Robert99

Hmm. Lot of points there to address. Of course I know the bills were buried in sand. Kaye's point was he doesn't think they washed up there naturally, or were dredged to the spot. We're not discussing KC, by the way. ANYONE who turns out to be the hijacker could have planted those bills. Your theory explains the presence of the money by saying Cooper crash-landed at or near Tina Bar. But you have no body, no briefcase, no chutes, no money bag or any of the remainder of the ransom...and the north-south route of the jet was miles east of Tina Bar...unless you can prove otherwise. Not knowing the source of the map doesn't necessarily make it useless or wrong. The FBI used it to conduct a pretty big search. Some info is known. Paul Soderlind and his NWA team undoubtably had a hand in it. You should contact members of his family and ask them. Some are at Facebook. The only problem I've ever seen with the map are possible gaps and lags in the transcript it is associated with, meaning maybe Cooper jumped further south than it was first suspected. But I don't see any evidence that Flight 305 took a starboard turn over Tina Bar on its way to Portland. Where does Kaye say he doesn't think the bills were water-soaked? Well, here's couple of quotes for you: From Skyjack, Page 255: ***Analyzing the evidence, he (Kaye) was able to make one conclusion. Cooper did survive the jump, he thinks. Under the microscope, Tom noticed the money had been bound for so long, the ink of serial numbers on th e bills had bled into each other. When he looked at them further, he found that they lined up precisely behind each other in the stack. Tom did not expect this. When he used his fishing rod to cast a packet of bills into the Columbia River, what happened was clear: The bills fanned out in the water, like the fins of an exotic fish. So if the Cooper bills had floated loosely in the water, when they dried and stuck together, the serial numbers would not be in perfect alignment. They would be slightly off. Which means what exactly? "The money did not float down the river," Tom says. "So how did it get to Tina Bar?" "Nonnatural means," he says. Which means? "People...If there's one story the money tells us, it's that." Just on a different note, I got to speak with retired FBI agent Furhman, the guy who interviewed the witnesses in Seattle. I asked him: When they found the money, did anyone ever think the idea of finding several bundles of the ransom in the same exact spot...miles from the flight path...was significant. (rather than some loose bills, or one random packet, which might be easier to explain) He said no one thought of that angle. We've been down this road before, you know. These money bundles did not have legs, nor did they have little strings holding them together. And you have to get them somehow to the place where they were found TOGETHER..and explain further how they managed to do that if they weren't attached. If they weren't water-soaked, and they didn't float it from the river, then how do you explain that? Tom Kaye dances around this point, but it's obvious he favors some kind of human intervention. I think you should ask him to expand on his comments. Now Kaye says the condition of the bands relegates the placement or arrival somehow of the money to within one year or so AFTER the hijacking. But what if the money did not see the light of day for several years before it actually arrived? Kaye's test also show that rubber bands kept for an extended period of time in a drawer do NOT degrade. If the ransom money was kept in a box, a container, even a good bag, those bands might have lasted for years. This is one point where I think Kaye might be off. I think if it was a plant, that it was not done that soon after the hijacking. If I were to guess, I would say it was done sometime after the FBI managed to get around the Statute of Limitations in 1976. You have to believe the hijacker was definitely watching the calendar. Five years, and you are home free if they don't identify you for a warrant. That was the law then. You see, for Kaye's conclusion to work, you have to prove that the bills got to their present condition not in a period of one year...but roughly between 1972 and 1980. Eight years of exposure. And even though US currency is made of good paper, it rains a lot in Washington State and things buried in the ground here rot much more quickly than say...Arizona. This is totally unscientific, but I have doubts the actual paper money could have lasted so long under a few inches of sand for so many years. Eight years of rain in the Evergreen State. Eight winters, eight springs, and the occasional flood. My belief is that they would have become a mushy mess by that time, or completely biodegraded. And if you believe they arrived there via a flood, then you still come back to How Did At Least Three Bundles Stay Together for The Long Trip? The amount found was roughly $5,800 - about three bundles originally. If this turned out to be true, then the possibility that Cooper survived the jump and planted the money later becomes exponentially more likely. That's an opinion, of course. Blevins, If you want to know what Tom Kaye thinks and has posted on his web page, then that web page would be a good place to visit. You obviously have not done a serious reading of what Tom Kaye has written. Apparently, you feel free to dismiss an actual researcher's work because a writer has put out a book that is more sympathetic to your own theories. Would you know an genuine fact if it bit you in the butt? Until you actually read Tom Kaye's research and his conclusions that are discussed on his web page, you don't know what he has said. Despite your denials, this thread is all about KC and your book as far as you are concerned. Robert99

Blevins, Your ability to misquote and make half-assed conclusions from those misquotes is without equal. Tom Kaye said that his tests indicated that the rubber bands, whether in water or buried in sand, would deteriorate and break within one year. That is the exact condition in which the bills were found. You must have missed the information that the bills were buried in sand. For starters, that might explain how the bills were still found together in 1980 even if the bands broke prior to the end of 1972. Just exactly where does Tom Kaye say the bills were never in the river or soaked by the river water? He doesn't. Kaye does completely rule out the Washougal washdown theory. And I don't recall seeing any statement from Kaye that could be used to support a "Cooper planted the money theory", though he did state that the idea of Cooper dying in the jump should be re-examined. In the matter of the flight path, it appears that the FBI agents in Seattle that Tom and his team talked to are not certain who prepared that map or the source of the information used in preparing the map. Consequently, your support for that map being accurate is not based on fact, but your own need for Cooper to survive the jump and land a long way from Tena Bar in order to not undercut your KC theory. Robert99

Anyone who thinks it was within a year of the find needs to read Tom Kaye's analysis on his web page. There can be no misunderstanding that he plainly states within a year of the hijacking itself. Robert99Quote ... and: just above the deeper clay strata level which Tom says Palmer misidentified and actually is, the clay base to the whole river! Thus, the money was not newly arrived as Palmer said, but older and weathered out of a deeper level due to erosion, with a newly arrived 'upper active level of sand' added on top (due to the flood of 79). ... all of this because: Rubber bands deteriorate (break) in less than one year when exposed to Nature, as revealed by smog studies in CA and Tom's own tests. The Critical Clue: 1. Rubber bands deteriorate within one year, in nature. 2. The Ingram bands were . . . . . what? Still on the bundles? In what condition? (he doesn’t define that). 3. "Interpretation: The bundles must have been buried while the rubber bands were still pliable, within approximately one year of the skyjacking." 4. The found money was 9 years old. Who knows how old the rubber bands already were when applied to the Cooper money. (Tom didn’t ask ... doesn;t state that?) 5. Rubber bands are a clock. (How are rubber bands a clock in this case? Tom doesn't explain...) Criticism pending further explaination: This is about the same precision as trying to hit the Moon with a rock, shot from a slingshot, aimed in the direction of the neighbor's barn. Pending some statement of the condition the Ingram rubber bands were in, I fail to see any connection between Tom's rubber bands tests and the Ingram find at all.Moreover, Tom did not have any of the Ingram rubber band fragments to inspect or test, so far as I know? Interpretation: Tom's rubber band tests say nothing about 'when the money was buried'! Even under the best of conditions, such as my temperature and humidity controlled closet, rubber bands have a finite lifetime and it is measured in the very low single digits, such as two or three years, and not in larger digits, such as seven or eight years. The very fact that one of the bundles of bills had been "torqued" verifies that the rubber band on that bundle was still pliable when it was buried by sand or it would not have been able to keep the bundle together. The older the rubber bands before they were placed into use, the shorter their useful life. Who knows if these bands were pristine or if they were previously used in the bank's operations? Tom Kaye gave an outer limit estimate of one year from new (he didn't specifically use that word as I recall but his tests were undoubtedly on new bands) to disintegration when exposed to mother nature in the brush. Based on my personal experience, Tom's estimate and test results are realistic. Various sources have stated that at least some of the rubber bands on the bundles that were found buried were still in place when found (this does NOT mean that they were still pliable or bearing loads) but disintegrated when touched. Rubber band time keeping technology may still be quite primitive, but it clearly indicates that the money arrived at Tena Bar at a time much closer to the date of the hijacking than the date it was found. Robert99

Anyone who thinks it was within a year of the find needs to read Tom Kaye's analysis on his web page. There can be no misunderstanding that he plainly states within a year of the hijacking itself. Robert99

Read Tom Kaye's analysis on his web page where he clearly states that it was within one year of the skyjacking which was on November 24, 1971. That is, the money was covered by sand at Tena Bar before November 24, 1972. If you feel that there is an error in Kaye's analysis, then point it out with actual proof. Robert99

I don't KNOW what Duane did when he was out of my sight at Tena's bar. Jo, The simple sentence above answers the question. However, that sentence was buried in a two page post that covered everything from your daughter's high school prom, to where the restrooms were located at the Red Lion, and about two decades of your life with Duane. Please be concise in the future. Some people, including me, have a life that is not centered on this thread. Robert99

Thanks for the information. There are more stories in circulation as to who found the money and what was actually found at Tena Bar than there are people to tell them. But all of them seem to have some common ground in stating that it was not Brian Ingram who found the money and that the Ingrams didn't notify the law enforcement people, at least not the FBI, until the next day (which was a Monday) and not until they had talked to some other people about the money. Then the FBI didn't visit Tena Bar until Tuesday. Are you willing to elaborate on what you talked to Ingram and Carr about? And do you have any more information on the specific location where the bundles of money were found? Also, were shreds of bills found in the area and was all of the money at about the same level in the sand? There is probably more disinformation out about the money and its discovery than valid information. Robert99

Jo, If Duane was out of your sight at Tena Bar, how do you know what he did there? Robert99

This is the wording I understood and what Kaye seemed to say - I interpreted to mean the money was only on the beach or deposited there within a yr of it being found. Jo, Stop trying to distract from what Tom Kaye plainly said on his web page by adding a lot of unrelated speculations in your posts. Tom Kaye's exact quote on when the money arrived at Tena Bar is quoted in my post no. 45920. And if you don't believe me, go to Tom's web page and check for yourself. Whatever Duane threw into the Columbia River in 1979 was not the money. I don't know what the fine would be in Washington state, but if Duane had thrown that trash into the river today from the Oregon side, he could be fined more than $6000. Jo, Have you taken Shutter up on his offer of a computer? You should do so and you should also check out if the "aol" files that you claim you would lose if you upgraded from your dial-up ISP can be printed out or put on a DVD. Of course if you did up grade to a high speed ISP, you wouldn't be able to blame your misinformation on anyone except yourself. Robert99

Let me do some speculating and I would like to emphasize that these are NOT necessarily Tom Kaye's conclusions even though he did the work that I am going to base these speculations on. Maybe he agrees with them and maybe not. Tom Kaye did quite a bit of research related to the rubber bands that were used to bundle the bills. In the rubber band analysis, which is on his web page, he lists a "Fact", an "Experimental Fact", and an "Interpretation" of those facts. See his web page for an explanation of the facts. Tom Kaye's interpretation of those facts is as follows: "Interpretation: The bundles must have been buried while the rubber bands were still pliable, within approximately one year of the skyjacking." If the bundles were covered with sand within about a year of the hijacking, then they must have been exposed to water action for a period of time before that to do the "torqueing" of the bills that is discussed on Tom Kaye's web page. For the "torqueing" to take place, the bottom of the bundle would have to be constrained in one place while a stream of water crossed the bundle in a manner that would fan out, or "torque", the bills. The time required for this "torqueing" would probably not be more than two or three weeks assuming the bundle was exposed to water throughout that time. Tom Kaye has also reported on his web page, that based on some of his other experiments, the money did not come down the Columbia River. In my opinion, it is logical to conclude that the money was at its found location and covered with sand within a few months of the hijacking at the very latest. An obvious conclusion is that the money entered the water very near where it was found. Consequently, there is no need for convoluted theories of an off-course airliner, Washougal River flooding, the money transported down the Columbia River and arriving at Tena Bar in near pristine condition, and then being acted on by water and sand to achieve the condition in which it was found. Robert99

The possibility of a Freedom of Information Act request in the Cooper case was recently raised on this thread. I am not familiar with that act and don't know how the legal aspects of it are handled. But the following is a discussion of the various channels of communication that were used during the hijacking. The NWA 305 Boeing 727 had a MINIMUM of two VHF radio transceivers for voice communications. It may have had more, but two were MANDATORY. The airliner could also receive voice communications, but not transmit, on other VHF frequencies such as the frequencies of the VOR stations used for navigation. In addition, it is very likely that the airliner could receive some voice communications through the ADF receiver (and probably receive the standard AM commercial broadcast stations as well). But there is no indication that anything mentioned in this paragraph was used for communicating with the airliner during the hijacking. During flight and ground operations, the airliner apparently used only its two VHF transceivers for communications. They would be used to communicate with the FAA Air Traffic Control system (airport towers, air traffic control centers/controllers, etc.), the ARINC (Aeronautical Radio Incorporated) system operated by the airline industry, and NWA company radio frequencies. On the last item, part of the ground communications by the airliner while on the ground in Seattle was done on the NWA company ground frequency. But the first two items are the most important. The FAA communications between the towers and air traffic control facilities were routinely tape recorded in the early 1970s. In addition to the voice communications over the radios, extensive coordination was done between controllers using a dedicated telephone system. These telephone communications were also routinely recorded. See the Oakland Air Traffic Control Center transcripts for examples of this. Following the hijacking, the Chiefs of the Seattle and Oakland ATC centers had transcripts made of their communications with the airliner and certified that those transcripts were true and complete. The Oakland Center's transcripts appear to be complete but the Seattle Center's transcript has obviously undergone a major redaction. In general, the location of the airliner can not be determined from the Seattle Center's transcripts. Communications between the airliner and the ARINC system were also done by voice radio. Generally, the messages were then transmitted by teletype from the ARINC facility to the appropriate airline facility. However, in special cases, the airliner's voice communication were patched through the commercial telephone system to the appropriate airline facility. Both of these means were used during the hijacking. Therefore, all of the communications between the airliner to the ARINC facility and from the ARINC facility, including the phone patches, to the airliner were probably tape recorded and, in some instances, a hard copy was made by the teletype. All of the above tapes would appear to be subject to a FOIA action. But the tapes, or transcripts, of the greatest importance are those of the communications between the airliner and the Seattle ATC center that took place from the take-off in Seattle until the airliner passed the Eugene, OR VORTAC. That includes the phone communications between the controllers that passed the airliner from one sector controller to another. Since these communications involved a major crime, the tapes and transcripts were undoubtedly preserved. In my opinion, these tapes and transcripts should be the focus of any FOIA action. The ARINC tapes and transcripts would, in my opinion, be of secondary importance here. But they probably should be included in any FOIA action. Does anyone want to pursue a FOIA action? Robert99

this would be with the assumption Cooper lived in this area correct? keep in mind the tie appears to have been used prior to this crime. Tie Tac holes are present in the tie prior to having the tie clip on it. how do we know he didn't fly into Portland under another name, or take a bus, hitchhike lol who knows......can we really assume he was from Portland/Vancouver? or do you have a different angle?Quote This brings me back to something I almost posted the other day ... Sluggo thought Cooper might have picked a place for his hijacking as far away from his home base as possible ... a section of the country in limbo (in the boondocks) with few hijackings and poor security. Snowmman then proved flight 305 was a recent addition since the August only, which began its day on the east coast. The last short flight of the day after a long day - crew tired - day before Thanksgiving - security low. I think Sluggo and Snowmman are correct. Cooper would probably not be interested in making a mess on his own door step. And the hijacking was probably planned based on the new NWA flight being a 727, a short time for the law enforcement types to react, people taking off early for Thanksgiving Day, etc.. Cooper probably recognized the opportunity that was developing for the hijacking and made the most of it. Cooper got the money and died rich but probably within 90 minutes. Robert99

Robert, thank you for the advise and often you and I disagree, but I have never ever gone into the attack mode with you and / or with others (exception JT). I might be wasting my time, but I have had a belly full of this kind of individual in the last 6 months. If I sound silly defending the credibility of you guys and myself then so be it. You and Homid and others have done some excellent research...I do NOT want to see any of it trashed even if I do NOT agree with it all - the technical stuff I leave to you guys. I just ask stupid woman questions in that respect. My part of this is telling about the things I remember and what Duane told me. My memories do NOT mean Sxxx, but the research you guys worked hard to compile should not be made light of. Not Silly - just being protective of everything that has been accomplished on this thread. Read back from the time the man came to the thread - his motive is not good. He has put himself in CHARGE (like his handle). He is deliberately stating things in a manner that he can use to write a book or utilize the work you guys have done in a manner you will not be happy with. He is using you guys to CREATE his own version of Cooper....note how he composes his post. He makes his statements as facts - go back and note he is leading you guys and you are NOT going to be happy with the end result! What he ends up will not be conjecture - but be published or made public as FACT. This man is a TAKE CHARGE person and he has a reason to word things the way he does. He led you right into one of the posts - getting you to agree he was right. That is all it will take to discredit anything you have done and what you are really saying. This man is not one you play games with or banter with - this man will destroy everything you have ever tried to accomplish on this case. I for one respect the research you have done and do not want to see it slaughtered...everyone is entitled to an opinion but this man takes your statement and makes it his own with leading words of conviction - hence it become his words - NOT yours. Did you make your trip to WA just to have everything you have tried to accomplish - be flushed down the toilet? He does this in a very subjective way with his leading questions being used to start his conversation and his answers are interperted as fact and become fact....which he claims as his own. Jo, Your reply comes as a total shock to me. You are the same person who has called me: 1. A troll living under a bridge. 2. A phony. 3. An ass. 4. A moron. 5. A plant from the FBI to make sure the Cooper case is never solved. 6. And probably other names that I can't remember right now. Jo, Don't worry about CCharger taking over the thread. Since both you and Blevins believe that this thread couldn't exist without your guidance, I'm sure that any indication that CCharger is moving to unseat Weber/Blevins would result in a blood bath here. Robert99

I don't know why she would want to intimidate me. If she knew anything about me, she would know I am impossible to intimidate. I don't pretend to have all the answers. I am here to learn and exchange ideas in a civil manner. I will continue to do that regardless of what she thinks and says. Jo Weber, AKA Mrs. Cooper, is scared to death that someone will finally discover the identity of the real D. B. Cooper and that it will NOT be Duane Weber, her deceased husband. Jo has been on a crusade for the past 17+ years to prove that Duane Weber was Cooper. Her motive for doing this remains unclear. But Jo Weber is the biggest mystery on this thread, even bigger than Cooper himself. Robert99

Jo, Calm down. And quit trying to intimidate CCharger. You are wasting your time, the thread's time, and just making yourself look silly. Robert99

The weather information that I am referring to was actual reproductions of the FAA and National Weather Service teletype reports. It apparently was from the FBI files and was attached to posts by Ckret and maybe others at a later date. Anyway, it covered the entire northwest part of the country and represented everything that was available to aviators that evening. And again, the weather was basically just another northwest fall evening. There was nothing in the information to support the "storm" claims and the weather was something that the airliner could easily handle. It was just another cloudy/light rainy night at the office. Robert99

Again, thanks. I disagree, however, with your comment that the weather was not important. Wind direction would certainly influence where Cooper landed (if his chute deployed). I was wondering if perhaps the easterly winds from the gorge might somehow have floated Coop to the west towards Tena Bar rather than to the north and east as most of the favorite Coop DZs are. On the night of the hijacking, the winds aloft in the Portland area were from the southwest and the winds through the Gorge were blowing from the west to the east at about 10 knots at ground level, based on the weather reported on the eastern end of the Gorge. If Cooper had opened his parachute at 10,000 feet, he would have had about 5 to 10 minutes of descent time before he hit the ground and would have been blown a few miles in a northeast direction. This time depends on his rate of descent, which would certainly have been more than 1000 feet per minute, and the height of the terrain in which he landed. The distance covered would be caused by about a 15 knot average wind blowing him northeast during his descent. The placard from the airliner was found at about 1500 feet elevation according to Tom Kaye. If Cooper did a free fall from 10,000 feet to the ground in the Tena Bar area, he would have only been blown about 1000 feet to the northeast and he would probably not have travelled more than 1500 feet forward along the aircraft track from the point of separation from the aircraft. Robert99

You are in luck. Ckret, the FBI agent, sent all available weather information to this thread. Unfortunately, I don't have the number of the posts that included that information. However, I do have the print outs. Perhaps a member of the thread can pinpoint Ckret's posts about the weather. The weather information includes the hourly sequence reports, the wind aloft forecasts, etc., etc.. Additional weather information is available from such online sources as Weather Underground. Basically, the winds at 10,000 feet in the Portland area were from the southwest at about 25-30 knots. The surface (ground) winds at Portland International Airport, which is 30 feet above sea level, were from the south to southwest at approximately 10 knots. There were several cloud layers with an overcast reported at 5000 feet. Visibility at Portland was about 10 miles and there were light rain showers in the area. Himmelsbach's book states that the airliner was at 10,000 feet and in heavy rain at the time Cooper jumped. Recently, Rataczak (the co-pilot and only living member of the cockpit crew) said that they were in freezing rain at 10,000 feet. Since the ambient temperature at 10,000 feet was well below freezing, Rataczak's statement begs the question of why it was "rain" rather than "snow", which would seem more likely under the circumstances. But there is nothing in the weather records of any clouds above 5000 feet. Hominid did a comprehensive analysis of the entire weather picture for the time of the hijacking. His work can be considered as the gold standard for the overall weather picture. There is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that the winds in the Columbia Gorge that evening were from the east. Locations on the eastern end of the Gorge were reporting winds of about 10 knots from the west. I recently made two drives through that entire Gorge to get a first hand look at it. In my opinion, the Gorge did not have any influence on the Portland weather at time of the hijacking. And it would probably have only minimal influence on the Portland weather even with the winds blowing from the east. Overall, in my opinion, the weather was not of any particular significance during the hijacking. Robert99

Blevins, It is time for you to do your own check-in at the Reality Hotel. Your basically accept on "faith" (and I don't mean religious faith) that people who produce something that agrees with what you want are correct? Where is your "proof" that their work is correct? Obviously, you don't feel that you need to know how they arrived at their conclusions. Anything that supports your theory that Cooper (aka as KC) survived and held on to enough money to buy some real estate and make loans to a friend is necessary to back up your book's story line. Robert99

Blevins writes: Robert, you make a LOT of assumptions with those statements. First, you don't know WHEN Cooper might have tried the ripcord. Maybe he did it right off the stairs, as 377 and I have suggested. Rataczak has already stated that the stairs only had 24-36" of headroom on their initial opening, which means either Cooper leaned really far over to squeeze through that opening, or he backed down the stairs. Carrying the load he did, I favor the back-down theory. As I've said previously, if you go FORWARD and those stairs take a sudden drop from your weight, you could easily go head-over-heels and right off the end. Two chutes, a moneybag, a briefcase. Big load. R99 replies: Blevins you need to consider your own assumptions. What makes you so sure he took the brief case with him? As a number of people on this thread have explained to you numerous times, as Cooper moved further down the stairs the opening between the bottom of the stairs and the fuselage would increase. Consequently, Cooper did not jump through the small opening you imply above. Further, it doesn't make any difference whether Cooper backed down the stairs or not. There is no way that he could avoid tumbling once he was off the stairs. This has also been explained numerous times. Blevins writes: And who says it was a 'dark and stormy night'? Dark yes, stormy no. Cold, definitely yes. R99 replies: Rataczak, whom you quote approvingly above, says it was stormy. Why don't you believe him this time? Blevins writes: And how do you figure that 305 was a few miles WEST of the Interstate 5 freeway when it passed by Tina Bar? You have no evidence showing that. You may have some evidence that the flight was not exactly where it was shown on the flight map at certain times, but only in a basically north-south direction, not east or west. R99 replies: Blevins, did you read the post to which you are responding? Obviously not. Blevins writes: You keep trying to move the flight west somehow, in order to explain the Tina Bar money. You also don't explain how...if Cooper impacted on ground as you say...why no one has found anything at or around Tina Bar except approximately three bundles of the ransom. R99 replies: Blevins, you HAVE to explain how the money arrived at Tena Bar. That the money arrived at Tena Bar is a FACT not a THEORY. The rest of your comment above was discussed in the post to which you responded. Maybe you should read it. Blevins writes: You have an entire scenario cooked up here, but it relies on two UNPROVEN and RATHER LARGE assumptions: 1) Cooper died in the jump. 2) The flight was west of the freeway by miles. The first is unknown and unproven, and frankly...not supported by the slightest shred of evidence. The second is simply unproven. R99 replies: Blevins, you are also relying on two UNPROVEN and RATHER LARGE assumptions: 1. Cooper survived the jump. 2. The flight was east of the freeway by miles. The rest of your comments above apply to your own assumptions also. But you have no explanation at all for how the money arrived at Tena Bar. Blevins writes: I've attached a demo picture that may not be completely realistic, but does show that sometimes people DO secure things around their waist when jumping, and survive. R99 replies: People have also fallen from great heights, thousands of feet, without parachutes and survived. But if the money bag was not securely and snugly tied to Cooper or his parachute harness it would complicate the dynamics of his tumbling, and there is no way he can avoid tumbling. If the money bag was at the end of a several foot cord, you would have a "earth - moon" dynamical system and not just a single body, or "earth", system. Perhaps you could restrain from lecturing Tom Kaye and Georger long enough to ask them to explain the differences in these two system to you. Robert99

WE do NOT KNOW if Cooper was a HEAVY smoker. I do NOT remember reading a statement his fingers were yellowed from smoking. Maybe he had airplane glue on his finger tips and why the prints are not viable to identify Cooper! To put Jo Weber's post in the proper perspective, in 17+ years of claiming that Duane Weber was Cooper, Jo has not been able to come up with a single piece of evidence to support her claims. Jo cannot put Duane in the northwest part of the country in 1971. Jo cannot put Duane in a parachute at any time. Jo cannot put Duane on, or even close to, the hijacked airliner. Jo cannot prove that Duane wasn't in jail on the date of the hijacking. Nevertheless, Jo continues to claim that Duane was Cooper and give lectures to other posters who make statements that are more believable than her own. Robert99

The amount of the money does not have any known significance beyond the fact that it was/is a lot of money and his means of attaching it to his person/parachute were somewhat limited. That amount of money would be equivalent to about one million dollars today. In my personal opinion, the work done by Tom Kaye and reported on his web page eliminates the possibility of the money coming down the Columbia River from any distance greater than a few hundred feet. Again in my personal opinion, Cooper was probably on the ground and dead less than a minute after separating from the aft stairs of the aircraft. He probably impacted on solid ground very near where the money was found. Also in my opinion, the money was in the process of moving INTO the Columbia River for the first time when it hung up in the sand. It was then exposed to flowing water, maybe from the Fazio property, for a sufficient time to accomplish the "torqueing" of one of the packets of bills as shown in Tom Kaye's analysis which is on his web page. In due time, sand covered the money and the Ingram's came along and found it. The money find location was several feet higher vertically in 1980 than what is now listed as the find location. Also, depending on the available information and GPS accuracy, the location could be off by 20 feet or more horizontally along the river's shore line. And maybe into the water itself as it now exists. But it wouldn't back up the steep slope on the Fazio property. Robert99 Awesome info. Thanks. However, in order for your theory to prove true, Coop must have splattered somewhere near Tena Bar. Do you disregard the accepted Vector 23 flight path? Also, how do you explain a mangled corpse attached to a billowing parachute and $200K not being discovered almost immediately on that part of the river? Not attacking, mind you, I am just curious how you come about your thoughts. Let me answer your last questions first. The parachute canopy would not come out of the pack unless the ripcord was pulled. Hitting the ground at 180+ MPH would not cause the parachute container to open. The particular type parachute that Cooper used had a rather unique pilot chute. The pilot chute was compressed so that a stud in the bottom part of the pilot chute came out the top of the pilot chute and then this stud fit through an opening in both the left and right flaps of the container. The third ripcord pin (out of four) from the top of the container then fit through that stud. The end result was that if the ripcord was not pulled (or at least the third pin) then the pilot chute would remain attached to the container and the canopy, even if it came out of the pack, could not open. Presumably, Cooper was not dumb enough to tie the briefcase (supposedly containing a bomb) to the parachute. Just tying a 22 pound bag of money to his waist or the parachute was dumb enough. It would be aerodynamically destabilizing, it is an absolute given that Cooper would tumble upon leaving the stairs, and he may have been injured in leaving the stairs. And "it was a dark and stormy night", which means that Cooper was basically jumping into a black hole and would be unable to stabilize himself even if he had a reasonable amount of skydiving experience, and there is no indication that he did. Cooper could have been on the ground in as little as 40 seconds and not more than 60 seconds if he didn't pull the ripcord. If this was his first actual jump, and there are indications that it was, he may well not have realized how short 40 seconds can be. Added to the other stresses he was under, it may well be that Cooper could not find the ripcord in the darkness or just simply forgot to pull it. In addition, there are some reports that the ripcord on this particular parachute had been modified in some unknown manner (no one has been able to pin this down exactly) that made it even more difficult to pull. In any event, Cooper could have impacted on solid ground in the vicinity of Tena Bar, and depending on a number of things, he might not have been visible due to landing in brush, weeds, etc.. And I think the ground at Tena Bar was covered with snow within a day or so of the jump. No one was looking for Cooper at Tena Bar because the FBI and everyone else was looking for him about 20 or 30 miles away. That was, and continues to be, the "official" jump area. When Tena Bar came into the picture in 1980 with the discovery of some of the money the, reportedly Captain Scott was "leaned on" to make a statement that the airliner had drifted to the east by quite a distance while still north of Portland. This was to support the Washougal wash down theory. Scott did make such a statement but there is no way on God's green earth that the airliner, with all of its navigational equipment, could have done that without Scott knowing it in 1971, and he apparently didn't. In regards to the V-23 claimed flight path, this has been discussed at great length on this thread and I personally do not buy it for a great number of reasons. Here are a few of them: 1. The flight crew would not fly over Portland/Vancouver with a bomb on board. 2. The segmented flight path around the west side of Portland on the FBI maps is absurd. No pilot would fly that under these circumstances. 3. The time hacks on the FBI maps simply don't check out. The airliner had a constant ground speed in that area of slightly more than three nautical miles per minute. Some of those times indicate that the airliner flew three nautical miles in one minute while the adjacent time hack indicates that it flew six nautical miles in one minute. This is simply not realistic. 4. There are four "x" marks on the south/southwest side of Portland on those maps that indicate that the airliner flew directly from the Mayfield (now Malay) Intersection direct to the Canby Intersection (which is south of Portland) on V-23. In a direct flight straight from Mayfield to Canby, the airliner would have passed directly over or about 1000 feet to the west of Tena Bar. 5. Finally, the radio transcripts between the airliner and the Seattle Air Traffic Control Center have been "sanitized" to such an extent that the location of the airliner can not be determined accurately after it was about 20 nautical miles south of the Seattle airport until it was being handed off to the Oakland Air Traffic Control Center just North of the Fort Jones VORTAC in northern California. If you want to see the kind of information that should be in the Seattle ATC radio transcripts, then read the Oakland ATC radio transcripts. Robert99

The amount of the money does not have any known significance beyond the fact that it was/is a lot of money and his means of attaching it to his person/parachute were somewhat limited. That amount of money would be equivalent to about one million dollars today. In my personal opinion, the work done by Tom Kaye and reported on his web page eliminates the possibility of the money coming down the Columbia River from any distance greater than a few hundred feet. Again in my personal opinion, Cooper was probably on the ground and dead less than a minute after separating from the aft stairs of the aircraft. He probably impacted on solid ground very near where the money was found. Also in my opinion, the money was in the process of moving INTO the Columbia River for the first time when it hung up in the sand. It was then exposed to flowing water, maybe from the Fazio property, for a sufficient time to accomplish the "torqueing" of one of the packets of bills as shown in Tom Kaye's analysis which is on his web page. In due time, sand covered the money and the Ingram's came along and found it. The money find location was several feet higher vertically in 1980 than what is now listed as the find location. Also, depending on the available information and GPS accuracy, the location could be off by 20 feet or more horizontally along the river's shore line. And maybe into the water itself as it now exists. But it wouldn't back up the steep slope on the Fazio property. Robert99

I can't remember where, but I remember seeing reference to a phone /communication device in the lavatory of a commercial plane. Does anyone know if this is true on a 727 or any commercial plane? Attached is a picture of what I think is a accurate layout of the Cooper plane. (found on the net) The NWA aircraft hijacked by Cooper was a 727-052 (the last three digits may not be entirely correct) which pre-dated the 727-100 shown in the schematic. In addition, each airline had their own layout of seats, meal service stations, lavatories, etc.. In the NWA aircraft, Cooper was seated in the last row of seats on the right side and there was a lavatory immediately behind him. On the left side of the aircraft, directly behind the last row of seats which were opposite Cooper and directly across the aisle from the lavatory, was a flight attendant work station which included an "interphone". The flight attendants could make announcements over the cabin public address system and talk directly to the cockpit crew using that interphone. So Cooper stayed close to his seat, which was adjacent to the lavatory, and kept track of the flight attendants that used the interphone to pass Coopers demands to the cockpit crew. He stayed in a small area until the flight was enroute to Reno and Tina had gone to the cockpit. Robert99

Answering my own question, I believe that the ticket agent is deceased. I realize that daily routines can vary, but it should be a relatively simple matter to find out what the common practice was in the 70s -as a general rule, did the ticket agent fill out the tickets or did the passenger? maybe someone in the NW historical society would know. I agree with you MrShutter - every ticket I've looked at also looks like the same person wrote both the name of the passenger and the flight information. I did quite a bit of airline flying in the same time frame as the hijacking and I never wrote a single thing on an airline ticket or saw any other passenger do so. The airline people did it all. In fact, if you worked for a large organization that had its own airline ticket office, your ticket would probably be delivered to you and completed in all details without any particular input from you personally. Your first personal contact with the airline people would be when you handed the ticket to the agent at check-in or at the boarding gate. Robert99