time the Rover sits, doing nothing! Do you realise, we dont even have coordinates for where the money actually was! And yet we are asked to make judgments about tides and currents and fields, and those who could speak to these issues don't, and some consider these issues settled but settled with 'what'? Correction: we are not asked to make judgments. This forum is irrelevant and basically an anecdote. That frees others to screw around forever on their own terms - It's pure frustration on my end.

Jo, That is a pretty serious claim. If Jerry truly has been tasked with silencing you who gave him the job? Does he get paid? Why must Jo be silenced? 377 Jo has been the most un-silenced person in the history of the Cooper case in every aspect of the case. Her output has been staggering compared to anyone else. But I am equally surprised anyone would still be promoting Christiansen, golly-gee. Ubetcha!

good searches! Shake the bushes on Weinberg and his associates which included parachutists.

How about a store in Seattle or Portland in 71? Purchased right before the hijacking.

Yes, clip ons, especially among workers and working class. Quick, cheap. Because the tie meets social standards. (Interesting he takes it off before he jumps). We had a driver in Quebec City. When alone in the car he took it off instantly - hated wearing it. But when transporting people or getting out of the car he always put it on, like a requirement of the job. Then off, and he would almost tear it off, and down on the seat beside him. I thought it was funny. My mother always told him to take it off once we were in the car but he insisted on keeping it on as long as there were passangers - for public appearance. He felt important having it on if we were in the car. Then off immediately, to fit in with his peers .... He had a whole thing about this tie! As a kid I thought it was very funny. I dont know if JC Penny or what. Somehow I doubt JC Penny in Quebec City. It may be too early for Eatons? In fact there were vendors near the old section who sold things like ties and shoes and stuff... our driver might have bought his there. Social class is important in EU. Carried over into Canada. People dress accordingly. When I grew up in the 50s social class was evident especially in cities in Canada. (even farmers would wear a tie - old broad thick wool ties, usually brown). well I may be making more of this than there is but if our Dan Cooper is the Dan Cooper from Tintin... then our hijacker was making some kind of point, if only to himself, and at some intellectual level... How many people hijacking aircraft would pick that name out of a hat? Cooper is a common name, but Dan Cooper (aviation hero and parachutist)? Have any other hijackers used folk hero names? How do the odds split for a dimwit to pick a hero name vs a common English name? Either way it seems to me at a level higher than a dimwit would naturally do?