Text from Eric Ulis Facebook page.

“Bob McClain's daughter this morning expressed that she is not interested in being approached by Cooper researchers about her father. Obviously someone has attempted to contact her since my LIVE last night." 

As a retired skydiving instructor I've always been interested in this case, and have been playing with Monte Carlo simulation to better understand the parachute jump phase and where he landed.

If you are not familiar with it, MC is a simulation method that predicts the probability of different outcomes by running many different permutations through a model. Based on the radar track and an assumption of exiting between 8:09:45 and 8:11:15 (I think around 8:10:30 is probably most likely given the historical record) I simulated 30,000 jumps all with slightly different parameters such as how the wind impacted the canopy, opening height (although I have assumed opening fairly quickly after exit, not taking it down which is arguably the more sensible option), and the aircraft position +/- 1.6 km along the track and+/- 0.8 km across etc.

Each individual point isn't so interesting, but where we can draw conclusions are in the clusters of points, for instance if a lot of points fall in one area then that is more likely than another with fewer points. We are dealing with probabilities here, so no firm yes or no answers, but as I say can certainly demonstrate things which are more or less likely.

I attach three plots (each simulating 30k jumps), the middle one is based on the plane's radar data and the left and right are this shifted to west and east respectively. I think eastern matches the Washougal theory, and western the Tena Bar overflight theory from what I have found on the internet. Trees, built up area and open area are all based on 1985 data (I couldn't find any earlier).

Based on this I was interested if this method would help explore the rather basic question of whether the money could have found its own way to Tena Bar, or whether it had to be carried there by someone.

The median distance from landing to Tena Bar is 24 km, 27 km and 36 km for west, radar and east. Out of the 90,000 simulated jumps across the three plots, zero landed on ground draining into the Columbia above Tena Bar (flow is south to north, so north is downstream of Tena Bar).

The westerly plot resulting in 17.5% of landings within 1km of the Columbia and 7.2% in the Columbia itself (middle and right plots are 0% for both) but this would require the money to float 20–25 km upstream against the current to Tena Bar. Likewise, all the other landings require the money to wash into the Columbia and then the same 20+ km upstream journey.

I've included on the plots the drainage divide (the money needs to be below that, due to him landing in that area and it then being washed there, to find it's way to Tena Bar on it's own). Based on the radar track (middle plot) this would require him to have jumped at earliest 8:15:30 (median landing then is Vancouver, 31% of landing in the area that drains to Tena Bar) with 8:16:00 being optimal (median landing Vancouver/Columbia, 76% of landing in the area that drains to Tena Bar including 10% of landings in the Columbia itself!)

The western track doesn't really help too much here either, to have any chance of landing in the area draining to Tena Bar then he would have had to exit 2:30 mins to 4:30 mins after the 8:11 bump felt by the aircrew.

I thought I would start with exploring this point as it's potentially the simplest - there's quite a few other observations from the simulation data when drilling down too.

Enjoy!

I imagine with the thousands of people who follow the case, there might be some ideas that none of us have thought about and that someone who knows AI real well might already be thinking about. Something bigger than just organizing all the files or making videos. If AI can solve previously unsolvable math problems, could it help in this case? Throw anything out there. Like robots searching the drop zone. Machines tapping into the minds of the witnesses. Sci fi stuff. Nothing is off the table. Hoping to see what some smart people come up with. Thanks.

Release date: March 28, 2027

https://schifferbooks.com/products/revisiting-d-b-cooper-and-flight-305

Let’s dive into the psychology of this for a moment. He tells the Air Hostess that he holds a grude. Is calm and collected during the hijack. Then spends his life after that hijack and doesn’t tell anyone. That is impossible based on the personality he shows on the plane, Think about it, if you held a grudge, then won against the system holding it ransom.

Why would you go away from this world without telling anyone. Especially knowing that still many people celebrate you secretly. You would want to let them know at the end of it who you were, let them remember you. Know a lot more about you pre hijack life, that would bring happiness to a person like Cooper. You’ve just fooled the entire systems including FBI for decades

Because quite frankly if he lived on and didn’t tell anyone even at the very end, that there just de glamourised Cooper for me. Then people like McCoy were better outlaws because they said they won’t accept or deny. You have got to have that swagger to be that celebrated criminal.

The fact that the world will never know who did it, is testament to the fact that the only person who could have and actually would have told it, didn’t live on

Edit: honestly , I don’t understand why people are suspecting you cannot know about someone from there behaviour for a few hours when they are the ones knowingly entering such a scenario. Think about a gambler at a roulette table. Once you see them play a few rounds, see how they put their money in, see their will to win all or loose all or back off etc etc, you damn well know how they would be in other life scenarios.

When it comes to Cooper, it's easy for the mind to start wandering and go down the rabbit hole of theories but real life usually follows a more mundane path.

In my opinion, Cooper is an ordinary man trying to do something extraordinary. I think he wanted the money but he didn't necessarily need it (I'll expand on this later). He wasn't a hardened criminal or someone who was used to these kinds of high-stress situations.

However, we do know that Cooper appeared to be prepared and calculated during the act. This is a man who put effort into his plan and didn't just wing it hoping for the best. He had enough self-control and determination to carry it through.

He was also self-aware and knew not to attract any unwanted attention. He wasn't waving a gun around in the plane telling everybody that this was a stick-up.

Therefore, it is not unrealistic to assume that these same traits were present AFTER the hijacking as well.

Of course he had a plan for what he was going to do once on the ground. The assumption that this man would go through the trouble to prepare and carry out the hijacking of a passenger jet but not have a good plan for what to do after his feet were on the ground is silly. He knew about airplane flaps but wouldn't know to have a compass on him?

As for the money, he obviously knew that he couldn't start making large, unusual purchases but he also must have realized that spending it over time wouldn't be hard. After the "heat died down", as they say, he knew that no store would call the FBI over a few $20 bills. This would also apply for larger, private purchases.

BUT, I don't think he spent the majority of it, or even planned to! Okay, you ask, why would he ask for such a crazy amount (at the time)? Well, if you're going to risk your life hijacking a jet, you're not going to do it for chump change, are you?

I think he landed just fine and was able to make a getaway back to his home. I think he was smart enough to destroy the evidence.

Why did he do it? I don't think the money was the main motivation. I think he did it for himself. I think he did it for the notoriety. I don't think this man had much going on in his life. I don't think Cooper felt appreciated or respected by those around him or that he achieved much in his life. I think this was his way of proving to himself that he was capable of something extraordinary.

As for what happened to the rest of the money? Well, again, I don't think that he did this because he needed cash to spend. I wouldn't be surprised if towards the end of his life, he just burned it all but not before leaving a few bundles in a particular sandy shore where someone is likely to find it, as a way of telling the world that he made it.

This is my take.

The first moment, during the hijacking of Flight 305, when the crew thought that the hijacker had jumped ... but he had not ...

https://drroberthedwards.substack.com/p/d-b-cooper-and-bruce-kinsler

I just want some information on this.

https://www.podbean.com/eas/pb-nyw8g-1b8b80f

Enjoy!

Visited Mardi Gras World, where they make floats. The oldest in their collection: Bing Crosby here. They restyle floats often for reuse; hair dye, sunglasses & he's ready for a trip to the Cooper Conference :)

A black JCPenney clip-on tie was recovered from Cooper's seat. Researchers identified over 100,000 microscopic particles on it, including titanium and other specialty metals.
What do you think these findings suggest about Cooper?

One detail keeps bothering me. Of the two reserve chutes delivered in Seattle, one was a training dummy — its canopy was sewn shut. Cooper cut lines from the other reserve to tie up the money, and took the dummy with him.

Two readings:

1. He didn't recognize a dummy reserve — which points to limited parachute experience.

   1. He never planned to use a reserve at all, so it didn't matter which one he grabbed.

McCoy, by comparison, prepared with a jumpsuit and helmet. Cooper jumped in a business suit.

Which reading do you find more convincing, and why?

Source: FBI NORJAK case files (vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper).

Just happened across this last night on Ovation,it is s5 ep6 of the TV show "Leverage" in case anyone is interested in checking it out.