« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 61 62 [63] 64 65 ... 302   Go Down

Author Topic: Flight Path And Related Issues  (Read 1102969 times)

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1597
  • Thanked: 444 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #930 on: July 05, 2016, 07:32:49 PM »
Robert99 wrote: "Nevertheless, after a long weekend of number crunching and quite a bit of luck in figuring out where some of the problems were, I hope to start posting later today on how everything fits together in the flight path, the jump, how the money got to Tina Bar, and why the Cooper hijacking was just a two-bit crime committed by an inept individual who got lucky for several hours one afternoon."

Really looking forward to seeing your flight path analysis.

But how do you conclude from flight path data  that Cooper was inept?

If it was indeed a "two-bit crime committed by an inept individual" we might have to reconsider Duane Weber as a prime suspect.  ;)

377
Logged
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9300
  • Thanked: 1025 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #931 on: July 05, 2016, 07:55:44 PM »
Quote
But how do you conclude from flight path data  that Cooper was inept?

Not surviving might be a clue?  O0
Logged
 

Offline Parrotheadvol

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Thanked: 141 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #932 on: July 05, 2016, 10:23:56 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Robert99 wrote: "Nevertheless, after a long weekend of number crunching and quite a bit of luck in figuring out where some of the problems were, I hope to start posting later today on how everything fits together in the flight path, the jump, how the money got to Tina Bar, and why the Cooper hijacking was just a two-bit crime committed by an inept individual who got lucky for several hours one afternoon."


If it was indeed a "two-bit crime committed by an inept individual" we might have to reconsider Duane Weber as a prime suspect.  ;)

377

Nah. I think you're still giving Duane too much credit. Inept individuals would be offended at your including Duane in their ranks.  :D
Logged
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9300
  • Thanked: 1025 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #933 on: July 05, 2016, 10:34:14 PM »
I feel multiple emails coming from Jo this evening..... C:-)
Logged
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9300
  • Thanked: 1025 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #934 on: July 06, 2016, 11:02:19 PM »
Has anyone heard of the plane flying directly over La Center?
Logged
 

Offline andrade1812

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 624
  • Thanked: 144 times
    • My Website
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #935 on: July 06, 2016, 11:07:00 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Has anyone heard of the plane flying directly over La Center?

I think the "In Search Of" episode mentions La Center. I'm not aware of any other sources...
Logged
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9300
  • Thanked: 1025 times
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #936 on: July 06, 2016, 11:15:42 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Has anyone heard of the plane flying directly over La Center?

I think the "In Search Of" episode mentions La Center. I'm not aware of any other sources...


Something was sent to me by a good source, but I'm still working on what it is....I know where it came from, but trying to figure it out....
Logged
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #937 on: July 06, 2016, 11:54:55 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Has anyone heard of the plane flying directly over La Center?

No but the original FBI-NWA search map was printed on a La Center Quadrangle chart.
Logged
 

Offline andrade1812

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 624
  • Thanked: 144 times
    • My Website
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #938 on: July 08, 2016, 07:38:17 PM »
I don't know if this has been posted before, but here's an interesting article on SAGE:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

(hyperlink button aint working, for whatever reason...)
Logged
 

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4365
  • Thanked: 465 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #939 on: July 27, 2016, 11:39:35 PM »
Rataczak Redux

Anybody upset that Bill Rataczak changed his story on the History Channel, again?

Big Time, this time, saying that they were flying over terrain that had 5,000-foot elevation. That can only mean he was far east of V-23 and zooming over the far slopes of Mt. St Helens and the other Cascadian peaks.

I can respect a man saying that he is tired and wants to put a 45-year old story to bed. But when he starts dropping big hints about the truth being different than what everyone had been believing, well, Billy, ya gotta take my phone call. To clam up again is just irresponsible.

Yes, I know that Bill and Tina are being nominated for sainthood after their heart-felt interview on the History Channel - I wept along with Bill - but his comments need investigation, and Tina owes me, well if not an apology, than an explanation. 11 slammed doors is not proper behavior for a saint. Or even a nun. Or even an ex-nun.
Logged
 

Robert99

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #940 on: July 27, 2016, 11:59:30 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Rataczak Redux

Anybody upset that Bill Rataczak changed his story on the History Channel, again?

Big Time, this time, saying that they were flying over terrain that had 5,000-foot elevation. That can only mean he was far east of V-23 and zooming over the far slopes of Mt. St Helens and the other Cascadian peaks.

I can respect a man saying that he is tired and wants to put a 45-year old story to bed. But when he starts dropping big hints about the truth being different than what everyone had been believing, well, Billy, ya gotta take my phone call. To clam up again is just irresponsible.

Yes, I know that Bill and Tina are being nominated for sainthood after their heart-felt interview on the History Channel - I wept along with Bill - but his comments need investigation, and Tina owes me, well if not an apology, than an explanation. 11 slammed doors is not proper behavior for a saint. Or even a nun. Or even an ex-nun.

Eleven slammed doors?  Bruce, do you know what a "hint" is? ::)
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 12:00:09 AM by Robert99 »
Logged
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #941 on: July 28, 2016, 12:02:25 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Rataczak Redux

Anybody upset that Bill Rataczak changed his story on the History Channel, again?

Big Time, this time, saying that they were flying over terrain that had 5,000-foot elevation. That can only mean he was far east of V-23 and zooming over the far slopes of Mt. St Helens and the other Cascadian peaks.

I can respect a man saying that he is tired and wants to put a 45-year old story to bed. But when he starts dropping big hints about the truth being different than what everyone had been believing, well, Billy, ya gotta take my phone call. To clam up again is just irresponsible.

Yes, I know that Bill and Tina are being nominated for sainthood after their heart-felt interview on the History Channel - I wept along with Bill - but his comments need investigation, and Tina owes me, well if not an apology, than an explanation. 11 slammed doors is not proper behavior for a saint. Or even a nun. Or even an ex-nun.

Maybe R99 can comment on Bill's (new?) account ? 

Maybe it was a back-ass way of Bill trying to say: 'we were only at 5000 ft not 10, 000 ft ...'? That conflicts with the flight comms. Who knows why he said what he said!  :)) It just adds more complexity to an already complex mystery.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 12:18:05 AM by georger »
Logged
 

haggarknew

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #942 on: July 28, 2016, 12:18:07 AM »
Does anyone happen to know when the crew actually realized they had enough fuel to make it to Reno? Wouldn't this affect what path they took?
Logged
 

Robert99

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #943 on: July 28, 2016, 01:30:05 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Does anyone happen to know when the crew actually realized they had enough fuel to make it to Reno? Wouldn't this affect what path they took?

According to the "FBI Notes", the airline crew was advised at 8:10 PM that the "range to Reno now looked good" and gives the same time as "May be the best estimate of when he [Cooper] exited airplane".  And the same time would be almost directly overhead of Tina Bar, in my ever humble opinion.

The airliner was level at 10,000 feet MSL from just north of the Malay Intersection (northwest of Portland) to a point between the Fort Jones VORTAC and the Red Bluffs VORTAC in northern California, at which point it began a climb to 11,000 feet and stayed at that altitude until near Reno.

Between SEATAC and the Red Bluffs VORTAC, the MEA [Minimum Enroute Altitude] is also 10,000 feet MSL.  MEA is the minimum altitude that is necessary to receive all navigational stations that determine the airway.  To be more precise, the MEA is actually 10,000 feet MSL only between the Medford (now Rogue Valley) VORTAC and the Red Bluffs VORTAC.  The MEA is less than that between Medford and Seattle.

While Cooper never mentioned any route south, he did specify that the airliner was not to go above 10,000 feet.  And Cooper did not hang around for the airliner to get to Medford. 


Logged
 

Robert99

  • Guest
Re: Flight Path And Related Issues
« Reply #944 on: July 28, 2016, 01:36:35 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Rataczak Redux

Anybody upset that Bill Rataczak changed his story on the History Channel, again?

Big Time, this time, saying that they were flying over terrain that had 5,000-foot elevation. That can only mean he was far east of V-23 and zooming over the far slopes of Mt. St Helens and the other Cascadian peaks.

I can respect a man saying that he is tired and wants to put a 45-year old story to bed. But when he starts dropping big hints about the truth being different than what everyone had been believing, well, Billy, ya gotta take my phone call. To clam up again is just irresponsible.

Yes, I know that Bill and Tina are being nominated for sainthood after their heart-felt interview on the History Channel - I wept along with Bill - but his comments need investigation, and Tina owes me, well if not an apology, than an explanation. 11 slammed doors is not proper behavior for a saint. Or even a nun. Or even an ex-nun.

Maybe R99 can comment on Bill's (new?) account ? 

Maybe it was a back-ass way of Bill trying to say: 'we were only at 5000 ft not 10, 000 ft ...'? That conflicts with the flight comms. Who knows why he said what he said!  :)) It just adds more complexity to an already complex mystery.

The airliner crew reached 10,000 feet just north of the Malay Intersection.  They then, without exception, always reported being level at 10,000 feet until they started a climb to 11,000 feet between the Fort Jones and Red Bluffs VORTACs in northern California.  They needed the additional altitude to get over the mountains between Red Bluffs and Reno.
Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 61 62 [63] 64 65 ... 302   Go Up
« previous next »