Robert99

You need to take a look at the Australian parachute link that Mrshutter earlier today. Also there is some good information from the early skydiving days. I completely agree with your last sentence above. Robert99

Georger, Mrshutter, Smokin99, and the Poster Who Must Not Be Named, This is to tie up another loose end on the Cossey connection to the Cooper parachutes. In Bruce Smith's article on the Hayden parachute(s), a picture of the packing card is included. It gives a date of May 21, 1971 as the last packing date prior to the hijacking on November 24, 1971 and the packer was Cossey. In the 1971 time frame, emergency back parachutes had to be repacked ever 60 days I think it was. It could have been each 90 days. In either event, the Hayden parachute was either 4 months and 3 days or 3 months and 3 days overdue for a repacking. Tosaw's book quotes Tina as seeing Cooper pull out a packing card and looking at it. If Cooper did this for both back packs, then he may have rejected the Hayden parachute because it was way overdue for a repack. Cossey was required to keep logs of his repacking activities. If the logs for the 1971 time frame are still available, and I'll bet he kept them, then information on his repacking/repair/modification activities are in them. After a suitable period of time, perhaps someone with some social graces, and this probably rules out Blevins, Jo, and Bruce, could contact the Cossey family through someone acquainted with them and check the information on his parachute activities in 1971. Robert99

Georger, You are correct. I do remember previous discussions on the thread about this. As a certified parachute rigger, Cossey could easily and legally modify his personal emergency parachute to a left hand pull. That is, the rip cord would be mounted on the harness on the right side of the wearer's body and pulled by his left hand. I have also seen pictures of some early skydivers that had rip cords for their back packs mounted on the harness on the right side and then pulled off to the right by their right hand. This feature was supposedly to help them maintain stability during pulls. As 377 remarks elsewhere this morning, the Sky Diving Community, as a Sovereign Nation, seems to do whatever it damn well pleases and doesn't consider itself obligated to follow other people's rules. Robert99 Is this assuming that Hayden is now out of the equation with the back packs? lefty model http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/REL31363/ Hayden rip cord is on the left for a right handed pull (see photo from The Mountain News) Hayden apparently did own one of the back packs that made it into FBI possession. Bruce quotes Hayden as saying both of his back packs were identical. Since the one in Bruce's pictures is a right hand pull, it is logical to assume that the second Hayden parachute was also a right hand pull. But Cossey claims to have owned and modified the back pack that Cooper actually took with him and that it was a left hand pull. There is a simple solution here. All we need to do is find Cooper's remains, if any, along with an NB-6 parachute with the chest and leg straps still fastened and, ideally, with the rip cord still in its housing. Or at least the housing still on the harness. That would answer a lot of questions and put this thread out of business, although Jo and Blevins would probably claim thread ownership and object to closing it down. Robert99

377, Don't dismiss the Edsel so fast. It would be worth a bundle at one of these exclusive car auctions. The Ford Marketing Department VASTLY overestimated the marketing potential for the Edsel. The same marketing people then proceeded to VASTLY underestimate the marketing potential for Ford's next product - the Ford Mustang. So Ford's marketing people made big-time mistakes on two consecutive products. I speak as a Charter Member of the Mustang Generation. Robert99

Georger, You are correct. I do remember previous discussions on the thread about this. As a certified parachute rigger, Cossey could easily and legally modify his personal emergency parachute to a left hand pull. That is, the rip cord would be mounted on the harness on the right side of the wearer's body and pulled by his left hand. I have also seen pictures of some early skydivers that had rip cords for their back packs mounted on the harness on the right side and then pulled off to the right by their right hand. This feature was supposedly to help them maintain stability during pulls. As 377 remarks elsewhere this morning, the Sky Diving Community, as a Sovereign Nation, seems to do whatever it damn well pleases and doesn't consider itself obligated to follow other people's rules. Robert99

Jo, As of this post, all indications are that both the Hayden parachute(s) and the Cossey parachute(s) were right hand pull types. Also, an altimeter would not have been of any use to Cooper since he did not know where the aircraft was and the height of the terrain under the aircraft was very irregular. He did not have any means of determining his terrain clearance. Robert99

Bruce, All the pictures of Hayden and parachutes in your article in the Mountain News show a standard right hand pull. That is, the rip cord is located on the harness on the left side of the body of the wearer. The wearer would reach across his body and pull the rip cord with his right hand. Robert99

Bruce, Could you post a photograph showing the left hand pull. Robert99

Smokin and Georger, If Cossey's back pack had a left-hand pull, which was rather unusual for that day, then perhaps it suggests that Cooper was left handed and selected the NB-6 for that reason. Robert99

Jo, The above is EXACTLY what everyone on this thread, including me, has been telling you all day. You really need to start reading the posts before claiming that someone is lying. Robert99

Simplified: Front pack and Back pack. Question would the BACK pack ever be referred to as an emergency chute or reserve chute as Robert99 stated? I thought the emergency chute or reserve chute was the Front Pac. Guess Robert99 thinks so. The back pack is the main chute...damn sure wouldn't be an emergency chute....and reserve in other subjects mean alterative or back-up or a force set aside. Jo, Let me try to explain it to you again. And please READ this post. In the 1971 time frame, if you only had on one parachute it was always an "emergency" parachute and had to be packed by a certified rigger such as Cossey. In civilian aircraft, emergency parachutes were typically back packs or seat packs. And only one parachute was worn per crew member. However, in military aircraft, emergency parachutes could be either seat packs, back packs, or chest packs. The chest packs were usually quick-attach packs with the harness being worn continually and the parachute pack quickly attached to the harness by a couple of fasteners during an emergency. On aircraft with a large number of crew members, all three types of packs might be used. But each crew member only had one parachute. But when deliberate (non-emergency) parachute jumps were made in the early days of civilian aviation, two parachutes were used per person with both packed by a certified rigger. The military had its own regulations for such people as paratroopers. When skydiving became popular after WW2, the civilian rules were that only the reserve (usually the front pack) had to be packed by a certified rigger and the jumper (presumably after some instruction from someone) could pack the back pack. But to repeat again, "emergency parachutes" can be chest, seat, or back packs but the term usually means that the wearer only has on one parachute. In the present day of square canopies, I don't know if the "reserve" parachute (which is also worn on the back) has to be packed by a certified rigger or not. Perhaps 377, Amazon, or other current jumper can answer that question. Robert99

Yes. Now if we could only get Jo and Blevins to write with such clarity. But sci-fi and fiction buffs apparently only believe their own writings. Robert99

Regardless of what was in the dummy chute, Cossey apparently did all the packing for the emergency back pack parachutes, and for the reserve chest packs that were required to be packed by a certified rigger, in that locality. It would seem logical that if a chest pack was only going to be used for ground training, the canopy would be removed and replaced by a beach towel or some such thing and the contained marked "dummy" or words to that effect. The training container could be something straight out of the trash barrel. No point in using $40 bucks worth of airworthy equipment for a dummy trainer. Robert99

Jo, I have included your entire post above since you, when some of your errors are pointed out, have a habit of going back and changing your original post and then claiming you never made the original statements. I was not replying to your post since it was made after my reply to Georger and Smokin99's post was already on the thread. So your "corrections" are nonsense. While I realize that you probably already have had this information for years in your files out in the garage, in Skydiving the front pack (back in my day) was called the "reserve" parachute. The word "emergency" parachute is usually used only for the back pack (if no front pack is involved) and it must be packed by a certified rigger such as Cossey. In the Skydiving operations I was involved with, the front "reserve" parachute had to be packed by a certified rigger and the back pack could be, and usually was, packed by the jumper. Read my original post above for the other information you seek if you really want some answers. Finally, read Georger's final paragraph above in response to one of your posts. Robert99

Jo, Read the post that is just above your original post. Robert99

Unless I'm reading posts wrong, this is a total contradiction by ckret of what he posted 6 months before. (Bold added by me) Jeez....this from someone on the INSIDE. No wonder reporters just go with what they have... And just scanning quickly, so far have found nothing to show that anyone on this thread challenged the inconsistent statement. Will keep reading and if I find differently, will post it. Keep in mind Ckret keeps saying he is getting his info from reading 'the files'. So the contradictions are in the files, presumably. Ckret then resorts to calling Cossey personally - and posted back here ... Im sorry but Im not going to look all of this up right now. Im just kind of tired of all the personal bs one has to put up with here ... Smokin99's remarks above include the statement that Ckret said the two back parachutes came from Cossey's house. That is probably CORRECT. Most of the emergency parachute riggers I have known over the years DID operate from their houses. The last rigger I knew before retiring from flying had a large house with a really nice finished semi-basement (this is an Arizona thing and not a complete basement as people in other parts of the country would call them) that included his repacking tables and equipment plus sewing machines for doing specialized work related to parachuting and aircraft emergency equipment. He took great care of my Butler emergency parachute for several years and bought it from me the day after I retired from flying. So my reading of all of the above is that the chest packs were owned by and provided by the sports parachute center. And it is probably the source of the instruction sheet. Also, Cossey owned one of the backpacks, the one that Cooper used, and that Hayden owned the other one, which was returned to Hayden. It was probably in Cossey's possession for him to repack it. So in view of the urgency of the FBI request, Cossey sent them both to SEATAC by a Sheriff's deputy or a Washington State Policeman. Finally, Cossey packed all four of the parachutes. I see no problem with Cossey's connection with the parachutes. In fact, I see no problem with the FBI's parachute story at all. The parachute "problems" seem to originate from people who have never seen one up close. And yes, I am referring to Blevins. In other news, the sun came up on schedule this morning, it is still shinning, no clouds in the sky, etc.. Robert99

Jo, After all the names you have called people on this thread, including myself, your request is beyond belief. You have taught this thread the language of the proverbial mule skinner. Robert99

Blevins, The "flying saucer" craze started about 1947 when a private pilot in Washington State claimed that he has seen several while flying along a mountain range. Within a week or two, everyone was seeing those things throughout the USA. A couple of years ago, one of the science cable TV channels did a thorough study of that original 1947 sighting. The conclusion of their experts was that the original sighting could not have happened as claimed. If some qualified scientists had been consulted in 1947, the country might have been spared all the UFO nonsense of the last 65 years. But other people have their own agenda, such as cashing in on the gullible. About the time Amazon and I were at WPAFB, OH, some UFO expert on the east coast, who was heading to a UFO believers conference in OH, claimed that the USAF had five dead little green men in a refrigerator at WPAFB and even gave a building number. But the closer he got to OH, the more he hedged his bets. And he didn't even want to discuss the subject when he got to OH. And in fact, there are some natural weather factors that can explain the original 1947 sighting. Robert99

Blevins, If there is "solid proof", then it's not a "theory". It's a "fact". Robert99

Jo, I doubt very much if the FBI told you or anyone else that the Cooper is "closed". Translated from the Greek, your second sentence says that the case is in "limbo" until some actionable information turns up. The investigation of "Duane Weber", "KC", whoever it was that stiffed the guy in Seattle for a week's rent, and other sundry characters has probably been closed. Same with the other 900+ people who confessed to being Cooper. Robert99

Hell, I know. But, I had to say it the last 5 pages are worse than the previous 1696 You obviously haven't read the first 1696 pages or the now locked thread. Robert99

And exactly who appointed RobertMBlevins to claim that I made statements which I did NOT make? I'm sure Jo Weber must be jealous since YOU are now infringing on her territory by making such claims. Robert99

Jo, You also use an avatar and I doubt if "Jo Weber" is your legal name. You were calling yourself "Mrs. Cooper" back about 2006 and I wouldn't be surprised if you have had your name changed to "Mrs. Dan Cooper". And all available proof about your skill level is that it is lower than zero. That is, you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. Also, your claims that you really don't want to post here are nonsense. Like Blevins, you will never leave this thread willingly. Both of you have found a home right here. Robert99

RIGHT on Blevins. Short and DIRECT!

Jo, Forget the FBI. They have real jobs to do and don't sit on their rear ends waiting for you to give them their "assignments" for the day. With your confession that this thread has been a complete waste of time for you, why do you still hang around and keep repeating that NEW information has been developed which will solve the Cooper case RIGHT NOW and leave egg on the face of all the Jo Weber doubters. Jo will get her revenge! Just show us up and put us out of our misery. That is apparently what you are getting out of posting here. But the new Blevins Paradox interest me the most. Blevins states that his book is making him a pile of money despite the that he is mainly giving it away. Perhaps Blevins is on to something, but how does that work? Robert99