You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Would Portland's ATC be involved in tracking 305?

It depends. R99 doesn't believe so but they were flying into there airspace with a bomb. reports from radar operators back this up but is not believed by a few.

Again, there is nothing to suggest that the hijacked airliner was ever in touch with the Portland tower or in airspace controlled by the Portland tower.

Thanks R99.  I thought there was a comment from one of Portland's ATCs stating he could distinguish the difference between 305 and the chase planes due to their difference in elevations? He might have also mentioned a difference in speeds?(maybe?) 
 

I don't mean to imply that the approach controller was in communication with 305, only that the controller was observing them on his radar.

I don't mean to imply that the approach controller was in communication with 305, only that the controller was observing them on his radar.

In the redacted Seattle ATC Center radio transcripts, about the only thing that was routinely included was during handoffs from one controller to another the airliner was directed to push the "ident" function on their transponder.  And that was the way the two controllers knew they were talking about the same radar target.  In the initial contact with the new controller, the airliner routinely stated its altitude which was standard procedure in 1971.

I don't know if the flight data information was displayed on the controller radar targets in 1971, but the Portland tower controllers may have known that the hijacked airliner was flying south from SEATAC even if they didn't know which target it was on their screens, or even if it appeared on their screens.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I don't argue with people who think the moon landing was faked. I don't argue with people who think the earth is flat. I don't argue with people who think Trump won the election.

I also no longer argue with people who think the flight path was anything other than the central one. The physical, circumstantial, and documented evidence is utterly overwhelming, and any other suggestions aren't worth considering.

That said, there are many other logical scenarios that place the money on Tena Bar besides landing near there or Cooper walking there - particularly those involving the river.

You see Chaucer, this is the kind of statement that one would consider rude. After all, the inference in the first paragraph is clear.

Now, let me describe the extent of the evidence supporting the FBI Flight Path: A guy from the Air Force hands the FBI a map a few days after the skyjacking and says "Here's the flight path."

There you go. That's it. Very compelling.

The problem is that the physical evidence does not support the FBI Flight Path--Tena Bar, placard, fiberglass skirt. Oh, and a grand total of ZERO has been found along the FBI Flight Path where one would expect to find something.

As for the river and Tena Bar: Explain the June diatoms. Explain three individual packets. Explain the money being found 50 feet from the water's edge and several feet above the average river surface level. Oh, and explain the timing of the infallible FBI Flight Path.

Good luck.

Sorry. Didn't mean to be impolite, but it's true.

We've been over this a million times. None of the physical evidence you have stated supports a western flight. Period. In fact, some of the evidence you stated may not even be evidence to begin with.

Your presumption is that "someone got it wrong". Who? The Air Force, whose literal job it was to track each and every aircraft in our airspace to defend against Soviet attack? The radar data, which was state of the art at the time? The unit assigned to interpret that radar data? The 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron based at McChord? About 20 to 30 active duty airmen and 5 to 7  civilian contractors who train endlessly and do this stuff in their sleep? Your premise is based "someone got wrong"?

So, yeah, when given the choice between "the USAF hands the FBI a map and says, "Here's the flight path" or "Someone got screwed up." I'll take the USAF. Every. Single. Time. Compound that with all the other evidence, the suggestion that the flight path was anything other than down Victor 23 is to me nothing more than a conspiracy theory.

As for your Tena Bar comment, I am on record as having put forward an explanation for all of the things you mentioned, and IMO is more plausible than the USAF and FBI "messed up" up the flight path.

Think me rude or not, but your and other's continued pushing of this unsubstantiated fantasy, obfuscates the truth and is ultimately detrimental to the case. Sorry, but I won't indulge your fantastical theories by engaging you in an argument about it. Flat earthers and 911 truthers have "evidence" too, and it doesn't make their theories any more legitimate.

This flight path was settled years ago. Has been settled repeatedly since. Continues to be settled. Will remain settled in the future. IMO, this thread should be locked.

1) The placard came from 305. The FBI said as much. To suggest it did not come from 305 is to say that someone in the FBI identified this instructional placard pertaining to the airstairs emergency release coming from a jet that didn't even have an airstairs emergency release. How is that possible? That's kind of like saying, this exit sign came from a jet that doesn't even have an exit.

Research by Shutter and Flyjack would suggest otherwise. Regardless, the placard was found along Victor 23 and what variables that affected its location between the time it would have left the aircraft in 1971 to the time it was found is completely unknown.

2) The fiberglass piece came from the airstairs of a 727. Also, the FBI wrongly stated a piece that size wasn't missing from 305 which is clearly incorrect (we can see the panels missing in film and photos).

It has never been confirmed that this piece came from 305. Regardless, the exact location of the find is unknown, but Cinebar, the town associated with the find is located east of Victor 23.

3) And the money was found where the money was found. Three independent packets buried together no where near the FBI dropzone.

There are other means for the money to end up where it was other than dropping near Tena Bar. Also, you're using the money find as evidence for the flight path and the flight path as evidence for the money find. This ends up being no evidence at all.

4) Nothing has ever been found along the FBI Flight Path after 50 years. Nothing. Zero.

Other than the placard you mentioned, the panel you mentioned, and the parachute that Cossey said wasn't his. Regardless, absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence.

I think I'll let the evidence--the stuff listed above--dictate what I believe.

So will I.

All of that said, I am still interested for someone to explain to me how ransom money that left the jet at 8:12 PM ended up at Tena Bar via the Columbia.

This assumes the money left the plane at 8:12 which is in far more dispute than the flight path itself. Interesting that you dispute the flight path despite a mountain of evidence but happily accept the 8:12 jump time which has far less evidence - almost like you are cherry-picking evidence to fit your pet theory.

That's the nice thing about not having a pet theory or suspect that I have to make the pieces fit for. I can just look at the evidence and draw conclusions or change them.

I respect the work you have done on the case, but I'm sorry, regarding the flight path, you're just wrong.

Cinbar, they describe a part, not a piece of one. we have another part from the stairs that also doesn't belong to 305..two separate 302's..

The placard is under serious question..."the FBI said as much" they also show a path they said was the right one? what do they know about the placard other than what is told to them. is it documented missing November 24, 1971? an interior photo clearly shows the emergency function missing from where it should be if it was installed on 305. if the system was not on the plane the placard wouldn't be on it? that's pretty simple logic. how it got where it was found could become the real mystery..

First they claimed it was missing several days after the hijacking and another report claims it was missing after the test in January of 1972? one time or both times and only documented 8 years later? where did the placard go, it's not in evidence and Cowlitz doesn't have it. they don't have any documents what so ever of the incident. poof, as Jo would say.

In my opinion I see multiple flags here..

I think we're getting into semantics when we're debating "part" versus "pieces of a part." The Boeing employee who found the part and verified it came from within a 727 stated a size which matches the size of the missing panels. Moreover, he stated that the part came from the same spot as the missing panels, "above the door."

The placard: How is it possible that the FBI announced that the placard came from a jet that didn't even have the part that the placard referenced? That would be like the FBI announcing that a window shade came from a jet that didn't even have any windows. That would be a colossal F up. Again, how could this be possible? Moreover, if the placard didn't come from 305, which commercial 727 did it come from flying with its airstairs deployed?

All of that said, we know for damn sure where the money was found. With that in mind, how could the money have gotten to Tena Bar from the FBI Dropzone? If the FBI is wrong about the dropzone, why can't they be wrong about the flight path?

the panels or skirting is two pieces. one for each side. the agent should of known if he mentioned a portion or a piece of a larger part.

The placard
If you read the newspapers they flip flop on it even being from 305. a colossal fuck up would be the flight path being off vs a placard. one would be the fault of the Air Force and the placard would lie upon the FBI. one thing I noticed in the 302's. it was shown to NWO and they didn't state whether 305 had the function. they should of confirmed it vs stating it came from a 727.

I'm showing what I see and one of the things I agree with on with Flyjack. he was the one who posted the still shot of the interior of the plane. the video is still on YouTube, I believe. I went back and forth with him in emails and forums over the years stating we didn't know if 305 had the function. it appears that it didn't and this throws a huge flag into this in my opinion.