This is precisely what Scott told Himmelsbach according to a couple of accounts. Specifically, that he flew west of downtown Portland and that he believes they flew about 10 miles west of the FBI Flight Path. Additionally, Ammerman stated that he believes the jet passed west of downtown Portland between the 405 and Beaverton--this while traveling on heading of 160 (due south). Also, consider that Ammerman was never interviewed by the FBI.

Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. 305 cutting off the dogleg and veering outside of V23 by 2 or 3 miles is meaningless if that's what it takes to skirt downtown Portland. Moreover, V23 heads 175 degrees from Battlefield, therefore 305 would naturally merge right back into center line V23 just south of Portland.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. 305 cutting off the dogleg and veering outside of V23 by 2 or 3 miles is meaningless if that's what it takes to skirt downtown Portland. Moreover, V23 heads 175 degrees from Battlefield, therefore 305 would naturally merge right back into center line V23 just south of Portland.

You are making this up as you go along ... Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 ?

Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23 but to Ammerman who was "beholden" to V23!  That is the central point of Ammerman's whole testimony and he has been tested on that point by at least five interviewers! Ammerman has told EVERYONE! that the only time 305 could have slipped out of V23 was during the brief period when Cliff was not watching the scene as 305 briefly passed on the west side of V23 passed Portland and his testimony is: "or I would have alert everyone instantly. I was lining the T33 and 305 for a rendezvous, and that was dependent on knowing exactly where 305 was".  So sir it is not like you are saying: Remember that 305 wasn't beholden to V23. Those are your words - not Ammerman's. Ammerman never said what you are trying to inform us he said! Ammerman has never said what you are saying he said. 

You are just looking for an 'out' you can plop some cobbled west path in. Whether it fits with Ammerman's testimony or not. Its as simple as that.

BTW! When you say Cliff says he was never interviewed by the FBI --------- SO WHAT! IT DOESN'T MATTER. why would the FBI interview cliff at all! ? McChord has the tape! Nobody needs Ammerman! Ammerman's superiors were deposed and worked with the Air Force.

You are just floating more nonsense when you are posing that empty news. The FBI didn;t interview Walt Disney either - 

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

It's difficult to tell. What I have mocked up on Google Maps shows the jet flying over Woodland and Tena Bar, passing between the 405 and Beaverton, and ultimately merging into the centerline near Canby.

You need to be working off of Skyvector or sectional maps..

Let me comment on about the last 20 posts between EU and Shutter.

First, I am saying that the "FBI map" DOES NOT look like it was drawn on a 1971 FAA Sectional Chart since the airway widths shown appear to be 8 Nautical Miles (due to a number of factors this remains to be confirmed).  If the date of the change over from 10 Statute Mile widths to 8 Nautical Mile widths can be determined, that would give the earliest that this map could have been prepared.

The map shows Mount St. Helens at its original height before it blew its stack about three months after the money find at Tina Bar.  Update issues of sectional charts are published about ever six months and include updates up to about six weeks before the published date.  Thus, it would take at least one and probably two update cycles before the new Mount St. Helens height was shown on the sectional charts.  The map would have to be prepared on an issue of the sectional chart prior to the date of the issue of the map with the new height shown.  This assumes, of course, that the "FBI map" was prepared on a current issue of the sectional chart and not on an out-of-date issue.

Later today, time permitting, I will post on the meaning of "headings" and such things as used in aircraft navigation and air traffic control.  But it is something that everyone should understand when discussing the flight path.  And EU is correct when saying that if a controller told a pilot that he was pointed in the compass direction of 160 degrees while in the Portland area in 1971, the aircraft was actually pointed almost straight south, or 180 degrees, when there was a no wind condition.  More on this later in greater depth.

Further, assume that the airliner did fly direct between the Malay and Canby Intersections.  Its maximum distance from V-23, assuming an 8 Nautical Mile width for V-23, would still be only about 3 Nautical Miles.  And that would be in the Tina Bar area.  There is no basis for a flight path west of the Malay to Canby path.