georger

Something is amiss. Maybe the pencil plots had big range errors but 1971 radar, even cheap ones, had sweep to sweep range errors at least an order of magnitude better than .5 miles. If I was tied to Pier 47 in SF and painting Alcatraz with my 1969 vintage Decca 101 X band radar, the Alcatraz echo image stayed put... no visually perceptible range variation from sweep to sweep. Absolute range accuracy (comparing to govt nav chart) was within 1 or 2 %. It is really easy to get accurate and stable radar ranging by using a crystal controlled sweep oscillator to control the radial (ranging) sweep of the CRT electron beam. Even a free running oscillator of good design would do a decent job at getting the range right and minimizing range error drift. 377 OK... there are posts about the gear being used at the time but these posts are old ... but will look. Thanks for these details... I have no problem with "standard error" and it looks like thats exactly what we have. Sluggo's latest post on this is very good.

OK. Direct question. Is there ANYTHING you know that suggests or documents Cooper saying his bomb was "electronic" and could be triggered by a squak signal, saide to anyone?

Either Cooper is taking out of his you know what or he is trying to intimidate the crew. Not "intimidating them into not sending them a squawk signal" just plain intimidating them. If someone gave me a message like that I would assume, just like the crew, they meant don't go to 7500, which is the code for Unlawful Interference aka hijacking. To answer your questions though... Squawking the signal has little to do with tracking. For Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) in the U.S. (IFR is what all commercial flights operated under), a plane is generally assigned a transponder code at the clearance delivery stage on the ground and it stays with that aircraft the entire flight. So tracking isn't an issue. It is more a backup way of letting ATC know you have a situation on board. If you have a guy in the cockpit with you demanding you don't tell air traffic control you are being hijacked you may be able to get away with changing your transponder to the code. As for explaining why no squawk was sent... If you are referring to the code the crew was supposed to send when Cooper jumped it doesn't. That code wasn't the hijack code, it was a code given by ATC that Cooper would not have any knowledge of. If you are referring to the hijack code, they obviously were able to communicate the message over the radio. REPLY> I wonder if this is true? This is an astounding thing if Cooper said this, especially in the context of technically trained people. On the other hand, if this is true and Cooper believed this, then it may imply COOPER DID NOT BUILD HIS OWN BOMB - SOMEBODY ELSE DID - or HE BUILT A BOMB OUT OF COMPONENTS HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND (and somebody, at Radio Shack?, told him this transistor or diode or tr switch was vulnerable to: RFI, Cosmic Rays, FBI rays ) ??? I think you all know what I am saying here - Wont day more until this is clarified...

REPLY> That is interesting. Why would he think he could fool anyone on that!? This paints the same portrait Ckret has pushed namely: 'had enough superficial knowledge to be dangerous'. (but also stupid in the face of technical people). I wont get into the techgnical aspects of this but Cooper is basically describing a situation that would be dangerous even for himself ... no bomb control. If this is true it could be very telling ... (and almost a relief!). Does anyone know exactly what frequency and mode we are talking about here?

I like your epilogue!!!

The dredging: What is your understanding of How far either side of Tina Bar the river was dredged? Links? George

I'm thinking maybe it wasn't a real salute. Maybe a wave, hand up kind of thing. Even though, shows relatively relaxed, confident? well, the description of rig up is even worse for changing a perception of Cooper, I think. I was thinking though that it might be overstated. I think any dummy familar with slider buckles would be able to cinch up the straps. Note I commented on the probable error in "canvas" here. page 32 "Cooper put the military parachute on his back and cinched up the canvas straps to make them fit his chest and thighs. Tina noticed how quickly and easily he completed this complicated operation - just looking as though it were an everyday occurence" There is another description of Cooper inspecting the open stairwell very quickly after takeoff. So I don't know if I agree with Ckret's interpretation of wanting to jump right away. He definitely seems to have started getting things in motion around the stairs right away. REPLY> I think if Tina said it was a salute, that is what it was. Again, its audacious if not stupid, even for a worldclass jumper to do. (In the next fifteen minutes he could be saluting a bear or have a fencepost up his rectum.) He is the only unsolved case of this kind in aviation history. Nothing quantifiable in that! We could speculate forever.

Georger..I went back and looked at Sluggo's leg knots/distance to see what you were talking about. Yes..too much variation. BUT: these tick marks were hand drawn right? I suspect if we allow a little variation on each tick mark (error) that we could get them so the variation in speed distance is not so bad? In fact I can estimate. A fast leg covered 4.1 NM A slow leg nearby: 3.02 NM So a .5 NM error on both of the surround tics would account for that. Isn't our radar only about that accurate? So I think what it says is that if from tic to tic we could see an instaneous 0.5 NM error, or that the hand drawing could introduce that error, then we can't make any flight speed analysis from the tick marks does that make sense? We don't know enough about the instaneous causes of radar error. (attached sluggos thingee again) (edit) It does look like if Cooper jumped at 2015, then maybe they had started changing the flaps back to 15 degrees already? thinking it may have jumped earlier at the oscillations. So I guess we're not sure about Cooper's exit speed. REPLY> Sluggo had an explanation for this - he will chide me for forgoetting, but his answer made sense. The ONLY reason it matters to me is (a) trying to refine a drop point and (b) sure as hell somebody would see this and make a big deal about it - peer review and all that. Personally I can live with it except as it affects zeroing in on a drop point. And yes. The radar had .5+- in it as I recall Sluggo's post.

I'd say from my experience jumping from a jet and in seeing birds flying around boats on marine radar that Cooper had enough separation to be resolved distinctly from the 727 echo within one second. The closer the plane is to the radar the sooner the Cooper and plane echoes would become distinct because a fixed distance between them gives higher angular separation when closer to the radar antenna (polar geometry). At 10 miles it should have been a piece of cake to see the Cooper echo. Certainly ATC raw radar tapes would have been preserved after such an incident. They are when accidents are involved. What happened to them? 377 REPLY> Well, resolution would be a function of distance, beam spread angle, frequency, type of target (reflective vrs amorphous etc), etc etc ... it sufficies to say I think you are very correct. 10 miles and in 1 second a body has fallen far enough from the plane it is detectable. As I recall this (this is crude cuz radar is not my area) these old radar(s) had different beam widths a controler could switch between to change resolution? Like a kind of magnification? In fact I saw a radar panel a control officer was working back in the 60s and the tech had several different plastic reticles he could put over the screen then switch between beam widths to change resolution... But if they werent looking then all of this is irrelevant. Cooper probably had that figured out too!

Thanks Nuke.

REPLY> I should not have read this! Cooper is now coming off as far more in control and competent than I thought he was. Saluting Mucklow? WTF is that!@!!

>>>>>>>>> damn good work Snowmman!

All, Sometimes I get furious angry frustrated irritated with Ckret, especially when he doesn’t reply to my posts, IMs, or e-mails in a timely manner. Today I ran across THIS and it reminded me that our favorite Special Agent has a “real-job” and isn’t setting around the office reading dropzone.com posts and answering e-mails. The guy in the article who rammed the SUV was Ckret. The attached photo shows Ckret in the background (on the cell phone). So, Ckret…. Why does it take you so long to reply to my e-mails and posts? Sluggo_Monster Damn, if I ever turn from highway robbery to bank robbery I am going to carefully avoid Ckret's district. I don't want to run into James Bond while I am trying to get away. I remember a bar in SF that was frequented by Samoans, Tongans and other BIG HUGE guys. An SF cop told me that when they got a call about a fight there, they would wait about ten minutes and then roll. "No need for me to get between two crazed elephants when I am only four years from retirement" is how one cop described it. "We kinda let them work things out on their own before we show up." Different response philosophies. 377 >>>>>>>>>> not trying to be funny but its called self preservation. Now, what was Cooper's slant on this!

Warning: Danger Will Robinson… Danger Danger Do not confuse “winds aloft” with ground level winds. If navigators and pilots did that, they would be in a world of hurt. Want to know what the prevalent winds at ground level are? Find the nearest airport and look at the runway alignment(s). Sluggo_Monster Sorry about the Will Robinson quote, I don’t watch movies like you guys do. What was the “big toe” reference? REPLY> totally aware of the distinction, morever winds aloft can be in a different direction from winds at the ground ....

In this case... it means; "Not yet to Portland, but definitely in the suburbs." REPLY>>> across south of the Columbia? Portland goes right up to the river so any suburbs are basically Portland itself. Is there an automatic proximity to such messages going out ?

Flaps 30 or 40 on most planes requires near landing speeds. In fact, I pulled out my 737 reference charts and for both 30 and 40 instead of giving a specific knot number it simply says Final Approach Speed. There likely would be a slowdown associated with lowering the flaps. Thanks Nuke (I always think of you as The Cooler for some reason :) What flabbergasts me, is that this 30 degree flap/slowdown issue was in the FBI summary report for 37 years. And so it's clear that Cooper jumped at a reasonable exit speed right? And the story's been put in the papers forever that he jumped at some crazy speed. I mean, the more we learn, I'm expecting the jumpers out there to be thinking: easier and easier jump? It depends on what you consider reasonable exit speed and clear. I'm looking at files that accompany accompany a payware 727 plane for a flight simulator. I'm not sure how accurate they are, but they have the maximum extension speed for 30 degrees as 180 knots. Other than Towsaw there is nothing to confirm the drop to 145 knots. REPLY> Sounds stupid but I say a prayer for him every night. Thanks for sharing this Cpt Kirk.

Also remember that 305 was given instructions to squawk a special transponder code when Cooper jumped. This certainly would have received the controller's attention. Of course that code never came, and no one was certain that a jump occurred until the plane landed in Reno minus a passenger. REPLY> we do not know that they didnt communicate to the company through all of the suspected jump period in lieu of squaking the transponder ... they may have been ordered not to by the company? Why the company would give such an order is totally beyond me, if they did. But after the fact they had no problem whatever identifying a bail time period. It has always struck me something is being concealed for some reason ... I mean if they were seriously thinking or on the verge of trying to kill the guy why advertise it with a squak!? The comapny would say: keep this to yourselves.

Flaps 30 or 40 on most planes requires near landing speeds. In fact, I pulled out my 737 reference charts and for both 30 and 40 instead of giving a specific knot number it simply says Final Approach Speed. There likely would be a slowdown associated with lowering the flaps. Thanks Nuke (I always think of you as The Cooler for some reason :) What flabbergasts me, is that this 30 degree flap/slowdown issue was in the FBI summary report for 37 years. And so it's clear that Cooper jumped at a reasonable exit speed right? And the story's been put in the papers forever that he jumped at some crazy speed. I mean, the more we learn, I'm expecting the jumpers out there to be thinking: easier and easier jump? It depends on what you consider reasonable exit speed and clear. I'm looking at files that accompany accompany a payware 727 plane for a flight simulator. I'm not sure how accurate they are, but they have the maximum extension speed for 30 degrees as 180 knots. Other than Towsaw there is nothing to confirm the drop to 145 knots. REPLY> unless time and disatance are accurate - this is why I questioned the large variation in ground speeds between markers on Sluggo's map. I mean its impossible to be doing say 160 kts one minute and 235 the next, then back to say 175 - unless you are a UFO! I mean either the radar data is accurate or it isnt. The overall slope (average) of the data seems within acceptable range but these large variations one minute to the next seem to make anything possible when it wasn't (if physics applies).

In this context Sluggo can use "very near" because if they are giving 305 a PDX altimeter setting it generally means that the plane is very close to the airport. The altimeter settings are derived from the closest weather observation station in the vicinity of the plane's path. And if we take the radar data and assume it is accurate, the plane is very close to PDX at 8:15. Yeah, that's another thing that amazes me. Jumpers here have given examples where ATC folk could count the jumpers exiting a plane with their radar. If the ATC folks had been on the ball or told "look now" they would have been able to see Cooper bail? I mean we were joking about SAGE picking him up. But here he's just 10 miles out from PDX ATC? Should have been easy? (if they were looking) REPLY> unless he is shielded by the plane. Until he separates a sufficient distance from the plane radar can't resolve him as a discrete object .. so would have something to do with Cooper's radar angle vis-a-vis the plane.

I have a request in with the Special Agent who makes nicknames. In this context Sluggo can use "very near" because if they are giving 305 a PDX altimeter setting it generally means that the plane is very close to the airport. The altimeter settings are derived from the closest weather observation station in the vicinity of the plane's path. And if we take the radar data and assume it is accurate, the plane is very close to PDX at 8:15. REPLY> ... and VERY CLOSE is ? 1 mile. 5 miles. Im trying to connect this to Rataczack's statement.

The wind direction was apparently different up by Lake Merwin. We're still not in agreement about winds down by the new LZ. Ckret has posted some stuff about battleground but I'm not sure of it's accuracy? I've posted surface wind stuff at PDX. Sluggo says surface wind doesn't matter. So we need to get in agreement on the winds at the new LZ and where the data came from. We've never agreed. I know I believe in winds from the SE as most probable by the new DZ. I'd like to see the source of other's data. REPLY> Hopfully we can get the winds down - I was also mulling over 20:15.56 (below from Sluggo) with respect to Rataczack. "SEA CNTR advises Portland Altimeter (Corresponding Sea Level Barometric Pressure) is 30.03 inches of Hg. [This is important because it shows that at 20:15:56 they were very near Portland.]" _Sluggo website I wonder what "very near" means.

Ckret, You have the experience and reputation. You must give Sluggo his new acronym. Just pretend he robbed a Seattle bank and you are looking at the video. 377 REPLY> I could suggest one but he probably wouldnt like it: Capt. Kirk (as in Star Trek).

EXACTLY RIGHT!!! The last transcript Sluggo & Ckret posted reveals they discussed getting rid of Cooper or trying to render him ineffective. It has always been on my mind that except for Cooper's bomb they might have done something to screw Cooper over, just as he was bailing.. We went through a discussion once of the single entry "15,000" ... and discussion about oxygen right around the same time in the transcript. Sluggo decided it was a typo ? That entry made me wonder if the crew was up to something...

Can you say body language... ltdiver REPLY> no kidding! looks like they dont want to be there in a big way ... I think they were under orders from NWA through everything. Go back and look at the CBS interview just after they had landed at Reno. (on Youtube) Scott doesnt want to say anything and Tina keeps looking at Scott for clearance to say anything.

QuoteThe new LZ is just 10 miles from PDX. REPLY & QUESTION> See the 72 FBI LZ maps attached. Note the wind vector lines A-B, H-P, O-R which define drift at the various latitudes. Arent they going the wrong direction vs the wind charts you found? It should be SE to NW, not SW - NE as shown on the 72 maps ??? What am I missing!? BTW I did a little gamma adjustment on this map so its a bit easier to read - more B&W contrast. George