dudeman17

I'll leave it to the dedicated researchers to debate the flight path, the winds, the placard and what-not, but it is discussed how far Cooper may have drifted after exiting the airplane, and there is a factor, from a jumper's perspective, that may affect that, especially if Cooper was an experienced skydiver. And that factor is, how high did he open the parachute. So, IF Cooper was a skydiver... In those days, skydiving was still a fairly 'barnstorming' venture, and the people involved were fairly ballsy. (Add to that the ballsiness of someone willing to hijack an airliner.) It was not uncommon for people to intentionally pull extremely low. 'Ground rush is a gas, but it sure ain't practical.' There were low-pull contests in which two jumpers would face off in freefall and play blackjack with the Reaper. Some people speculate whether Cooper pulled right out the door, at altitude. I would seriously doubt that. It's been mentioned that typical pull altitude is around 2500'. The reasons for that is, one, to give time to deploy a reserve in the event of a malfunction, and two, to give room to maneuver the parachute into the ideal landing spot. Neither of these apply to Cooper because he only has one parachute, a bailout rig that IS a reserve, and it is non-steerable, i.e. non-maneuverable. One of the factors in the success of his jump is exactly where did he land - safely in an open field, or drifting into trees/rocks/a hillside where there is a higher chance of injury, hampering his ability to hike out. So Cooper's best chance at landing safely may have been to maneuver himself in freefall (yes, you can do that) over an open field, then pull so low so as not to drift out of it. So how far did he drift? Possibly not far at all.

So I notice on the news today that it's the 10th anniversary of the deaths of Farrah Fawcett and Micheal Jackson. I remember the day. Farrah died first and it was in the news, then Michael died and of course that was huge news. It didn't take long for the following joke to appear... Farrah Fawcett died. When she got to heaven, God said to her, "Farrah, you were beloved by millions of people, and you fought a valiant fight against your cancer. For that, I'm going to grant you a special wish." Farrah replied, "I just want for all the children to be safe..."

I remember seeing something on tv once where this guy claimed he was at a party a day or two before the money find and someone at the party told him that the money find was going to happen. The guy said he didn't think much of it until he saw it on the news a couple days later. Any one else remember that, or give it any credence?

First I have a question - How high can he get that thing? Now, my answer to your questions. Your dad and the dzo should be able to figure the legalities, BUT... At 22 jumps, you are nowhere NEAR ready to do this. Get AT LEAST a couple hundred jumps, then have local high experienced jumpers that you trust help you with the logistics. Please do not put your father through the trauma of being involved in your death.

I tried to make a joke the other day and got 'serious' responses from the two people I referenced and was hoping to get a chuckle from. It's entirely possible that NONE of the usual suspects are the real Cooper. It's also entirely possible that there are people who do know who the real Cooper is, and they just aren't talking.

So, what are you saying, Robert? That Peter-san (not Sheridan) was Cooper? Faked his own death in Viet Nam a couple years earlier to ensure he'd get away with it? Geez, and I was starting to think that it was George Hamilton.

Robert, I'm having trouble with your recent posts and your blog article. Three security clearance holders and an FBI agent go to a ballgame. One of the SC guys has read your blog and has an interest in the case. He asks the FBI guy about it, and the agent noncommittally nods affirmation to the SC guy's suspicions, apparently comfortable doing so BECAUSE these guys hold clearances. So the next thing this guy does is betray the reason he holds a clearance by emailing a WRITER and blabbing what he's found out. I can kind of follow it that far, because the guy knows you've put a lot of work into it and might like to know that you could be right. But then YOU write a blog article and post here, naming names and showing a picture. You've written several posts expressing disdain that a rigger would yank a reporter's chain, "Almost getting him FIRED!", then you potentially risk the jobs of three clearance holders and an FBI agent, ostensibly for personal vindication. I'm pretty sure that's not consistent.

So what was the rest of it about? Skydiving? Military? Crime? I'd be interested to read it if I could find one at a reasonable price.

A few thoughts.. Regarding the videos posted by Robert and Eric yesterday and the nature of law enforcement agencies. LEA's and the people who work for them are often arrogant and self-superior, and wouldn't imagine that they'd need the public's help in solving cases. When they do ask for the public's help, they are not inviting the public to look over evidence hoping they (the public) find or figure something that they (the LEA) has overlooked; they (LEA) are hoping that someone with specific knowledge will come forward with new evidence. That's the second time you've mentioned that. Actually, Shutter did not make that statement. The reason I bring this up is because your attention to detail was a bit off there, and such errors can solidify in one's mind and affect the way one perceives evidence. I'm not a rigger and I don't know the specifics of older gear. (Although I do know a bit about Navy conicals - my first reserve ride was on one, one that was four years older than I was.) Jerry Baumchen, who posts elsewhere on this site, might know. I was thinking of asking him about that 'other' Steinthal canopy that was ascribed to one of the bailout rigs, whether that might be a pilot chute. Did you see my answers to your PM a while back?

Don't know what the Amboy chute was, but just because it was 34' doesn't necessarily make it a cargo chute. The 35' T-10 is a pretty standard personnel chute that's been around since the 50's and I believe is still in use today. Don't know if it was ever used in bailout rigs (I doubt it because it packs pretty big), but it was used as a main for paratroopers and early sport skydivers. I made several of my first jumps on them.

Don't know anything about the placard other than what I've read on here, but certainly paper/cardboard/thin plastic or whatever it was made from would be more susceptible to damage. Thinking back to that video 377 posted showing the paratroopers exiting, I noticed that when the deployment bags came out of the containers, they were getting blown upwards into the top of the stair channel/bottom of the plane. Something similar might likely happen to the lightweight placard and/or the door it was attached to. Or it could have been damaged after landing over time and whatever it may have been exposed to. A couple questions about the placard that come to mind: 1) How was it attached to the door? If it was a decal, or glued to it, how would it come off in pretty much one piece? 2) Where else could it have come from if not the Cooper plane, either during the crime or the subsequent tests? I can't imagine other jetliners cruising along with the rear stair door open, for another one to get blown out of.

DC-9's came out in '65

Not sure exactly what you mean, but a person would easily survive a 200mph exit. Fighter pilots eject at much higher speeds.

I saw that on the Airtrash page a couple weeks ago, was saddened. I did some of her student jumps when she went through AFF at Elsinore in the early 90's. Beautiful human being, always bright, cheerful and positive whenever I saw her. And you're right - great, genuine smile. Fly free indeed...

Eric, I think your idea that it would have been easy for Cooper to conceal and bring his own rig is mistaken. Gear of that era was fairly bulky, I think it would indeed have been difficult to conceal. I read somewhere that the possible reason he asked for more than one rig was so that they would give him good ones for fear that he might make someone else (Tina) jump. You'd be surprised what people might wear on a jump. Suits, costumes, nothing but a rig... It would be no problem at all to jump in a suit, which I would guess he wore to blend in with the other passengers. Just ditch the tie (which he did) so it doesn't beat you in the face. The issue would be the loafers. If they were dress shoe type loafers they might well blow off on a 200 mph exit. If they were high tops, like someone suggested they might have been, then more likely that they would stay on. Either way, I would think that would be more of a concern for hiking out of the woods than the jump itself. You said that he also had some kind of bag that you imagined might contain better boots. I would hope to agree with that. The reason I asked about that is because in that other book I read that I mentioned in an earlier post, written by a jumper from that era, his 'Cooper' actually did bring his own parachute. I don't recall how he got it on the plane unnoticed. Both books, though, have the hijacker actually jumping not over Washington, but on the approach to Reno.

Mr. Blevins, you said that you read that book 'Ha Ha Ha'. You said that it's a work of fiction, but I'm curious - In that account, does the hijacker jump one of the parachutes supplied by the authorities, or does he have his own parachute?

Front-mount reserves not having pilot chutes would be consistent for that era. But the only way "E" makes sense is if that second chute described is the pilot chute, but 24 inches, not feet. Could it have been opened later for inspection by the FBI, and that info added to the report?

Here's a thought that may clear up one of the mysteries. Is it possible that that second chute, described as "an integral part of the parachute" is the PILOT CHUTE for that rig? A pilot chute is a small, spring-loaded chute that pops out when you pull the ripcord. It anchors in the air and pulls out the primary parachute. It could be another FBI typo, perhaps it's 24 inches, not 24 feet. Don't know if the manufacturer/part number/serial number is consistent with that, but maybe Joe or 377 can find that out.

It is 100% certain that Hayden would not have a belly pack to go with his bailout backpack. They are not compatible. A sport skydiver uses a sport main parachute that he packs up and uses however many times he jumps. The 'belly pack' is a front-mount reserve, packed by a rigger, in case his main malfunctions. The bailout backpack, packed by a rigger, does not use a front-mount reserve, because it IS a reserve in case the pilot/plane malfunctions.

There is a lot of conflict. But I think the whole thing stems from - Flyjack thinks that the one Hayden got back was not the one they found on the plane. Now you just said, "If two backpacks were found on board..." - but that's not right is it? I thought it was established that one backpack and one front-mount were found on board. So that's where the problem starts. Cooper uses one backpack, it's gone. One backpack is found on board. If that's not the one they gave back to Hayden, that would mean that that rig was never on the plane. A question - The front-mount that was found on board, did they give that one back to whoever it came from? Got any more of those Excedrins?

Robert, I think the part you're not getting about the 5/6 parachute theory is, that not all of them were on the plane. I'm not saying that I subscribe to this theory, indeed I'm just interested in the one he used and how it might affect the success of his jump, but as I understand it... Cooper asks for 4 parachutes. Maybe a couple different agents get on that, I dunno, but perhaps someone gets 2 from Hayden, someone else gets 4 from Cossey or Sky Sports or whoever, but they end up giving Cooper 4 out of the six. The other 2 are no longer in play. It sounds like the one Hayden got back may have been one of those, the other one seems unaccounted for. The part that I question about all of that is, at least 3 of the backpack ones are bailout rigs, certainly the ones they gave him were. The 2 front-mounts are useless from the get-go, regardless that one of them was a dummy, because they don't have harnesses, and don't attach to the bailout ones. I think I speculated on this before, but maybe they did that on purpose - he asks for 4, they give him 4, but 2 of them are unusable, limiting how many other people he may have forced to jump. But they gave him 4, if there were 1 or 2 others, they were never on the plane.

If they were hi-tops, they'd certainly have a better chance of staying on.

Something else - Supposedly Cooper was wearing loafers, presumably of the dress shoe variety (since he had a suit on). Unless those things were fairly snug, I would expect that they might likely blow off on a 200 mph exit. That means he would be landing and hiking out in his socks. I hope he had feet like Cody Lundin.

The hope is to educate it so it doesn't go in.

I'm not a dedicated Cooper researcher, I just follow along out of curiosity. But it seems like a lot of time is spent debating minute details that seem superfluous to me. To me, the main questions are, exactly how did he pull it off, and of course the biggie, who was he? Like the parachutes - how many, who owned them, their serial numbers...? To me the operative issues would be specific to the one he jumped: 1. The size. For instance, a heavier person under a smaller canopy might have a greater chance of spraining an ankle or something on landing, affecting his ability to hike out. But Cooper seems like an average size guy. If he had experience, could pull off a decent PLF, he probably could have landed any of those ok. 2.The type of canopy, specifically whether it was steerable or not. If not, then he's pretty much at the mercy of the winds as to how far he drifts, and more importantly, exactly where he lands. If he lands in trees, rocks, on a steep hillside..., he has more chance of being injured. If it was steerable, then he has a better chance of landing unscathed in a flat, open area of his choosing.