Robert99

Blevins, Am I crazy for pointing out to you that your claim about the accuracy of the so-called FBI flight path is nonsense? Even the FBI people, reportedly including Himmelsbach himself, don't know where that map originated or who prepared it. Then there is the little matter of the internal contradictions of the data that is on that map. Even a science fiction writer should be able to understand at least some of those contradictions. Further, it is obvious that you have no understanding whatsoever of what Tom Kaye did in his experiments and what his conclusions are regarding how the money arrived at Tena Bar. Kaye's conclusions are reported on his web page, which you apparently have not bothered to even read. Kaye eliminates the Washougal wash down theory, to which you apparently subscribe, as a possible means for the money to arrive at Tena Bar. And the fact that Kaye did not find diatoms on the bills as expected, suggests to him that the money had never been exposed to the Columbia River water in the first place. In view of your stated interest in the Cooper hijacking, did you attend Kaye's lecture on the hijacking at the recent opening of the museum exhibit? You would have learned something if you had gone. Of course, constantly repeating the same lame stories is your way of operating. When was the last time, or would it be the first time, that you presented any meaningful information on the Cooper hijacking? You couldn't even resist pushing your KC book in the post to which I am responding. Robert99

Rataczak is/was a company guy. That carries with it certain legal stipulations, by contract. Some say these are lifetime restrictions. Never mind there is also a criminal case involved! That is the first-fact about Bill Rataczak, and all the other crew members. How long that stays in force, I dont know. If you have made a study of "body language" (I have and I'll bet 377 and others on this thread who are in similar professions also have), then a picture taken probably a day or so after the hijacking is very revealing. That picture was taken at a press conference (Seattle?, Minneapolis?) and shows the three pilots seated at a table and directly facing the unseen newspaper types. All three pilots have their arms folded across their chests. Arms folded across the chest in such a situation means that the individual(s) have "closed" up and are no longer open for business (such as this press conference). The three flight attendants were also seated at the same table and, if I remember correctly, one flight attendant was looking in the general direction of the reporters, one attendant basically had her back to the reporters, and the third one was seated sideways to the reporters. Basically, they gave the impression that they were not interested in what was going on and had tuned out just as the pilots had. I would suspect that all six of those people had been briefed by NWA management before the press conference. Robert99

Blevins, Hold your horses here. My mention of you was only to warn the new poster not to buy your book. I did use the word "cases" in reference to two long time posters here whose initials are Bob Knoss and Jo Weber. Overall, I was just passing The Wisdom Of The Ages to the new poster. Robert99

This is one good reason why someone should go to the source and ask a few questions. And if Himmelsbach had so little faith in the map, then why did the FBI and the US Army end up mounting a big search in the Ariel area? They could have used airplane data too! Do you know of they were given food and water? The flight recorder data was recorded on a looping tape that recorded over the old data about every hour or so. So the crew would have to pull the circuit breaker on the flight recorder to stop it within that hour or so if they intended to preserve that data. If the jump was at about 8:15 PM, then they would need to pull that circuit breaker by no later than about 9:00 PM to preserve any meaningful data. The plane landed in Reno a few minutes after 11:00 PM. Another big question is did the 1971 flight data recorders record flight navigational information? If not, the data wouldn't mean much. Robert99

Shutter, the following is on pages 46, 47, and 48 of Himmelsbach's book. The first chase aircraft for the airliner was a USAF T-33 on a night training mission out of Portland International. It took off to the west and was shortly afterwards directed toward Lake Oswego where it ended up about three miles behind the hijacked airliner. But the two pilots on board never had visual contact with the airliner. The book states that two F-102s were dispatched from the Idaho Air National Guard in Boise but did not make contact with the airliner. The book also states that two F-106s took off from Hamilton AFB in California but did not see the airliner. Only the C-130, which was also from Hamilton AFB, was able to make contact and it stayed with the airliner until it landed in Reno. On page 47, Himmelsbach states that the National Guard helicopter, with him onboard, took off from Portland International and flew south. On page 42, Himmelsbach describes the helicopter lift-off from Portland International as follows: "We lifted off, did a sharp climbing turn to the right, and headed for the position where we thought the jet might be. I looked down just as we passed over southwest Portland and my home in West Linn." So both the T-33 and Himmelsbach's helicopter were headed to the southwest side of Portland and the Lake Oswego and West Linn areas. No one went to the east or north. Shutter, a PM is enroute to you. Robert99

Blevins, As reported on this thread several dozen times previously, Rataczak has made a public statement within the last year or two that he is the ONLY one who knows which side of Portland the airliner was on when it went by. Does that sound like a ringing endorsement for the "official flight path"? Robert99

Blevins, Please remind me again why you have so much confidence in the so-called FBI flight path? Robert99

Blevins, What is your source for the above statement? Where were the SAGE radar antennas located? On the Soderlind matter again, Soderlind had reportedly worked up his estimate of the jump point before the airliner even landed in Reno. Robert99

Blevins, Have you even bothered to read Soderlind's write-up on the radar accuracies he used in coming up with the original jump location? If you have, then why don't you list them here as well as specify the location site of the radar that produced his data? I am not your nursemaid and I am not going to do your homework for you. Nor am I interested in being your "pen pal". I am fortunate enough to have "pen pals" who do know what they are talking about and I had rather talk to them. Robert99

Well, I'll bet they were at least REASONABLY accurate. Otherwise the 1970's would be historical for all the mid-air collisions of commercial aircraft, especially between Seattle and Portland. You could make a nice living just scrapping out all that wreckage along the I-5 corridor. Now you're trying to blame crappy radar for the reason you put Flight 305 on the west side of the freeway north of Portland - and by several miles. Unproven. I want to see something solid that actually proves, or calls into serious question with evidence, that all those people were wrong on where 305 was between SeaTac and PDX. Paul Soderlind (and his team at NWA) weren't exactly slouches at their jobs. And they had time on the ground to plan the tracking of 305, since Cooper was delayed at SeaTac a couple of hours. Excerpt from Soderlind's obituary: ***'Soderlind retired in 1973. He later became a consultant for Boeing, Embry-Riddle, the U.S. Air Force and the Federal Aviation Administration, among others. In 1997, he was inducted into the Minnesota Aviation Hall of Fame and was the first to get the FAA Citation and Gold Medal for Extraordinary Service to Aviation Safety...' He was also a pilot for NWA, and pretty much the greatest employee the airline ever had. There's even a scholarship program in his name. I think I mentioned he was a real smart guy. And if his team says Flight 305 was here or there (they had a great hand in the creation of the FBI's flight map) I will believe he and his results rather than yours, unless you can prove otherwise. Blevins, As people have pointed out to you repeatedly, you need to actually read the posts before replying to them. Paul Soderlind and NWA people are reportedly the very ones who prepared the initial jump area estimate, and they included a write-up which discussed the accuracy of range and azimuth radar data. You should read their write-up. And if you ever do read it, the accuracy might come as a surprise to you. But I am sure that you can waffle a bit on that point. In the early 1970s, the basic goal of ATC radar operators was to keep the radar returns from merging. This was a "relative" position control rather than an "absolute" position control. If you are interested in learning anything about aviation, you should go to the FAA's web page and get copies of some of their publications, some of which can be downloaded without charge. Admittedly, this would reduce your time for monitoring and pontificating about ever post on this thread and working on your next "authoritative" book on whatever it is you are writing about. You are the leading expert on just about everything aren't you? Robert99

Hope I am not misquoting who said what, but would you please explain the statement above...and also answer this question. Did the VOR located West of Battleground and off of NE 112 Av have anything to do with calculating the plane's position? I ask this because Duane took me to that VOR and mentioned THE GUYS working there - he also mention a small air strip North of there. That airstip is N.W. of Battleground and on that same Road. Jo, Radar positions were not as accurate in the early 1970s as you apparently believe. The write-up with the original predicted jump area discusses those accuracies. The only VOR in the Portland area that defines V-23 is the Battleground VORTAC. In 1971, the Battleground VORTAC was known as the Portland VORTAC and located in exactly the same geographical position. The FAA just changed the name, everything else about it stayed the same. Robert99

Jo, Please define "apology" for me. As I remember it, just a few weeks ago you called me a name and then claimed it was all my fault that you did so. Robert99

The placard is a known factor, and indicates the flight path at that point very well. The money found at Tena Bar, not necessarily so, because no one can say how it arrived there. The idea that Flight 305 was several miles EAST of Tena Bar is the established flight path, (not 'my theory' lol) so it is YOU who are venturing the theory. And your theory goes against what was plotted by the FBI, Paul Soderlind and his team at NWA, and the available radar data. Although you keep denying it, you are determined to move the flight to the west side of the Interstate 5 freeway in your attempt to explain the money at Tena Bar. Problem: You don't have any proof, or at least enough to go against the official flight path established decades ago by the people and items I listed above. Blevins, Since I am the one who did the calculations concerning the point where the placard separated from the airliner, I feel that I probably know as much as you about what it means. First, my point was to do a "conservative" estimate of the separation point. That is, the distance calculated was the "minimum" that the airliner would have been from the location where the placard was found at the time they separated. A number of estimates were required for this calculation and the "minimum" distance calculated was two or three nautical miles west of the centerline of V-23. The "actual" distance could have been greater. And if it was greater, it would undermine your own theory even more. Second, the FBI map of the first predicted jump area included a several page discussion of radar accuracies with respect to both range and azimuth from the radar site. So where was the radar located that was used in the preparation of that predicted jump area? Surely you wouldn't place your total faith in something that important without knowing the facts. Third, the positions and times on the FBI flight map have been discussed to death on this thread several times already. Did the airliner really fly three nautical miles in one 60 second period, then fly six nautical miles in the next 60 second period while maintaining the same airspeed? If so, the laws of physics as understood for centuries previously will have to be re-written. Fourth, no pilot would fly the segmented circle around the west side of Portland as indicated on the FBI map. Fifth, what do those four red "x" marks on the southwest side of Portland mean? Is the fact that a direct line between those marks and the Mayfield/Malay Intersection passes over Tena Bar purely coincidental? Sixth, why did the chase aircraft, including Himmelsbach in his helicopter, head for the southwest side of Portland when they were trying to intercept the airliner? Finally, if the "official flight path" you claim to believe is so accurate, why hasn't Cooper been found in the last 42 years? Robert99

if you are saying it was a no pull. it's would be attached to him for a period of time I would say? if he landed in the river...where is the body? welcome to the form...... Yes, welcome. River landing? Maybe. One point I've brought up about it is if you calculate the total amount of possible water landing against landing on ground, the chances are far greater he came to the ground. There's just a lot more dirt and rock between Seattle and Portland than lakes and rivers. It's strictly an 'odds' thing, and completely non-scientific.

Following is a preliminary explanation of the information Blevins has posted as being in KC DD214. KC was born in Morris, MN or enlisted while living there, maybe both. He was born 17 Oct 26, enlisted 25 May 44, entered on active duty on 18 Dec 44. His Army serial number was 17 141 033 and appears to be a Regular Army serial number. From this, it appears that KC joined the Army in May 44 with a delayed entry for active duty. He was 17 years old at the time he joined and went on active duty after his 18th birthday. One of the advantages of early enlistment is that you are no longer subject to the draft. So about the day he graduated from High School (and probably became eligible for the draft the same day) he joined the Army with a delayed entry onto active duty. KC departed from the Continental US on 15 Aug 45, about a week after the second Atomic Bomb had been dropped, and arrived in the APTO (probably Asiatic Pacific Theater of Operations) on 7 Sep 45. This does not necessarily mean that KC arrived in Japan on that date. However, at some point KC did make it to Japan. The surrender documents ending WW2 with Japan had been signed on 2 Sep 45 onboard the battleship Missouri which was anchored in Tokyo Bay. On 13 Sep 46 KC headed back to the US and arrived on 26 Sep 46. This last date is probably the date of his arrival on the west coast. No date is given for KC leaving the Army. During his Army service, KC earned the Parachutist's Badge and qualified as a marksman with the M-1 rifle. He received several medals and ribbons including the Good Conduct Medal. As a minimum, this means he stayed out of trouble and/or was discreet. KC was discharged for the Convenience of the Government under AR 615-365. The information following the AR number is probably supplemental information for implementing the AR. Basically, it appears that KC was discharged as a part of the postwar downsizing of the Army and that he was not interested in making the Army a career. The $300 listed was a mustering out payment and not part of his regular pay. The $73 would be to cover travel expenses back to his enlistment point (Morris, MN?) from wherever he was discharged (Fort Sheridan, IL?). The "T/5" means that KC was in a technical field but that field is not mentioned. The exact meaning of the "5" is not clear but should not be automatically assumed to be equivalent to E-5 as used in the modern army. Robert99

Blevins, You addressed the above comments to Bruce Smith. You berate Bruce for not providing "proof" about some of his comments and you have threatened him with legal action if he didn't make some changes to his book. So, just for the hell of it, where is your proof that KC was NOT HIV positive? Just list the original sources for your allegations. Now an "Economics" question. What is the cash value of your KC book and the related media rights of a gay KC story, versus the cash value of your KC book and the related media rights of a gay KC who also messed around with young boys story? Is there a difference in those values? Do you have "proof" that your belated efforts to polish KC's reputation is not just an effort to protect your own financial interests in your KC book and its media rights? Just follow the money. Robert99

Rather than repeat Jo's whole post, let me simply say again that Georger is right. It would be folly for the Fazio's to build a house between their farm buildings, which are clearly visible in the aerial photographs, and the river beach. That soil is extremely sandy and any building there is going to have a very short life span. There does appear to be a residence on the east side of the farm buildings. It backs up to a hayfield. But I have no idea who, if anyone, lived in that building. In addition, even a shed for boat equipment along the Tena Bar beach would be unlikely. There is a marina just a few hundred feet upstream of Tena Bar (I believe Amazon kept her boat there for several years) between the mainland and Caterpillar Island. And there appears to have been a small marina about three-quarters of a mile downstream of Tena Bar at one point. But boats or anything related to them being in the immediate area of Tena Bar for lengthy periods of time is very unlikely. The enormous erosion problem at Tena Bar is shown in pictures and discussed by Tom Kaye on his web page. Robert99

Blevins, To the best of my memory, a parachute was NOT required for doing acrobatic flying in the early 1970s EXCEPT in certain situations. If you were flying your own plane solo and not-for-profit, then no parachute was required. If you were carrying paying passengers and doing acrobatics, then a parachute was required for each person on board. Generally speaking for sports aviation, if you were interested in staying alive, then a parachute was a very good idea. If not, then no need for one. For sports contests with airplanes, the organizer usually required a parachute. Robert99 Why don't you call Hayden and ask him yourself? He has an ongoing business in Kent, WA and freely answers questions if you are nice. He is not hard to find. First you say chutes weren't required. Then you say if people wanted to stay alive, or it was required by an organizer, they would wear them. Well, maybe Hayden wanted to stay alive. He said he was told (we're talking late 60's here) he had to get chutes. Ask HIM. It's verification of the source. Why would you take my word alone on it anyway? Blevins, the comments in posts just above cover the situation I was talking about. Hayden was your source, or was he Bruce's source? You said Hayden didn't want to wear a parachute in your original post. Then you suggest just above that maybe Hayden did want to wear a parachute. Your efforts to be on both sides of the same question at the same time are remarkable. Is that good research? Georger is right. Robert99

Blevins, To the best of my memory, a parachute was NOT required for doing acrobatic flying in the early 1970s EXCEPT in certain situations. If you were flying your own plane solo and not-for-profit, then no parachute was required. If you were carrying paying passengers and doing acrobatics, then a parachute was required for each person on board. Generally speaking for sports aviation, if you were interested in staying alive, then a parachute was a very good idea. If not, then no need for one. For sports contests with airplanes, the organizer usually required a parachute. Robert99

Blevins, Have YOU researched anything that will appear in your upcoming book? Or, are you just copying posts from this thread? Citing your own post as "research" will not get the job done. Robert99

Tom Kaye's web page has a picture and discussion of a bundle of the 20s that had "fanned out" due to an apparent "torque" applied by water flow. That particular bundle had only one rubber band (and it was on the left end of the bundle) when found. It could have started out with two or more rubber bands, but only one was present during the "fanning" out process. Robert99

Smokin, Thanks for the interest. I've been on a trip in an easterly direction and just got back a few days ago. I am going to deliberately post less here in the immediate future but will continue to work on some things that are related, in one manner or another, to the Cooper case. And the Cooper case is not the center of my life. Robert99

Every statistical analysis that I could find in the literature that had any chance of producing meaningful information has already been applied. Some progress has been made using a statistical approach, but there does not seem to be any chance for further progress that way. Basically, determining some segments of a possible series of algorithms seems to be the only route to a solution. I am absolutely sure that a single algorithm will not solve the problem. There are several short sets of data. They are, or will be found to be (I'm sure), statistically independent but, nevertheless, related. Don't ask me to explain that further at this point. But to repeat, algorithms seem to be the only possible way of making further progress. I would prefer that any further discussion of this be both off DZ.com and privately. Also, I won't have time to pursue this matter further until about mid-September. Robert99

I never said I didn't accept Ckret's statement. I made an argument of logic. It is interesting that Gray's book doesn't mention the randomizing of the money bundles. That information would have been bookworthy. Gray had access to the FBI files, he was monitoring the DZ message board and in contact with Ckret aka Carr. Maybe someone should email Gray. If portions of bills were actually found 3 feet deep in the sand as well as close to the surface (as the Ingram money was), it would by itself eliminate the Washougal wash down theory as a possibility. It would mean that the deposition of the money at Tena Bar was a "repeatable" action and that the money had landed close by and remained there for quite a while, meaning long enough for three feet of sand to be deposited over the first bills that moved toward the river. Also, portions of the bills buried 3 feet down would eliminate Duane Weber as a possible Cooper candidate. When last seen by Jo Cooper during their visit to Tena Bar in late 1979, Duane was supposedly carrying some of the money which he intended to bury. However, Duane did not have a shovel. Duane Weber does not appear to be the type of person who would dig a hole 3 feet deep and deposit some money in it, all with the hope that somebody would discover the money at some unspecified later date. So unless this post has triggered Jo's memory, a distinct possibility, and she now remembers that he was also carrying a shovel, the reported connection of Jo and Duane Weber with Tena Bar is nonsense. Robert99

Jo, Let's just drop the subject. Robert99