Robert99

Why did you leave out the parts about Reca being Jack the Ripper and also being responsible for sinking the Titanic?

Slim King, you simply don't know what you are talking about. I have also lived close to the Snoqualmie Pass and driven over it. And the airliner was never in that area. The 10,000 feet altitude requested was also the Minimum Obstacle Clearance Altitude and the Minimum Reception Altitude for V-23 in the flight south from Seattle. That means if the airliner were lower than 10,000 feet, there is a possibility of flying into a mountain and/or not being able to receive the radio stations that were necessary for navigation and communicating with air traffic control. I think that the Seattle radio transcripts are redacted because I have read them and know what type of information that is missing from them. As I have pointed out repeatedly before, just compare the Seattle transcripts with the Oakland transcripts and you should be able to see the difference also.

Slim King, if you are going to solve the mysteries of life you need to start paying attention to the evidence. Otherwise, you are just putting out bullshit. If you are actually interested in how the airliner got from Seattle to Reno all you have to do is read the Seattle ATC and Oakland ATC radio transcripts. The Seattle transcripts are heavily redacted, but the Oakland transcripts are classic air traffic control communications. The Oakland ATC transcripts explain in plain English how and when the airliner got from V-23 to Reno. You should give some consideration to determining what you are talking about before posting nonsense.

There are two "normal" flight paths between the Seattle VORTAC, which is located on the SEATAC airport, and the BattleGround VORTAC, which was known as the Portland VORTAC in 1971. The airliner was supposed to be generally following the V-23 airway that was a dog leg shaped route with change in direction at the MALAY Intersection, which was known as the Mayfield Intersection in 1971. The other flight path is a direct route between the SEATAC airport and the present-day Battleground VORTAC. In 1971, this route was known as V-23E but it is now known as V-495. The distance between the Seattle VORTAC and the Battleground VORTAC is 105 nautical miles along the V-23 centerline and 102 nautical miles along the V-23E (V-495) centerline. In the flight towards Reno, the airliner was told by Seattle Air Traffic Control that they were free to make any deviations from V-23 that they needed to do, and that the ATC people would keep other aircraft out of their way. Consequently, they were not required to stay on the centerline of V-23 and apparently did not do so. Their main deviation, and the most logical one, would be to bypass the Portland area on the west side in order to avoid flying over the Portland population center with a bomb on board and a nutcase that was unpredictable. More detailed analysis of this flight path has been posted on this site and Shutter's site over the years.

I know exactly what you mean by that last sentence. I have encountered quite a few of them here myself.

It is unlikely that a standard flat 28-foot canopy would fit into a container designed for a 24-foot canopy. However, a 26-foot conical canopy probably would. Some skydivers, such as 377, used a 26-foot conical canopy for a reserve, which had to be packed by a licensed FAA rigger, and I suspect they were able to pack it into the same container as the standard 24-foot military reserve chest pack. But no one is really going to know what canopy is in the WSHM parachute without opening the pack.

I have just taken another look at the NB-6 container and NB-6 harness in my garage. There is nothing on the harness except the harness webbing and the associated hardware. Here is the story on the container. Going from top to bottom, the top metallic cone is on the top flap, the second cone is on one of the side flaps, the third cone is on the pilot chute, and the fourth and bottom cone is on the bottom flap. The top and bottom flaps are square and not rounded. The corners of the top and bottom of the container are basically empty and just give the appearance of being rounded. There are some snaps on the corners that apparently connect to the back pad. There are other things on the back of the container that relate to connecting the back pad and the harness to the container. But the shape of the corners is not an item of consequence.

Okay. Now take a look at the NB-6 rig on Sluggo's site which is linked on Shutter's site and elsewhere. Sluggo's rig is a genuine NB-6 rig throughout with a 26-foot conical canopy, harness, container, and pilot chute. I also owned an identical NB-6 rig for several years and sold it along with an aircraft just a few months prior to the hijacking. The main attraction of the NB-6 rig was that it was much smaller than a rig with a 28-foot parachute. Its small size made it attractive for use in aircraft that had very small cockpits. The end result was that an NB-6 rig cost at least twice as much as a 28-foot canopy rig. After taking a look at Sluggo's NB-6 rig and the WSHM rig are you able to detect a substantial difference in their sizes?

Do you and FlyJack believe everything you read just because it is written down?

As been pointed out repeatedly previously, the canopy in the WSHM parachute appears to be too big to be an NB-6 type 26-foot conical canopy. Unless there is something else packed in that container with the canopy and pilot chute.

This is the Hayden parachute that is now in the WSHM. I frankly do not think that the description on the packing card is correct about this having a 26-foot conical canopy. Maybe someone can get it opened and inspected some day.

FlyJack is correct. Whether you call them barf bags, puke bags, vomit bags, or something else they were a standard cockpit item. But I have never seen such a bag on a parachute rig. While I have never personally needed or used one, I have had passengers who did, and they sure beat having to clean up the interior of the aircraft afterwards. I used to give passenger rides in gliders on hot summer days. I always explained what the bags were for to the passengers and told them to let me know if they started feeling airsick. I also kept a close eye on their upper lip and if beads of sweat started popping up on that lip I knew that they were getting sick regardless of any claims to the contrary. They are relatively small cylindrical plastic bags that have about a two-quart volume with a means for sealing the top after use.

Note that there were apparently problems determining the exact path of the aircraft from the very beginning. So, no more pontificating about the validity of the so-called FBI map.

A couple of take aways from the above. First, Hayden apparently did use the word "identical" rather than "similar" in describing his two parachutes. Second, Hayden apparently sent his two parachutes by taxi to someone at Boeing Field (the site of the next CooperCon) rather than directly to Harrison at the NWA terminal at SEATAC. How Hayden's parachutes got from Boeing Field to SEATAC is unclear but was probably by another taxi ride.

Actually, I think the museum parachute is a 28-foot canopy in a 28-foot container.

I have ALWAYS claimed that the museum chute is NOT an NB-6. I am not sure what FlyJack is claiming about that chute at this point.

I thought FlyJack included a picture just above of the Hayden parachute that is in the WSHM.

I have never seen an Olive Drab NB-6 container. The NB-6 rig that I owned was Sage Green, Sluggo's NB-6 was Sage Green, and ever NB-6 rig that I have seen in real life or pictures was Sage Green. The circular seam on the bottom of the NB-6 container is just a construction detail and does not have any further significance.

If I understand the question correctly, you are referring to the bottom flap of the container. There is a similar flap at the top of the container. These end flaps are connected to the top and bottom cones that are on the side flaps. The top end flap (or maybe one of the side flaps) will usually have a metallic "guide" for the ripcord to help keep it from getting bent. In the pictures shown above, the circular seams as well as the straighter ones are on the side flaps. There will be similar seams and usually cloth "pockets" on the end flaps to help the rigger get the end flaps completely under the side flaps. This is just the way the containers are built.

Bruce Smith has/had a blurb on his web site related to an interview he had with Hayden and there were several pictures of the parachute that was returned to Hayden in that post. As I remember Bruce's post, Hayden told him that his two parachutes were "similar", I don't remember him using the word "identical", and were "assembled" for him by Cossey from various parts that Cossey had obtained from skydiving sources, which may have included military surplus stores. In the 1960s and 1970s, as the skydiving craze started, most of the early parachute rigs were assembled from surplus parts and included 28-foot canopies. Some of these 28-foot canopies were modified with a 5-TU or 7-TU modification to make them steerable to some degree. This was the absolute bottom of the line skydiver rig. And it was dirt cheap. The rigs described above required a chest mounted reserve that had been packed by an FAA licensed rigger. The back parachutes could be packed by anyone even if they didn't know what they were doing. The NB-6 parachutes, with a 26-foot conical canopy, were in great demand because they were quite small when compared with a 28-foot rig when packed. As a result, they cost several times as much as a 28-foot rig. The NB-6 rig in Sluggo's pictures is 100% NB-6 and I owned a similar one for several years. It has a 26-foot conical canopy, an NB-6 harness, an NB-6 container, and an NB-6 pilot chute. Since getting involved with the Cooper hijacking, I have purchased an NB-6 container in its original shipping plastic bag through E-Bay. I think it was manufactured sometime in the 1980s. I have also purchased an NB-6 harness and pilot chute from Ralph Hartley who has/had a skydiving operation just south of Portland. Does anyone know what type of acrobatic aircraft Hayden owned when he purchased his two parachutes? ADDENDUM: FYI, if the rigger's card has a 9-digit ID number, it is his Social Security Number. A few years ago, I mentioned this to Shutter and I think he went to the SSN Death Index and determined that the rigger in question was still alive.

FlyJack, why don't you copy Sluggo's pictures of the front and back of a 100 percent genuine NB-6 rig to this site and compare the sizes of the various rigs. Sluggo's NB-6 pictures show a 26-foot conical canopy in that rig. Also, I owned and flew an NB-6 rig with a 26-foot conical canopy for several years and sold it along with an aircraft just about two or three months before the Cooper hijacking. My offer about the rig and repacking still stands. Pictures of the shroud line attachments to the canopy skirt and how the shroud lines attach to the risers are extremely important.

First, I wouldn't believe anything Cossey said even with corroboration. Secondly, see the comment above.

FlyJack, I have flown with 24-foot seat parachutes that were about half the size of that 28-foot parachute container in your picture. All believable evidence indicates that both of Hayden's parachutes were 28-foot canopies in containers designed for 28-foot canopies.

Shutter supposedly attempted to do that but was unsuccessful. If there is someone on this thread that lives in the Seattle area and is willing to give it a try, please do so. I will help with the expenses, maybe all of them. But if a repack can be arranged, we need to get a cameraman involved who is willing to photograph every square inch of the entire rig both inside and outside.

No, its not!