Robert99

How true!

If a person can fool other people into believing their story, then there's a story. This is what fuels UFO books. If not, then there's a story about the story and the motivations of the person who concocted it. This is what fuels stories like Big Fish. I've always thought the biggest potential story in all of this DB Cooper non-sense was not the DB Cooper story itself, but the people that crawl out of the woodwork claiming some connection. Some are comical, some are tragic, most are just outright annoying, but there's a story in there somewhere. Not that I'm going to write it. There's no way I'd even give a whack at it without being bribed heavily. Two books will be necessary to fully cover the Cooper matter. The first book will cover the investigation and why it wasn't solved in 1971 or 1972. This book will sell 20 copies at most. The sequel will be as Quade describes above. It will be the most colorful book, filled with photographs of photogenic women, and make a ton of money.

Jo, Orange1 and ClassClown are correct. For your information, it was obvious that Cooper knew that the 727 could be jumped. The 727 was ALWAYS intended to be a passenger aircraft although quite a few were converted to cargo aircraft (with a large side door) and used by such companies as FEDEX. The decision to use some of the aircraft for cargo was an economics decision and did not have anything to do with the military. When the 727 was designed, there were already better military cargo aircraft, such as the C-130 and C-141, in service or on the way. And as everyone has told you for years on end, there is no possibility whatsoever that Duane Weber was Cooper.

The problem is what happens AFTER you go off the stairs. If you open the parachute immediately as 377 recommends, and it stays in one piece, then your problems will be minimized. If you do a free fall with a delayed opening, then you are going to tumble and perhaps violently. There is no way you can avoid that since you are above an overcast initially and do not have any visual references to help you stabilize. The type of tumbling motion depends on how and where Cooper attached the money bag to himself.

What is the rest of the thread doing?

You are hinting here that this is the only explanation as to how the money ended up at Tena Bar. Did it fall from the sky like the placard? If so, Occam might also say it's unlikely three packets (approx. $5,800) of the money would land in the same spot, with nothing else discovered. Did the money go into the Columbia somewhat nearby and wash up at Tena Bar? Again...same problem. Did someone plant it there? Maybe. But the evidence shows it was unlikely to have been done at the time of the hijacking, and would have to have been planted later. Did Cooper no-pull into the Tena Bar area? Maybe. But the problem there is the lack of any other evidence found at the site. No chutes, no other money, no briefcase, no body. I think simply moving the flight path to justify the location of the money is too much of a stretch. Blevins, Occam's Razor is defined in my desk dictionary as "the scientific principle that in explaining a thing no more assumptions should be made than are necessary." That is, other things being equal, the simplest explanation for the "thing" should be selected. The money was found at Tena Bar - period. The money was last seen on an airliner. Falling from the airliner to Tena Bar is the simplest explanation possible. I am not saying that the money landed at the spot Brian Ingram found it or that it buried itself under the sand. If you would familarize yourself with the geography of Tena Bar, you would discover that there are some very formidable constraints on what could happen to the money after it landed there. These constraints have been pointed out several times before. You have asked a number of questions and attempted to apply Occam's Razor to them without formulating them in a manner where Occam's Razor can be used. For instance, you write "Occam's Razor might also say it's unlikely three packets (approx. $5,800) of the money would land in the same spot, with nothing else discovered." How can you apply Occam's Razor to this? Frankly, I think that Occam's would say IT IS likely that three packets of money would end up at the same spot since all the packets were in a single bag when last seen in the airplane. The "with nothing else discovered" is not relevant to the problem. There is only one explanation as to how the money got to Tena Bar. Whatever it is, it remains to be proven. Also, there is only one flight path for the airliner in the Portland area. And whatever it is, it also remains to be proven.

The position that Tom Kaye has given for the placard's landing place is consistent with the airliner being on or just slightly east of the V-23 centerline (on the left side while inbound to the BTG VORTAC) when passing several miles south of Toutle. It was approximately 35 nautical miles from the BTG VORTAC at that point. And the location of the placard is extremely important since the airliner would have to pass up wind (which was from the southwest) of that point. And if the airliner stayed close to the centerline of V-23, it would pass reasonably close to the original estimate of Cooper's jump point, which was just north of Highland, according to the FBI maps. NEVERTHELESS, I still consider ANY flight path from the placard location to the 23 DME point south of Portland to be unproven at this point. But I think a flight path east of Portland can be ruled out on time and distance considerations. I also consider a flight path west of Portland to be the only "logical" path. There are just to many problems explaining how the money got to Tena bar to support a flight path on or east of the V-23 centerline. Also, the flight crew had discussed avoiding flying over populated areas before they took off from Seattle. If you apply Occam's Razor to this matter, it would come out in favor of the west side flight path which would pass over or very close to Tena bar. Occam would probably slash a wrist before selecting a more easterly flight path. But there are other problems that need to be resolved and they include converting the flight path on the 1971 maps to present day maps. That involves changes between the NAD27 grid system and the WGS84 grid system. Also, the magnetic variation in the Portland/Seattle area has changed significantly since 1971. The orientation of the SEA and PDX/BTG VORTACS have been changed and the radials defining V-23 have been changed in some instances. This means that the geographical track of V-23 has changed between 1971 and today. In some cases by several nautical miles. I hope to have more on this in a few days.

Then why is Rataczak also quoted as saying: "... and we could see the suburbs of Vancouver coming up". My quote is from an FBI agent of record who read the 302's. I also have other sources who agree. Where is your quote(s) from? All these different quotes from different sources is getting downright perplexing. How can there be so many (even contradictory) versions? If you have an explanation I sure would like to hear it! Is this like Popeye's complaint (1950s)? Popeye: " I can read writin when it's writ, but I can't read writin when it's wrot". Do we need Olive Oil to lead us out of the darkness? Who is our Olive Oil? The quote about being able to see or not see the lights of Portland comes from page 95, George Nuttall's book, where he has a copy of a letter from Harry Grady, his research partner. Grady cites conversations he had with Jerry Thomas and Ralph Himmelsbach in which, apparently Ralph H., stated that "There was a cloud cover below them [the airliner] when they passed over Vancouver [this would include Portland] that was so thick they couldn't see landmarks or even the glow of city lights". The above matter was discussed to death a few months ago in connection with Sailshaw's claim that Cooper parachuted into a field adjacent to the Portland Airport, then walked to the airport parking lot, retrieved his car, and drove off into the sunset, figuratively speaking. I have never seen a claim that the flight crew could "see the surburbs of Vancouver". But I have seen a claim, in numerous sources, that the co-pilot had said that the aircraft must have been "in the Portland/Vancouver surburbs" when Cooper jumped. I am not familiar with the writings of Popeye and Olive Oil. Sorry.

The Sarah Palin part I can believe.

Dan, What are you talking about? Can you provide a coherent explanation of the above?

Dan, There is a small but important problem with your DZ idea. It seems that the airliner was at 10,000 feet, there was an overcast at 5,000 feet, there was a broken cloud layer at 3,500 feet, and there were scattered clouds below that. The co-pilot of the airliner has been quoted by several sources as saying that they could not even see the lights of Portland when they passed through the area. So unless Cooper had X-ray vision, he couldn't "spot" anything that night.

The flight was basically on V-23 from Seattle to just a few miles north of the Red Bluff, CA VORTAC. The flight path the airliner followed in the Portland area is a matter of continuing disagreement. Hopefully, I will have more on this specific point in a few days. Just before reaching the Red Bluff VORTAC, the Okland Center controller turned the aircraft direct to Reno. To clear the mountains between Red Bluff and Reno, the aircraft had climbed to 11,000 feet. Once the aircraft had cleared the mountains it started descending at a requested rate of descent of only 300 to 500 feet per minute. Prior to being handed off to Oakland center, someone (presumably from NWA or Seattle ATC) had informed Oakland that the aircraft was having trouble turning. So the aircraft had trouble climbing out of Seattle, it had trouble turning, and it had trouble descending. The descent into Reno was slow, involved a lot of turning, and included having to break off the first attempt at landing due to being to high. The Oakland radio transcripts, including the phone chatter between controllers, is available on Sluggo's web page. If you read the Oakland transcripts, then also read the Seattle transcripts from take off to the hand off to Oakland center. You will probably notice how short and uninformative the Seattle transcripts are compared to the Oakland transcripts.

Well, there are only two types of Cooper books, basically. Those that generally cover the case, and those that have a specific suspect. Geoff Gray's was the only one that was a little different. He covers the case, but also makes a personal journey out of it. what personal journey? "Peeless in Portland - How to Become a Celebrity on Per Diums and Other People's Work!" ? Maybe Farflung could cash in as well. A suggested book/film for him would be "Dee Bee Does Seattle and Portland". This would be a juiced up version of the classic "Debbie Does Dallas".

Of course, that's exactly the same type of thing a psychopathic liar of a used car salesman would say as well. Congratulations are due to Quade for locking a new Cooper thread seven minutes after it turned up on DZ yesterday. Now if he could only do that to the meaningless books that keep turning up.

How true and fitting!

Do you mean seven more? Cooper books are multiplying faster than rabbits!

Oh my gawd! Four more?

If they are screening his calls, he had better have his next job lined up and starting about next Monday.

Use your imagination. The chosen wardrobe would probably be appropriate for whatever was being offered for sale.

Arfuller, There was no storm at 10,000 feet in the Portland area that night. Actually, there was some light rain showers at Portland and plenty of humidity and clouds, but no storm.

QuoteFirst, if Cooper were actually Canadian, someone would have figured that out by now. No accent, my eye. I've never met a Canuck I didn't like, and never had one open his/her mouth without knowing right away they were from the Land Up North. It's one thing to make a mistake. It's quite another to simply make stuff up because it's convenient to your case and might land you a book contract. Consider this: Has Marla Cooper offered up even one thin scrap of evidence beyond her own word that her uncle was the hijacker? If so, I haven't seen it. She does a lot of appearances, a lot of fluff. But hard evidence is LACKING. Kenny Christiansen may or may not be the hijacker. I feel certain that Bernie knows perfectly well Ken Christiansen was the hijacker.Quote Blevins, I have personally known Canadians who spoke American English without an accent. Marla hasn't presented any serious evidence and neither have you. You state that Christiansen "may or may not be the hijacker" then you state "I feel certain that Bernie knows perfectly well Ken Christiansen was the jijacker". If you are certain that Bernie knows KC was the hijacker then YOU also know that KC was the hijacker. Either KC was or he wasn't the hijacker, you can't have it both ways. Here is the acid test. Is there anyone on this thread who would buy a used car from Marla or Blevins?

Actually, the flare part is nonsense also. The way Janet and Galen explain it would not result in any useful information to Cooper about the wind speed or direction. None of the people mentioned in the Janet article seem to have the slightest idea how "spotting" is done. And with a round canopy, it wouldn't make much difference to Cooper anyway since he is going to come down wherever he comes down. What do you think about the idea that a flare could help someone on the ground spot the hijacker after he's through the clouds? Do you feel the "dynamite" might well have been road flares? I think it was Ralph H. who suggested the bomb was road flares based on the color of the wrappers around the sticks. Also, I think someone has posted on this thread about dynamite that had the same color as the presumed road flares. So I think road flares or dynamite is still an open question. But the flight crew and NWA could not take any chances and had to assume it was dynamite. It is unlikely that Cooper could have known his geographical position at the time of the jump to within a 20 mile radius at best. And I doubt that a road flare, even only a mile away, is going to help much in two people joining up in that area and those weather conditions.

Actually, the flare part is nonsense also. The way Janet and Galen explain it would not result in any useful information to Cooper about the wind speed or direction. None of the people mentioned in the Janet article seem to have the slightest idea how "spotting" is done. And with a round canopy, it wouldn't make much difference to Cooper anyway since he is going to come down wherever he comes down.

Arfuller, The Janet story is bullshit! The airliner was at 10,000 feet when it passed through the Portland/Vancouver area. There was an overcast at 5000 feet and a broken cloud layer at 3500 feet plus other scattered clouds below that. There is no way that Janet could have seen the hijacked airliner much less someone standing on a "ladder" beneath the airliner. The surface winds at Portland were about 10 MPH from the south-southwest and the winds aloft up to 10,000 feet did not exceed about 30 MPH also from the southwest. You can check the weatherunderground.com web site for additional information on the Portland weather. Even if Janet "didn't have a reason to lie", did she have a reason to tell the truth?

The "reasonable standards" for beauty seem to evaporate about 2:00 AM. Anything goes after that time.