Robert99

OMG!!! Chaucer, you apparently don't have the slightest knowledge of knots, nautical miles, miles per hour, statute miles, indicated airspeed, ground speed, head winds, tail winds, or anything else aeronautical. I have posted on all of these over the years, but the people who need to get the FAA publications on aircraft navigation, weather, etc., apparently don't feel the need to know about anything related to those subjects before pontificating on them. What Chaucer has posted above, is basically nonsense. I am not a member of the Cooper universe, at least the one that is beyond Pluto, and have other matters on the front burner. Nevertheless, I will go over the whole navigation thing again as time permits. But I want to post some things on the GEOREF, or whatever it is called. This matter is definitely not closed.

FlyJack, you and Olemiss need to do some actual analysis of the times and flight paths. You simply cannot claim that 20:22 is correct based on the so-called FBI chart. To claim that 20:22 is correct you have to claim that the flight crew could not read a simple DME number from their instrumentation, that George Harrison could not read a clock at the time the flight crew transmitted their DME location, and that the ARINC ground station could instantly type that information into their teletype system and push the send button. All of this has been discussed at great lengths here for the last 10+ years. You have got to stick with the facts and you are not doing it.

First, let me first correct the "2014" in my post above. The date should be "2009" which was 14 years ago. The 8:18 PM (or 20:18) time is a valid data point for reasons that have been explained numerous times. The limited time and location data available, plus the low quality of that data, for the flight path in Washington and Oregon does not permit the assumptions that you are making. In effect, you are dismissing valid data because it does not fit into your assumptions. The proper way to operate is to determine what the valid data is telling you and then work from there.

FlyJack, the time hacks are supposed to be for the ground speed. If you actually check out the time hacks between the Malay Intersection and Portland, you should note that in a one-minute period the airliner travelled 3 nautical miles but in the very next one-minute period as plotted the airliner travelled 6 nautical miles. This is nonsense. There are a number of reason for the air and ground speed to vary north of the Malay Intersection. Remember that the airliner slowed down at Cooper's request. But from the Malay Intersection on to Reno, the airspeed was essentially constant although the ground speed varied. All believable evidence indicates that the winds aloft at 10,000 feet were constant and from the southwest (245 degrees). However, as the airliner turned to the southeast at the Malay Intersection and then to the south at Portland, the headwind component of the winds aloft changed so the ground speed increased very slightly between Malay and Portland and then decreased very slightly between Portland and the point where the airliner turned to the east directly toward Reno. The ground speed would increase slightly after the turn toward Reno. And for the record, I stand by everything I have written about the times, winds aloft, air speeds, ground speeds, etc., since 2014.

FlyJack, there is plenty of evidence for my previous post and I pointed that evidence out to you. All you have to do is check it out. On your comments about the time marks south of Portland please read the following carefully and it applies to the time marks north of Portland. First, we need to discuss radars. The antenna on radars that are typically used for enroute air traffic control make a complete rotation ever 10 seconds or 6 times per minute. That means that the radar operator, depending on what he sees, could have 6 different locations for an aircraft for each minute. It also means that the time hacks plotted on a radar chart are not necessarily exactly one minute (or 60 seconds) apart. For instance, one time hack might actually be for 12:06:00 minutes and the second one for 12:07:50 minutes but they could both be shown on the chart as 12:06 and 12:07 (or it could be rounded up to 12:08). It all depends on who is doing the charting. But the assumption that a minute is missing in the plotting is nonsense. The charting person just didn't provide a time hack for the missing minute.

FlyJack, both the 8:22 and 8:18 times are correct if you understand what they are referring to. Again, the airliner reported over the ARINC radio system, which Harrison and other NWA personnel were listening to, that it was 23 DME south of what would have to be the present day Battleground VORTAC at 8:18 PM. The airline crew was reporting their actual position at that time. The ARINC ground station also received that information at 8:18 PM. The ARINC ground station had to take that radio information, format it, and type it into the ARINC teletype system and sent it over that system at 8:22 PM. At about three nautical miles per minute, the airliner was actually about another 12 DME miles south of the Battleground VORTAC (or about at 35 DME miles) at 8:22 PM. To understand the above, just compare the times for the first two position reports the airliner made after taking off from Seattle. Times in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts are about two minutes earlier than the times that are listed for the ARINC teletype messages being sent. This is no fluke; all of these times are accurate to the minute.

FlyJack, the Harrison time of 8:18 is undoubtedly correct since he was on the phone link when the crew reported that the 23 DME time over the ARINC radio link. The ARINC teletype message had to be "processed" and then typed into the system and the 8:22 time is when the teletype operator pressed the send button. This has been discussed at length previously. Harrison worked in a highly time-oriented industry and had plenty of experience reading clocks and his own wristwatch which he probably set to GMT every day. The 23 DME was probably actually reading something between 23.0 and 23.9. And the DME reading is the actual straight-line distance between the airliner and the antenna of the DME instrument on the ground. The vertical distance of the airliner above the DME instrument is 10,000 feet minus the altitude of the DME station above sea level. So doing a little trigonometry reveals that the airliner's ground distance from the DME station is only a few hundred feet less than the DME reading in the cockpit. This small distance can be ignored in view of the quality of the data.

Olemiss, please keep in mind that the map mentioned above may not be the same map that we now refer to as the so-called FBI map. Perhaps the information on the above map was plotted on other charts and maps along the way.

Good questions.

FlyJack, there are posts online here, probably by you, that NWA (meaning Soderlind) had a computer program with the 0.5 mile error capability. The sectional charts are printed on both sides of a large piece of paper. The Seattle sectional covers the area from the Canadian border to about 100 miles south of Portland so it would be necessary to paste two of these maps together to have a single map of the area.

FlyJack, thanks for making this search. I need to do a few more calculations and will try to post the results tomorrow. But the end result appears to be that information that first appears in an Air Force navigation training manual in the 1July 1973 edition of Air Force Manual 51-40 was used in preparing the so-called FBI map. If this is proven to be correct, then the FBI map as presented on DropZone would have been prepared more than 19 months after the hijacking.

FlyJack and others, let me add some comments here and then ask a special favor or FlyJack. First, the "yellow" map is an enlarged section of the FAA Seattle Sectional Chart. These sectional charts are updated every six months, and the yellow map shows the height of Mt. St. Helens as 9677 feet. Mt. St. Helens exploded a few weeks after the money was found at Tena Bar and later updated sectional charts list Mt. St. Helens height as being 8365 feet. So the yellow map is older than the first updated map showing the post-explosion height of Mt. St. Helens and it is newer than the Seattle sectional maps that were in use previous to the one was effective on November 24, 1971. This assumes that everyone used a chart that was within its effective dates in their work. In the actual Sectional Charts, built up areas such as Portland and Seattle are indeed yellow in color. Tanish colors are used to indicate some elevations of the terrain. Anyone interested in actually making a federal case out of this should acquire a Seattle Sectional Chart and also visit the "FAA.gov" website and download the Aeronautical Information Services "Aeronautical Chart User's Guide". And actually studying these two items would be quite helpful. Flyjack, you recently posted a link to Air Force Manual 51-40, dated 1 July 1973. This manual supersedes Air Force Manual 51-40, Volume 1, dated 1 August 1968, as amended. I am trying to find a copy of this last document and have been unable to find one on the Internet except for a single copy that is for sale, and I have not been able to determine if it even contains the information that I am seeking. Even a detailed copy of the index or table of contents would be most useful. I am also a member of the Insitute of Navigation and have made a search of that organization's archives without success.

Flyjack is correct in discounting the probability of the money bag ending up in the river on the night of the hijacking. But in all probability, Cooper was probably a no-pull who landed on solid ground in the vicinity of Tena Bar with the money bag being damaged on ground impact. I initially considered the possibility that the money packets (or whatever you want to call them) arrived separately. Dr. Meyer Louie and I spent an entire day a number of years ago checking into that possibility. We (primarily Meyer) checked the entire area including the diary drainage pond (which was dry) with metal detectors and found absolutely nothing that could have been related to the hijacking. So the only conclusion from the above is that anything related to the hijacking has long since departed the Tena Bar area and probably at the same time the money was deposited there. Again in all probability, the money was still in a damaged money bag when it arrived at Tena Bar and probably still attached to what was left of Cooper's mortal remains which was probably just bones at that point.

Think rainwater. As the joke goes, you can tell the difference between summer and winter in Oregon because the rain is warmer in the summer.

Sauvie Island is why the Columbia River flow turns north. The Columbia River flow is ALWAYS going downhill. The normal water surface of the Columbia River at Tena Bar is only about two or three feet above sea level. And it is 90+ river miles from Tena Bar to the Pacific Ocean (and sea level). So the flow from the Columbia River goes about one inch downhill for every three miles or so.

Olemiss, you mentioned a few posts ago today that you had a Cooper book out. If so, what is the name of it and where can it be purchased?

Chaucer, your ego is in control again. First, I have never claimed to be smarter than everyone else. Second, I do happen to have a number of decades of training and experience that are directly relevant to the Cooper hijacking investigation. And you obviously hold that against me. Third, you have refused to list any training or experience that you have that is relevant to the Cooper matter. And I don't think that is due to modesty. Or to be more blunt, you are in over your head.

Chaucer, why don't you attend the CooperCon this year, wherever it is being held, and then pay a visit to Tena Bar and do some personal research? One of the things you should pay attention to is the flow of river water between Caterpillar Island and the eastern shore of the Columbia River. The water that passes between those two boundaries also passes by a marina and then re-enters the Columbia at the southern end (the upstream end) of Tena Bar. The re-entering water flow forms what I will call a "boundary layer" between the river shoreline and the main channel flow. These flows are dissimilar so how do you explain how the debris from the main channel flow get across that boundary layer and up on the beach at Tena Bar. I eagerly look forward to your explanation which I assume will be quite convoluted.

Why don't you visit Tena Bar and take a look? That way, you can speak from personal experience. Also, see my reply to Chaucer just above.

I don't consider myself to be an "expert" on anything and in the circles I travel in the term is usually used as a pejorative. Having been to Tena Bar several times over the years, I know for a fact that it is not a dump and probably never was. It is frequented on a daily basis by fishermen and others, and they don't litter. Contrary to your claim, when the river flow from the east turns to the north the debris is pushed to the Oregon side of the river. That is one reason the shipping channel is on the Oregon side since the river was naturally deeper there due to the river flow scouring it out.

Georger, I didn't say that I thought the money arrived in the Tena Bar area by coming down the river for several miles. Actually, as you well know, I think Cooper was a no-pull and impacted on solid ground near Tena Bar. The money bag and Cooper then moved down to where the money was found during the next flooding. Cooper and the rest of the money then continued on downstream.

The Wenatchee area.

Speaking of ducking the issue!

Chaucer, if the money got a ride on a log, it would still end up on the west side of the river (the Oregon side) when it passed the Tena Bar area. When I was about 10 years old, I did a lot of swimming in a tributary of the Columbia River (about three miles from the Columbia itself) so I do have some personal experience with river flows from a very early age. And I stand by what I have written about the Tena Bar money find.