"Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?

We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.

1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.

At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?

It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."

This is actually very simple:

1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.

2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).

3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.

Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.

This is actually very simple:

1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.

2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).

3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.

Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.

I appreciate the thorough analysis provided above.

To be sure, yes the flight path may be accurate and the timing drastically off--to the tune of 6 or 7 minutes--or DB Cooper may have landed precisely where the FBI searched, and he survived, and for reasons not quite apparent decided to bury the money on Tena Bar.

The wind direction info from Tom Kaye is meaningless. It pertains to readings from Salem, OR--which is 90 miles to the south--and west of Seattle which is 100 miles to the north.

All of that said, the dramatic series of events that would have to take place--Cooper lands exactly in the middle of Columbia, three packets separate from the rest of ransom but stay together, three packets have to self-bury for years, no smelly corpse is noticed drifting out to sea, no parachute canopy or attache' case is ever discovered, on and on and on--is too fantastical for my taste. I believe the simplest and most direct explanation, the one that I have talked about at length, is the most likely scenario and truth to the matter.

Of course, I may be wrong. That said, I do believe the truth looks a lot more like my version than the other versions.

Good post andrade1812.

What I would very much like to know is how the flight path was constructed. Does anyone here know? Was it a matter of crunching numbers to arrive at coordinates that were then plotted on a map? Was it something more simplistic? I'd really like to here from someone who actually knows--not just surmises--how the flight path was drawn up.

What runway did 305 use out of Portland?

Cooper, or the Hobo that murdered him, could have buried the money at Tena bar too. Again, it's a problem that doesn't require a radical solution. I used to believe Cooper buried the money at Tina Bar because he felt some guilt about what he did and decided to bury the "tip" he tried to give the stews as a form of penitence. 

I would even consider moving the flight path to the west a few miles, since (from one of Hominid's posts) the original mapmaker started making crosses to the west before striking them and re-positioning to the east.

Regardless, I believe the best method is to find the simplest explanation that explains the data, and working from there, rather than creating a complex one that happens to fit the data and doubling down on it.

Ive always said the money itself gives some clues - like any corpse does!

Quote

"Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?

We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.

1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.

At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?

It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."

This is actually very simple:

1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.

2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).

3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.

Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.

Several points -

I dont know how anyone could argue with radar plots, unless they had their own radar data?

What happened along a radar plot and its time stamps is another matter. But the placard find on the ground fits within a probability zone along the radar plot.

I remember people asking if the pilots had ever flown 'this route' before and the answer was "no" ? If 305 flew V23 north from PDX to SEA  then technically the answer was "yes" ?    Maybe that's one of the reasons V23 was chosen 'to return on' ?

One of the reason for choosing V23, it is said, was because it was the lowest elevation route - which fit the needs at hand including Cooper's demands. Does any other route south fit those requirements? Those requirements were important at the time.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Quote

"Think about this: What does a Western Flight Path look like in terms of evidence?

We've already been granted three pieces of evidence.

1) The placard find.
2) The money find.
3) The "nothing find" in the FBI search area or along their flight path.

At what point do you question the truth of it all? If I find the attache' case or parachutes on Bachelor Island will it continue to be the tired old, "Yeah but the Air Force said this is where the jet flew" defense? Exactly how much evidence do people need to find--or not find--for them to question the flight path?

It really gets to a point of being ridiculous. I shouldn't have to explain my theory at all at this point. Those who still subscribe to the FBI flight path need to explain their theory and why in light of what has been found after 47 years, and where it was found, that they still think the jet flew over Ariel."

This is actually very simple:

1) The Placard was found years after the event and was subject to atmospheric disturbance. It's location was not recorded with a GPS device upon being found, nor was it unearthed under controlled scientific conditions. However, I would admit it's location was likely stable enough to give us a broad understanding of where the plane was. The placard was found under V23. The data Tom Kaye gave us show the winds were more southerly than we previously understood, and it also looks like the winds weren't as bad near the surface. From my rough estimation, it looks like the plane was about one and a half miles west of the flight path. This is well within a fair 2-sigma margin of error for the data we have.

2) The Money Find is perplexing, but not contradictory of the orthodox flight path. The money could have gotten to Tena bar in several ways. Cooper may have pitched it into the river before the 1974 dredge operation. Cooper may have introduced the bag into the Washougal watershed by traveling away from his original Ariel DZ to a neighboring watershed and the 1972 floods could have delivered it to Tena Bar. Cooper could have belly flopped into the Columbia with the money. Cooper could have lost the money during the jump, and it dropped into the Columbia. None of these scenarios require changing the flight path. They only require changing the timing of the jump. And as we have seen, the FBI had doubts about when Cooper jumped. We have doubts about when Cooper jumped, and the whether Rat reported the oscillations or the "bump" and 8:10 (or 8:13).

3) Nothing was found, or has been found, other than the placard and the three bundles. This again means one of several possible scenarios. Cooper could have landed safely and destroyed/buried/recovered his parachute, harness, briefcase and other items. Those items could have been cached near a river that later flooded, and those items could have been swept out to sea. Cooper could have pitched everything into the Columbia with the same result. Or Cooper, all his gear attached, could have belly flopped into the Columbia and later been swept out to sea. We don't need to theorize a new flight path, all these scenarios are possible under the FBI map. Some require changing the jump time, but this is, as noted, a perfectly acceptable hypothesis given the data.

Moving the flight path is a radical solution to the data. Accepting that we don't know the precise timing of the jump is not. In fact, based on released FBI documents, there is a lot of room for error when it comes to the timing of the jump.

Several points -

I dont know how anyone could argue with radar plots, unless they had their own radar data?

What happened along a radar plot and its time stamps is another matter. But the placard find on the ground fits within a probability zone along the radar plot.

I remember people asking if the pilots had ever flown 'this route' before and the answer was "no" ? If 305 flew V23 north from PDX to SEA  then technically the answer was "yes" ?    Maybe that's one of the reasons V23 was chosen 'to return on' ?

One of the reason for choosing V23, it is said, was because it was the lowest elevation route - which fit the needs at hand including Cooper's demands. Does any other route south fit those requirements? Those requirements were important at the time.

Only V-23 was discussed for the flight south.  It does have lower terrain than V-23E but I don't believe this factor was mentioned by the pilots or anyone else.  You might check the ground elevations close to the Pacific if that is a matter of interest to you.

No one knows where those radar plots in the FBI flight path came from.  But they were not automatically plotted on that map.  Someone marked that flight path on the map using information from some unknown source.

so who plotted this computer generated map ? using what data from whom?

Possibly Paul S. or Harrison?

Possibly got the info from here....

whats the date on that document?  (must run ... am on laundry duty tonight ........ woe is me!)