The placard has always been suspect. Remember, it could be from 305. But most likely not.

However, I believe Boeing reported that the placard from 305 was missing when they repaired it Nov. 26 at Boeing Field.

Somebody reported it missing - that my recollection too. Who? Documentation?

The placard is like a decal or a bumper sticker. it's not going to come off very easy. placards are known to come off the exterior of aircraft. my guess would be fuel related and wind shear peeling it off over time..

It was someone from the flight crew that did the testing..his memory is sharp as ever..he claims the decal was missing two days later when they did the test.

The hijacking was November 24, 1971. the flight test was done January 6, 1972. the statement was made seven years after the fact..his memory is actually dull as can be. it's almost like he was saying this to backup what was found. no other documentation has surfaced..

Other placards can be seen in the video showing the stairs. the other problem would be having a placard for an emergency option that doesn't appear to be on 305.

Most of the test crew didn't have anything to do with the plane. most wouldn't be involved until the time for the test..

The stairs were opened long before the area the placard was found. the pressure had settled to hardly any movement on the stairs. the placard should of been found around McChord..

Much like hurricane shutters you have pressure involved. the maximum gap is one quarter inch from the wall. anything more allows pressure to pull the shutter off the wall. the decal is strong, similar to a bumper sticker. I have a problem believing pressure got behind it..

Sounds like a negative load is required to pull the placard off the wall. that would occur when the stairs opened..

turbulent flow? Think of how much a leafblower can do with 120MPH air flow. The turbulence can be as damaging as a constant force.

The placard didn't come from flight 305!

Well I have heard just the opposite reported on many shows on this topic.  So sorry if I do not take your word as gospel.  No offense.

There's been some discussion recently about Rat's statement about seeing the "lights of Portland" and that Cooper jumped before then. If the sky was overcast with two cloud layers, how would that affect the crew's ability to see the city lights? Perhaps the city lights would be bright enough to penetrate the cloud cover?

These were experienced pilots - to put it mildly! These people know the difference between light and dark .... just as they know the difference between a camel and a bath tub!

Duhhhhhhhhhh.

This is NOT an issue of fine distinctions requiring measurements. They knew where they were, they knew what they were seeing based on thousands of hours of prior experience .... the only issue is the timing of the reports.  Cooper seems to have had some idea of how much time had passed since becoming airborne and where the plane was .... he knew, for example, the plane was nowhere near Reno or Columbus, KS. He knew he was south of Seattle somewhere approaching the Columbia/Portland.

The clock and the heading of the plane render R99's 'two layers of clouds' irrelevant. Rtzk's statement about what he saw during this time period further renders R99's clouds irrelevant. Read the music! There is no part in the music for 'two layers of clouds'!