You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

basing this once again on the tumble?

That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.

Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? 

But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?

The short answer is "no" to all of your questions.  The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes.  The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft.  The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast.  But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

basing this once again on the tumble?

That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.

Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? 

But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?

The short answer is "no" to all of your questions.  The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes.  The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft.  The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast.  But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.

Well I am 10000% confused - based on your posts about terminal v of the placard.

You say:

(1) The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.

(2) It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute. Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.

So which is it? 700 feet per minute    or       1000 to 1200 feet per minute.    


Ulis says the placard is 1/3 of an ounce = .0625 lb. The mass of the falling object is involved in calculating terminal v. As I recall you said the tv of the parachutist was based on the person being 200 lbs. So, one object is .0625 lb. and the other is 200 lbs. Based on that one of the sky divers at DZ ran a terminal v calculation. His result was the placard has a Tv of 4.9 ft/sec = 294f/min = 3.3 miles per hour!

Why is the skydiver at DZ getting a different terminal v for the placard than you or Elvis Ulis?

Lastly, have you read this pdf Shutter sent to me? You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login    You acknowledge that the 727 is notorious for having a pronounced back draft (enough to kill people on the ground and roll planes over at 4 nm following a 727). You claim that the placard somehow travel "fast" you say, and escaped the back draft of the 727 completely ... to go its merry way with an instant terminal v of  either 700 feet per minute    or       1000 to 1200 feet per minute, depending on the day of the week?

So let me ask this. Do you consider feathers and canon balls equal in the time each takes to fall from say 500 feet to the ground? In other words, are you assuming (like the feather vs canon ball) that the Constant of Gravitational Acceleration applies equally, to the placard and the 200 lb man under parachute, as in the feather vs canon ball example?

In fact Robert, I seem to remember you saying years ago that you did not believe the 'flight path' of 305 could ever be 'proven' by reliance on the placard, because of the uncertainties involved in the placard problem. So what has changed in the last several years? This placard is now assuming almost supernatural powers! Magical powers. It not only escapes the back draft from 305 powerful enough to send small aircraft traveling 4 nm behind into a tailspin. It leaves the plane "fast", to quote you, without damage? Fast how remains to be defined. And this satanic placard now has the Terminal velocity of a 200 pound man dropping under parachute!

Man proposes. The placard and God disposes! And the placard is now key to the flight path of 305! I guess we no longer need the radar tapes.     

Georger, I suggest that you read your own post above which is pure baloney.

It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute.  You seem to recognize that there will be a difference in descent rates of feathers and cannon balls in the atmosphere.  This principal is usually demonstrated in Physics 101 with an actual feather and small weight in a vacuum tube where their descent velocities will be the same.  Then the tube pressure is increased to the ambient pressure and the drops are repeated.  The feather is always the last one down.

If the calculations made by the DropZone skydiver were correct, and they are not, the placard would have drifted about 15+ miles downwind.

The remaining portion of your post is nonsense.  You are claiming that I have made statements which are completely contradictory to anything I have said.  I will get a copy of the NASA report and reply to your claims.  For instance, you apparently don't understand the difference between wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts.

In the meantime, stop making false claims about what I have said.  Surely you can find some other means, you might try facts if such exist, to support your commitment to the FBI flight path.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

basing this once again on the tumble?

That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.

Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? 

But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?

The short answer is "no" to all of your questions.  The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes.  The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft.  The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast.  But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.

Well I am 10000% confused - based on your posts about terminal v of the placard.

You say:

(1) The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.

(2) It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute. Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.

So which is it? 700 feet per minute    or       1000 to 1200 feet per minute.    


Ulis says the placard is 1/3 of an ounce = .0625 lb. The mass of the falling object is involved in calculating terminal v. As I recall you said the tv of the parachutist was based on the person being 200 lbs. So, one object is .0625 lb. and the other is 200 lbs. Based on that one of the sky divers at DZ ran a terminal v calculation. His result was the placard has a Tv of 4.9 ft/sec = 294f/min = 3.3 miles per hour!

Why is the skydiver at DZ getting a different terminal v for the placard than you or Elvis Ulis?

Lastly, have you read this pdf Shutter sent to me? You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login    You acknowledge that the 727 is notorious for having a pronounced back draft (enough to kill people on the ground and roll planes over at 4 nm following a 727). You claim that the placard somehow travel "fast" you say, and escaped the back draft of the 727 completely ... to go its merry way with an instant terminal v of  either 700 feet per minute    or       1000 to 1200 feet per minute, depending on the day of the week?

So let me ask this. Do you consider feathers and canon balls equal in the time each takes to fall from say 500 feet to the ground? In other words, are you assuming (like the feather vs canon ball) that the Constant of Gravitational Acceleration applies equally, to the placard and the 200 lb man under parachute, as in the feather vs canon ball example?

In fact Robert, I seem to remember you saying years ago that you did not believe the 'flight path' of 305 could ever be 'proven' by reliance on the placard, because of the uncertainties involved in the placard problem. So what has changed in the last several years? This placard is now assuming almost supernatural powers! Magical powers. It not only escapes the back draft from 305 powerful enough to send small aircraft traveling 4 nm behind into a tailspin. It leaves the plane "fast", to quote you, without damage? Fast how remains to be defined. And this satanic placard now has the Terminal velocity of a 200 pound man dropping under parachute!

Man proposes. The placard and God disposes! And the placard is now key to the flight path of 305! I guess we no longer need the radar tapes.     

Georger, I suggest that you read your own post above which is pure baloney.

It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute.  You seem to recognize that there will be a difference in descent rates of feathers and cannon balls in the atmosphere.  This principal is usually demonstrated in Physics 101 with an actual feather and small weight in a vacuum tube where their descent velocities will be the same.  Then the tube pressure is increased to the ambient pressure and the drops are repeated.  The feather is always the last one down.

If the calculations made by the DropZone skydiver were correct, and they are not, the placard would have drifted about 15+ miles downwind.

The remaining portion of your post is nonsense.  You are claiming that I have made statements which are completely contradictory to anything I have said.  I will get a copy of the NASA report and reply to your claims.  For instance, you apparently don't understand the difference between wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts.

In the meantime, stop making false claims about what I have said.  Surely you can find some other means, you might try facts if such exist, to support your commitment to the FBI flight path.

R99 replies:

Oh my, another Georger tantrum.

The personal crap you dispense aside - let me search my old emails for your exact quotes from the past. How many years did it take for you to accept R2's account that 305 flew straight down the middle of V23? You carped about that like a child forever. You are still carping about it. What insults have you heaped on R2?

R99 replies:

I haven't heaped any insults on R2.  I think he/she is absolute right that the airliner flew straight down the centerline of V-23, at least to the Malay Intersection. 

"Wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts". You will find the NASA/Ames pdf deals with all of them. In the meantime - learn how to spell. No doubt you will return with criticism of the NASA/Ames pdf too. 

R99 replies:

Are you claiming my word checker doesn't know how to spell?  Specifically, what are you referring to?  It is entirely possible that I may criticize the NASA report, but I will read it first.  I try to make it a point to read something before criticizing it.  You should do the same.

Thanks for the "It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute." info. 700 feet per minute for the placard, but which direction!  That is 11.6 f/s  in the first second = 7.95 mph ? That is your definition of "fast"? Or are you going to take back that you said that too?

R99 replies:

A good working assumption is that both the placard and parachutist are moving downward (toward the center of the earth) once they are out of the aircraft's wake.  Gravity works 24/7!  As used here, the term "fast" means that the placard will be out of the slipstream in a matter of seconds, the exact number depending on a number of unpredictable variables.

Let's see: In the same one second the Jet is moving 200 mph = 293.333 f/s .  In the time the placard falls 1 sec (11.6 feet) the jet with its vortex will have moved 293.3 feet ahead and the radius of the back blast will have covered what expanding area as the jet continues to move ahead? The placard? All terminal v for that placard due to Gravity will cease instantly? Or will your placard falling at 11.6 f/s  in the first second be out of the vortex zone? You have already said it will. Your exact word was "FAST".. the placard is moving fast at a mere 11.6 f/s, you said. So while the placard has dropped a mere 11.6 feet the plane will have moved a football field length ahead with its engine cluster back draft cone extending 300-500 feet (or more) behind, with high velocity gases. But you say the placard having moved 11.6 feet down will miss the blast zone.     

R99 replies:

The airliner was actually moving about 225 MPH (or about 330 feet per second) with respect to the air mass, and so was the placard until it separated from the airliner.  Your calculations above are apparently based on the assumption that the placard will have a zero forward speed immediately upon separating from the airliner.  Such is not the case.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

basing this once again on the tumble?

That picture of the placard does not look like the placard pictures that I have seen.

Maybe it was flattened by someone to fit in an evidence envelope? 

But again I ask: what was the down pitch of the engines at this point in the flight - any? Or can the pitch of the 727 engines be changed? I want to know how far below the plane turbulent high velocity air, extends? Can you tell us?

The short answer is "no" to all of your questions.  The wing tip vortices may continue for several minutes.  The engines are bolted in place and their "pitch" depends only on the angle of attack of the aircraft.  The 727 is reported to have had an unusually strong downwash and my guess is that the placard is going to go out the bottom of that downwash field fairly fast.  But there is no quantitative data on the flow field at altitude that I am aware of.

Well I am 10000% confused - based on your posts about terminal v of the placard.

You say:

(1) The average descent speed of the placard, after it was out of the influence of the aircraft downwash, is estimated to be about 700 feet per minute at 10,000 feet altitude and less than that at lower altitudes.

(2) It should be remembered that the descent rate of a 1971 round parachute was about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute. Eric's earlier post comparing the drift of the placard with a parachute is in excellent agreement with these numbers.

So which is it? 700 feet per minute    or       1000 to 1200 feet per minute.    


Ulis says the placard is 1/3 of an ounce = .0625 lb. The mass of the falling object is involved in calculating terminal v. As I recall you said the tv of the parachutist was based on the person being 200 lbs. So, one object is .0625 lb. and the other is 200 lbs. Based on that one of the sky divers at DZ ran a terminal v calculation. His result was the placard has a Tv of 4.9 ft/sec = 294f/min = 3.3 miles per hour!

Why is the skydiver at DZ getting a different terminal v for the placard than you or Elvis Ulis?

Lastly, have you read this pdf Shutter sent to me? You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login    You acknowledge that the 727 is notorious for having a pronounced back draft (enough to kill people on the ground and roll planes over at 4 nm following a 727). You claim that the placard somehow travel "fast" you say, and escaped the back draft of the 727 completely ... to go its merry way with an instant terminal v of  either 700 feet per minute    or       1000 to 1200 feet per minute, depending on the day of the week?

So let me ask this. Do you consider feathers and canon balls equal in the time each takes to fall from say 500 feet to the ground? In other words, are you assuming (like the feather vs canon ball) that the Constant of Gravitational Acceleration applies equally, to the placard and the 200 lb man under parachute, as in the feather vs canon ball example?

In fact Robert, I seem to remember you saying years ago that you did not believe the 'flight path' of 305 could ever be 'proven' by reliance on the placard, because of the uncertainties involved in the placard problem. So what has changed in the last several years? This placard is now assuming almost supernatural powers! Magical powers. It not only escapes the back draft from 305 powerful enough to send small aircraft traveling 4 nm behind into a tailspin. It leaves the plane "fast", to quote you, without damage? Fast how remains to be defined. And this satanic placard now has the Terminal velocity of a 200 pound man dropping under parachute!

Man proposes. The placard and God disposes! And the placard is now key to the flight path of 305! I guess we no longer need the radar tapes.     

Georger, I suggest that you read your own post above which is pure baloney.

It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute.  You seem to recognize that there will be a difference in descent rates of feathers and cannon balls in the atmosphere.  This principal is usually demonstrated in Physics 101 with an actual feather and small weight in a vacuum tube where their descent velocities will be the same.  Then the tube pressure is increased to the ambient pressure and the drops are repeated.  The feather is always the last one down.

If the calculations made by the DropZone skydiver were correct, and they are not, the placard would have drifted about 15+ miles downwind.

The remaining portion of your post is nonsense.  You are claiming that I have made statements which are completely contradictory to anything I have said.  I will get a copy of the NASA report and reply to your claims.  For instance, you apparently don't understand the difference between wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts.

In the meantime, stop making false claims about what I have said.  Surely you can find some other means, you might try facts if such exist, to support your commitment to the FBI flight path.

R99 replies:

Oh my, another Georger tantrum.

The personal crap you dispense aside - let me search my old emails for your exact quotes from the past. How many years did it take for you to accept R2's account that 305 flew straight down the middle of V23? You carped about that like a child forever. You are still carping about it. What insults have you heaped on R2?

R99 replies:

I haven't heaped any insults on R2.  I think he/she is absolute right that the airliner flew straight down the centerline of V-23, at least to the Malay Intersection. 

"Wing tip vorticities, downwash, and engine exhausts". You will find the NASA/Ames pdf deals with all of them. In the meantime - learn how to spell. No doubt you will return with criticism of the NASA/Ames pdf too. 

R99 replies:

Are you claiming my word checker doesn't know how to spell?  Specifically, what are you referring to?  It is entirely possible that I may criticize the NASA report, but I will read it first.  I try to make it a point to read something before criticizing it.  You should do the same.

Thanks for the "It is about 700 feet per minute for the placard and about 1000 to 1200 feet per minute for a typical parachutist using a round 1971 era parachute." info. 700 feet per minute for the placard, but which direction!  That is 11.6 f/s  in the first second = 7.95 mph ? That is your definition of "fast"? Or are you going to take back that you said that too?

R99 replies:

A good working assumption is that both the placard and parachutist are moving downward (toward the center of the earth) once they are out of the aircraft's wake.  Gravity works 24/7!  As used here, the term "fast" means that the placard will be out of the slipstream in a matter of seconds, the exact number depending on a number of unpredictable variables.

Let's see: In the same one second the Jet is moving 200 mph = 293.333 f/s .  In the time the placard falls 1 sec (11.6 feet) the jet with its vortex will have moved 293.3 feet ahead and the radius of the back blast will have covered what expanding area as the jet continues to move ahead? The placard? All terminal v for that placard due to Gravity will cease instantly? Or will your placard falling at 11.6 f/s  in the first second be out of the vortex zone? You have already said it will. Your exact word was "FAST".. the placard is moving fast at a mere 11.6 f/s, you said. So while the placard has dropped a mere 11.6 feet the plane will have moved a football field length ahead with its engine cluster back draft cone extending 300-500 feet (or more) behind, with high velocity gases. But you say the placard having moved 11.6 feet down will miss the blast zone.     

R99 replies:

The airliner was actually moving about 225 MPH (or about 330 feet per second) with respect to the air mass, and so was the placard until it separated from the airliner.  Your calculations above are apparently based on the assumption that the placard will have a zero forward speed immediately upon separating from the airliner.  Such is not the case.

R99 replies are above.

A question for Georger.  Were you on the crew at Berkeley (or USC)?

Boeing 747 & Boeing 727 - "Wake Turbulence Tests" - 1974:





Sources of turbulence behind and around a 727 are: wing tip vortexes, engine cluster blast, aircraft body, wheel and flap configuration (flap settings affect turbulence behind the aircraft) ....

One thing that has always bothered me about the placard find is the statement 'it was found almost directly under the flight path'. What would explain such a finding? Some directive force at work? A faster descent rate than has been estimated to date? Greater placard mass than has been estimated to date?  Was the placard attached to something heavier than the placard alone, a panel door or cover metal ...?

The TAG tests do not mention any interference  from turbulence behind the aircraft. 377 said people parachuting from the back of a 727 noticed no  interference  from turbulence behind the aircraft. Still the placard was found 'almost directly under the flight path'.  It raises questions ...   

It is noteworthy to me that avionics engineer R99 hedges his proclamation that the 'placard left fast' when leaving the 727. I guess he is saying his estimated terminal v of a mere 11.67f/sec (700f/min = 7.9mph) is FAST ? It feels like he is ducking the issue of interference from any avionic forces to allow for an unencumbered free fall for the placard. Why else would he stipulate "fast" without defining "fast"? I am not comfortable with his explanation.