You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

And...a guy who works with scrap is wearing a tie because....?

He's a buyer?

In my wildly speculative mind, yes, a buyer of sorts who works for a company interested in buying up scrap. Figure that we have Company A, who our buyer works for. Company A likes buying up scrap metal and Company B creates scrap metal but has no interest in hanging onto it. The two companies have a longstanding relationship of this transaction. So every now and then Company A gets a call from Company B. Company B says "Hey our scrap bins are getting full, you want to make us an offer?" Because this is nothing new, both companies essentially know that yes that Company A will basically buy whatever Company B has to offer but Company A needs to send a guy in a tie to look at the amount and possibly type of scrap and make an offer. Company A sends him to go inspect what the scrap is and make an offer while the muscle waits in the truck. Company B signs off on the agreed to amount and the buyer goes and grabs the grunts, leads them to the scrap bins, tells them exactly what they're grabbing and lends a hand to try to stay relatable to said grunts. Afterwards they all go out for a beer up there in Everett, start bullshitting with a few Boeing engineers and after a few beers said engineers let slip that a 727's aft staircase can be lowered while in flight. As I say, my wildly speculative mind.

Bruce you say:  "    And...a guy who works with scrap is wearing a tie because....? "

I say:  " He is just an office worker at Boeing in the "Manuals and Handbooks Group" and passes by the "Materials and Processes Lab" on the ground floor below his office at least two time a day and scrounges thru their scrap tub skids looking at interesting things and his tie happens to drag through some of the stuff in the scrap tub skids. "  Also, he wears a tie/loafers just like the one in the photo they did for the Boeing Skydiving Club Add in the Boeing News (July 12, 1962) well before Norjak.

Bob Sailshaw
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I think it was direct contact vs by chance..what makes me wonder more is that it appears the crt's had liquid phosphor..the way the screens are made doesn't look like it would get onto clothing, or at least personal clothing. the video I watched had them dressed in lab coats...

I don't think it could be from salvage (IMO) or a dump. the ties doesn't match that theory? not much that I remember was recycled in those days, or at least not like today's standards. I feel more of the manufacturing area more than anything.

I don't think it could be from salvage (IMO) or a dump. the ties doesn't match that theory? not much that I remember was recycled in those days, or at least not like today's standards. I feel more of the manufacturing area more than anything.

I dont know about welding - I tend to doubt the rare particles would be there but ...

I think the emphasis is on manufacturing or research-development where there would be recycling.scrap etc. A list of such places is endless especially if you include military/DOD related programs. The high number of such places back in the 60s and 70s is part of the problem. Its runs the gamut from military operations to universities to private industry and everything in between. This is part of why I am focused on looking for a 'cocktail' of particles that points in some direction ... I think that is Tom's approach also. Except now Tom's list is large enough to contain some diversity with groupings. His first list was just a starter. More should come ...   

Did anyone ever browse Boeings scrap bins with a SEM?    I doubt it unless you were working for some govt agency charged with health and safety ... in contrast people watched the Columbia River below Hanford with a fine tooth comb! Once the environmentalists got going ... well you know what happened then - all hell broke lose.

do we exclude oscilloscopes? they shouldn't have any red phosphor in them. the screen is green?

Having recently read Gunther's book DB Cooper:What Really Happened, and perusing all these other suspects that do not fit, the new information about the tie, fits well with LeClair, as he is, by far, in my opinion, the most likely of the known suspects.
The book was ridiculed when it first came out, and was dismissed... but evidence that came out well after publication, does point, and fits, as LeClair being Cooper.  I am utterly amazed how everyone is looking the other way from this guy.
Everything, especially of the behavior of LeClair and especially Clara... the psycology and motivation are all very reasonable, and logical.
Gunther deliberately changed details as to protect the two sources, as he agreed....
Assuming it is LeClair.... to find him, one should contact Gunther's heirs to see if they have the original data provided by LeClair and Clara.....and then do a search based on that....  If its not available, then one should start with searching the Paratrooper records, and isolating all those Canadian born (gunther said London, Ontario which likely means its not there but in eastern Canada)... for this seems one of things that Gunther didn't shield...  and then isolate the ones who went to a public university in on the east coast on the GI Bill (Gunther said it was Rutgers, so I figure it'd be on the east coast, but definitely not Rutgers for having said it).   Then, of the few on the list, find the one who disappeared from his family....  those seem to me, the data points that Gunther didn't obfuscate.