georger

_____________________________________________ He did seperate out Schaffner from Mucklow pretty quickly, using the more vulnerable of the two to meet his needs and he relied on that to the end. He ascertained that in general people were bowing to his demands and he stayed with that to the end. The critical period came early after Cooper handed his note to Schaffner and the attention of Schaffner and Mucklow shifted to Cooper and away from other passengers newly seated on the plane. Two passengers, Richard Simons and his wife (both interviewed at Seattle) got a little upset and it almost unraveled things, if what I am told is true. Read this carefully: The passengers had taken their seats and were getting acclimated. Schaffner and Tina were making their rounds and doing their work. Cooper slips his note to Schaffner. Schaffner slips the note into her pocket. Cooper has to lean out and get Schaffner's attention for Schaffner to read the note. Tina and Flo discuss the note and one goes forward to pilot Scott, but Schaffner comes back and is now on station with "our friend in the back". Hancock wonders what is going on and sputters with eye gestures (seen by some of the passengers) back at Schaffner. Schaffner grimmaces Hancock off, Hancock goes forward to converse with Scott and is informed. This is the scenario I have been told. Passengers begin to feel a little neglected and several are looking around frankly wondering about the absence of flight attendants. But people get settled in and Hancock and Muchlow seeing to everyone with Schaffner stuck in the back with Cooper. Passenger Simmons and his wife turn around and look back at Schaffner attending Cooper alone, then turn back and say something to each other. Simons abruptly gets out of his seat to go back to use the lavatory and heads directly back at Schaffner standing (blocking) the aisle at Cooper's side. Simons is almost to Schaffner and Cooper suddenly looks up at Simons and "glares defiantely" straight at Simmons with Schaffner now looking a bit stricken (so I am told Simons said). Simons not wishing a problem (but wondering if there is one) steps to Schaffner's right and Schaffner moves to let Simons by. Simons edges by Schaffner with Cooper still glaring at him and Simons goes back to the Lav wondering about 'this guy' and what is going on. (Ckret might know all about this from the interviews conducted at Seattle. Simmons and his wife were interviewed several times later.) This is not heresay. Simons came back out of the Lav and Im not sure where Schaffner was then, but as Simons passed Cooper, Simons looked back at Cooper but Cooper's head was now low and Cooper did not look up at Simons a second time. Simons went back to his seat and he told his wife what had happened. Simon's wife turns around and looks back at Cooper (Cooper's head still low). Simons and his wife have a discussion and now they both turn and look back at Cooper, with Schaffner now back with Cooper's and Schaffner and Cooper are talking. Simon's wife said later that she was a little miffed at how one occupant at the back of the airplane was occupying the flight attendant's time, or seemed to be, and Mr. Simons himself was miffed at Cooper glaring at him in a defiant manner as Simon's went back to the lavatory. Simons said he and his wife discussed this briefly and decided to let it pass and mind their own business. But inside the terminal they were flabberghasted that the person in the back had been hijacking the plane. So Cooper may have thought he was in control, but just below the surface things could have unraveled quickly at any time, with Cooper relying on the context of the airplane and people's good manners (and his bomb!), to keep order. I wish to point out that Cooper was never tested. Had the Simon's wished to make an issue this whole thing could have unraveled on the spot and who knows what would have happened. (Very likely unless ordered by Cooper Scott would have returned the plane to Portland where they had just left.)

Yes, gold was floating at around 35 an ounce in 71. I know from personal experience. Passage 6:21 and Scott's words in TR#1 of the pi transcripts is where technical competence is seemingly attributed to Cooper directly. But, regardless of whatever assets Cooper had, he relied on the technical competence and experience of others to hijack the airplaine. His only real asset was his bomb. Everything else is secondary. Cooper did not give a technical note of any kind during the whole hijacking. 'Go here, do that, do this and that by such and such a time...' is all we know for a fact he said, written in his single note given Schaffner. He didn't even specify the parachutes to use! We have a very small amount of evidence to work with here. It isn't like he left a resume. If he had had technical knowledge he would have used it.

It's not cheesy at all but factual and realistic.

In general I agree with your thesis. He was deluded. Detached from reality even if he had skills and knowledge. Something pushed him over the edge to risk everything. Anger? Revenge? Dire need? Deep manic depression? He's thinking and acting on one level but not on another for critical level (the level needed for self protection and survival). His personal needs overrule his conscience, if he had one. He's detached from reality and lucky he didn't get a bullet through his head, to bring this down to Earth! Lazy but also driven. You know Ckret, he might have had a revolver conceiled on his person, that no one saw (in the paper bag?). Hijacking are an inherently violent act (indirect violence) because they can turn lethal at any instant for everyone on the plane and send everyone in a flash to the full forces of nature. There is less margin for error in an aircraft vs say on a ship or on land. Cooper cut through all of that and there is the heart of his violence and denial. I think this guy could have been very violent in a flash if required, and he kept the most vulnerable person on the plane with him at his side (along with his bomb) - that pretty much tells you what Cooper was all about and the stress he placed on himself to keep even five minutes of this going. Few people could think straight in that kind of stress which he had to be experiencing, whether he showed it or not.

That is (has been) my understanding too - with Scott concentrating on radio work. Wasnt there a post about this some time back?

QuoteThis is where you brilliant types leave me shaking my head as well as the rest of the theorist who want to put the Portland area as part of Coopers plan. If Cooper needed to land around Portland or Vancouver he would have directed the pilots to fly that direction. ____________________________________________ Its not that Portland was his plan but it just worked out that way, just like sitting on the ground at SEA for almost 2 hrs wasnt planned, then bailout with rear door open immediately after liftoff didnt work out, so he takes his next best option under poor visibility after Scott levels and slows the plane which is skyglow from Vancouver & Portland and he bails. ... and money turns up at Tena Bar.

Im assuming that, or something close to that. Thanks...

can you do a jpeg or gif or bmp ???

I take everything you guys with first hand knowledge say, as near gospel. Then tell me this. He meets the air stream once he's out of the vacuum behind the plane. Then what forces does he encounter? That is where I think I have read things might fall apart for him. Any help appreciated - Playing devil's advocate here, but anyone who hasn't jumped doesn't seem to understand how difficult it is to just "fall out" of a plane. The transcript also states "ability to jump out of a 707 with a parachute on is nil" , which it clearly wasn't (I assume they meant 727 not 707?) ... just because opinions are expressed in the transcript doesn't make them fact! In any case there are enough guys who have had experience jumping out of jets, they have stated that the exits are quite wild, but this is not the same as being "sucked out".

_______________________________________ They are two kinds of events, physically, in terms of the aircraft itself. A pilot is going to know the difference between an oscillation and a bump, but, these are two pilots, a flight engineer, so its more than one witness all with great technical expertise.

The transcript clearly states that Cooper requested to fly with gear down and flaps at 15 deg. (and, btw, that after underway all lights to be turned out in aircraft - which sounds like someone familiar with a n night jump?) ____________________________________________ yes it does but a jump into what, where if he plans to escape with his hide on? He trades technical knowledge for a possible suicide?

I will make a quick reply & hopfully more later ... Go to the end of 6:21/18:21 which is the passage everyone cites giving credit to Cooper for 15* flaps and other technical knowledge. It starts with Scott saying: "We have instructions from the Individual." as if what follows are explicit instructions from Cooper. Next senetence begins: "He wants . . ." and the technical list follows. Next comes strong debate about these technical requests at the of which Scott says: "Roger, will talk to him again". Every technical discussion through this period ends with Scott saying: "will talk to him again". There even comes a point in these technical discussions where somebody says 'Where id he get that!?' and Scott replies something like, 'well maybe he's got the manual back there ... dont know what he has back there', alluding directly to Cooper's technical requests and some assumed technical expertise on Cooper's part, but, , , these technical debates come to nothing. The settings required to accomplish a bailout are few and clear, whether Scott or Cooper or SEADX knew them. The 727 had 3 flap options (discussed at length in other groups): 5, 15, and 25 degrees, if I am correct. 15 degrees goes automatically with 160-170 kts and gear down and BELOW 10,000ft which was Cooper's original request. Regardless of who requested 15 degrees, 15 degrees is the only option based on the other flight parameters. All Cooper had to do was request configs for a bailout - the rest follows. (This has been discussed at length in other forums). 6:21 and Scott's remarks does make it sound like Cooper had technical knowledge. 6:21 is the Genesis of Cooper's Urban Legend - the diabolical genius who got away with it. So let's assume he has technical expertise. Does this help him get off the ground at SEADX in the fifteen minute turn around he originally expected? No, that becomes almost 2 hours! Does it lift the clouds for a bailout? Does it change getting the air stairs out as he wanted? And why if he has important technical demands is he making them through a third party, Mucklow? Why isnt this technical genius working the futures market or the gold market vs hijacking an airplane? It reads: "will talk to him again".

Snowmman, what does the RED X denote on your last Quinn's Cove jpeg? Those are VG photos. Tnx. Im back, coming up to speed, but we have massive flooding here, more storms on the way, its a mess. Im OK, all I know are OK, so... what's the X. ??

Okay georger… let’s get one thing straight… here… and now, damn it! Flattery will get you everywhere!

True, its the difference between direct flow vs indirect flow. At the back of the aircraft you arent experiencing the direct flow through the air stream. At the front and sides you are. This is why at the tail they call it a "slip stream"? if I am correct, because you are out of the direct air flow. But I have been told by a Boeing engineer (who actually worked on the Cooper Vane) and by oher people that 305 was flying "dirty' meaning significant turbulence for anyone bailing at the back. As a technical point, 305 opened it rear door before 10,000 feet and was unpressurised, and Scott still reported the pressure difference (due mainly to the Bernoulli affect). They did discuss tying Tina down for her safety, because it was her who Cooper wanted to open the door (its in the transcript).

As stated in numerous posts before, the aircraft was not pressurized...Therefore, there would be no 'rushing out of air' from the plane when the rear door was cracked open. Also, stated before, there is no turbulence at the back of the plane with the door open. Or at least, very little that would perhaps remove a paper placard poorly affixed to the open door. ltdiver __________________________________________ Yes, the plane was not pressurised for altitude, but there is a pressure difference between inside vs outside due to air flow around the aircraft. Hi velocity air outside vs. no-velocity air inside equals a pressure difference, ie. the Bernoulli affect. True, the pressure difference is least at the tail (underside) of the aircraft but the minute you open the rear door, air from the inside is drawn out and pressure equalises. Then, you have a more steady state. This is basic physics.

and one more thing: I ADMIRE THE HECK OUT OF SLUGGO. I can say this very easily. His website is magnificent and a work of art. I have even sent people there. When I first saw his website my jaw dropped. If that guy was anywhere near I would take him out to dinner, or give him a job, or something. He probably doesn't need a job. Maybe he could give us all jobs! I don't know but I admire the heck out of Sluggo, and I get a kick out of him too. So your words are well taken, Snowmman. George.

Quotehey georger, I don't understand the new timeline either. I do, at least I think I do, and when it arrives I think everyone is going to be very happy if not smiling. While I am very serious I also am trying to have some fun with this, not as an older smartass, but as a grain of sand on the beach of this whole thing and I think a few conclusions are beginning to take form after a lot of hard work on everyone's part and what can be learned is being learned. George

Or, try this as an experiment . . . Take a piece of plywood, 1 foot x 1 foot square and attach it to the lower part of the rear bumper to a car with gaffer's tape so that one edge is hinged and the rest is allowed to flop in the breeze. Drive the car down the street at various speeds and either from the side of the road or a following car watch the behavior of the piece. My prediction is that no matter how fast you go above say, 10 mph, it will always flap in the wind. It's never going to just sit there and hold still. That's your oscillation right there; just the staircase flopping in the breeze. DB Cooper doesn't have to be anywhere near it from stair deployment to the moment he exits. He doesn't have to have one foot resting on it while he gets all misty-eyed about his future and he doesn't have to keep opening it to toss crap out. It's going to flop around all by itself. As for your "wind rush", there really isn't one until you get out. Oh sure there is a small amount of turbulence flopping bits and whatnot around right at the door, but you can easily stand in the tail gate of a 727 without hardly noticing it at all. The wind, for the most part, is going past the plane, not into it. I will say more, I hope ok. Everything in motion has a natural frequency depending on the situation of course. The key is motion. (from atoms to aircraft to posters sitting chairs typing). The stairs are attached to the pane so their motion in the airflow has a 'moment', develops a natural frequency of movement. A hole in an object in motion causes a Bernoulli effect. So the minute the back door was cracked on the plane in motion, air was sucked out (like a car window only more so.). Cooper knew this. That is very likely why he wanted Mucklow to be the one to open the door. (Its in the transcript) Scott asked if she should be tied down and the answer was yes. Once air rushes out of the plane it probably equalised, unless some change in altitude. But I have always wondered how far into the plane turbulence was a factor. You skydivers would know something about this -

Exactly. (A Feynman experiment) George

Sluggo. Forgive me for saying this but I thought it was decided 305 and no 727 operated by NWA had TTY capability. So who is doing the typing? George

Resolution also a product of weather conditions in those days. A fanciful sidenote Ive always wondered about is if any HAMs or SWL's happened to catch any of the communications. The period around Thanksgiving used to be rather active during those years, on the ham bands. Ive never seen anything in print if someone did report hearing something - - - George

Snowmman, forgive my ignorance, but unless I am dreaming this, somewhere in these pages (previous locked Thread) there is an extensive discussion about what communications 305 had, or did not have. Phone, radio, TTY, RTTY, etc. A number of people researched this. I thought the conclusion was, 305 had no RTTY, no TTY, no phone, and everything was done by radio transcribed into a TTY machine (or something) on the other end. Maybe I'm totally wrong but this discussion did take place here previously. It was out of that discussion that the issue of time stamp accuracies developed. The previous debate was everyone thought Scott or Rataczak were sitting in the cockpit typing out their messages (which I also had assumed), until someone here did some actual research and discovered NWA did not supply its 727's with RTTY or TTY capability in 1971. So that took the issue of TTY in 305 off the plate, a few here said 'oh!', and it was decided all flight comms coming from 305 were by radio. My reference to this matter was based on what I thought I read, not from Sluggo's website, but from discussion here.... George

georger, I am well aware that if I place information on my website, this forum, or any other forum, readers are free to use it as they see fit. They may use it to better understand the “facts of the case,” or use it to further their own agenda to prove a suspect was or was not Cooper. However, the above statement is a total distortion, in fact, it is pure fiction. Point by point: (Fact) Ckret never questioned me about the accuracy of time stamps on the transcript. (Fact) There never was an RTTY, they didn’t exist on NWA flights at that time. (Fact) The time stamp is a product of the TTY and as such in inalterable. (Fact) Based on the above statements the “who” is a machine. (Fact) The time stamps are set in stone with the exception “listen to type time” delays. (Fact) The FBI assigned to “listen to type time” delays to be 1 min or less. (Fact) 8:10 cannot become 8:13 – 8:20. 8: 10 can become 8:09 and only 8:09. (Fact) The crucial fact here is the oscillations were time-stamped but the pressure bump was not. The pressure bump time was estimated (by the flight crew) as 10 to 15 minutes after the 8:05 call to the back. That is the only time issue with any variability. (Fact) Times listed on the TTY log do not change the position data based on Air Force Radar. The TTY log is useful for identifying the times of communications. With few exceptions (where positions were reported by the crew) it does not identify positions of the aircraft. (Fact) The Radar data is accurate to 1 NM (plus or minus) along the azimuth of the scan. The angular resolution is unknown (to me). I would appreciate the courtesy of checking with me, before you attribute your conjecture to my data. What say you? Favorite-Nephew Ckret?

Changes in nitrite/nitrate levels caught my eye because of the mention of "salts" as possible purple staining cause. I was also thinking of potassium or sodium nitrate runoff from the Fazio farming operation as a source of "salts" _______________ Well that is testable. If particular nitrates say of Na or K are present in the money that would show very easily in any spectroscopic test - with the H-K lines at 3934/3968 and the D1-3 lines at 5876/96. Whatever is in the environment leaves its traces. Now if we would find some trait not in the immediate environment then that would be interesting and require explanation. That is how these tests work and their value. I know some are reading this thinking: "Oh No! Now we are going into CSI and tinfoil hats!". Not really. As a practical matter you don't do these tests unless it is warranted. ...